Cheating...

There's a thread regarding general views on education here. However, it doesn't go into one major issue with education: cheating. Educational institutions always have various regulations regarding cheating (they define it and set up punishments for it). As with any regulations, these are . . . selectively . . . enforced.

I don't want to know if you've cheated before. I'm more interested in how cheating is viewed by your peers. It seems that "culture" has a lot to do with viewpoints on cheating--this is probably because cheating is a moral issue, and morals are set by society.

Is it ever okay to cheat? If you cheated on an exam, would your friends (or enemies) do anything about it? How easy is it to get away with cheating? If you get caught, are the punishments a good deterrent?

More specifically... Is it okay to do homework in groups, but you shouldn't cheat on exams? If you're allowed to bring a dictionary to an exam, but no notes, is it okay to write notes in the dictionary? Is it okay to plagiarize (sp?) if you're sure the teacher doesn't know the source? Is it okay to take something written in another language, translate it into your own language, and turn it in as your own work? Is it okay to help a friend cheat, as long as you don't cheat yourself?

And for those not in school... Is it okay to cheat at work? If your boss tells you finish something in 2 days, and you finish in 2 hours, is it okay to slack off until it's due? Is it okay to cut out of work 15 minutes early on Friday, because you worked an hour of unpaid overtime on Monday?

There's thousands of other examples I could write, but I think you get the idea. Cheating is, basically, doing something to get an unfair advantage. But what is unfair? Isn't it always the losers who decide something was unfair, after the fact?

I'm interested to know your opinions and thoughts.

And if you *must* relate it to gaming somehow (as this is a gaming forum)...is there any correlation between RL cheating and cheating at multiplayer games? (I don't care about single player cheating, since gaining an unfair advantage over a computer is like cheating a swimming pool by using a float.)

--Zeno

How bizarre...

I admit, I haven't posted messages frequently. However, I was a frequent visitor, and up until a couple months ago, was participating in some threads on the XCOM UFO Defense forum.

The tsunami in Southeast Asia put a damper on my participation. (I blame Lobsterman commandos from T'Leth).

When I returned today, I had no idea that my bookmarked website link would not exist.

I had no idea that I would be referred to a "did you mean this site you never heard of before?" link.

I had no idea that I would find said XCOM forum here, in a totally new and bizarre setting, incorporating all types of strategy games.

I'll catch up, read the old news, and figure out what happened. I'm not looking for replies or anything. Just commenting...that this was a really odd experience. Like making a pot of coffee and discovering it is neither in a pot nor coffee at all, but instead, it's a pitcher of freshly squeezed orange juice. As recently happened one morning when I was very, very sleepy.

--Zeno

Questions on Editing Alien Stats/Equipment

This is for XCOM:UFO.


Okay, I'm planning to create something but I want to see if there is:

1) An existing program
2) If not, then a similar program
3) If not, then any interest?

I can generate a flat file with a series of numbers. Then, I can take that flat file and copy over the alien data in Geoscape.exe.

Why? To give each alien stat (the modifiable ones) a variable boost in power based on a random number. I could add this to XCOMUTIL, so that after every battle, the Geoscape data for each alien would be "randomized" (it would occur after Tactical closes and before Geoscape executes). In effect, every battle would start with aliens that have random stats.

That's the implementation. As for the game effect, I will take the original stats and give a 20% chance for improvement. If there is improvement, I will give a 1% to 100% randomized increase. I will also give a 5% chance for significant improvement, with a 100% to 300% randomized increase. The maximum for any stat will be 200 (thus even on Superhuman difficulty, no alien will hit the wrap-around at 256+).

This would give aliens a 25% chance for each skill to be improved--so some aliens might be very fast, have high reactions, be sharpshooters, have strong armor, have high psi strength to resist psi attacks...etc. I would also give non-psionic aliens a small chance to have psi-power, and (maybe) non-flying aliens a small chance to have flying ability.

Mind probes, obviously, would suddenly become a lot more useful. Soldiers with psi skill might not be able to control every alien they come across. Veteran soldiers would have to be careful even when facing a mere Sectoid Soldier. Those of us who have near-memorization of every alien ability in the game would be taken by surprise on occasion. I think the positives outweigh any negatives, as long as the Geoscape data-copying process is 100% error-free to prevent game corruption.

--------

Since the information is in the same location, I could easily incorporate a similar system for HWPs. It's generally considered that HWPs are radio-controlled, rather than artificial intelligence. Therefore, I could give very slight modifications to account for the skill of the operator (basically, firing accuracy and reactions, as everything else is built into the system). For HWPs, there would be a range for both increased and decreased stats (rather than the Alien system that only gives improvements).

