Are all of the following attacks an option?

Sat, 11/28/2020 - 13:28

#1

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

End damages? Discussion

The 1 AP attack does 39.

The 2 AP constant salvo does 52 or 26.
The 2 AP burst salvo does 46 or 44.
The 2 AP charging salvo does 60 or 2.

The 2 AP constant with cancelation does 32.

***

These damages are based on having only 1 squad. But if you have multiple squads, using the AP as efficient as possible. We get the following:

The 1 AP attack does 91.

The 2 AP constant salvo does 78 or 39.
The 2 AP burst salvo does 69 or 66.
The 2 AP charging salvo does 90 or 6.

The 2 AP constant with cancelation does 56.

***

On squad basis, the burst is obviously the best weapon.
Unless you want to deal with buildings, then the constant salvo is better and the charging is best.

On efficient basis, the burst is less than the 1 AP attack. Which beats all other attacks, even the charging one, by 1 damage.

The cancelation on squad basis, is a better choice than the charging and even constant salvo. But in its function, the 1 AP attack and the burst salvo will beat the cancelation. And thus the cancelation is actually not a choice here.

The cancelation on efficient basis, does rise relatively in damage. Except for with the 1 AP attack. The burst option is also not surpassed. Meaning that the cancelation is still not a good choice.

When do players use the cancelation?
If the enemy is in range yet is planning on running away. Which normally costs AP and the player would do less damage.

Maybe the difference is too big. In a sense, 13 got reduced to 8. Only for a fact that 1 AP can get spared.

So, how much damage should the cancelation be able to do, before even becomming a practical choice?

Sat, 11/28/2020 - 13:39

#2

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Comparing with 1 AP

The 1 AP attack does 39 damage on squad basis.
The cancelation does 32 damage on squad basis.

To be a practical choice on squad basis. The damage should be at least 40. This means 10 instead of 8 damage on a 1 shot basis.
It could also be 11 or 12 damage.

So I need to figure out a way to do this in a none abusive way.

Sat, 11/28/2020 - 18:02

#3

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Damage = 11.74

Oofff, well....
I found another solution.
Where abusing the system is not profitable.

A constant damage with the option to cancel the second shot. The damage is 11.74 (through some ridiculous math)

After 4 successful shots, we get a total damage of roughly 47.

It is better than the 1 AP attack on basis of a squad.
It is slightly better than the burst, on basis of a squad.
It is slightly less than a normal constant salvo.

When being efficient with AP. The total damage will be roughly 82.
It surpasses the normal constant salvo as well.
But we need to keep in mind that the effecient numbers do have 1 AP remaining for all 2 AP salvo's.

I have no idea if the calculations are correct for the more complex variants of a salvo of 3 or more AP. I need to test this out.

Nor am I aware if round damages with round prices are possible now...

Wed, 12/02/2020 - 00:04

#4

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Rules for fairness

The minimum costs of a choice weapon;
- At least the salvo costs.
- At least the costs if the salvo is reduced in lenght.

The choice effect, can only be based on whatever is going to be added.

***

Example:
Salvo 14-0
Costs 400
If it was a single shot, thus 14, costs 700.
The addition is 0
There would be no choice as singles are always better.
Onyl a salvo (400, 2ap) and a single shot (700, 1ap) are possible.

Salvo 14-14
Costs 700
If it was a single shot, thus 14, costs 700
The addition would be 0-14, which normally costs 300. What price should be added to the minimal costs of 700?

Salvo 14-0.7
Costs 715
If it was a single shot, thus 14, costs 700
The addition would be 0-0.7, which normally costs 15. What price should be added to the minimal costs of 715?

Salvo 0-14
Costs 300
If it was a single shot, thus 0, costs 0
The addition would be 0-14, which costs 300. What price would we add now?

***

Looking at improvements of total damage. And then dividing this by 2 for 2 choices and by 2 for 2 to 1 ap. So divided by 4 with 100 percent damage addition. Gives weird numbers obviously.
But perpaps it is balanced.

Or simply divide the addition by 4 is another solution.

Either way would add 75 to the last choice mentioned above.

Wed, 12/02/2020 - 10:40

#5

let-off studios

Offline

Joined: 02/07/2011

Incentivizing

Is there a way to change the costs for these actions that would motivate players to always want to choose a certain option?

Is one of the options clearly a sub-optimal move? If you want it to still be a valid option, then there are two ready options to consider:
- Use math to determine the cost, but increase its effectiveness.
- Reduce its effectiveness based on the math, but make it cheaper to use.

