Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Centigrade]

How so? We're dealing with how many hits it takes to kill an unarmed but armoured dwarf. Why would it matter whether he takes five hits from one human or one hit each from five humans?

Snowball effects can really mess up these sort of tests, especially on a scale of hundreds.

What snowball effect? I am testing hits needed to kill, not who wins in a fight. The dwarfs will lose every time, because the dwarfs are unskilled and have no weapons while the attackers are either Proficient or Great, and have either a copper, iron, steel, or adamantine weapon. The variable being tested is how many hits, on average, it takes for a given weapon of a specified material wielded at a particular skill level to kill (or perhaps merely incapacitate) a dwarf wearing various armour sets.

[Loud Whispers]

What snowball effect? I am testing hits needed to kill, not who wins in a fight. The dwarfs will lose every time, because the dwarfs are unskilled and have no weapons while the attackers are either Proficient or Great, and have either a copper, iron, steel, or adamantine weapon. The variable being tested is how many hits, on average, it takes for a given weapon of a specified material wielded at a particular skill level to kill (or perhaps merely incapacitate) a dwarf wearing various armour sets.

Because then you're also including exhaustion, multiple combatants standing upon one another [or rather, lying down] as well as RNG strangeness.

[DWC]

What snowball effect? I am testing hits needed to kill, not who wins in a fight. The dwarfs will lose every time, because the dwarfs are unskilled and have no weapons while the attackers are either Proficient or Great, and have either a copper, iron, steel, or adamantine weapon. The variable being tested is how many hits, on average, it takes for a given weapon of a specified material wielded at a particular skill level to kill (or perhaps merely incapacitate) a dwarf wearing various armour sets.

Because then you're also including exhaustion, multiple combatants standing upon one another [or rather, lying down] as well as RNG strangeness.

None of those variables determine if an attack bypasses armor or not, besides the strangeness of RNG, but that's why you have a larger  sample group.

[Centigrade]

What snowball effect? I am testing hits needed to kill, not who wins in a fight. The dwarfs will lose every time, because the dwarfs are unskilled and have no weapons while the attackers are either Proficient or Great, and have either a copper, iron, steel, or adamantine weapon. The variable being tested is how many hits, on average, it takes for a given weapon of a specified material wielded at a particular skill level to kill (or perhaps merely incapacitate) a dwarf wearing various armour sets.

Because then you're also including exhaustion, multiple combatants standing upon one another [or rather, lying down] as well as RNG strangeness.

None of those variables determine if an attack bypasses armor or not, besides the strangeness of RNG, but that's why you have a larger  sample group.

Yeah this is my response but I am willing to hear and entertain a rebuttal if Loud Whispers has one? I don't want to overlook a valid concern.

[Loud Whispers]

Nah, seems good after all.

[DWC]

It might be possible that an exhausted or prone attacker has a penalty to how much force they put behind an attack. Never really occurred to me, but I don't parse data so much as I look at combat reports and results. Group vs group seems a more realistic experiment methodology and could produce more useful results.

Say you have some marginal armor material like bone or leather, it gets plowed through almost every time with a silver shortsword with a healthy attacker, but if the attacker is tired or knocked over, the attacks have less effect and more attacks are deflected or mitigated. That margin there would be important and it would be overlooked if no attacker was ever tired or prone.

[Centigrade]

It might be possible that an exhausted or prone attacker has a penalty to how much force they put behind an attack. Never really occurred to me, but I don't parse data so much as I look at combat reports and results. Group vs group seems a more realistic experiment methodology and could produce more useful results.

Say you have some marginal armor material like bone or leather, it gets plowed through almost every time with a silver shortsword with a healthy attacker, but if the attacker is tired or knocked over, the attacks have less effect and more attacks are deflected or mitigated. That margin there would be important and it would be overlooked if no attacker was ever tired or prone.

And this is why I intend, for my testing, to include nothing but the unedited 0.34.11 game client, and run several large samples. I will end up running several thousands of individual combat encounters, so the influence of outlying effects, while included, ought to be normalized.