★ Tanki Online Wiki Hub ★

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

^

I fully understand what you are saying but I just don't want players to go read the wiki and come out thinking the critical only gives a 9% bonus. Maybe another note saying you are getting a 30% bonus from a normal shot within the max damage range? And we KNOW the average values for Smoky, (not to mention Thunder, Rico, and Twins) and how to calculate them as well.

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

IMHO:

• For players that understand the damage model, the 9% information is irrelevant.
• For players that do not understand the damage model, this 9% information is irrelevant and misleading.

 

If I may propose something, then

• I would delete this passage with 9%
• tell simply that the damage of critical shots is higher then of normal shots, and that they occur with a certain likelyhood
• and that the critical damage is not reduced by range and deals the same damage up to infinite distance

[Shedinja 1,488]

 

IMHO:

• For players that understand the damage model, the 9% information is irrelevant.
• For players that do not understand the damage model, this 9% information is irrelevant and misleading.

 

If I may propose something, then

• I would delete this passage with 9%
• tell simply that the damage of critical shots is higher then of normal shots, and that they occur with a certain likelyhood
• and that the critical damage is not reduced by range and deals the same damage up to infinite distance

 

This can be arranged. It'll be written as simply a higher standard damage than a typical shot that does not deviate with range, unlike standard Smoky shots.

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

^would be perfect, thanks ! :)

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

http://en.tankiwiki.com/Wasp

Desription defines "Acceleration", the table of values does not give a value for Acceleration. (fwd acceleration)

Desription does not define "Power", the table of values does give a value for Power.

Same goes for Hornet, Hunter... and then I stopped checking the hulls :p

 

If acceleration is a function of weight and power in this game, then this function would be of interrest.

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

 

I was about to post that exact thing! :lol: Acceleration statistics from 0 speed are missing.

[You.Have.to.die 519]

I was about to post that exact thing! :lol: Acceleration statistics from 0 speed are missing.

Technically, if someones speed is 0 then they're not accelerating, they would be stationary. :)

[Tofu 6,773]

Technically, if someones speed is 0 then they're not accelerating, they would be stationary. :)

Not necessarily. 0 speed does not mean 0 accelerationn. They would however be stationary

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

Technically, if someones speed is 0 then they're not accelerating, they would be stationary. :)

Not necessarily. 0 speed does not mean 0 accelerationn. They would however be stationary

No, I meant acceleration rate from stationary.  There are different rates for accelerating in different direction than the one you are going, etc.

[You.Have.to.die 519]

Not necessarily. 0 speed does not mean 0 accelerationn. They would however be stationary

That is literally what i said  :mellow:

[Shedinja 1,488]

http://en.tankiwiki.com/Wasp

Desription defines "Acceleration", the table of values does not give a value for Acceleration. (fwd acceleration)

Desription does not define "Power", the table of values does give a value for Power.

Same goes for Hornet, Hunter... and then I stopped checking the hulls :P

 

If acceleration is a function of weight and power in this game, then this function would be of interrest.

The exact components and how they interact with one another to form power is something worth investigating, so I'll make a note to check this as soon as possible. The hull pages, by all appearances, are in need of a brush up, and have been added to my to-do list; for the time being, Acceleration has simply been replaced with Power, for immediate clarity. Expect them fully brushed up by the end of December. Their respective guide pages are also planned to be modified, while the turret pages have already been thoroughly edited spare Shaft (which will follow suit soon enough).

 

As a side note, the In Depth: Game Mechanics section is currently undergoing an experimental format change, as displayed under the Smoky category. Suggestions and inquiries are welcome.

Edited December 14, 2016 by Shedinja

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

ty :)

[Tani_S 743]

Wow that looks nice! Good job  :wub:  Especially the information in the Critical Damage Mechanics section was new to me.

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

Nice job! :) 

 

9% is still there.... :mellow:

[Shedinja 1,488]

Nice job! :)

 

9% is still there.... :mellow:

Wait a moment, where is the remaining 9%? If I left one in the SmokyRangeVariation Chart by mistake, it's because that was one of the first graphs I made for the section, and it may require editing, since the problem was not brought up by the community at the time.

