Is IOND damage acculumative

[The Iron Duke]

Sometimes I try to fry the weapons on a target and find they are damaging me before the weapons go down.
Okay! I drop their shields, give em a good dose of IOND, but then have to retreat to allow my shields to recharge. The target's shields recover also. Return drop his shields and apply another good dose of IOND. Is the second and sebsequent IOND treatment accumulative as to the degradation of his weapons, or does it all start again with each shield recharge.

[AleksMain]

It is accumulative. I used Centaur, armed with Ion Disruptors to board Pirate Ospreys (two had been boarded already). After about 10 minutes of attacks and retreats back turret of enemy ship was destroyed always and boarding team claimed it safely.

[pjknibbs]

A weapon is either destroyed or not destroyed...it won't un-destroy itself if you stop using the IonD for a while!

[Al]

the Ion Disruptor will have a chance of destroying equipment when it hits the ship and the shields are down. It doesn't damage them in stages if thats what you mean so there is no problem with breaking off your attack and then returning.

[cezarip]

the Ion Disruptor will have a chance of destroying equipment when it hits the ship and the shields are down. It doesn't damage them in stages if thats what you mean so there is no problem with breaking off your attack and then returning.

What does it mean "...when it hits the ship..." since it is more or less a beam. I use bursts but the question is: will the weapons be destroyed if you maintain the beam for longer times on the target (by keeping the trigger pressed)?

[AleksMain]

What does it mean "...when it hits the ship..." since it is more or less a beam. I use bursts but the question is: will the weapons be destroyed if you maintain the beam for longer times on the target (by keeping the trigger pressed)?

More total time of IonD action on unshielded ship - more chance of enemy weapon destruction.

If you fire 10 sec , then 10 sec (after some period of time) , then total time will be 20 sec.

[cezarip]

What does it mean "...when it hits the ship..." since it is more or less a beam. I use bursts but the question is: will the weapons be destroyed if you maintain the beam for longer times on the target (by keeping the trigger pressed)?

More total time of IonD action on unshielded ship, more chanse of enemy weapon destruction.

So is the total time which counts, not the number of times the IonD hits the target.

[AleksMain]

So is the total time which counts, not the number of times the IonD hits the target.

Presume weapon hit 10 times per sec. And you fire (using this weapon) during some time. And possibility is related to number of hits. So possibility related to time of fire too. More time (total time) - more possibility.

[The Iron Duke]

pjknibss wrote:

A weapon is either destroyed or not destroyed...it won't un-destroy itself if you stop using the IonD for a while!

Is the second and subsequent IOND treatment accumulative as to the degradation of his weapons, or does it all start again with each shield recharge. Destroyed wasn't mentioned.
Al wrote:

the Ion Disruptor will have a chance of destroying equipment when it hits the ship and the shields are down. It doesn't damage them in stages if thats what you mean so there is no problem with breaking off your attack and then returning

So there is a problem breaking off the attack, when you return you are 'back to square one' with the weapon integrity intact, or has it been damaged by the initial Ioning. If not, no matter how many times you return you cannot destroy the weapons unless it is a continous attack, without allowing the shields to regenerate. Back to the original problem.

[The_Hypo]

As far as I know, it works like this:

Each hit with a weapon on an enemy has a chance of destroying something in the cargobay, whether its a weapon or not. The reason the Ion is so effective at this is because it hits the ship alot and does very little hull damage, it may look like a beam but it isn't its just firing so fast that it looks like one. So, if you fire on it then break off and come back later it'll make no difference because each hit has its own chance of damaging something so rather than it being a progressive change its "Does this hit destroy something? Yes/No."

Hope that helps.

Bye

[perkint]

Cumulative or not - not applicable.

Get the shields down. For each hit with an Ion Disruptor (ID) the game engine thinks "do I destroy that weapon or not"? Doesn't make any difference if it is the first time you've taken his shields down, or the 42nd. The engine never thinks "a few seconds more and I'll take it, oops, he's broken off, back to scratch".

Obviously the weapons will die quicker if you can hammer him for 30 seconds continuously with no shields. But, hammering him in three 10 second blocks (once you have spent the time to bring his shields down again, in between) gives you exactly the same chance of trashing his weapons.

The only thing you lose is the extra time to bring his shields down again.

