安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
1. no
2.no
3.no
Have a nice day!
i have 6 telescopes and 6 consoles.
i DO have 100% coverage from time to time.
im thinking of trying a dozen telescopes and consoles to see if i can get permanent 100% coverage.
In fact, I did experiment to see if I could increase the percentile protection of my base just by building telescopes, as I thought they might have an inherent protection value. But it seems that two or three telescopes are no more effective than one unless they are manned and being monitored.
+1. It gets to a point where it's a lot less trouble & expense to just deal with the rare metor hit you get than try for 100% protection...
Mathematically you cannot achieve true 100% detection chance without rounding numbers.
Detection probability= 1 - (0.4)^(#big telescopes-active) * (0.6)^(#small telescopes-active)
With 5 active big telescopes you have 98.976% detection chance.
With 6 you have 99.5904%.
With 7 you have 99.83616%.
This is the same for antennas.
Interception probability= 1 - (0.5)^(#big antennas-active) * (0.75)^(#small antennas-active)