Slick
Joined: Jul 03, 2004
|
 Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:35 |
 
|
Anyone know how to properly predict the casualty rate for MB? Against armor 7 I came up with this => ( ( ( (21/36) * (6/36) ) + ( (15/36) * (10/36) ) ) / 2) = 23/216 or .10648
Is this correct?
LOL. Apparently if you put an 8 and a ) you get a smiley with shades. |
_________________
Some people get "it", and others don't. How about you? Do you get "it"?
Last edited by Slick on %b %24, %2005 - %16:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:42 |
|
Math? There's a reaosn I married an accountant's daughter, you know.... sheesh....  |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Slick
Joined: Jul 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:47 |
|
/me smacks Macavity upside the head for spamming. Let's stick to serious answers for at least a few posts please. 
Note to self: Curiousity killed the Slick, by smothering him in Spam. |
_________________
Some people get "it", and others don't. How about you? Do you get "it"?
Last edited by Slick on %b %24, %2005 - %15:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
Bald-boy
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:50 |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Intuitively, that doesn't seem right. Given that you're dealing with 2d6, the probabilities should be based on 36ths.
Quickly thinking it through while writing:
First, we find the probability to get through armour:
* 8+ to get through without the use of MB - 15/36 (or about 42%)
* 7 to get through when MB is necessary - 6/36 (Roughly 17%)
* -6 to fail - 15/36
Now we find the probabilities to cause a casualty:
* 10+ to cause a casualty without MB - 6/36 (Roughly 17%)
* 9 to cause a casualty with MB effect necessary - 4/36 ( Roughly 11%)
* -8 to fail - 26/36 (Roughly 72%)
Now we need to combine these:
We have three cases which cause a casualty:
* MB not necessary on either roll
(15/36) * (6/36)
* MB necessary on the armour roll
(6/36) * (6/36)
* MB necessary on the injury roll
(15/36) * (4/36)
And then we combine these:
(15/36) * (6/36) + (6/36) * (6/36) + (15/36) * (4/36)
And throwing this into my trusty calculator, I get a total probability of 31/216 or roughly 14.4%.
I'm sure someone will point out any mistakes I've made here  |
|
|
Bald-boy
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:56 |
|
|
BooAhl
Joined: Sep 02, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:57 |
|
6/36*1/6+15/36*10/36=186/36*36=31/216
I would say |
Last edited by BooAhl on %b %24, %2005 - %16:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
Bald-boy
Joined: Jun 20, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 15:58 |
|
I'm with Christer on this one
So that means that the prob for cassing an AV7 player rises from ((15/36)*(6/36)) 6,9% to 14,4% when you have MB? nice ^^  |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:01 |
|
(7/12 * 1/6) + (2/12 * 10/36) = 14.3518518% |
|
|
Fama
Joined: Feb 09, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:01 |
|
Someone (I think it was Malthor) sent me this Excel file with all these nifty chances... But anyway.
| Code: | Mighty Blow Armour 1,000 0,972 0,917 0,833 0,722 0,583 0,417 0,278 0,167 0,083
Casualty 1,000 0,264 0,245 0,219 0,185 0,144 0,100 0,065 0,037 0,017
|
That's AV 2 to 11. According to this, it would be 14.4% to make a casulty. Hope you can figure that out =) |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:07 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | (7/12 * 1/6) + (2/12 * 10/36) = 14.3518518% |
Although that might be;
(5/12 * 10/36) + (2/12 * 1/6) = 14.3518517% |
|
|
Slick
Joined: Jul 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:10 |
|
Well I find it strange that MB causes more cas than Claw (12%), but if you say so. I also figured out that PO+Claw+RSC is only 38.5% cas rate against armor 7.  |
_________________
Some people get "it", and others don't. How about you? Do you get "it"? |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:12 |
|
Depends on the AC, MB will likely help alot on AV7, whereas Claw makes a huge difference on AV9 |
|
|
Slick
Joined: Jul 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:45 |
|
It also appears that PO + Claw is insanely effective. /me scribbles this down in his notepad |
_________________
Some people get "it", and others don't. How about you? Do you get "it"? |
|
Telcontar
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 24, 2005 - 16:46 |
|
| Slick wrote: | | Well I find it strange that MB causes more cas than Claw (12%), but if you say so. I also figured out that PO+Claw+RSC is only 38.5% cas rate against armor 7. |
Do you? Claw only helps vs the armour so you will get lots of stun, ko (normal chance) with it.
While MB helps with the injury too. And therefore adjustes the figures for stun downwards and Ko and injury upwards
edit: to ask stupid question and remove it afterwards |
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk? |
|
|
|
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
