Virgil gave the scoring algorithm in another post. I thought it would be interesting to graph it. Clicking on the graph should show it larger
(http://i49.tinypic.com/2hqau6p.jpg) (http://i48.tinypic.com/34sjzn4.jpg)
how did you make that graph because it's completely backwards and wrong, there's an aymptote along the x-axis, therefore the line will never touch the x-axis, what you've got will touch the x-axis in about another hour
Take a look at the numbers under the graph... at firsst they raise slowly, but later on they raise with jumps in hours... hence the graph looks weird...
in that case the graph is even more wrong, what he's trying to do then is a histogram, he's using the wrong graph paper and no consistent graduating scale for the time, a graph of this sort would look like the graph y=1/x except that the top end of the graph connects with the y-axis
edit: here you go
(http://i360.photobucket.com/albums/oo46/soulful_plain_strider/score.jpg)
Quote from: Aurzel on January 12, 2010, 02:26:42 PM
in that case the graph is even more wrong, what he's trying to do then is a histogram, he's using the wrong graph paper and no consistent graduating scale for the time, a graph of this sort would look like the graph y=1/x except that the top end of the graph connects with the y-axis
edit: here you go
I used Excel. Unfortunately I did not save anything after I made the graph. Now I realize something is wrong and I'll look into what I did. Aurzel's graps is how it should look, since as Virgil said in his post (http://knucklecracker.com/forums/index.php?topic=309.msg2824#msg2824), "To get a score of 1 you have to let the game play for over a year. "
I did want to show almost a logarithmic increase in time, but unfortunately, Excel does not let me scale the X-axis logarithmically, unless I"m missing something.
Virgil said it would take over a year to get to 1.
_k
^^ as I quoted right above you.
and although technically its impossible to get a score of 0, i'm sure if left on long enough (several years probably?) the number would be so low that it would be rounded down to 0
well im not sure if the system actually rounds up or down, or if it just ignored all the number behind the decimal point
As an aside, you can use this site to plot functions:
http://www.walterzorn.com/grapher/grapher_e.htm
I use it whenever I've trying to craft a function to do something (like a series of ln's added together or something) and I need to see what it will look like.
Quote from: virgilw on January 12, 2010, 09:43:31 PM
As an aside, you can use this site to plot functions:
http://www.walterzorn.com/grapher/grapher_e.htm
I use it whenever I've trying to craft a function to do something (like a series of ln's added together or something) and I need to see what it will look like.
super cool site!
Quote from: Karsten75 on January 12, 2010, 10:24:36 PM
Quote from: virgilw on January 12, 2010, 09:43:31 PM
As an aside, you can use this site to plot functions:
http://www.walterzorn.com/grapher/grapher_e.htm
I use it whenever I've trying to craft a function to do something (like a series of ln's added together or something) and I need to see what it will look like.
super cool site!
It's super special awesome!
_k
Too bad the 'Double Down' option doesn't improve your score (read: reduce your score more slowly).
Great game though, I enjoy it a lot!