Quote:
Originally Posted by Julhelm
Consider that the dot stack shoes error between detected bearings and generated bearings. Our percentage is kind of like an inverse of that, and much easier to code.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destex
TMA algorithms produce all kinds of quantified parameters to indicate the accuracy of the solution. They should be referred to with suspicion, of course, but for a rather simplified game such as CW, I don't see anything drastically wrong with representing solution quality with percentage.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by banryu79
Exactly...
|
All fair enough... I look at it as the AO's estimate of the solution's accuracy. But that it's a percentage isn't the point - the point is that tying certain elements to that percentage (IE, plot tracking at 95%, course estimation at XX%, etc) is an issue.
At any point, I should have all three parameters - it's a solution. Not a good one (percentage applies here!), but a solution. It's the Captain's job to weigh all that's going on, how he feels about that solution, and attack when he's ready. Under this system (the CW one, to clarify), I feel like I have no choice but to wait to shoot on a 95% solution because it's the only one that provides me any feel for relative motion since I can't look at PBB data.
There are times when a bearings only shot is needed, I don't argue that point. But for any type of deliberate attack, this system almost forces you to wait longer than you might really need to.