i never said what Vr, but in the next sentence i write what velocity ratio is, any idiot can make the link between the two. On that detail, yes i know, when i design wings wtc, right down to the nearest mm. But engineering is practicality, so you have no what to cut and what details to keep. I didbt post my maths because, one its a game forum, 2 any person wjo understands effiency can do the proper FULL maths and find the same results , and the 130 is supposed to be mm, so human piranha only best when that closeSorry, can't take you serious with a wall of unreadable text. Also, if you're trying to prove something to someone else, you can't leave out details, including where you're getting your information from, the formulas you used to get every variable, etc. I have no idea how far along you are in your engineering degree, but I work with plenty, both mechanical and software engineers, and they'll tell you being able to document and explain a concept is just as important as doing it. Come back with references (both on formulas and where you get 200 damage per pellet), some formatting, maybe a shorthand at the beginning with what variable are (what the hell is Vr, you never say), etc. Keep in mind this is a multiplayer forum, not an engineering forum. Explain things like you're explaining them to a 5 year old. After you adjust all that, maybe then we can have an intelligent debate on if what you're claiming is correct or not.
Simply based on in game mechanics and usage, trying to use the Pirahna at 130 on a Human is just a silly idea. There are several dozen other methods of dealing better damage.
highest damage weapon? (math done)
#51
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 03:47
#52
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 03:54
Claymore.
Also M8 Avenger is deadly on full auto. No kidding.
- bauzabauza et Fortack aiment ceci
#53
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 03:55
Maybe you should stop trying to make complex posts from your phone.
Your spelling and formatting is so shitty that what your writing wouldn't make sense, even if you had you facts straight about the weapon's stats, which you don't...
https://docs.google....RnbGRDYnc#gid=8
Here ya go, maybe next time you'll actually get your basic stats about the weapon right at least.
By the way, you spelled Reegar wrong throughout all your posts.
- Fortack aime ceci
#54
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 04:03
Human Adept max damage with Piranha: http://kalence.drupa.....053384!.F...9
GI Piranha: http://kalence.drupa.....053314!5BGA.S
Man, what a revelation! We've all been such fools for not realizing that the human adept is the optimal kit for the piranha!!!
- J. Peterman aime ceci
#56
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 04:15
i never said what Vr, but in the next sentence i write what velocity ratio is, any idiot can make the link between the two.
It's not the readers job to make assumptions, it's the writers job to make everything clear.
Edit: Also it's good writing practice to say the long hand before the shorthand. For example, "In order to find the velocity ratio, or Vr, you must....blah blah blah". Then from there on out you can use Vr because you've told the reader what it means. It's basic writing.
I didbt post my maths because, one its a game forum, 2 any person wjo understands effiency can do the proper FULL maths and find the same results
Again, not an engineering forum, Why would you assume people here would know formulas and whatever math you did. Also, if people could do that, don't you think we already know the best weapons?
and the 130 is supposed to be mm, so human piranha only best when that close
You didn't write mm, you wrote m, a very big difference. Why wouldn't you fix that in your original post? Secondly, do you ever clarify as to why human? Because other classes have better accuracy, stability, and damage passives.
#58
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 04:26
Who doesn't love a good maths story!
#60
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 04:42
Gonna agree with DisturbedPsic0. You would find less arguements and denials if you presented your case in a more clear and concise manner.
It doesn't help that you leave out details, mislabeled your units of measure, and used incorrect data.
It does make for a humorous read though.
#61
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 05:21
Please elaborate on the frictional differentials between doggiestyle and ahem reverse cowgirl position, OP.
- Deerber et Pearl (rip bioware) aiment ceci
#62
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 05:22
This topic is the perfect example of "not even wrong" in action.
#63
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 05:28
Not dense, people are trying to argue aeronautical engineering with their highschool engineering knowledge.
LOL @ highschool engineering knowledge.
Dude, time for you to eat the fruit of the clue tree. There are plenty of people here who can effortlessly understand the most complex calculations that you can produce.
Give it your best shot.
Keep going, everyone. I'm sure you'll get your victory against the OP with enough argument no you won't
But if we gave up, that would mean that somebody would be WRONG ON THE INTERNET!
#64
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 05:32
i never said what Vr, but in the next sentence i write what velocity ratio is, any idiot can make the link between the two. On that detail, yes i know, when i design wings wtc, right down to the nearest mm. But engineering is practicality, so you have no what to cut and what details to keep. I didbt post my maths because, one its a game forum, 2 any person wjo understands effiency can do the proper FULL maths and find the same results , and the 130 is supposed to be mm, so human piranha only best when that close
Come on now, name drop who you really work for. Toys R Us? Slim Shady's Engineering Co? McDonald's?
Hey, i know what your thinking, is it really worth increasing the bun size to make it bigger at the cost of increasing it's drag speed which requires the average person to be slightly stronger as well take longer to lift the burger to your mouth x multiple passes required?
We all know Lockheed only hires professionals that know how to document and submit a report, because they fired or more likely just didn't hire you if you submitted it like what's on the front page.
I'm not sure what you call that OP but it most definitely doesn't make any sense.
Oh ya, and since we are talking about hamburgers, I'm going to reference them as hotdogs, because you know, potAto potato, it's all the same right?
- robarcool aime ceci
#66
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 06:00
LOL @ highschool engineering knowledge.
Dude, time for you to eat the fruit of the clue tree. There are plenty of people here who can effortlessly understand the most complex calculations that you can produce.
Give it your best shot.
But if we gave up, that would mean that somebody would be WRONG ON THE INTERNET!
Give a complete example of a quantum gauge theory in four-dimensional space-time.
See ya in bout 50 years.
#67
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 06:05
G.I. + harrier + space magic
is the way
#68
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 07:28
Give a complete example of a quantum gauge theory in four-dimensional space-time.
![]()
See ya in bout 50 years.
![]()
You should set this as a task for the OP. I've been there and done that.
The exact dimensionality has little effect on the structure of a gauge theory. And very few people bother with the quantum form of the entire theory(*) because they really only want to know what particles fall out with which masses, so the group algebra normally suffices.
If you want to understand the dynamics of the theory then a lot of it is in the classical (tree graph) level and one can normally estimate the loop corrections most easily.
(*) And because renormalisation is a tough enough process that almost anything is worth avoiding it.
PS Or am I making this all up and it's just a test?
PPS The regular forum idiot will be along shortly to make an asinine remark about nerdiness, as if being on a video game forum doesn't implicate them as well.
#69
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 07:29
OK.... Wait.... WUT?

#70
Guest_Chino_*
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 07:29
Guest_Chino_*
- Zig et Deerber aiment ceci
#71
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 07:43
OK.... Wait.... WUT?
That's just what I learned in primary school. Once I got to high school they started us on the advanced stuff.
Now we need someone really smart to define a spontaneously symmetry-broken and fully covariant gauge theory of ME3 multiplayer. Ideally, it should explain why the RNG store works the way it does.
#72
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 08:16
#73
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 08:45
#74
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 09:06
Excellent troll thread. The seriousness of the responses is what really makes it.
There's a serious response? I don't see it.
I love it when people take Anarchy seriously.
What a wonderful quote. I'll call Homeland Security.
#75
Posté 28 juillet 2014 - 09:14
I do find it quite funny that it took 3 pages to establish that the Piranha works best at point blank range.




Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut







