End Level Graph Suggestions

[Nemoricus]

I've noticed that the end level graphs are normalized so that the peak of each graph is at the top of the chart area. However, it would be nice if those graphs were adjusted relative to each other.

For example, the energy gathered/energy used graphs both use the same units, energy units/s, so if these graphs were adjusted relative to each, one could directly compare their energy use to energy collection. Like wise for Creeper/Good Creeper Coverage, Creeper/Good Creeper Killed, and Ore Collected Use.

Also, it would be nice if you could selectively turn off graphs, to make reading them easier.

A quick question: I noticed at the end of my most recent mission that the Energy Collection graph was oscillating, despite the fact that my energy production was constant during that period. Any idea what's going on there?

[knucracker]

You can click the labels at the top to turn on/off individual graphs.

As for the oscillation, the values are averaged over time so there can be high/low values depending on what collection cycles fall into what measurement intervals.

For the normalizing, the problem is that scale is often pretty different.  For instance, the creeper vs anti-creeper ratio can be pretty extreme.  If they were on the same scale the anti-creeper line is almost always stuck to the x-axis and barely bobbles above it.  The energy graphs are closer, so maybe I can look at that.

[Nemoricus]

You can click the labels at the top to turn on/off individual graphs.

Oh, didn't know that. Thank you!

As for the oscillation, the values are averaged over time so there can be high/low values depending on what collection cycles fall into what measurement intervals.

I'm not sure that I understand what's going on here. If the second by second energy collection remains the same, shouldn't the graph be a constant? Unless the reactors don't all add their output at the same time?

[UpperKEES]

I'm not sure that I understand what's going on here. If the second by second energy collection remains the same, shouldn't the graph be a constant? Unless the reactors don't all add their output at the same time?

The values for the graph probably aren't measured every second, but for instance every 10 seconds. One moment all you weapons can be idle, while the next moment they all fire at an emitter that just spawned more Creeper.

[Nemoricus]

I can see how Energy *Use* would oscillate, but if the number of reactors doesn't change from second to second, why should the Energy *Collection* graph oscillate like that?

[UpperKEES]

Not sure. Could you maybe post an image? For the graph you have to use Alt-PrntScrn and paste it into a paint program to save it. Use 'Additional Options' to attach the image to your forum post.

[Nemoricus]

Sure. In the picture that I've attached, the region in the middle has a constant number of reactors. The steps are due to reactor efficiency upgrades, but in between the energy collection line fluctuates slightly.

[UpperKEES]

Oh, I actually expected much bigger oscillations. I can imagine only integer values are being displayed (because only full packets can be stored or dispatched), so if you collect for instance 11.5 energy per second, you could store (or deplete) 11 units of energy in the first second, while you store (or deplete) 12 units of energy the next second. Not sure though, so please correct me when I'm wrong Virgil.

[Nemoricus]

I can imagine only integer values are being displayed (because only full packets can be stored or dispatched).

That actually makes a lot of sense, and would explain what I'm seeing perfectly.