Finally, Civilians could be adjusted. Though this would have little effect, a Civilian could have high psi-strength, health, or time units to make them potentially survive longer. I would only allow minor increases for Civilians, as the idea of Civilians with higher stats than my soldiers would really annoy me.

--------

And that leads to my question. Has anyone come up with a way to equip Civilians by default? I know it is possible, because there is an XCOMUTIL command to ARM aliens. Therefore, it would be a nearly-identical programming process to ARM civilians.

I recognize that this might require saving the Tactical game, exiting, ARMing the civilians, then reloading the game. There might be some problems with the 170-item limit, thus requiring the destruction of some objects. The same problems exist with the alien ARM command.

Regardless, I would personally like a modification to equip Civilians with a standard pistol and one clip. That's it. If the 170-item limit is reached, don't give any more pistols. Some of the 10-15 civilians in a terror site would (it seems to me) be armed, though anything bigger than a pistol seems excessive and unrealistic.

I like the idea of terrified civilians potentially shooting at the XCOM rescuers in their confusion, or the highly unlikely chance of a civilian killing an alien. It would amuse me even if it only happened once per game.

Tactical Firing Accuracy Formula

This information comes courtesy of NKF, via his response on another topic.




I came up with the same formula, and verified it some time ago (who knows, maybe I verified it from one of NKF's previous posts?) If anyone has a different formula, this is the place to discuss it.

NKF's speculative description of "drift" is really what I was looking for. There must be some mathematical formula to determine true firing accuracy, taking all factors into account.

i.e.
firing accuracy * health% * weapon accuracy * kneeling modifier * handedness modifier = chance to hit target tile at range 1.

The chance to hit target alien within target tile = ? (This is probably a formula based on target's height.)

The chance to hit target tile at greater than range 1 = ? (There may not be a range modifier, as I suspect your "drift" description is correct. If there is no range modifier, then a mathematical formula to express maximum and probable degrees of inaccuracy must be possible.)

The modifier for inability to see the target (when using a scout/spotter) = ? (This is probably not a factor, as it is accounted for in the range formulae).


There are also two modifiers not mentioned in NKF's formula:

The modifier for darkness (and varying degrees of light level) = ?

The modifier for target in smoke = ? (This appears to be related to the number of smoke-filled tiles through which a round passes.)



So, the question is...does anyone know an all-inclusive mathematical expression to determine the chance to hit, or the degrees by which a missed shot is likely to miss?

Though it's not exactly the same topic, throwing accuracy information is welcome here.

Air to Air Combat

I do not have the Official Strategy Guide, so I may be repeating information. However, to date I've never seen any corrections to (or analysis of) Air to Air Combat techniques in XCOM.

I'll do the weapon analysis here. If someone has details about Cautious/Standard/Aggressive modes, please add them! Specifically, I would like to know:
--Chance of each UFO type escaping each XCOM craft (dependent upon attack mode)
--Increase or decrease in accuracy and damage based on attack mode
--Increase or decrease in XCOM craft damage taken based on attack mode

If someone is willing to do a full analysis, I'd love to see a numerical analysis that compares UFO range, damage capability, and hull armour versus each weapon and attack mode. The Unofficial Strategy Guide gives recommendations, but I prefer statistics over prose (when available).


First, let me give the real "Accuracy" values for the XCOM craft weapons (the information in the UFOped is incorrect).



I use the following equation to calculate damage over time. Note that range is ignored.

t = time duration of combat (in game seconds)
r = weapon reload time
a = weapon accuracy
d = weapon damage


Number of shots fired = N = int (t / r)
(Maximum number of shots fired = weapon capacity)

Average number of hits = H = N * a

Average damage = D = H * d


(((Thank you, Spaceman, worked perfectly!)))




ASSUMPTIONS:
I have assumed that pilots in XCOM have no stats, therefore the listed accuracy is a strict percentage chance to hit (unlike the tactical field weapon accuracies). I also assume no accuracy change based on distance to the target, and I assume the target is in range for the duration of combat.

What does that mean? It means, I haven't taken into account the "ufo flees" event. XCOM weapons only fire when a UFO is in range. When the UFO flees, it quickly escapes the range. Shots from XCOM weapons do slightly exceed their "maximum" range, but they will not hit. This means a wasted shot--a severe penalty for the limited-capacity Avalanche, Stingray, and Fusion Ball Launcher.