Is the move to be used in desperation only? Then consider the same kind of options for balancing:
- It can be expensive, but will ensure the player gains some "breathing room" after it has been done.
- It's a high-cost, high-risk maneuver, but when it hits, it hits BIG.

It's clear you've done a lot of the "math" work to determine probabilities and such. When coming into fine-grain options like this, you can also let the way you want the player to feel guide your decisions, too.

So, what will deliver the best feeling when the maneuver is successful? How much tension do you want to have invested in that single die roll or Action Point?

Thu, 12/03/2020 - 03:00

#6

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

let-off studios wrote:Is

let-off studios wrote:

Is there a way to change the costs for these actions that would motivate players to always want to choose a certain option?

Obviously, the most efficient weapon is chosen. But there are several situations where every choice differs in effectivness.

The "single shot" and "salvo" are 2 distinct choices.
The "choice" weapon would be right in between. Thus giving players a middle ground.

let-off studios wrote:

Is one of the options clearly a sub-optimal move? If you want it to still be a valid option, then there are two ready options to consider:
- Use math to determine the cost, but increase its effectiveness.
- Reduce its effectiveness based on the math, but make it cheaper to use.

I am using math to see the costs. But "dividing by" the costs to see the efficiency of the damage. The calculation of the costs should be based on the practical input of players.
An example is that the first shot is always fired. The second shot in a salvo would be a choice if it is added or not.
This in contrary to dual wield weapons that has 2 weapons of different attributes.

let-off studios wrote:

Is the move to be used in desperation only? Then consider the same kind of options for balancing:
- It can be expensive, but will ensure the player gains some "breathing room" after it has been done.
- It's a high-cost, high-risk maneuver, but when it hits, it hits BIG.

The salvo is the big risk for mobile units. It is often used to be more efficient against slow and still objects.
The choice weapon is the one that would ensure things and should create breathing room that the high and zero risk don't have.

let-off studios wrote:

It's clear you've done a lot of the "math" work to determine probabilities and such. When coming into fine-grain options like this, you can also let the way you want the player to feel guide your decisions, too.

So, what will deliver the best feeling when the maneuver is successful? How much tension do you want to have invested in that single die roll or Action Point?

This is a tough one. But let's say we got our basic (unsure) players, daring players and players that feel unsure about themselves while still wanting to take the risk.

Thu, 12/03/2020 - 18:47

#7

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Tripple dots

Not really going into detail.

But it looks like that having a choice would mean that there is a gap in designs.

The second shot in a choice weapon needs to be at least 50% in damage than that of the first shot.
Only to make it count as a choice.
There will be more factors involved: not just damage addition. But actually damage substraction.

Since other RPS can also be involved. I think that it is safe to say that: no...

Slowly progressing. This little post costed me 2 hours of research. Just to give you an idea of all the math and logic involved.

And if I think of the interactions with other choices. Perhaps I should just stop.

We already have the choice between single shot weaponry and salvo's. And there is a limit to certain aspects of the game.

This is the 1*6/6 versus 6*1/6 choice all over again.

My precious players simply need to accept this...

***

In other news!!!
I can add an action called salvo.

...

:)

Players can choose to save AP by simply having units fire a salvo with their single shot or salvo fire.

A single shot can go from 1 to 7 AP. This has to be declared prior. But man, the damage goes waaaaaay up. The risk of course is that if the targets are dead or have run away. The remaining AP are lost. Which could have been spend on moving and stuff.
The single shot can go from 3 certain to 7 risk shots.

A salvo of 2, would be able to have 2, 4 or 6 AP spend.
A salvo of 2 can go from 2 certain to 6 risk shots.

A salvo of 3, would be able to have 3 or 6 AP spend.
A salvo of 3 can go from 1 certain to 6 risk shots.

A salvo of 4 or more would always have 1 certain shot and the rest of the AP adds as risk shots.

3-7
2-6
1-6
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
hmmmm, nice development.

Fri, 12/04/2020 - 13:40

#8

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

That last little stray of light on the background

"Treat each moment in the choice as a moment in the salvo".
"No need to look at the other RPS, right?"

***

How could I have forgotten.
I could treat the second shot as an individual (not many people are treated like this by me).
Testing commences now!

Fri, 12/04/2020 - 16:14

#9

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

A new (super duper old actually) insight

It doesn't matter how much we think that we choose to have that second shot or not.
If we don't choose that second shot. We get a first shot the next time.
Thus this one too will be very important in order to see what is best.

