-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] There is nothing wrong with a reaction time based analysis.
A human would be random, aimbots would tend to be the opposite. But you would need a large data sample to be sure you were not generating a false positive. 100ms is generally considered the limit for human reflexes. It is what gets 100 meter sprinters and F1 drivers pinged for jumping the start if they react faster than that, but as has been said several times, they do not get the benefit of sound or visual (shadows, gun barrels, muzzle flashes etc.) cues. Hell, in a war in certain spots, I will just sit there tap tapping a colt into a choke point. Nuke Ramps into Radio Room, Outside Bomb train to little Ladder room etc. On 1/20/06, Stephen Moretti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Whisper wrote: > > Does that answer your question? > > > So basically if I'm reading you correctly. > > He's : > a) got the calculations wrong > b) using the wrong figures to make the calculations in the first > place. > c) You can't actually make these kind of calculations based on > "travel" times, because bullets don't travel. > d) Even if he had got all of the above right none of this takes into > account team work and experience. > > > So all in all its a load of rubbish? > > Stephen > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
