Full Version: Balze of Glory
Bah, now I found where that 66 acres is coming from. Quix is a physicist, which means sometimes multiplication is beyond him (give him an ODE or PDE any day and he's happy, 3rd grade math he flounders with). Ignore his 270,000 number. It was closer to 5 acres in size (anyone wanna bet that he messed up his decimal places again? I swear, the man can't work with numbers at all....)
The kiloton is equal to 1,000 metric tons of TNT. A metric ton is 1,000kg, or 2,204.6 pounds. A metric ton really should be considered one megagram.
It is not difficult to see the correlation between the power of TNT and the power of C-12 in Shadowrun. It'd be easier if I had Excel here. [Then I could double-check my possibly dubious mental math and application of Shadowrun's rounding rules, too.] Anyway, you can kind of graph it out in your head.
1kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, average of one success or two, for a maximum of 4D, 2 meter blast radius.
1kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, average of 6 successes, average of 15D, 2 meter blast radius.
10kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt10]D, or 9D, average of 4 successes, average of 11D, 4 meter blast radius.
10kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt10]D, or 37D, average of 18 successes, average of 55D, 5 meter blast radius.
100kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt100]D, or 30D, average of 15 successes, average of 37D, 13 meter blast radius.
100kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt100]D, or 120D, average of 60 successes, average of 150D, 13 meter blast radius.
1000kg of Commercial Explosive [one metric ton]
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt1000]D, or 94D, average of 47 successes, average of 117D, 39 meter blast radius.
1000kg of C-12 [one metric ton]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt1000]D, or 379D, average of 189 successes, average of 491D, 41 meter blast radius.
5000kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt5000]D, or 212D, average of 106 successes, average of 265D, 89 meter blast radius.
5000kg of C-12 [The Tom Collins Device]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt5000]D, or 848D, average of 212 successes, average of 954D, 80 meter blast radius.
1000000kg of Commercial Explosive [one thousand metric tons, or one kiloton]
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt1000000]D, or 3000D, average of 1500 successes, average of 3750D, 1250 meter blast radius.
1000000kg of C-12 [one thousand metric tons, or one kiloton*]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt1000000]D, or 12000D, average of 6000 successes, average of 15000D, 1250 meter blast radius.
Obviously, the fact that Shadowrun always rounds down, and the quantum granularity of Damage to one meter, have some strange effects on what is already a pretty strange way of making explosives work in Shadowrun.
My ultimate question in this case is why C-12 was used at all, since an atomic bomb [or its cousin the neutron bomb] would have been much more effective, and probably cheaper. I suppose the character might not have been smart enough to build one. One wonders as well why no stats for atomic devices are given in Shadowrun. I suppose the developers...ah, well, nevermind.
*Although in this case, the "kiloton" is useless except as a standard of comparison to the megagram of TNT, since C-12 is obviously not a standard to which we compare atom bombs.
It is not difficult to see the correlation between the power of TNT and the power of C-12 in Shadowrun. It'd be easier if I had Excel here. [Then I could double-check my possibly dubious mental math and application of Shadowrun's rounding rules, too.] Anyway, you can kind of graph it out in your head.
1kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, average of one success or two, for a maximum of 4D, 2 meter blast radius.
1kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, average of 6 successes, average of 15D, 2 meter blast radius.
10kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt10]D, or 9D, average of 4 successes, average of 11D, 4 meter blast radius.
10kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt10]D, or 37D, average of 18 successes, average of 55D, 5 meter blast radius.
100kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt100]D, or 30D, average of 15 successes, average of 37D, 13 meter blast radius.
100kg of C-12
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt100]D, or 120D, average of 60 successes, average of 150D, 13 meter blast radius.
1000kg of Commercial Explosive [one metric ton]
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt1000]D, or 94D, average of 47 successes, average of 117D, 39 meter blast radius.
1000kg of C-12 [one metric ton]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt1000]D, or 379D, average of 189 successes, average of 491D, 41 meter blast radius.
5000kg of Commercial Explosive
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt5000]D, or 212D, average of 106 successes, average of 265D, 89 meter blast radius.
5000kg of C-12 [The Tom Collins Device]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt5000]D, or 848D, average of 212 successes, average of 954D, 80 meter blast radius.
1000000kg of Commercial Explosive [one thousand metric tons, or one kiloton]
Rating 3, base Damage 3D, -3 blast per meter, [3 x sqrt1000000]D, or 3000D, average of 1500 successes, average of 3750D, 1250 meter blast radius.
1000000kg of C-12 [one thousand metric tons, or one kiloton*]
Rating 12, base Damage 12D, -12 blast per meter, [12 x sqrt1000000]D, or 12000D, average of 6000 successes, average of 15000D, 1250 meter blast radius.
