settle an important bet - Page 4

rofl this is not close canons kill marines really easy(2 hits if i remember correctly) and their range is far greater than marines also marines will tend to obstruct other marines and such and canons regenerate shields

pd: baal shhhh

and if they come wave then a brake then another wave etc canons will rape them even more because they will regenerate their shields in that time

you guys are noobs. rines ez. the nukes might make a difference so i voted for cannons+nukes tho.

On December 01 2008 23:43 Darki wrote: rofl this is not close canons kill marines really easy(2 hits if i remember correctly) and their range is far greater than marines also marines will tend to obstruct other marines and such and canons regenerate shields pd: baal shhhh and if they come wave then a brake then another wave etc canons will rape them even more because they will regenerate their shields in that time

read the thread u fish....

first scale test = marines won by a land slide

lol, even after big results, there are still ne sayers

Well you're just talking about computer AI right? So with 10K marines, there's a very large chance that the AI will mess up and the marines will start streaming in one at a time.

And, if a human is controlling the marines, he wouldn't be able to get them all to charge at the same time, no matter how fast he is, so they'd be getting owned one control group at a time.

but we agree baals still a newb tho right? : ]

cannons would win if Elky micro'ed them manually

for people who are kinda blindly choosing one side or the other based on intuition...here's the theory.

if you send 10 marines vs 1 cannon it is very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average.
but if you send 20 marines vs 2 cannons, it is once again very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. BUT, the % of marines that survive might be lower in this scenario.
and as you continue to increase the number of cannons (maintaining the 10:1 marine:cannon ratio), the % of surviving marines can continue to decrease, possibly to the point where the cannons actually win. but the % of surviving marines may also reach a level that stabilizes as you continue to increase the numbers, so that for any arbitrarily large n number of cannons, 10n marines will defeat them.

finally, the spatial arrangement of the cannons and marines becomes an issue as the numbers grow large. when the marines are constricted to attack in waves, this can be advantageous to the cannons. or, when the cannons are restricted to have less than 100% of them firing at all times, this can be advantageous for the marines.

given the results of the trial runs with 300 vs 30, i would estimate that there's a very low probability that 10k marines won't destroy 1k cannons

Exactly, its a standard hyperbole that will quickly flatten out or "stabilize"

20 vs 2 50% survive

40 vs 4 40% survive

100 vs 10 35% survive

500 vs 50 33% survive

10k vs 1k 29 % will survive

100k vs 10k 28.9% will survive

and so on, the line in the % of deaths of marines as the # of unit increases quickly flattens out

lol next thing ur gonna tell me is there is math in poker amiright?

LOL

dude on a perfect scenario cannons win ez first 3 lines is flawed because a 4th cannonw ill shoot imo second if the cannon only need 2 shots to kill a marine and asuming each cannon will shoot the marine infront of it the the marine will only shoot once before it dies, lather rinse repeat it takes more than 10 shots to kill a a cannon so rines ez lose IMO. ( UNDER PERFECT CIRCUMSTANCES I REPEAT PERFECT!)

- Jorge

btw i just talked to jorge about this and we agree that a simulation has to be run with more lines of cannons, atleast 5 rows for it to be more accurate because once u get down to the last line of cannons, but with the other cannons aiding as there will be 2 lines of cannons shooting getting more shots in, i think that it will be more close and the cannons should win

I think the cannons would win because of the range if they come straight up with no flanking.

