Subspace Hockey/Football Zone Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Group Moderation: To edit access to a group you control, go to the Membergroups interface from the Moderate button. If you don't have that option, contact Kilo Dylie with the names of the moderators who should be on your group.

Poll

Do you like Random Damage?

Yes
- 8 (29.6%)
No
- 14 (51.9%)
Dont care
- 5 (18.5%)

Total Members Voted: 27

Voting closed: July 14, 2017, 08:39:33 PM


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7

Author Topic: Random Damage  (Read 1917 times)

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2017, 01:15:20 PM »

zero seven you have told me nothing new.  i know all of these things.  i have already highlighted understanding of literally pretty much everything you just wrote, and in some instances have typed identical fucking sentences.  i already took the time to look at the graphs and tables and i understand how bullet dmg works.  there is nothing in my recent posts that suggests otherwise.  i am actually an intelligent person with a pretty acute sense of math and the like and a transcript to prove it, regardless of how you and doobie treat me. 

it is a question of semantics and you are getting caught up in a word (DUD) that i already took the time to define specifically for the context of this discussion, just so i could avoid having to type all of this bullshit.  i am trying to keep it simple at the moment so we can see if we agree on some basic premises, like ive said about 3 times.  why in the fuck would i want to convolute the convo and type "durr hey guys we really need to fix that minimum damage being brought up to a level such that each L2 (i mean this in the classical sense) bullets will always drain a terminal amt of damage from all ships xcept 2 & 4" every time when i can condense it into one word.  it is not a stretch to define dud the way i am defining it. 

when a bullet takes 100% energy of a certain ship you shoot a majority of the time, the times that it doesnt are a dud.  thats the connotation, thats how its inferred and implied pretty much always, and it makes sense, for the purposes of this convo, to keep it that simple.  allow me to illustrate my understanding and provide proof for my above statement to appease your dense mind:

referencing the tables, you can see that ships 1,3,5,6 all have under 500 energy.  you will also see that L3 and L4 bullets do over 500 energy dmg on-ball.  you will also see that the "L2" ships, spid and terr, have over a 50% chance (thus, majority) to shoot either L3 or L4 on-ball (78% for terr, 80% for spid).  thus a spid or terr will take a full 100% of ship 1,3,5,6 energy ~80% (~91% for ship 1) of the time.  those times that it doesnt, we call a DUD. 

and for the record, DUDS HAPPEN RANDOMLY - THERE ARE % CHANCES FOR WHAT TYPE OF BULLET YOU SHOOT, THUS ONE CAN EQUATE DUDS TO RANDOM DAMAGE AS THE DAMAGE THAT WILL OCCUR IS NOT PREDICTABLE.  ARE YOU REALLY THIS DENSE?

what is really holding the discussion back is your insistence on trying to complicate things.  save it for later.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 01:40:11 PM by Poseidon »
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #41 on: June 28, 2017, 01:38:16 PM »

Bos and zero seven the effort is appreciated... But please don't waste any more of your time.
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #42 on: June 28, 2017, 01:41:49 PM »

doobie emerges out of the shadows with another fail credibility assassination attempt
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #43 on: June 28, 2017, 01:56:21 PM »

legit, the whole last page was ppl cluttering the thread trying 2 explain things to me that i obv already know, in some instances repeating back to me what ive already said as if they were schooling me. 

as ive stated i think 3 times previously, all i want to know is:

Do the people who make the decisions in this zone think that ships 1,3,5,6 should have 100% of their energy removed from an on-ball L2 ship bullet every time (meaning going from ~80% chance to 100% chance), even if that means having to sacrifice velocity-dmg in this instance? 


edit: i dont come on this fucking forum looking to have extreme point by point arguments or type all this words.  i really am just asking a simple question and people are coming left and right complicating it so i indulge in defending myself, and the whole of it is just totally unnecessary. and i realize im to blame sometimes for playing 2 much defense and not letting things slide and instead just trying to keep it focused, so ill try to be better about that
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 02:07:17 PM by Poseidon »
Logged

Steve Cheese

  • Donator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 3121
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #44 on: June 28, 2017, 02:30:11 PM »

NO THEY DO NOT THINK THAT.  THEY HAVE SAID IT MULTIPLE TIMES ALREADY
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #45 on: June 28, 2017, 02:37:03 PM »

steve cheese please stop yelling and reference what you are saying.  i have read through this thread, and you are not only wrong but badly wrong.  nobody has said that they do not think an L2 bullet should do that dmg.  in fact, the only person who has even answered that question is BoS, and he said that he DOES agree with it.  see what im dealing with here?
Logged

SuperDan

  • RSHL Captain
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 2002
  • freezeem.ytmnd.com
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #46 on: June 28, 2017, 02:38:03 PM »