Tim

[AleksMain]

Cumulative or not - not applicable ...

Accoding probability theory:

The probability of an event is defined to be the ratio of the number of cases favourable to the event—i.e., the number of outcomes in the subset of the sample space defining the event—to the total number of cases.

Probability of destruction of enemy weapon by IonD is constant, so if we increase "total number of cases", then we increase "number of cases favourable to the event", i.e. chance of destruction of enemy weapon by IonD. So, probability of event has cumulative distribution.

[The_Hypo]

In that case you also increase the number of possible outcomes that are not favourable. So its a bit of a moot point no?

Unless I've missed the point entirely which has never happened before

Bye

[AleksMain]

In that case you also increase the number of possible outcomes that are not favourable...

"Number of possible outcomes that are not favourable" not included in the formula. You are wrong. There are one constant and two variables. If we will increase one of variables in ratio, we must increase second too to get same constant.

[The_Hypo]

"Number of possible outcomes that are not favourable" not included in the formula. You are wrong. There are one constant and two variables. If we will increase one of variables in ratio, we must increase second too to get same constant.

Surely that's like saying if I flip a coin what's the chance of getting heads or tails[1], its 50% either way, but what's the chance of it being tails or heads next time, its still 50%, the chance of it happening doesn't change just because it happened just before.

For example, you could flip a coin a million times that lands on heads each time and then asking what the chances of it landing on heads again are, it would still be 50% wouldn't it?

[1] ignoring the possibility of it landing on the edge of the coin for simplicity's sake

Bye

[NeverSnake]

Surely that's like saying if I flip a coin what's the chance of getting heads or tails[1], its 50% either way, but what's the chance of it being tails or heads next time, its still 50%, the chance of it happening doesn't change just because it happened just before.

That's true as well. There are two statements here:

The chance that a weapon will be destroyed in each IonD hit is constant.

The chance that a weapon has been destroyed after X hits increases as X does.

[AleksMain]

Surely that's like saying if I flip a coin what's the chance of getting heads or tails[1], its 50% either way, but what's the chance of it being tails or heads next time, its still 50%, the chance of it happening doesn't change just because it happened just before.

That's true as well. There are two statements here:

The chance that a weapon will be destroyed in an IonD hit is always constant.

The chance that a weapon has been destroyed after X hits increases as X does.

I am more than sure that after half - hour hits back turret of M6 will be destroyed in 100 % of all cases.

I am sure that after 10 min hits back turret of M6 will be destroyed in 70 % of all cases.

And that because of all above IonD damage is cumulative.

[Nanook]

....
And that because of all above IonD damage is cumulative.

That's just very limited empirical data. The game does not keep track of such things, to the best of my knowledge. There's no point in doing so, since it's much easier to just use the Random Number Generator to determine whether each hit destroys any particular item on the ship. The only IonD damage that's cumulative is the minor amount of hull damage done by the TC version of the weapon.

[AleksMain]

The game does not keep track of such things, to the best of my knowledge. There's no point in doing so, since it's much easier to just use the Random Number Generator to determine whether each hit destroys any particular item on the ship.

Introduction to probability

Not everything in life, however, can be predicted using science and technology. For example, a toss of a coin may result in either a head or a tail. Also, the sex of a new-born baby may turn out to be male or female. In these cases, the individual outcomes are uncertain. With experience and enough repetition, however, a regular pattern of outcomes can be seen (by which certain predictions can be made). For example, the result of the next 100 tosses of a coin can be assumed to be 50 heads and 50 tails. Since there are only two possible outcomes, the chances of getting a head or a tail are equal. This describes the basis of the Random Phenomenon:An event or phenomenon is called random if individual outcomes are uncertain but there is, however, a regular distribution of relative frequencies in a large number of repetitions. For example, after tossing a coin a significant number of times, it can be seen that about half the time, the coin lands on the head side and about half the time it lands on the tail side.

So, I repeat yet once, if we will run your Random Number Generator more times, we will get better chance to get successful event. And does not need keep track of such things. Probability of event stored in the code of the game.

[The Iron Duke]

What wonderful intelectual arguments we have gentlemen.
So, it is not accumulative. - Ergo, the first 10/20 second burst of IonD could/may destroy all weapons. Has anybody had this happen? I don't think so! So what's the criteria?