http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Thread%3AUser_talk%3AXor%2FBetter_MEA_formula%2FTradiotional_MEA_proof%2Freply_%285%29Thread:User talk:Xor/Better MEA formula/Tradiotional MEA proof/reply (5) - Revision history2026-04-06T01:20:51ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.34.1http://robowiki.net/w/index.php?title=Thread:User_talk:Xor/Better_MEA_formula/Tradiotional_MEA_proof/reply_(5)&diff=52242&oldid=prevBeaming: Reply to Tradiotional MEA proof2017-09-26T17:59:22Z<p>Reply to <a href="/wiki/Thread:User_talk:Xor/Better_MEA_formula/Tradiotional_MEA_proof/reply_(4)" title="Thread:User talk:Xor/Better MEA formula/Tradiotional MEA proof/reply (4)">Tradiotional MEA proof</a></p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>Better for what? It does not increase your MEA. Though it decreases the target angular size, so it reduces the probability to be hit. Calculating probability to be hit is yet another beast, which we probably should attempt to solve analytically.<br />
<br />
There is another issue, the traditional MEA is good only for a single isolated wave, the real question is how to increase the MEA in a stream of constantly fired bullets.</div>Beaming