I think all ships should die when you shit them with a yellow bullet... maybe the levi can barely survive it.. but nothing should be dudding imo

if it takes 2 shots within 1 or 1.5 seconds to die, it should die.. not tank 3 shots in 1.5 seconds and dud all 3 of them
Logged

Blessings_of_Sins

  • RSHL Referee
  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 858
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #47 on: June 28, 2017, 02:43:22 PM »

EDITED AS REQUESTED BY POSE
« Last Edit: June 29, 2017, 06:52:14 PM by Blessings_of_Sins »
Logged

RSFL Season 1 : X-Factor
MSHL Season 4 : Baby Seal Killers
2008 Mini Tournament : Barker's Beauties
TWHT Season 2: R&P
RSFL Season 5 : BIG
RSHL Season 24: Salty Puckers

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #48 on: June 28, 2017, 02:44:37 PM »

yes thx SD, this is the convo im tryin 2 have.  in my opinion i think levi and jav should survive.  maybe levi with 70% total energy taken from an L2-ship blast and jav 80%, to give some space for velocity based dmg. this also encourages people to pay more attention to energy conservation, adding an even further dimension to that skill. those numbers should be discussed eventually once this shitshow can get back on the rails. 
Logged

Steve Cheese

  • Donator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 3121
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #49 on: June 28, 2017, 02:47:02 PM »

Biggest benefit of random damage IMO is that it allows you to adjust the odds based on relative velocity.  So you're more likely to get the heavier bullet if you're lunging at an oncoming puck carrier rather than backing up with them.

Also, I think the fact that you're not guaranteed to tank (e.g. jav getting hit by spid) when you expect to is a good thing. 
The fact that you're not guaranteed to kill when you expect to is less of a good thing, but that is easily addressed by not letting each ship go below the expected level.

When you consider velocity as a way to counter attempts to tank, that's pretty cool imo.
Pose-Try reading this slowly.
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #50 on: June 28, 2017, 02:47:59 PM »

BoS i pretty much agree with the gist of your numbers, but i dont like they way you are formatting it.  i dont like it because it isnt accounting for the fact that people don't always sit at 100% energy.  ie. it should only take 1 on-ball level one bullet to kill a spider w/ 25% energy.  i think if you change your numbers to a energy-percentage basis, it would be easier to have a convo abt this
Logged

Steve Cheese

  • Donator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 3121
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #51 on: June 28, 2017, 02:49:51 PM »

So there is no point in discussing or implementing anything with static damage anymore.  Check.
Now try reading this.

That covers both coders who have been dealing with settings.
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #52 on: June 28, 2017, 02:53:54 PM »

steve cheese, goldeye doesnt explicity state the answer to my question.  not only that, but it seems if anything the implication would be that he indeed DOES think L2 bullets should do 100% to those ships ("The fact that you're not guaranteed to kill when you expect to is less of a good thing") - the opposite of what you said was stated multiple times by ppl in this thread (has been stated 0 times). any reasonable inference of his statement in that quote would imply that what one should "expect" is still up in the air.  in fact, reading further into it, you will notice in this thread that goldeye rly likes the idea of velocity based dmg, so one might reasonably infer that he doesn't agree with my question.  is this what you meant?  either way there is nothing clear about his statements in regards to my question, so please dont vs me about it

AND DOOBIES COMMENT WAS OBVIOUSLY SARDONIC ARE U SRS??
Logged

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #53 on: June 28, 2017, 02:54:51 PM »



Change subject to "Spider + Terrier Buff"

For those eating popcorn at home:

Blue is current settings.
Red is truly random settings, default continuum.
Orange is the underlying result Pose is taking forever to get at while spewing garbage about static vs. dynamic.

Here is how you would go about trying to maintain the same relative expected damage (how much damage we "feel" the spider should cause based one existing random probabilities) while getting the lower end 20% of Spider's damage range eliminated. This would result in a Spider killing a ball carrier w/ 500 or less energy 100% of the time except for tank / lagger message. No duds. The downside of this balance is now it has a 95% chance of killing a Jav with 100% energy. Previously a Spider had a 58% chance.

« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:06:15 PM by zero seven »
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #54 on: June 28, 2017, 03:04:26 PM »

i actually got to my point on in the middle of the first page when i stated clearly the my most important point was the question ive been asking over and over again and ive been dealing w/ witch hunt mentality ever since. 

regardless of your graph/table which, no surprise here, completely overly complicates a simple question, the only 3 people who have answered the question: Me, SD, BoS - agree that its results are desirable.  and incredibly, even after making an unnecessary table vs me abt the question, you have managed to still avoid answering said question.  so, i really would like to know, where do you stand on this?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:12:43 PM by Poseidon »
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #55 on: June 28, 2017, 03:18:48 PM »

also, the reason i am focusing on L2-ships is because ya'll people have a real problem with keeping things simple.  but for the record, this isn't just about a buff to L2-ships, but a complete rehaul of the system, and essentially buffing every ship and having them hit for a consistent, predictable amount of base damage depending on the ship. 

and in reference to zero sevens table, which i think is eventually needed in this debate and i do appreciate, a lot of this will probably have to be done by adjusting ships total energy and how much energy it takes them fire, thrust, recharge rate, etc.  but yall already know this, and again, im trying to keep it simple and make sure we are on the same basic page abt what we are trying to achieve. 
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:34:37 PM by Poseidon »
Logged

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #56 on: June 28, 2017, 03:25:29 PM »

I'm a huge proponent of static damage and unlike you have actually contributed to the zone to get it tested by translating our current testings into static approximations while maintaining the balance we've already worked on for 20 years via incremental tweaks.

Doobie is the biggest proponent, who you've already alienated.

SuperDan's quote on 1st page equates dud w/ random damage, which is wrong. His real desire is bullet buff.

BOS's real desire is bullet buff, and the proposal he's suggesting to try out is to completely overhaul all bullet damage settings based on arbitrary multiples (3x L1's to kill a Jav - why the fuck would we use this as target?) and doesn't factor in the millions of other energy relationships that already exist between ships.

Your real desire is bullet buff to 100% predictability of kills on certain ships. That can be achieved w/ random damage and I just showed you how. If you're interested do the math yourself on the settings you want, somehow get on Goldeye/Doobie's good side, and have it tested in an arena and get people to show up and play with it.

The philosophical questions on what we should do with settings are valid. But when you throw shit like this out there as a solid attack on random damage all you do is reinforce Goldeye's position that what the zone really wants can be accomplished with random damage. It hurts the real debate for static damage.
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Steve Cheese

  • Donator
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 3121
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #57 on: June 28, 2017, 03:30:46 PM »

You can use all the words you want. 07 understands what you are trying to ask but he also understands the constraints of continuum.

You have no technical knowledge, no desire to acquire said knowledge by your own admission, yet you continue to repeat yourself and act like you know what kind of undertaking you are asking for.

Goldeye and doobie have the ability and permissions required to alter settings. Your repeated nonsensical and idiotic posts have frustrated doobie to the point that he will obviously not assist in your endeavor. Goldeye has stated that he's too busy to spend time on an endeavor of this magnitude.

I don't want to personally attack you but you've been back for a few months and have provided nothing but walls of text without reading/comprehending responses to you.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:40:33 PM by Steve Cheese »
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #58 on: June 28, 2017, 03:35:13 PM »

if we can come to the same basic agreement about which ships should dmg whatever % of energy to specific other ships, i will personally take the time to figure all of this out on a mathematical basis and will present tables and graphs and etc, while hopefully still accounting for a way to implement velocity-based damage.  but i need some clarity on the velocity aspect.  in the tables, it says "max velocity bonus".  is this "bonus" a bonus to the odds that your bullet will go one level up, and how does this bonus scale with diff levels of velocity?

edit: i realize this has already happened in various iterations by various people.  my main goal here is to just try to get something happening and have the powers that be want to make it happen.  but i would also put in the work if it was necessary, just want to clarify that
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:37:26 PM by Poseidon »
Logged

Poseidon

  • Common Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 710
Re: Random Damage
« Reply #59 on: June 28, 2017, 03:45:36 PM »

and again, the majority of this topic has just been simple discrepancies in semantics that i feel like should have been obvious but for whatever reason they werent.  mayb its my fault for typing too much.  there is just a basic idea here that it seems like almost everybody agrees with - bullets that kill a majority of the time (regardless of velocity) should kill every time.  but... it seems like the powers that be cant reach a real consensus on this, perhaps because the limitations of our system (ie only having 4 levels of bullets), in order to keep the static settings reasonable, would jeopardize our ability to include velocity-based damage.  i dont have a total understanding of just how much they are jeopardized because i havent tried to do the math.  but for me, while we should try to include incorporate velocity-based damage as much as we are able, if it had to be completely sacrificed to get static minimums to a reasonable level, then that is absolutely what we should do.   

edit: honestly the whole reason for this thread was to figure out the best way to word a poll to fully incorporate the reality of the complexity of this in a simple way so that we can get a solid understanding as to what the community feels and hopefully proceed accordingly.  that was initially the service i was trying to provide for this issue.  still is.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 04:34:08 PM by Poseidon »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7
 

Page created in 0.107 seconds with 21 queries.