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

Wait a moment, where is the remaining 9%? If I left one in the SmokyRangeVariation Chart by mistake, it's because that was one of the first graphs I made for the section, and it may require editing, since the problem was not brought up by the community at the time.

No, that's not what I mean. :P Great job on the Game Mechanics section. :D I'm talking about the description for Smoky in "Turrets and Hulls".

[Shedinja 1,488]

No, that's not what I mean. :P Great job on the Game Mechanics section. :D I'm talking about the description for Smoky in "Turrets and Hulls".

I could have sworn I edited that. I must not have saved it at the time, but it's been edited accordingly now.

[marc.jp_44 20,844]

I thought you weren't allowed to swear.

Edited December 15, 2016 by Marc

[r_I_already_won0 2,359]

I thought you aren't allowed to swear.

This is grammatically incorrect. It should be 

 

"I don't think you are allowed to swear" or

"I thought you weren't allowed to swear"

 

:D

 

LOL grammar police to the rescue! :lol:

[marc.jp_44 20,844]

This is grammatically incorrect. It should be 

 

"I don't think you are allowed to swear" or

"I thought you weren't allowed to swear"

 

:D

 

LOL grammar police to the rescue! :lol:

Gawd I hate tenses.

[Tofu 6,773]

That is literally what i said :mellow:

No, you said 0 speed=0 acceleration

I say 0 speed does not mean 0 acceleration

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

As a side note, the In Depth: Game Mechanics section is currently undergoing an experimental format change, as displayed under the Smoky category. Suggestions and inquiries are welcome.

After my rankup for the sale is finally done, I had some time to check the Smoky section in detail

Overall comment: awesome :)

 

Please find some proposals and comments below ;)

 

 

 

inital text passage:

 

Smoky's normal shot damage varies randomly and depends on the user's distance from the target:

• For a target within the [range of maximum damage], a target will suffer a random close-range damage between the [maximum damage] and [minimum damage] per shot values.
• For a target outside [range of maximum damage] but within the [range of minimum damage], this inital random close-range damage will gradually slope downwards with distance and taper until the [range of minimum damage] is reached (where it deals 10% of the initial random close-range damage)
• For a target beyond the [range of minimum damage], the damage will not further decay with distance, but will remain at 10% of the initial random close-range damage.

Smoky's critical hits:

Smoky is capable of dealing a 'critical hit' - its recipient will emit a cloud of sparks. That 'critical hit' can deal significantly more damage [Critical damage] than a standard shot it's damage does not decrease by distance. Its average likelihood is 20% [Critical chance]. It's detailed likelyhood is based on the number of consecutive landed hits on a target; [...and continued..]

1st picture on damage distribution

• would be cool if there was a y-axis named "propability" or alike, for people that are not used to distribution graphs. It could be in the center, in order to leave you text around the graph untouched.
• text proposal: "95% of shots will deal damage _within_ blue and green secitons..." (replaced "between" by "within")

picture on damage over range

• It was misleading for me, that the range between [range of max dmg] and [range of min dmg] gets called [range of min dmg]. the brackets over the diagramm support this misleading information too.
• I would propose to use the same terms in this graph as they are given in the tables of values for each turret, and use those standardised names at the propper distances on the x-axis.
• I think this picture is the best point to show+explain, how the weak damage parameter influences the damage at ranges at/beyond [range of min dmg]. You could write that the damage there is between a maximum of [max dmg] x [weak damage%] and a minimum of [min dmg] x [weak damage%] or something simmilar, that gives the idea.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[Shedinja 1,488]

inital text passage:

 

Smoky's normal shot damage varies randomly and depends on the user's distance from the target:

 

The term 'random' implies that there is no correlation with Smoky's damage per shot whatsoever, but you're correct in the sense that its damage can't be predicted between the preset range. As such, the phrase has been edited as such:

 

"Smoky's damage capabilities vary within a set damage range, of which changes congruently depending on the user's distance from the target."

 

This phrase corrects many if not all of the issues listed for this segment, while simultaneously reducing the number of characters required. The graphs are doing the majority of the talking, remember.

