An Idea Of Boredom.......

[mYth]

An interesting discussion we had over here a few hours ago was this:

One example is a dueling-type scenario with 3 participants, each with different levels of skill as a marksman. Shooter A has a 95% rate of accuracy, shooter B has 75%, and C has 5%. The shooters take positions on an equilateral triangle; each chooses a target and (if alive) fires one shot. To be fair, it is agreed that the shooters will shoot in reverse order of their skill, I.E. first C, then B, then A.

The question is, if you are shooter C, what is the best strategy? At first glance, it might seem like shooting at A would be best, but really the best thing to do is to shoot in the air. That way, B will shoot at A, and if he misses, A will shot at B. Either way, C will end up with the first shot of the survivor. C exchanges the first shot in a "truel" for the first shot in a proper duel.




An idea of things to come for me out here.....just a few more months to go......i hope :?

 

[|Monk|]

myth, that's the randomest thing to just start talking about when you're bored. it's really interesting but how the heck did you come up with this whole complicated scenario?

 

[TonyMontana135420]

hmmm....let's see....if i were shooter C, i would probably shoot at myth.....j/k, hope you're having a fun time over at club med myth!!!

 

[RaNcid]

ok, so.. what i would do...

if A and B are pointing guns at each other and I was shooter C, I'd point my gun at the one that looked the most calm. Let's say thats shooter B. A is aimed at B and C is aimed at B. Each person has a 50/50 chance of shooting the other person. (this is explained in Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs) So... my acc could be 1% as shooter C but that's the average percent of the possibly that I shoot at targets rangeing from any distance and actually hit. Thus the percentile means shit in this situation. Thus, judging character/character signs/history/manorizism/etc. would guide me into choosing the target I'd rather be aimed at.

What if shooter A and B know they are the most acc and decide to both aim at shooter C to get him out of the way so that when facing each other not only will it be based on accuracy but also speed to give someone and extra chance? would shooter C still fire a bullet in the air?

 

[aurora]

Fuck c and b,ill camp short A behind the boxs.

 

[Ind3lible]

Of course shooter C's accuracy percentage is low. He shoots in the damn air!!

 

[mYth]

myth, that's the randomest thing to just start talking about when you're bored. it's really interesting but how the heck did you come up with this whole complicated scenario?

This was the least harmful thing we've discussed here.......we've talked about much deeper and darker things here that I could not in good taste post here for fear of deadly reprisals from some/most of you.......

hmmm....let's see....if i were shooter C, i would probably shoot at myth.....j/k, hope you're having a fun time over at club med myth!!!

Myth was actually shooter A in the discussion.......B was a Brit we have here.....and C was a Canadian..... :lol:

The Med is about a 45 hour drive from here, but the beer's good here......"God Save The Queen!"

ok, so.. what i would do...

if A and B are pointing guns at each other and I was shooter C, I'd point my gun at the one that looked the most calm. Let's say thats shooter B. A is aimed at B and C is aimed at B. Each person has a 50/50 chance of shooting the other person. (this is explained in Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs) So... my acc could be 1% as shooter C but that's the average percent of the possibly that I shoot at targets rangeing from any distance and actually hit. Thus the percentile means shit in this situation. Thus, judging character/character signs/history/manorizism/etc. would guide me into choosing the target I'd rather be aimed at.

What if shooter A and B know they are the most acc and decide to both aim at shooter C to get him out of the way so that when facing each other not only will it be based on accuracy but also speed to give someone and extra chance? would shooter C still fire a bullet in the air?

Well Tina, you've stirred some shit up here with that theory.......maybe you should be out here to place a female point of view on these discussions of ours........

Fuck c and b,ill camp short A behind the boxs.

We just absolutely love finding boxes here.......we actually build forts out of them to practice with sometimes.......then set'em on fire afterwards to roast weenies on...... :lol:

Of course shooter C's accuracy percentage is low. He shoots in the damn air!!

On second thought, we've decided that Deli is banned from these discussions...... :lol:

ROFL j/k.....but a very good observation Deli......C is actually the one whose chicken shit and aviods confrontation at all costs......

 

[mYth]

Here's another one we had today........hope it bakes the noodle:

Nuclear war, or atomic war in general, can be divided into two subgroups. The first, a limited nuclear war, consists of only the use of a small number of weapons in a tactical exchange aimed primarily at the opposing military forces. The second, a full-scale nuclear war, consists of large numbers of weapons used in an attack aimed at an entire country, including both military and civilian targets. Soon after the first use of atomic weapons, the Doomsday Clock was created by the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists as a symbolic countdown to full-scale nuclear war. A nuclear war, unlike a conventional war, causes widespread destruction at a large scale and has long-term globally damaging effects. It has been proposed that a full-scale nuclear war could bring about the extinction of the human race and permanent damage to most complex life on the planet, ecosystems as well as the severe disruption of the global climate. Thus the reference to nuclear war as a doomsday scenario. Most recently, The United Kingdom has a declared policy of sub-strategic nuclear strikes, in which case a limited strike would be carried out. Former Defence Secretary Malcolm Rifkind described this as a deterrence against harm to the UK's vital interests. Rifkind argued that following the end of the Cold War aggressors may believe the threat of a strategic nuclear attack to be bluff, and that a policy of a more limited strike would ensure that the nuclear deterrent had credibility. Yet with this sub-strategic policy, and the related potential for a new generation of limited yield "battlefield" nuclear weapons from the United States, alarms anti-nuclear groups who believe it will make the use of nuclear weapons a more acceptable part of a country's arsenal.


Just say the following......."Wow......."

 

[slick]

if he has 5% accuracy he should shoot himself , cause sure as shit he aint gonna shoot nothing else.