Encumbrance (Apocalypse) - Revision history

EsTeR: old page, removed cat

2023-09-20T02:54:25Z

old page, removed cat

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:54, 20 September 2023
Line 34:		Line 34:
	* Apoc'd says 73, for calculated speed 69.48.... Oops.		* Apoc'd says 73, for calculated speed 69.48.... Oops.
	* The starting MP formula may not even be nonstrictly monotone increasing in STR and SPD. Further investigation warranted.		* The starting MP formula may not even be nonstrictly monotone increasing in STR and SPD. Further investigation warranted.

	~~[[Category: Apocalypse]]~~
	~~[[Category: Agents (Apocalypse)]]~~

Zaimoni at 19:14, 28 December 2009

2009-12-28T19:14:22Z

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 Tentatively (needs more testing):
-* Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength
+* Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength (Wong FAQ, not verified)
-* Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum: the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item.  I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming same as elsewhere.  Contrary to appearances, each armor unit only has one square.
+* Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum (?): the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item.  I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming same as elsewhere.  Contrary to appearances, each armor unit only has one square.
 The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A.  Multiply this by maximum speed, then "do something" (both truncation and rounding are sometimes off by one).
@@ Line 10: / Line 11: @@
 RT speed is simply INT(TB speed/8).
 === Some examples courtesy of Captain Midnight's editor ===
@@ Line 21: / Line 32: @@
 This checks in as 85 encumbrance; calculated MP is 66.58, in-game 67.  Oops.  Calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle at 67 MP is 8 MP, with corresponding autofire 2 MP/shot.  We'd like 66 MP, for a calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle of 7 MP, with corresponding autofire 1 MP/shot.
+* Apoc'd says 73, for calculated speed 69.48....  Oops.
-<table {{StdCenterTable}}>
+* The starting MP formula may not even be nonstrictly monotone increasing in STR and SPD.  Further investigation warranted.
 [[Category: Apocalypse]]
 [[Category: Agents (Apocalypse)]]

Hobbes at 18:28, 13 November 2009

2009-11-13T18:28:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:28, 13 November 2009
Line 50:		Line 50:

	Apocalypse is not using either the geometric or arithmetic averages of the squares as the threshold (both check in around 4,290 for 65² and 66², which would give 66MP rather than 65MP. Inverting Apocalypse's distance function doesn't work either: INT(85*135/220)=52, calculated MP would be 69 rather than 67.		Apocalypse is not using either the geometric or arithmetic averages of the squares as the threshold (both check in around 4,290 for 65² and 66², which would give 66MP rather than 65MP. Inverting Apocalypse's distance function doesn't work either: INT(85*135/220)=52, calculated MP would be 69 rather than 67.

			[[Category: Apocalypse]]
			[[Category: Agents (Apocalypse)]]

Zaimoni at 03:27, 30 April 2008

2008-04-30T03:27:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:27, 30 April 2008
Line 32:		Line 32:

	So: the empirical formula is not what Apocalypse actually uses, as rounding the calculated MP at weight 89 gives 66 MP, not 65 MP.		So: the empirical formula is not what Apocalypse actually uses, as rounding the calculated MP at weight 89 gives 66 MP, not 65 MP.

			Even worse (<i>in vivo</i>):
			<table {{StdCenterTable}}>
			<tr {{StdDescTable_Heading}}><th align="left">Speed</th><th align="left">Strength</th><th align="left">Weight</th><th width="75">MP</th><th width="75">Calculated MP</th></tr>
			<tr align=center><td>73</td><td>44</td><td>85</td><td>51</td><td>52.49</td></tr>
			</table>

	=== Quest for the Real Formula ===		=== Quest for the Real Formula ===

Zaimoni at 02:38, 14 April 2008

2008-04-14T02:38:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:38, 14 April 2008
Line 36:		Line 36:

	Consider the thresholds as "pre-squared":		Consider the thresholds as "pre-squared":
	INT(8585135/220) = 4,433		* INT(8585135/220) = 4,433
	INT(8585134/220) = 4,400		* INT(8585134/220) = 4,400
	INT(8585132/220) = 4,335		* INT(8585132/220) = 4,335
	INT(8585131/220) = 4,302		* INT(8585131/220) = 4,302

	It turns out that the truncated arithmetic average of two squares in sequence, is their geometric average. So neither is being used by Apocalypse (65·66 = 4290, so 89 encumbrance would give 66 MP in this scheme rather than 65 MP).		It turns out that the truncated arithmetic average of two squares in sequence, is their geometric average. So neither is being used by Apocalypse (65·66 = 4290, so 89 encumbrance would give 66 MP in this scheme rather than 65 MP).

	Apocalypse is not using either the geometric or arithmetic averages of the squares as the threshold (both check in around 4,290 for 65² and 66², which would give 66MP rather than 65MP. Inverting Apocalypse's distance function doesn't work either: INT(85*135/220)=52, calculated MP would be 69 rather than 67.		Apocalypse is not using either the geometric or arithmetic averages of the squares as the threshold (both check in around 4,290 for 65² and 66², which would give 66MP rather than 65MP. Inverting Apocalypse's distance function doesn't work either: INT(85*135/220)=52, calculated MP would be 69 rather than 67.

Zaimoni at 02:37, 14 April 2008

2008-04-14T02:37:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:37, 14 April 2008
Line 32:		Line 32:

	So: the empirical formula is not what Apocalypse actually uses, as rounding the calculated MP at weight 89 gives 66 MP, not 65 MP.		So: the empirical formula is not what Apocalypse actually uses, as rounding the calculated MP at weight 89 gives 66 MP, not 65 MP.

			=== Quest for the Real Formula ===

			Consider the thresholds as "pre-squared":
			INT(8585135/220) = 4,433
			INT(8585134/220) = 4,400
			INT(8585132/220) = 4,335
			INT(8585131/220) = 4,302

			It turns out that the truncated arithmetic average of two squares in sequence, is their geometric average. So neither is being used by Apocalypse (65·66 = 4290, so 89 encumbrance would give 66 MP in this scheme rather than 65 MP).

			Apocalypse is not using either the geometric or arithmetic averages of the squares as the threshold (both check in around 4,290 for 65² and 66², which would give 66MP rather than 65MP. Inverting Apocalypse's distance function doesn't work either: INT(85*135/220)=52, calculated MP would be 69 rather than 67.

Zaimoni at 01:59, 14 April 2008

2008-04-14T01:59:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:59, 14 April 2008
Line 20:		Line 20:
	* 2 frag grenades, 2 gas grenades: 2 weight/encumbrance each, 8 total		* 2 frag grenades, 2 gas grenades: 2 weight/encumbrance each, 8 total

	This checks in as 85 encumbrance; calculated MP is 66.58, in-game 67. