Profile of theekvn

Jump back to quoted post19 Dec 2022, 15:56 PMProtos Angelus

As much as I respect his fortitude and decision and tenacity to create such simulations, they serve no real purpose. On paper they look nice and all, but the amount of extra, beneficial information they give you is nil. Mainly because there is no standard empirical method with which you will measure. It's a game with a large amount of variables/parameters, and trying to fit it to some model is... well. Not really necessary. Not to mention impossible. As nice as it looks, it's just a bunch of simple equations fitted to some data model, which was taken from the seralia stats. Not really telling anything. The most accurate and simple truth is: M1 81mm mortar, compared to OST mortar, has 25% lower AOE profile. That's it. That's the only difference if and only if the stats on seralia page are accurate. You can take what you want from it. Some will say M1 81 is useless, some will say it's OP. Don't care. I say it's meh performance wise, but being in USF, it's useless.
That aside, you also have a faction that needs to be mobile and aggressive, and spending MP on a mortar spells doom. But of course, I don't expect you to understand that.
Tens of thousands of games, and still you su** bal*s; With each faction. So stick to your paper general wannabe mathematician analysis or whatever rocks your boat, and leave me out of it.

Not to mention, nowhere does he explain the methodology he used in generating such stats. Which equations, which model, which representation. He just puts graphs on a paper, says he did 2500 repetitions and calls it a day. That wouldn't fly in a high school physics journal. I'm not saying he's lying. Of course not, but just putting graphs and giving a short explanation is... in poor taste.

Thank you very much. Have a pleasant day