SIMPLE ANSWERS:
The Plasma Beam weapon produces the most damage over time, ignoring range, for any engagement equal or more than 6 seconds in length.

The Laser Cannon produces the second highest damage over time, ignoring range, for combat durations between 6 and under 25 seconds, between 40 and under 50 seconds, and equal or more than 76 seconds in length. It produces the greatest damage over time for engagements between 4 and under 6 seconds.

The Fusion Ball Launcher produces the second highest damage over time, ignoring range, for combat durations between 25 and under 40 seconds, and between 50 and under 76 seconds.

The Cannon, PRIOR TO NEW TECHNOLOGY, produces the greatest damage over time, ignoring range, for combat durations between 2 and under 15 seconds, and engagements equal or more than 236 seconds in length.

The Avalanche Launcher, PRIOR TO NEW TECHNOLOGY, produces the greatest damage over time, ignoring range, for combat durations between 20 and under 30 seconds, and between 40 and under 75 seconds.

The Stingray Launcher, PRIOR TO NEW TECHNOLOGY, produces the greatest damage over time, ignoring range, for combat durations between 15 and under 20 seconds, between 30 and under 40 seconds, and between 75 and under 236 seconds.


BOTTOM LINE:
Prior to new technology, the Cannon has the cheapest ammunition and the greatest potential damage. Due to its limited range, every engagement will result in damage to the XCOM craft (costing repair time, not funds). However, a single Interceptor armed with dual cannon will not have problems with running out of ammunition, and it can usually (not always) take down a Medium UFO (taking massive damage in return, of course). Oddly, the Cannon is the most expensive weapon-delivery device prior to new technology, costing $30,000 (compare to the Avalanche at $17,000 and Stingray at $16,000). However, a full ammo reload costs only $4,960 (compare to Avalanche at $27,000 and Stingray at $18,000). Cannon suffer from the "lost ammunition" effect--you add ammunition in full 50-round belts even if you only need to top off a few rounds.

The Stingray Launcher has the second greatest potential damage prior to new technology, and carries enough missiles to engage UFOs that flee (causing a wasted shot or two). An Interceptor with dual Stingrays can, theoretically, take down a Medium UFO with minimal damage in return, though missed shots and fleeing UFOs will often empty the launcher without a successful shootdown.

The Avalanche Launcher has long range and is more accurate than the other starting-technology weapons. The limited capacity is its greatest weakness (though the $9000 cost per missile is a prohibitive problem during financial difficulty). It is highly unlikely for a single Interceptor with dual Avalanches to take down a Medium UFO, in my experience. Though the Interceptor will not take much (or any) damage, it will run out of missiles before it knocks the UFO out of the sky. It should have no problems with small UFOs, provided the UFO does not repeatedly flee. The (very strong) counter-argument, though, is that multiple Interceptors armed with dual Avalanches can take down large UFOs, and there is rumour of success against very large UFOs (using four Interceptors, and expect at least 75% losses).

When you have access to new technology, the Unofficial advice remains the Best advice. Research Plasma Beam Cannon. Two of these unlimited-capacity, long-range, high-damage weapons eliminates any concerns about airborne UFOs. They are expensive and time-consuming to manufacture, so putting them on weak-armoured Interceptors is wise ONLY if the Interceptor NEVER engages UFO battleships. Losing 4 Interceptors, 8 Avalanche launchers, and 24 Avalanche Missiles to a battleship is preferable to losing even 1 Interceptor and 2 Plasma Beam cannon, in my opinion.


FINAL RECOMMENDATION:
Before you have the Plasma Beam (or, before you've manufactured enough of them) I recommend mixing weapons. Stingrays and Avalanches can soften the UFO from a "Cautious" distance. When you're out of ammo, if the UFO is still airborne, switch to Aggressive and charge with your Cannon. If the UFO flees, start the next engagement on Aggressive (reducing its likelihood of fleeing). You risk taking damage, but rarely destruction, taking on Medium UFOs with a single Interceptor. You should not take on anything larger using this setup.

If you have numerous Interceptors and funds, but lack Plasma Beam technology, four Interceptors armed with dual Avalanches can take on any UFO, with very high success.

The monthly maintenance on an Interceptor equals its replacement cost, though replacing the weapons and ammo costs extra. Buy replacement Interceptors once, at the beginning of each month, and you won't suffer a significant reduction in funds compared with more conservative strategies.


That's all I've got.

Out.