The chaos went around again.

If a salvo has shot A and then shot B.
It can have the scores in damage like:
2*A, 2*A+B, 2*A+2*B

Then a choice weapon can have:
3*A, 2*A+B, 2*A+2*B

It is that 3*A that is better than the 2*A.
The first shot is the main factor...

Don't ask me how I got to this.
You don't want to read another 3 pages again.

Sat, 12/05/2020 - 09:30

#10

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Last test, unles someone has an idea

Still only viewing at salvo's and choices of 2 shots.
You ready for that 3 page essay I made?
I got a conclusion at the end.

The following are considered to be important:
Step 1
- The costs of the first shot as single shot.
- The costs of the second shot as single shot that costs 2 AP, so only 50% credits.
- The costs of the salvo if the weapon is used as salvo.
Step 2
- The costs of the 3 above are tested, which one is the most expensive. And consider this to be the minimal costs of the choice weapon.
- We select the primairy costs from the 2 shots that are considered as single shot.
- The other shot will be secondary. So either the first or the second shot can be secondary.
Step 3
- The secondary costs is added as 50% to the minimal costs.

***

I took a look at tier 12 weapons. Seeing as how I got more options here.
The damages for the salvo weapons are
2A/2A+B/2A+2B
The damages for the choice weapons are
3A/2A+B/2A+2B

Salvo weapons:
_0-28; _0/28/56; Charging
_3-24; _6/30/54; Charging
_6-20; 12/32/52; Charging
_9-16; 18/34/50; Charging
12-12; 24/36/48; Constant
15- 8; 30/38/46; Burst
18- 4; 36/40/44; Burst
21- 0; 42/42/42; Burst

Choice weapons:
_0-24; _0/24/48; Charging
_1-23; _3/25/48; Charging
_2-22; _6/26/48; Charging
_4-18; 12/26/44; Charging
_6-13; 18/25/38; Charging
9.6-9.6; 28.8/28.8/38.4; Constant
10- 8; 30/28/36; Burst
11- 4; 33/26/30; Burst
12- 0; 36/24/24; Burst

Now for some discussing?

21-0 salvo and 12-0 choice
Obviously, a player is going with the 21-0 salvo. The 12-0 choice isn't a choice at all. And is in fact a 12 single shot. At the second turn, a 12 single shot will have done 24 damage, while the 21-0 salvo is still at 21 damage.

11-4 choice
This one is special.
It is worse than the 12 single shot.
The second shot will not raise the damage. Because doing multiple single shots is better.

10-8 choice
This one is also special.
But still possible.
The second shot will not raise the damage sufficiently with one succes on the second shot.
But if 2 salvo's are completed. It will surpass doing 3 single shots.
So if a player is sure that 2 salvo's are to be completed. It can attempt making them. However, the player might as well go for a salvo weapon instead.

0-28 salvo and 0-24 choice
It is clearly the choice does less damage. But an AP will be saved if the enemy runs away. The salvo will remain costly. The second shot is more likely to happen when using the choice weapon.

0-28 salvo and 21-0 salvo
Clearly you gain 33% more damage if you are able to hit.

0-24 choice and 21-0 salvo
You can still gain more damage. But only by roughly 14%. But if the choice fails, you can keep that AP. If you are 100% sure it is going to succeed. Then the 0-28 salvo would be better.

3-24 salvo and 2-22 choice
6-20 salvo and 4-18 choice
9-16 salvo and 6-13 choice
In the worst scenario. They both do 6 or 12 or 18 damage.
Once the charging weapons hit. The salvo obviously gains more ground.
The higher the first shot can be, the lower the charging gain will be. Where the choice obviously gains less.
On an important side note. The choice weapon in the second turn AND worst scenario. Will have the upper hand above the salvo weapon. Because the salvo weapon will be stuck for 1 turn on the same achieved damage. Just like the burst 21-0 and the single 12.

***

12-12 salvo and 9.6-9.6 choice
This is it!!
Is the choice design of use compared to the salvo and single shot design?

12.0/24.0/36.0/36.0; single shot of 12
12.0/12.0/24.0/24.0; salvo of 12.0-12.0 going bad
12.0/24.0/36.0/48.0; salvo of 12.0-12.0 going good
_9.6/19.2/28.8/28.8; choice of 9.6- 9.6 going bad
_9.6/19.2/28.8/38.4; choice of 9.6- 9.6 going good

Salvo and single shot?
The salvo going bad will end up at 67% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going bad will be halfway at 50% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going good will end up at 133% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going good will be halfway at 100% than that of the single shot.

Choice and single shot?
The choice going bad will end up at 80% than that of the single shot.
The choice going bad will be halfway at 80% than that of the single shot.
The choice going good will end up at 107% than that of the single shot.
The choice going good will be halfway at 80% than that of the single shot.

Choice and salvo?
The choice going bad will end up at 120% than that of the salvo going bad.
The choice going bad will be halfway at 160% than that of the salvo going bad.
The choice going good will end up at 80% than that of the salvo going good.
The choice going good will be halfway at 80% than that of the salvo going good.

"Total scores"
Bad end situation:
_67%; Salvo versus single shot
_80%; Choice versus single shot
120%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 275% best option
_Salvo total; 187% worst option
Choice total; 200%

Halfway bad situation:
_50%; Salvo versus single shot
_80%; Choice versus single shot
160%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 325% best option
_Salvo total; 113% worst option
Choice total; 240%

Good end situation:
133%; Salvo versus single shot
107%; Choice versus single shot
_80%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 169% worst option
_Salvo total; 258% best option
Choice total; 187%

Halfway good situation:
100%; Salvo versus single shot
_80%; Choice versus single shot
_80%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 225% best option
_Salvo total; 225% best option
Choice total; 160% worst option

Strategically speaking:
If a player has planned well, a good situation takes place.
The choice weapon is the worst option to begin with. However, it will surpas the single shot. The salvo is obviously the winner here.

If the enemy will sneak away during combat.
The single shot weapon will be the best option at all times. And the salvo is obviously the loser here.

The top scores for the 3:
Single; 325% at the halfway bad situation.
_Salvo; 258% at the good end situation.
Choice; 240% at the halfway bad situation, but is the middle guy there.

The lowest scores for the 3:
Single; 169% at the good end situation. Good end?
_Salvo; 113% at the halfway bad situation.
Choice; 160% at the halfway good situation.

What if a game has all situations?
Single; 994%
_Salvo; 783%
Choice; 787%

What if a game has smart players, these scores are chances on the weapon being used?
Single; 713%
_Salvo; 371%
Choice; 0_0%

What if a game has only idiots, then ehm, these scores are chances on the weapon being used!
Single; 169%
_Salvo; 300%
Choice; 160%

***

Conclusion...?
So, players that are unsure, stupd or silly. Will have a lot of trouble when facing a player that uses the choice weapon.
However, if the players gain experience. They will use the single shot weapon the most.
The salvo weapon will be a good choice for strategic situations regarding immobile targets. Where the choice weapon will be the middle man.

The choice weapon still has a purpose. When a strategic player aknowledges that the enemy might run away. But the chances are so-so. Then using the choice weapon will yield is more than double a result, if such event does take place. Obviously, the single shot is the best in this regard. But eats up the AP faster than the other 2 weapons.

Sun, 12/06/2020 - 16:09

#11

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

A little redo

X3M wrote:

Step 3
- The secondary costs is added as 25% to the minimal costs.

This will make choice weapons a bit cheaper. Thus more damage. The gap gets smaller now.
The number of options with round numbers for the choice weapons goes down. However, there are still plenty of options left.

***

Choice weapons:
_0-24; _0/24/48; Charging
_2-23; _6/27/50; Charging
10.67-10.67; 32/32/42.67; Constant
11- 8; 33/30/38; Burst
12- 0; 36/24/24; Burst

What are the changes in discussing?

11-8 choice
This one is special, just like how the 10-8 choice would be. However, the damages are a bit better. So less risk.

***

12-12 salvo and 10.67-10.67 choice

Is the choice design of use compared to the salvo and single shot design?

12.0/24.0/36.0/36.0; single shot of 12
12.0/12.0/24.0/24.0; salvo of 12.0-12.0 going bad
12.0/24.0/36.0/48.0; salvo of 12.0-12.0 going good
10.7/21.3/32.0/32.0; choice of 10.7-10.7 going bad
10.7/21.3/32.0/42.7; choice of 10.7-10.7 going good

Salvo and single shot?
The salvo going bad will end up at 67% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going bad will be halfway at 50% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going good will end up at 133% than that of the single shot.
The salvo going good will be halfway at 100% than that of the single shot.

Choice and single shot?
The choice going bad will end up at 89% than that of the single shot.
The choice going bad will be halfway at 89% than that of the single shot.
The choice going good will end up at 119% than that of the single shot.
The choice going good will be halfway at 89% than that of the single shot.

