- 279
- 296
I'll use this calc as an example, specifically the comment made by DarkDragonMedeus and the thread of comments that came after it.
These are the specific statement made by DarkDragon that confuse me.
"VF is for fragments so small they're indistinguishable."
"VF is for is everything is just pebbles and they're not distinguishable."
"They all have to be nothing but pebbles, like no bigger than milliliters individually or something like that to be VF"
However as Bring up by other comments in the calc, parts of these statements are contradictory to the on-site explanation of vfrag
“Violent Fragmentation: Applied when the matter that was destroyed was turned into small but still distinguishable pieces.”
In other words, I just want to know if DarkDragons statements are true, because if they are then the on-site explanation definitely needs to be changed.
The current explanation would not only be far to ambiguous in regards to the size of debris for something that’s apparently supposed to be so specific, but straight up contradictory to the way we actually treat this kind of frag value in regards to distinguishability. It also seems that it spreads miss information to users who are now to making calcs.
These are the specific statement made by DarkDragon that confuse me.
"VF is for fragments so small they're indistinguishable."
"VF is for is everything is just pebbles and they're not distinguishable."
"They all have to be nothing but pebbles, like no bigger than milliliters individually or something like that to be VF"
However as Bring up by other comments in the calc, parts of these statements are contradictory to the on-site explanation of vfrag
“Violent Fragmentation: Applied when the matter that was destroyed was turned into small but still distinguishable pieces.”
In other words, I just want to know if DarkDragons statements are true, because if they are then the on-site explanation definitely needs to be changed.
The current explanation would not only be far to ambiguous in regards to the size of debris for something that’s apparently supposed to be so specific, but straight up contradictory to the way we actually treat this kind of frag value in regards to distinguishability. It also seems that it spreads miss information to users who are now to making calcs.
Last edited: