It's great that you have decided to do you own simulations.
On a broader scale this should bring the community closer to actual facts on how to best use afflictions and damage powers, and how they compare.
It seems you have done your calculations with a critvalue of 20 correct?
As most of my simulations are done with 16+ crit, we only have one directly comparable figure.
Basic Damage (where i also did a 20 crit simulation.)
Your result for damage shift 0 is 10,13
My result as shown on the damage graph above was 10,14
In Elrics simulations he also found the average time to be 10,1.
So everyone pretty much agrees on that baseline. Thats a good first step.
As a note) You might want to do more than 10.000 simulations. If found that results could vary a lot especially with combats taking longer than 5 average rounds. So i did all calculations with at least 300.000 simulations. when doing 300.000+ simulations i found the results would consolidate at the same answer down to 1 decimal.
Unfortunately im not a licensed ruby programmer, so i cant be much help there.
However i have a couple of questions for you:
1) When calculating your degree of fail, you seem to use 1-4 = 1 degree, 5-9=2 degree, 10-14= 3degrees, 15+ 4 degrees
The numbers should be 1-5:1, 6-10:2, 11-15:3, 16+:4
2) When progressive: End of round saves only seem to add one or subtract one degree on a sucessful or failed save. A succesful save should remove all conditions, and a failed save should add 1, 2 or 3 degrees depending on how much the end of round save was missed by.
3) When cumulative: failure to save only seem to bump up the degree by 1. As in 2). Failures should bump up with 1,2 or 3 depending on how much the roll was failed by.
4) It seems you do not take a crit into account when doing end of round saves. You always roll saves vs a DC 20 (and not 25 in the case of a crit)?
5) Do double staggers lead to incapacitated? I just could not find it. I guess it does since our numbers are similar.
As i mentioned. I have never looked at Ruby programming before, so i might just be misreading or missing these things.
Murkglow wrote:Not likely. Aside from the math (of which, since I provided neither version and don't know exactly what was done on either end to arrive at their conclusions, I'm not going to comment on)
I recognize that simulations like these are very difficult to make transparent. And as a relative new poster in these forums, i dont have a lot of credit to my name in M&M forums. Nothing much to do about that. Except enrourage you to test the numbers, and im confident that you will find that they hold true.
But generally speaking i fully understand not simply taken my findings as a universal fact of things. A healthy degree of scepticism as always a good thing.
Lord Fell wrote:Anyways...
A whole lot of wordy posts, a lot of math that I kinda skimmed over...
is there some sort of consensus here?
Well try using a progressive affliction damage shifted 3 or 4 steps above the defenders relevant fort/will shift. Im confident that you will find it much more effective than damage in most cases. (and also more costly)
I propose that the math/simulation-discussion is continued solely at this thread.