Obviously, the fact that Shadowrun always rounds down, and the quantum granularity of Damage to one meter, have some strange effects on what is already a pretty strange way of making explosives work in Shadowrun.
My ultimate question in this case is why C-12 was used at all, since an atomic bomb [or its cousin the neutron bomb] would have been much more effective, and probably cheaper. I suppose the character might not have been smart enough to build one. One wonders as well why no stats for atomic devices are given in Shadowrun. I suppose the developers...ah, well, nevermind.
*Although in this case, the "kiloton" is useless except as a standard of comparison to the megagram of TNT, since C-12 is obviously not a standard to which we compare atom bombs.
| QUOTE (3278) |
| My ultimate question in this case is why C-12 was used at all, since an atomic bomb [or its cousin the neutron bomb] would have been much more effective, and probably cheaper. I suppose the character might not have been smart enough to build one. |
While it's not unreasonable for a skilled person to put one together, it is rather difficult to obtain the necessary fuel.
This of course makes me wonder why a country that does NOT use the metric system used a metric method of measurement for the yeild on a device which it built. 
Us Americans are really goofy bastards sometimes
Us Americans are really goofy bastards sometimes
| QUOTE (BitBasher) |
| This of course makes me wonder why a country that does NOT use the metric system used a metric method of measurement for the yeild on a device which it built. |
As was stated elsewhere, they didn't. The reason the math is done according to such a fallacy is that the SR explosive rules don't convert will into pounds. They don't convert well into physics either, but that is a different debate.
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) | ||
As was stated elsewhere, they didn't. |
Where was this stated? BitBasher himself mentioned earlier that kTs are Imperial tons, but apparently he changed his mind since then. Do you have some other source?
| QUOTE |
| SR explosive rules don't convert will into pounds. |
Why not? Working that little multiplier into any of the calculations above would be extremely simple. It's always easier to do the math in metric (since the rules are in metric, and math in general is a lot easier to do in metric), but using the multiplier in the beginning and on the result is no problem at all.
| QUOTE (Austere Emancipator) | ||
Why not? |
Because, that little multiplier is just converting them back into kg before the rest of the math is applied. You can track the numbers in pounds, but you will convert them back to kg before calculating effective blast, whether you admit that is a stage of the process is irrelevant. Once the square root is taken, there is no easy process to convert the resultant number into the proper result.
As for the ton definition, this dictionary associates the kiloton and megaton with the British definition, while not stating exactly which size of ton is used as the base.
[edit]and yet other dictionaries associate it with the metric ton. Leading to a final conclusion that no one bothered to clarify which ton they were using when bragging about explosive potential in the 40's
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
| Once the square root is taken, there is no easy process to convert the resultant number into the proper result. |
Simply multiply by about two thirds (.674...).
I need to try posting while awake more often.
Yes, you can multiply the result by ~0.67 and retain the usually explosive rules.
Ignare my claims above, √10 = √2*√5, so yes you can convert from √pounds to √kg directly.
You're still converting, just at a different stage.
Yes, you can multiply the result by ~0.67 and retain the usually explosive rules.
Ignare my claims above, √10 = √2*√5, so yes you can convert from √pounds to √kg directly.
You're still converting, just at a different stage.
..
Listen to me: The kiloton is equal to 1,000 metric tons of TNT. A metric ton is 1,000kg, or 2,204.6 pounds. A metric ton really should be considered one megagram. The reason these standards are used is because they are scientific standards, and the development and measurement of the first atomic device was a scientific endeavor. Anyone who doubts that the kiloton is equal to 1,000 metric tons can message me privately, and I will provide sufficient proof to allay any doubts you might have. Otherwise, simply trust that I know what I am talking about, and move on.
Given that the actual difference between a 1000kg metric ton and a 2200 pound long ton is less than a quarter of a percent, I really don't think it makes any difference which you use. Especially not when discussing a subject that has as many fuzzy external influences as explosive power.
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
| You're still converting, just at a different stage. |
Yeah, I agree with what you said about converting SR to pounds being a pain. If you set it all up beforehand then it's still a bunch of work, and if you don't then you're stopping the game to do mental algebra and go whip out a calculator to find 1/sqrt(2.2) or some other arcane value.
Metric vs. Imperial Kilotons:
Does it really matter if you take Deadly plus 70 Boxes of Overdamage, or Deadly plus 72?
Does it really matter if you take Deadly plus 70 Boxes of Overdamage, or Deadly plus 72?
Never get between people and Math. Speaking of new Totems...
