FANDOM

Homuhomu123

aka 米琪卡哇(Michikawa)

  • I live in Montreal, Canada
  • I was born on April 13
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hello Homu!

    Here's the results of an accuracy test I did for the OTO 152mm triple cannon:

    Yahagi kai, level 90-91, luck 14, OTO 152mm triple cannon x2, morale at 0, health over 50%
    At level 90:
    97 shots fired, 37 hits, 55 torpedoes launched, 11 hits
    At level 91:
    103 shots fired, 32 hits, 66 torpedoes launched, 15 hits

    I posted them a week ago on himeuta (here: http://www.himeuta.net/f5-kancolle-discussion/akashi-depth-upgrade-theorycraft-6976.html), but they still didn't get interpreted, so I supposed that you might be interested.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • hey there homu
    I remember you used notepad to note down your results and as I got lazy with noting results down, I googled a hour for this here
    https://i.imgur.com/p2ekVcP.png
    in short,you press arrow and the number in the cell increases/decreases
    it seems that you can edit the layout of the counter
    if you are interested and have got openoffice.calc I can help you setting it up : >

      Loading editor
    • Appreciated dude! I tried downloading an openoffice but it couldn't be installed. Surely interested. Where did you get that software?

        Loading editor
    • you get openoffice here https://www.openoffice.org/download/ (whole packet)
      and that counter is an inbuild software of openoffice
      its well hidden,but get openoffice installed first and give me a screenshot of your taskbar as mine is in german.... : s

        Loading editor
    • Tried downloading it a few times, the Chinese version couldn't be installed anyway :v

      Gonna try downloading the English version, will let you know :D

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • you might wanna take a look at this post http://kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Akashi%27s_Improvement_Arsenal#comm-262899
    as far as i understood his description of the table,i didnt understand anything he explained  : v

      Loading editor
    • View all 30 replies
    • arayada~ I failed improving a T94 FD +9 to +10 :'v 

      lv. 38 Akashi 87 morale,lv62 Akizuki 100 morale

        Loading editor
    • About collecting data automatically, https://github.com/yuyuvn/KanColleViewer/issues/22#issuecomment-98072662.

      For example, I just added expedition logging on my local copy, so I think improvement logging is possible too. But the main question is who would use KCV with those features and how to collect the data.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey, I was wondering if you would be interested in helping me out with compiling what we know so far about accuracy and evasion modifiers into a set of convenient tables.  It seems we've gotten to the point where enough tests have been done now that there's actually a fair bit we know, but the individual results are very scattered about.  I've setup a sandbox page (http://kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Sandbox/Accuracy_Evasion_Tables) with a rough outline of how I envision it to be laid out.  The exact presentation will probably change along the way, and I'd also like to get sources linked eventually.  However, first I think it'd be good if we just got all the results crammed in first and let the rest sort itself out later once we have a better idea how it'll look.

    Interested?

      Loading editor
    • Sure man. That's a great idea, I was thinking about it too since the current combat page mentions few about it. The template gives very precise information, I like it, but on the otherhand most ppl will just regard them as solid basis without checking the sources themselves.... That would be my concern.

      You got a point there on collecting all data we have in hand. As you may have noticed, so far I collected a few. I was hoping that all the scattered confidential accuracy tests can be first translated & complied in one place, serving as an English database, from which we can finally provide some accurate information on your compliation tables.

      Cramming the results in  ->  Sure, for the part of overweight penalty we got bunch of tests. For the others you may do at your discretion.

        Loading editor
    • On the otherhand (if you don't mind), I can help you complie all the scattered tests you found. :)  Like how I did in the blog post "Accuracy Test Results".

        Loading editor
    • Well, that's the nature of disseminating information to a large and varied audience.  Few people are going to care about the sources, and most just want something they can take at face value.  We just have to try to get it right.  I'll start filling in stuff in a bit, but I'm sure there's some stuff that you know better than I do so I'll be counting on your backup.

        Loading editor
    • Understood. Got your back. 