• For a target within the [range of maximum damage], a target will suffer a random close-range damage between the [maximum damage] and [minimum damage] per shot values.
• For a target outside [range of maximum damage] but within the [range of minimum damage], this inital random close-range damage will gradually slope downwards with distance and taper until the [range of minimum damage] is reached (where it deals 10% of the initial random close-range damage)
• For a target beyond the [range of minimum damage], the damage will not further decay with distance, but will remain at 10% of the initial random close-range damage.

Smoky's critical hits:

Smoky is capable of dealing a 'critical hit' - its recipient will emit a cloud of sparks. That 'critical hit' can deal significantly more damage [Critical damage] than a standard shot it's damage does not decrease by distance. Its average likelihood is 20% [Critical chance]. It's detailed likelyhood is based on the number of consecutive landed hits on a target; [...and continued..]

1st picture on damage distribution

• would be cool if there was a y-axis named "propability" or alike, for people that are not used to distribution graphs. It could be in the center, in order to leave you text around the graph untouched. 

I considered this originally, but opted against it since it's already pretty clear that the higher the graph goes, the more likely it's going to occur. The text alongside each graph is there solely to explain the exact reasoning behind it.

• text proposal: "95% of shots will deal damage _within_ blue and green secitons..." (replaced "between" by "within")

I stated 'within' over 'between' due to the fact that the numbers along the borders are shared with other groupings. Under the context, the words seem synonymous.

 

picture on damage over range

• It was misleading for me, that the range between [range of max dmg] and [range of min dmg] gets called [range of min dmg]. the brackets over the diagramm support this misleading information too.

This will be changed accordingly, but this means that there will be no label between the maximum damage range and the minimum damage range. 

• I would propose to use the same terms in this graph as they are given in the tables of values for each turret, and use those standardised names at the propper distances on the x-axis.

This will be edited accordingly.

• I think this picture is the best point to show+explain, how the weak damage parameter influences the damage at ranges at/beyond [range of min dmg]. You could write that the damage there is between a maximum of [max dmg] x [weak damage%] and a minimum of [min dmg] x [weak damage%] or something simmilar, that gives the idea.

Is this not exactly described by the first paragraph and second paragraph in succession, in accordance with the chart? "Between xm and ym, the damage output of Smoky steadily and congruently decreases to 10% of its total power." "Between ym and zm, the damage remains the same (this is still referencing the 10% of total), and will do so even beyond zm." Congruent decrease means that the values of maximum damage and minimum damage decrease in such a way that they retain the same percentage difference after being shrunk.

 

It's like how a 4:2 block is shrunken to a 2:1 block. The sizes are different, but the shape and area percentages remain the same.

[BlackWasp777 4,555]

"congruent"

The term fits. I've never used it in that way (just for objects, not for graphs) but when I think of it.. it fits.

 

 

"Smoky's damage capabilities vary within a set damage range, of which changes congruently depending on the user's distance from the target."

I think it is maybe misleading to use the phrase "damage range" as users might get tempted to think about the differend [range of... damage] parameters. Maybe "damage bandwith" would work?

 

 

I stated 'within' over 'between' due to the fact..

I absolutely agree to you, that "wihtin" is the better wording. But you used "between" in the graphs :P

 

 

..but this means that there will be no label between the maximum damage range and the minimum damage range.

I think you do not need labels over the damage-per-range graph. If you write the terms [range of max damage] below xm, and [range of min dmg] below ym, then it should be very well readable.

 

 

"Between xm and ym, the damage output of Smoky steadily and congruently decreases to 10% of its total power."

What about:

"Between xm and ym, the damage output of Smoky steadily and congruently decreases to 10% of its close range damage bandwith."

When I pretend to myself to have no idea about this things, and then read "total power", then I thought instantly of the max damage parameter. "Close range damage" could be easier to grasp, as the reader understood earlier the damage bandwith principle explained in the close range case.

Edited December 18, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[You.Have.to.die 519]

Technically, if someones speed is 0 then they're not accelerating, they would be stationary. :)

  

Not necessarily. 0 speed does not mean 0 accelerationn. They would however be stationary

  

No, you said 0 speed=0 acceleration

I say 0 speed does not mean 0 acceleration

Really, where do I say 0 speed is 0 acceleration. :)