Getting between people and the math they argue is like getting between twh hovertrains, one of which left Seattle at 2345 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 123 MPH and the other left Denver on the same track at 2300 hrs. and traveled towards Seattle at 150 MPH. At which point do they collide, destroying themselves and you?
| QUOTE (John Campbell) |
| Given that the actual difference between a 1000kg metric ton and a 2200 pound long ton is less than a quarter of a percent, I really don't think it makes any difference which you use. |
A 1000kg metric ton /is/ a 2200 pound "long ton."
| QUOTE (Kanada Ten) |
| Never get between people and Math. Speaking of new Totems... |
That's not a new totem: it's called being a hermetic mage; the shaman who walks with mathematics.
| QUOTE (3278) |
| A 1000kg metric ton /is/ a 2200 pound "long ton." |
You mean that the avoirdupois long ton was created to be the same as the metric ton? Or how are they the same? Because they aren't exactly the same in size, as I'm sure you know.
The other 4.6 pounds were dropped for convenience, a difference of 4.6 pounds being found acceptable, while the 204.6 pound difference of the short ton was not.
| QUOTE (CardboardArmor @ Apr 4 2004, 01:33 AM) |
| Getting between people and the math they argue is like getting between twh hovertrains, one of which left Seattle at 2345 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 123 MPH and the other left Denver on the same track at 2300 hrs. and traveled towards Seattle at 150 MPH. At which point do they collide, destroying themselves and you? |
Assuming a track length approximately equal to this trip plan:
At 0917 hours the next day, the two will crash 1172.8 miles from Seattle killing all direct observes bringing up the zen-like question: "if two trains collide and no one lives to tell about it, did they ever actually exist as trains?" This question will be on all the news channels for a few months before the anchors shave their heads and start handing out flowers in airports.
[edit]thanks, I forgot that then tens digit only goes to 60
0877?? so is that 0917 then
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) | ||
Assuming a track length approximately equal to this trip plan: At 0877 hours the next day, the two will crash 1172.8 miles from Seattle |
It's a pretty boring problem, though. Try this one on:
Getting between people and the math they argue is like getting between twh hovertrains, one of which left Seattle at 2345 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 150 MPH and the other left Seattle on the same track at 2300 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 123 MPH. At which point do they collide, destroying themselves and you?
| QUOTE |
| Getting between people and the math they argue is like getting between twh hovertrains, one of which left Seattle at 2345 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 150 MPH and the other left Seattle on the same track at 2300 hrs. and traveled towards Denver at 123 MPH. At which point do they collide, destroying themselves and you? |
So two trains leave towards the same destination, on the same track, at two different times, with the later train going slower...
Wait thinking sdrawkcab here... damn dyslexia... So the later train (11:45 pm) is going at 150 and the earlier (11:00pm) is going at 123.
Right, the faster one will catch up to the slow one and hit it from behind. But when and where does this happen?
I misread one of those normal collision problems in middle school and spent a long time fooling around with this kind of problem, only to discover that it's deceptively simple.
I misread one of those normal collision problems in middle school and spent a long time fooling around with this kind of problem, only to discover that it's deceptively simple.
The slower train left 45 minutes earlier, meaning it's only 112.5 miles ahead of the faster train once it leaves the station. The faster train gains 27 miles on the slower one every hour. So 112.5 miles divided by 27 miles per hour means it'll take about 250 minutes to catch up, thus the crash will occur at approximately 3:55am, right?
That's just based on my shitty reasoning abilities, though. Math's never been my strong point.
But regardless, what's it have to do with the main topic?
That's just based on my shitty reasoning abilities, though. Math's never been my strong point.
But regardless, what's it have to do with the main topic?
Yeah, that's about right, 'cept you messed up the numbers a little. It's 92.25 miles ahead, and go from there.
I think I should have emphasized the question of where it happens, thus obscuring the easy route to the solution.
I think I should have emphasized the question of where it happens, thus obscuring the easy route to the solution.
| QUOTE |
| But regardless, what's it have to do with the main topic? |
Absolutely nothing.
Oops. I used the faster train's speed rather than the slower one for the initial distance. Bah.
So that means it takes place 3 hours and 25 minutes after the faster one left, or at 3:10am. The faster train would have traveled about 512.5 miles in that time, so that's where it'd have taken place. The exact location would depend on the track; I doubt if it's perfectly straight... I think.
So that means it takes place 3 hours and 25 minutes after the faster one left, or at 3:10am. The faster train would have traveled about 512.5 miles in that time, so that's where it'd have taken place. The exact location would depend on the track; I doubt if it's perfectly straight... I think.
You people completely took my joke and drained it of all possible humor. Just like a Math/Engineering major would.
I think I'll go curl up in the corner and cry now.
For reference: CardboardArmor is majoring in Biology.
I think I'll go curl up in the corner and cry now.
For reference: CardboardArmor is majoring in Biology.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.