Re: [GZG] FT Vector: Alternative Fire Resolution Distance

This is an interesting problem.

I'm going to put my anal retentive engineer's hat on for a moment (those
of 
you saying I never take it off - shut it ! B-) ). You're a code ghuru so
I 
figure you'll be pretty comfortable with this...

Let's set up the following terms
Sn = "Start-point" location on turn n
Mn = "Mid-point" location of turn n
En = "End-point" location of turn n

And it's the nature of the game that your end point of one turn is the
start 
point of the next turn or

En = S(n+1)

You're suggesting as the turn is a spectrum of time the best way to
model it 
is the average, or Mn. This is true. Mn is a good way to model the
average 
of a turn. But the entire game, a series of turns, is also a spectrum of

time. Let's look at a series of turns arbitrarily labeled 1 through 5.
I've 
put each turn on a separate line as I think it adds clarity, YMMV. Time
is 
passing from left to right.

S1....M1....E1
		  S2....M2....E2
				    S3....M3....E3
						      S4....M4....E4
								       
S5....M5....E5

So, while M1, M2, M3, etc are good models for the average of turns 1,2,3

etc, it can equally be claimed that E1, E2. E3, etc are also good
average 
modeles for the "turn time" elapsing between M1 to M2, M2 to M3, M3 to
M4, 
etc. So either can do a decent job of "average" representation, it's
just a 
matter of your frame of reference.

Combat based on the mid utrn point raises a number of issues which would

have to be resolved.

Combat onvolves facing and weapon arcs. Would you also base combat on
facing 
at the mid-point? Would this result in some odd commands (i.e. I will
turn 
180degrees so I am pointing at the target ( at 90degrees from my current

position) at turn midpoint)? Or do you write commands for movement pre
and 
post midpoint?

If combat is based on the average of fire during the entire turn time 
period, and weapons have defined arcs, should ships that manage to keep
a 
target in the same arcs from start to finish of the turn be more
effective, 
deliver more damage, than ships that need to turn to get a target into
it's 
fire arcs? If you start worrying about modeling the average in one area,

where do you stop?

I think I understand what your struggling with, which is the granularity
of 
FT turns and a desire for something finer, but I'm not sure this will 
ultimately be a solution that satisfies you. But then maybe I've 
misunderstood your itch...

Regards,
Martin

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom B" <kaladorn@gmail.com>
To: <gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:44 PM
Subject: [GZG] FT Vector: Alternative Fire Resolution Distance

> For your consideration/comment, as I am particularly looking for
> problems it may introduce or aspects completely overlooked....
>
> Note: Vector only.
>
> ----------
>
> Full thrust turns can easily be imagined to be 15-20 minutes long with
> distances covered in the hundreds, thousands or possibly tens of
> thousands of kilometers and engagement ranges from several hundred kms
> out to several hundred thousand kms. Space is big and in order to hit
> things, with enemies manouvering at long distances and ships firing at
> 'enemy location probability envelopes', weapons throw out a lot of
> rounds/shots/pulses in one game turn. The damage accrued in the game
> is the result of the sustained fire over a round rather than the
> instantaneous result of a single shot at a particular point.
>
> In order to adjudicate the result of fire, a modification to the
> existing rules is applied when determining range between ships. While
> moving both the firing and target vessels and establishing their new
> vector. establish the midpoint of the movement by measuring back
> halfway along the vector between their start and end point for the
> round. Fire is considered to occur at a range that is the distance
> between the midpoint marker for the firing and target vessels. Some of
> the fire will have occured further away than this point, some closer,
> but the average will be somewhere in the middle.
>
> This also reflects the application of thrust over the entire turn by
> the ship rather than it drifting most of the turn and applying all of
> its thrust at the end of the turn from the endpoint of the drift
> vector.
> ------------
>
> Comments? Reasons this won't work or is a bad idea? Non-obvious
> implications or rules interactions?
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
> http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.138/2618 - Release Date:
01/13/10 
07:35:00

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l