Choice and salvo?
The choice going bad will end up at 133% than that of the salvo going bad.
The choice going bad will be halfway at 178% than that of the salvo going bad.
The choice going good will end up at 89% than that of the salvo going good.
The choice going good will be halfway at 89% than that of the salvo going good.

"Total scores"
Bad end situation:
_67%; Salvo versus single shot
_89%; Choice versus single shot
133%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 263% best option
_Salvo total; 142% worst option
Choice total; 222%

Halfway bad situation:
_50%; Salvo versus single shot
_89%; Choice versus single shot
178%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 313% best option
_Salvo total; 106% worst option
Choice total; 267%

Good end situation:
133%; Salvo versus single shot
119%; Choice versus single shot
_89%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 159% worst option
_Salvo total; 246% best option
Choice total; 208%

Halfway good situation:
100%; Salvo versus single shot
_89%; Choice versus single shot
_89%; Choice versus salvo
Single total; 213% best option
_Salvo total; 213% best option
Choice total; 178% worst option

***

The top scores for the 3:
Single; 313% at the halfway bad situation.
_Salvo; 246% at the good end situation.
Choice; 267% at the halfway bad situation, but is the middle guy there.
HEY!!! this choice just surpassed the top score of a salvo.

The lowest scores for the 3:
Single; 159% at the good end situation. Good end?
_Salvo; 106% at the halfway bad situation.
Choice; 178% at the halfway good situation.
And here the choice surpassed the single!

***

What if a game has all situations?
Single; 948%
_Salvo; 707%
Choice; 875%
Ah, choice is right in between. Awesome!

What if a game has smart players, these scores are chances on the weapon being used?
Single; 682%
_Salvo; 352%
Choice; 0_0%

What if a game has only idiots, then ehm, these scores are chances on the weapon being used!
Single; 159%
_Salvo; 248%
Choice; 178%

Conclusion
Well, sure the choice has surpassed a couple of events in a better way. But still....
The biggest improvement is the choice good end compared to the single shot good end. Which is very important. Because players will actually prefer the choice weapon over the single shot weapon much more.

It went from 107% to 119% efficiency. That is an increase of 11%.

Tue, 12/08/2020 - 15:32

#12

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

While some work

I have found other inconsistencies. So I go back to the drawing board.

Sat, 12/12/2020 - 14:18

#13

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

So, I deviced a way...

To make sure that.
Every choice weapon is a choice on itself. Meaning that there is no "best" choice, rendering all other choices invalid.

If you compare with the previous ones. You see that every result is different now. And incrasing or declining at a certain situation.

Choice weapons:
_0-24; _0/24/48; Charging
_2-21; _6/25/46; Charging
_4-18; 12/26/44; Charging
_6-15; 18/27/42; Charging
_8-12; 24/28/40; Charging
9.6-9.6; 28.8/28.8/38.4; Constant
10- 9; 30/29/38; Burst
12- 6; 36/30/36; Burst

We see a return of the 9.6 choice.
in a bad situation, it will be better than the 12-12 salvo. In a good situation, it can be better than the 12 single. But players will eventually use efficiency by having multiple squads.

And the 12-6 choice will be like a single. But if players are able to get into a strategic situation. This weapon will cost 1 AP less.

The 10-9 choice will start lower, but has a better reward already of +2 damage.

***

Now then, I let them feast on this system. To see if there are still flaws.
But if there are not. I might be able to have a nice and easy way to determine bigger choices as well.

Where a third shot in a salvo is 1/3th than that of the first, to be a valid choice weapon.

12-6-4 would be such example.
12-4-4 is invalid.
12-6-0 is invalid.

But this is for later concern.

Sun, 12/13/2020 - 11:10

#14

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Little details

A choice salvo of 3 needs to be build up as following:

The second shot has to be at least 1/2 that of the first shot.

Not sure yet, but I think that...
The third shot has to be at least 2/3 that of the second shot.

12-6-2 is a no go
12-4-4 is a no go
12-6-4 is approved.

Not sure about the costs yet.
But for a choice salvo of 2. The first part weigths 3 and the second part weights 2.
This looks like the old system. Maybe it continues like this for every next shot.

Wed, 12/16/2020 - 08:08

#15

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Kill chances

I have yet to make the list of kill chances for the tier 12.
All the previous ones can be ignored because there where faults in the balance.

