Re: (TFT) Rewrite of Melee simulator in JavaScript

[Thomas Fulmer <tfulmer1@gmail.com>]

Cris,

Is the source code available by any chance (Java or JS)?

--Thomas

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:54 PM Cris Fuhrman <fuhrmanator@gmail.com> wrote:

> Indeed defending was NOT working. You spotted the bug and I believe I fixed
> it now (the logic was simply not activated because of a bad reference in
> JavaScript). You'll have to reload the page (maybe even shift-reload
> depending on how your browser caches) for it to work.
>
> My apologies for not verifying that option! I'm spoiled with Java catching
> this kind of bug at compile time. It's hard to believe a technology that is
> all the rage these days allows this kind of bug to happen. I feel like it's
> related to Klingon ships not having toilets or something...
>
> While trying to validate my results with some stats, I came up with the
> concept of "probable damage on first round." Basically, I use the to-hit
> probability multiplied by the average roll for the weapon damage (which is
> doubled if it's a pole weapon and you're charging).
>
> The number I came up with for a first-round charge with DX13 Spear no armor
> (065 in the simulator) is 7.75 points damage. This is considering misses,
> normal hit rolls, double damage and triple damage (I calculated it in a
> spreadsheet).
>
> 7.75 means that any foe with no armor is very likely to be knocked down on
> the first round, and probably hit again for a kill if he didn't die on the
> first round.
>
> Check it with any foe that has no armor and a DX lower than 13 (so charger
> goes first), say 069 (broadword, dx 12, small shield). Charger wins 76%
> according to the runs I did.
>
> To avoid most of the time even a -2 dx penalty from the deadly charge, a
> defender against that charge needs at least 3 points of armor. Pushing that
> theory to an extreme, consider 076 (broadsword, plate, lg shield) which has
> total armor of 7, stopping most of the probable first-round damage. In the
> simulator, 065 loses most of the time against 076 (winning 55.24%).
>
> I calculated it assuming defending. The 7.75 drops to 3.99 using the 4 dice
> to-hit probabilities and assuming no double/triple damage possible.
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 2:43 PM, PvK <pvk@oz.net> wrote:
>
> > If I follow you, I don't see how ST11;DX13;SPEAR;NO_ARMOR;NO_SHIELD would
> > defeat the same character charging it by choosing to Defend on the first
> > turn, 70% of the time. That makes no sense to me, so I think either I
> don't
> > understand, or the simulation isn't correctly simulating what you think
> it
> > does. Because, it should be less than 50%, since the defender will still
> > have a (fairly decent, with enemy DX 13) chance to get hit by the charge,
> > and then it's just a poke-off between two equal foe, with the defender
> > possibly starting with a major wound (or even being down or dead).
> >
> > If the numbers are good and I do get what you mean, and ignoring the
> > result I don't get above, then it seems like
> > ST12;DX12;BROADSWORD;NO_ARMOR;SMALL_SHIELD also answers your question
> > pretty well, with a 63% success rate. That design always seemed to me to
> be
> > generally the best all-around design for generic duel purposes in Melee,
> > from experience. Assuming a ST 11 DX 13 Mace/shield _dwarf_ is not
> allowed.
> >
> > Also, I see a win by armor: Try ST12;DX12;BROADSWORD;PLATE;LARGE_SHIELD
> > =====
> > Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> > Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> > "unsubscribe tft"
> >
>
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
>

=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"