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Homu do you have an article you can point out to regarding the benefits of luck to BBs? I have raised a question in this (http://kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/EliteBB) page but it seems like it is a topic that is not really certain yet?

    More specifically:

    Does luck actually raise evasion and accuracy?

    Is it true that all day time cut ins are unaffected by luck?

      Loading editor
    • Thanks for the msg. All my posts are on my profile page you may check that. 

      Concerns on the luck stat recently rose among ppl due to some tentative formula stating "+10 luck = +1 accuracy". Other than that I'm not sure if luck also boosts evasion, for it's not shown in the evasion term calculation. You may check the article "Accuracy Test Results (source to be cited".

        Loading editor
    • I see, thanks for the reply.

      I took a look at that article (luck/1000 formula and destroyer shelling comparison) and if it is really so, it would be one of the most expensive ways to boost your ship :P

      This just makes me wonder then about luck on carriers. It may actually do something after all...

        Loading editor
    • That's true... Although the destroyer shelling comparison test was the only related one I found.

      Neverthelss, I think people would rather spending maruyu on their Kitakami, for 1 luck = 1% CI chance, instead of 0.1% accuracy.

      As for luck stat & day CI chance, I haven't seen many tests on that. I personally did some experiments on artillery spotting, but none of them was specifically for this factor.

      I've designed a test for that: comparing high level Nagato & Mutsu (41cm*2, T32 Radar, Seaplane) at 1-1-1, each of them were accompanied by a CVL equipped w/ Saiun *4. The test was halted since Nagato had refused to show up for a long time...

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • are you sugesting nigth battle?

    my info:

    2BBV+2CV+CVL

    2BB+CL+2DD+1CLT

    lvl 30-40

      Loading editor
    • Hi! Welcome to KC wikia. Different ppl have different ways in leveling their ships, but the majority ones go to map 2-4 first node, then map 3-2 first node. For leveling DDs and CLs ppl prefer doing it at map 1-5 first 3 nodes, but do not enter the boss node since it will boost your HeadQuarter level. A higher HQ level means tougher enemies in event maps (and every extra operations, eg. 1-5, 2-5, 3-5 & 5-5).

      If you mean how to defeat the current event maps with your fleet, it really depends on how high your current HQ level is, and ship level too... 

      Night battle? Entering night battle from day battle won't boost your experience gained. It just increase your ammo consumption but another chance to destroy the enemy..



      If you need tutorials for leveling, here's a page might be suggested for you: I know there are a lot of info, but just take those most useful one for yourself.

      http://kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Tutorial:_Leveling

      If you wanna develop more skills in setting up for a combat, you may wanna check the game mechanics page, too:

      http://kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Combat

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey, Homuhomu. I decided to delete old info about abyssal AA cut-in and replace it with new one as I do feel confident about it.

    I remember all my bombers being shot down on first node of E5 (Tsu was the only ship with any AA-related eq there - two high angle guns at that) several times. Other people reported it as well. I could only find this one right now - he suspected CL Oni because we didn't know her eq back then.

    When doing 6-1 my Kaga would often fail to hit anyone (or only scratched) and every time I checked her planes after retreating I would see she had more than half of her bombers shot down, even when the only node I fought was B - that with one Nu-class - however, Tsu-class is there as well.

    Coincidentally, if Kaga managed to kill one or two enemies in air phase (she had Tenzan Tomonaga and Ryuusei 601), she would only lose 1-3 in each slot.

    These facts heavily imply one of enemies was capable of performing AA cut-in - again, only Tsu-class has proper eq. I think Tsu has built-in Anti Air Fire Detector just like Akizuki - who also is capable of performing AA cut-in with just two high angle guns.


    I came here with one other thing. The section about night special attacks has always bugged me because for mixed cut-in "130% x 2 (consecutive)" is used while "150% x 2 (simultaneous)" stands next to torpedo cut-in. Why different words?

    I actually tested this and both types of cut-ins are counted the exact same way: Torpedo cut-in and Mixed cut-in


    Edit: I'm not sure if you saw that but I found the video testing effects of Skilled Lookouts you asked for: http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm25670774

      Loading editor
    • Thank you for letting me know Progeusz san (:

      It seems Tsu class is highly suspected to have built-in AAFD. I'm sure ppl are gonna support the revision if they witnessed the same thing, please revise at your discretion. Btw how about her equipment? I mean 5inch Twin Dual Purpose Cannon. Does it have built-in AAFD as well, or just Tsu class?

      As for night battle special attacks, the note "simultaneous" and "consecutive" were preserved from the old edition (back to the early 2014). I'm not sure about their implication either, but the calculation is definitely applied separately on each simultaneous / consecutive hit (like what you've tested there).

      Thank you for the dedication and sharing the video (: I'm still looking for more tests with higher sample sizes and finally we can write something credible regarding the skilled lookouts

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Homuhomu!

    I'm not very active on the KCwiki so it took me a while to notice, but you've done quite some research on the game mechanics and collected alot of statistics. Now, I think you (and many others) have often encountered the problem whereby, say you switch one EQ and see 50% cut-in, and then another with 52% cut-in, and wonder if it's significant. I'm not extremely good at math, but I worked out a formula that seems to make sense (and works practically). See: Calculating Confidence Intervals for Underlying Probabilities

    Given a number of attempts and successes (say attempted to craft 100 times and succeeded 10 times) it calculates confidence intervals for which the actual probability lies in, rather than just saying, "oh, it's 10%, but not very confident". So, for this example, 10/100 success gives a 90% confidence interval that the actual probability lies from 6.23% to 16.22%. If it 1000 attempts with 100 successes, then the 90% interval becomes 8.56% to 11.69%, which is narrower range as you can see.

    This would help all the research you've done, and allow us to draw better conclusions on what changes the chances significantly and what doesn't. Please have a look through the post that I made and let me know what you think. I have no idea how good your math is, so if you do spot any errors, please let me know. On the other hand, if you need the MatLab code to run such a script to help you calculate, also let me know, or anything else for that matter.

      Loading editor
    • View all 7 replies
    • Hey Homuhomu!

      I've taken a look at the idea behind the standard error calculation, and I understand it better now. It's, as you have mentioned, great for any probabilities around 50%, which would work pretty well for most combat calculations I think. The error bounds are symmetrical, and they're kind of fixed, because they assume that the probability is 50%, which is when the largest error interval results. Another way of putting it is that it errs on the side of caution. So if you are at around the tail ends with high or low probabilities, the error estimated is going to be significantly larger than what it should be (causing you to work harder to achieve a narrower bound), which, although isn't necessarily a bad thing, as the work is already tedious as it is, it's best to know how how few samples are needed to ensure enough confidence.

      As also mentioned Mathiaszealot, "the proper method is to use the integral of a beta function", which I believe what I've managed to work out essentially does (it uses the Incomplete Beta Function which is a more general form of the beta function). I also realised that there's one more example in the Checking Whether a Coin is Fair wikipedia article which I tested against. What the example does is to use the standard error calculation to generate the bounds of the confidence interval for a 12000 coin toss with 5961 heads, and assumes that the underlying probability is 5961/12000 = 49.68% (which is close to 50%). To verify, I plugged the same figures into the MATLAB script, and it generated the same intervals. So this basically shows that the standard error calculation is valid for probabilities around 50%, which is what we already know and realise (just that now, it's been verified).

      So I suppose, if you need something quick, you could use the table you generated, since it's much easier to refer to. However, if you want a more thorough calculation, or if you're at the computer and have access to the MATLAB script, it would be better to plug the values in and let the computer churn out the exact confidence bounds.

        Loading editor
    • Thank your for the work and sharing this to me mate! Very appreciated (:

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • CONTENT

      Loading editor
  • 昭昭前世,惕惕後人。永矢弗諼,祈願和平。

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.