I think it is best to compare interesting choices.
Tier 12 has 60 health points. The numbers of damage are dice that can throw 001234.
Please keep in mind, this is a high tier unit. Which is often only used once or twice in a game. There are also division possible. Like for example. A choice weapon of 0-2 would be tier 1.

Single 12
1st shot: 0.00%
2nd shot: 0.41%
3rd shot: 51.9%

Salvo 12-12
Best strategy:
1st shot: 0.00%
2nd shot: 0.41%
3rd shot: 51.9%
4th shot: 97.8%
Worst strategy:
1st shot: 0.00%
3rd shot: 0.41% (there is no shot in the 2nd)

Choice 9.6-9.6
Best strategy:
1st shot: 0.00%
2nd shot: 0.00%
3rd shot: 5.39%
4th shot: 70.1%
Worst strategy:
1st shot: 0.00%
2nd shot: 0.00%
3rd shot: 5.39%

I find that the best results follow a nice square root of 2. Which is an important factor in most RTS games.

The single will be able to destroy half in the 3rd turn.
The salvo with succes in the 3rd turn as well.
Everything dies in the 4th turn if the salvo still has succes. But everything lives if the salvo was planned badly.
The choice with succes will destroy 3 quarters in the 4th turn. Which is better than half in the 3rd turn.

I should be able to determine the practical chances that each weapon can achieve. The choice should have an easier time reaching that 4th turn with succes, than the salvo. This because the choice is a weaker weapon to begin with.

Sun, 12/20/2020 - 06:34

#16

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

Completion

I have written a complete calculator for all the choices. From the choice of 2 to 7 shots.

This means that I can now create super weapons.
Whereas the salvo weapons had a lot of trouble being easy to design at higher salvo's than 4.

The salvo of 7 has a prime divider of 14197. This means that you need this same amount of damage to get a nice round number to the price. Which is by the way 36450.
That is waaay to high for the rest of the design. And thus only splitting things up might work.

A choice of 84 damage at the end of 7 AP, yields a price of a nice 600. If I fill in this same number for a salvo at the 7 AP, we get roughly a price of 215.7.
That is almost 1/3th of the choice value. However, the choice will be much more preferred since 7 AP is ending that round for that player in just 1 turn. Other players might do 7 turns in the same round.

To get a salvo of the costs of 600 credits and 7 AP. We need to play around with the round numbers a bit.
0-1-0-1-1-1-224
This can be for a laser.
First nothing, then the second turn there is a warning damage. Then nothing again followed by 3 more turns of a warning. Then a massive laser strikes the enemy. Doing 2.67 times more damage than the choice weapon would do. Heck, if it misses. It might still have killed 1 infantry unit :D
This for a measily 600 credits.

The true laser would cost 1800 regarding the weapon.
After all, it is a super weapon.
0-0-1-1-2-3-688
At first, nothing happens. Then the laser can't hold much longer in turn 3. This damage slowly builds up. Then it releases all damage.

688 looks like a lot. And it is equivalent to 34400 in credits if it was done in 1 AP.
229 infantry would be the average deathtoll in 1 shot. But only at default costs.
Including range, we would get less damage.

1800 as costs would be reduced to 300 default costs if the range would be for example 18.
So, to make sure no misunderstandings are created. A possible super laser would look like this as salvo:
0-2-1-1-2-1-98 (In total an average of 35 dead infantry, or depending on the damage type, 5 tanks of tier 7)
And this as choice:
0-0-0-0-0-0-42
(In total an average of 14 dead infantry, or depending on the damage type, 2 tanks of tier 7)

Normal squad of infantry would deal 30 damage at a range of 2. Which is 10 dead infantry. And to keep in mind, this is for 1 AP. However, with a range of 2, they need to start walking. And their speed is often also 2. 18 - 2 = 16. They can spend 7 AP on walking a distance of 6 per round. So, only after 3 rounds, they can get into range of that super laser. And by then 14 dead infantry per round will surely have that army of 36 infantry or 5 tanks, reduced to 0.

User login

Navigation

Apr 24 2024

Apr 20 2024

Apr 18 2024

Apr 16 2024

Apr 15 2024

Apr 13 2024

Apr 12 2024

Apr 9 2024

Apr 6 2024

Apr 4 2024

Apr 1 2024

Mar 28 2024

Mar 21 2024

Mar 20 2024

Mar 19 2024

Mar 13 2024

Mar 8 2024

Mar 5 2024

Mar 4 2024

	TradeWorlds — Smuggler's Run (7) by questccg
	Single Item Shipping at The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter