Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Talk:Stacking penalties: Difference between revisions

Discussion page of Stacking penalties
Latest comment: 25 November 2013 by Rain kaessinde
m Attached user signature to existing discussion text, for later formatting clarity.
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:


-- [[User|Naara elein]], 23:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
-- [[User|Naara elein]], 23:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Changed the penalty formula to a base-''e'' form, which matches in-game values to the full displayed precision of 10^-10. Note that the decay constant of 2.67 is an exact number, not a rounded decimal!
I also reset the penalty formula in terms of a zero-based index and changed/expanded the accompanying text accordingly. This eliminates a set of nested parentheses and reduces the visual complexity of the expression, which is a virtue when writing math in plain text.
-- [[User:Rain kaessinde|Rain]] ([[User talk:Rain kaessinde|talk]]) 18:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:35, 25 November 2013

2.22292081^2 is an approximation of LN(140)

The formula should be:

S(n) = 0.5^( (n-1)^2 / LN(140) )

-- Naara elein, 23:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


Changed the penalty formula to a base-e form, which matches in-game values to the full displayed precision of 10^-10. Note that the decay constant of 2.67 is an exact number, not a rounded decimal!

I also reset the penalty formula in terms of a zero-based index and changed/expanded the accompanying text accordingly. This eliminates a set of nested parentheses and reduces the visual complexity of the expression, which is a virtue when writing math in plain text.

-- Rain (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Reply