Speeding Up Damage Allocation

[szurkey]

For those who interested, here's the code I use for my TI-89 graphing calculator to generate 2d6 results for the DAC. I only use it for when more then six internals are needed.

Code: Select all

sfb()
Prgm
ClrIO

[1,0,0]->d
[0,1,0]->e
[0,0,1]->f

[1,0,0,0]->g
[0,1,0,0]->h
[0,0,1,0]->i
[0,0,0,1]->j

Prompt x
While x>0

[0,0,0,0]->a
[0,0,0]->b
[0,0,0,0]->c

For t,1,x
rand(6)+rand(6)->y

If y<7 Then
  If y=6 Then
    b+d->b
  ElseIf y=5 Then
    a+j->a
  ElseIf y=4 Then
    a+i->a
  ElseIf y=3 Then
    a+h->a
  Else 
    a+g->a
  EndIF
ElseIf y>7 Then
 If y=8 Then
    b+f->b
  ElseIf y=9 Then
    c+g->c
  ElseIf y=10 Then
    c+h->c
  ElseIf y=11 Then
    c+i->c
  Else 
    c+j->c
  EndIF
Else
  b+e->b
EndIf

EndFor

ClrIO
Disp x
Disp a
Disp b
Disp c

Prompt X
EndWhile

EndPrgm

The output is in the following format:
NUMBER OF INTERNALS
[TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE]
[SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT]
[NINE, TEN, ELEVEN, TWELVE]
x?

So results of:
8
[0,0,0,1]
[2,3,1]
[0,0,1,0]
x?

Means that 8 internals were rolled with results of FIVE rolled 1 time, SIX rolled 2 times, SEVEN rolled 3 times, EIGHT rolled 1 time, and ELEVEN rolled 1 time. To exit the program you enter any number less then 1. There is really no reason why something similar can't be done for almost any programable device.

My old, slow, TI-89 can "roll" 100 2d6's in 6 to 8 seconds.

[Scoutdad]

The problem with that system is in the ordering of the hits.
While it's nice to know that you rolled a 5 six times... when those actually come up in the sequence dramtically affect the end results ofthe damage allocation.
Sure, it's probably not too bad for a small volley - ay 10 or 12 hits...
But on a massive alpha strike of 50 or more hits... it can really skew the results to have the total number of 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s, etc. rolled listed in ascending numerical order.

I do something even simpler.
I purchased a small, 18 compartment divider at Walmart.
I then purchased 3 "bricks" of small (12mm I think) dice from Chessex.
One brick contains red dice, one white, and the third has blue dice.
I placed a pair of each dice into each compartment and superglued the lid shut.
Shake it briskly... set it down... read the dice in pairs... red, white, blue.
Do all three in one compartment and move to the next.
Stop when you get to the number of DAC hits you scored.
I can do 54 "hits" in one second.

Plus... it's transportable... doesn't require batteries... and is competely random

[Steve Cole]

Scoutdad: write that up and email it to me.

[Scoutdad]

Written up... emailed...

[szurkey]

While the results are slightly skewed for large amounts of internals, they are much less skewed than the Fed Commander damage allocation system, and as fast or faster than Fed Commander damage allocation system.

As for speed, here's a process analysis:

Code: Select all

My Method:
Input number of internals
Wait few seconds for results 
Write results on DAC
Loop
{  Look at DAC
    Mark SSD
}

Your Method:
Shake dice compartment divider
Loop while more damage
{  Look at dice compartment
    Loop three times{
        Look at DAC
        Mark SSD
    }
}

You have a nested loop. For low number of internals, your method is faster. For high number of internals, my method is faster. Also, you have to keep track of which compartment you read last. I could probably write a new program that stores the results in a character string, and then spits the string back out. But then I would have to look at the calculator, look at the DAC, mark the SSD. That's just one extra step that I don't consider necessary.

My TI-89 calculator is 7.5 x 3.5 x 0.875 inches. It is very durable. I've dropped it many times a year for 10 years. So how big is your dice compartment divider to lug around?

[Savedfromwhat]

They say NASA spent over a million dollars developing a pen that would write in zero g. Russia used a pencil.

[szurkey]

They say NASA spent over a million dollars developing a pen that would write in zero g. Russia used a pencil.

Even I'm not that bad. I originally got the TI-89 for math, physics, and engineering classes.

Now if I were to buy one of the soon to be released iPads, download the latest SDK for it, code up an interactive DAC (the iDAC), that would certainly qualify such a response. Actually, I would then have to code up interactive SSDs (the iSDD) for the iPad and then link them to the iDAC, I could then run my entire fleet from a $500+ tablet computer. I love the idea, but I don't have the time.

It should be possible to code up an app for any of the new smart phones, etc., to do what my TI-89 program does. They have too small a screen for the iDAC.

[Savedfromwhat]

To be honest I shouldn't have even chimed in as I am a Federation Commander player and Have only played SFB once (and never allocated any damage lol).

[szurkey]

To be honest I shouldn't have even chimed in as I am a Federation Commander player and Have only played SFB once (and never allocated any damage lol).

Not true. I'm perfectly okay with you chiming in. Most SFB players would be shocked and appalled at the version of "SFB" I play. I use a modified form of energy deallocation from FC, no attrition units (the only exception is for the Omega Hivers), no scatter packs, no wild weasels, no damage repair during a battle (but you can transfer shield boxes to an adjacent shield limited by your damage control rating), no explosive mines (including T-Bombs), etc. But I do use the DAC with my TI-89 calculator quickly generating numbers for groups of more than 6 internals. It's really more of mix of SFB and FC.

I guess you could say that I really play "Federation Star Fleet Battle Commander!"