On December 02 2008 01:11 [vital]Myth wrote: for people who are kinda blindly choosing one side or the other based on intuition...here's the theory. if you send 10 marines vs 1 cannon it is very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. but if you send 20 marines vs 2 cannons, it is once again very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. BUT, the % of marines that survive might be lower in this scenario. and as you continue to increase the number of cannons (maintaining the 10:1 marine:cannon ratio), the % of surviving marines can continue to decrease, possibly to the point where the cannons actually win. but the % of surviving marines may also reach a level that stabilizes as you continue to increase the numbers, so that for any arbitrarily large n number of cannons, 10n marines will defeat them. finally, the spatial arrangement of the cannons and marines becomes an issue as the numbers grow large. when the marines are constricted to attack in waves, this can be advantageous to the cannons. or, when the cannons are restricted to have less than 100% of them firing at all times, this can be advantageous for the marines. given the results of the trial runs with 300 vs 30, i would estimate that there's a very low probability that 10k marines won't destroy 1k cannons

All this was said before in post #39 in one sentence ----> "This is not a linear problem"

On December 02 2008 02:15 capaneo wrote: Show nested quote + On December 02 2008 01:11 [vital]Myth wrote: for people who are kinda blindly choosing one side or the other based on intuition...here's the theory. if you send 10 marines vs 1 cannon it is very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. but if you send 20 marines vs 2 cannons, it is once again very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. BUT, the % of marines that survive might be lower in this scenario. and as you continue to increase the number of cannons (maintaining the 10:1 marine:cannon ratio), the % of surviving marines can continue to decrease, possibly to the point where the cannons actually win. but the % of surviving marines may also reach a level that stabilizes as you continue to increase the numbers, so that for any arbitrarily large n number of cannons, 10n marines will defeat them. finally, the spatial arrangement of the cannons and marines becomes an issue as the numbers grow large. when the marines are constricted to attack in waves, this can be advantageous to the cannons. or, when the cannons are restricted to have less than 100% of them firing at all times, this can be advantageous for the marines. given the results of the trial runs with 300 vs 30, i would estimate that there's a very low probability that 10k marines won't destroy 1k cannons All this was said before in post #39 in one sentence ----> "This is not a linear problem"

yes but it seems people are not getting that the curve flattens quite quickly

On December 02 2008 01:11 [vital]Myth wrote: for people who are kinda blindly choosing one side or the other based on intuition...here's the theory. if you send 10 marines vs 1 cannon it is very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. but if you send 20 marines vs 2 cannons, it is once again very clear that the marines will win, and a certain % of the marines will survive on average. BUT, the % of marines that survive might be lower in this scenario. and as you continue to increase the number of cannons (maintaining the 10:1 marine:cannon ratio), the % of surviving marines can continue to decrease, possibly to the point where the cannons actually win. but the % of surviving marines may also reach a level that stabilizes as you continue to increase the numbers, so that for any arbitrarily large n number of cannons, 10n marines will defeat them. finally, the spatial arrangement of the cannons and marines becomes an issue as the numbers grow large. when the marines are constricted to attack in waves, this can be advantageous to the cannons. or, when the cannons are restricted to have less than 100% of them firing at all times, this can be advantageous for the marines. given the results of the trial runs with 300 vs 30, i would estimate that there's a very low probability that 10k marines won't destroy 1k cannons

lol i love you corwin

it seems OP is biased because the second poll has no meaning if the first poll is actually debatable

baal your curve is entirely wrong
300 vs 30 and only 22.6% survived, 500 vs 50 would have a smaller percentage than that
I have to admit that the result surprised me some and that my human experiments with this just dont matter at all cause I cant attack with 250 marines at the same time
but there is a huuge difference between 10000 vs 1000 and 300 vs 30. cannons have 3 range longer. in the 300 vs 30 scenario, once the marines have killed 10 cannons, only 20 are firing. once theyve killed 20, only 10 are firing. whereas normally, between 20 and 30 will fire at any given moment. i mean basically, if you made a scenario with 300 vs 40 however where the 10 cannons behind were invincible and the marines only had to kill the 30 in the front, it would kind of illustrate what I mean.. marines would also follow up behind but its just a tactical fact in starcraft that the bigger amounts of units you have, the larger the advantage of the longer ranged units becomes. rines have 4, cannons 7. 20 goons will absolutely slaughter 5 tanks. 200 tanks vs 800 goons and I actually think tanks will win ;p
but yea its very possible that I was wrong from the beginning, when I see 300 rines lined up like that makes them look stronger than "300 marines" ;(