Talk:Rifle and Morale Distribution in General
Is this with or without medals? -Branabus, minor
- Information about it added, Branabus. Still if you find any grammtical/syntax/diction/etc. mistakes, please correct them Thanks --Kuppuswami 10:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- I would like to know how you have found out that in-game medal description is faulty. --Hyyppa
- I am unsure what you are trying to ask me Hyyppa. Could you please help me and try to explain what your question is about? Btw, you were seconds faster than me in chasing the spambot ;)--Kuppuswami 10:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- In-game description says 3%, not 3 point increase. So how have you found out that this would be faulty and is actually 3 points instead of 3%? --Hyyppa
Ok. Now I've got you. Let's discuss your question with the 6 percent vs. 6 points example:
If we assume the game uses a 6 percent increase, all rifle values of deployed soldiers should go up by 6 percent. That way a normal soldier deployed with 17 rifle skill would gain 1 additional point resulting in 18 rifle skill, soldier deployed with 34 rifle skill would than have +2 resulting in 36 rifle skill and so on.
This would lead to an average increased by 6 percent. Basic average right now is ca. 20,5; the with-medal-average should then be around 20,5 + 6 * 0,205 = 21,73. Actually the measured with-medal-average is around ca. 25,3 and thus too far away from the expected with-medal-average. That is the fact that makes me believe the in-game information is faulty.
Oh, and one further visible hint is the uprating of the minimum from 11 to 17.
Hope that'll help. Regards --Kuppuswami 13:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- It is indeed faulty, I can confirm that. Urb made it so that if you have those ribbons, you get additional chances to get additional rifle points. I won't go into specifics, but it still relies on probability and randomness and is not a basic 6% increase. --Brutalized 14:21, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hey Brutalized,
- do you agree on the idea of a 6 point (not 6 percent) increase or do you hint on something else by saying there are additional chances which rely on probability and randomness? Regards --Kuppuswami 12:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- What's your point Jacob? That information is already in the article, isn't it? --Kuppuswami 11:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)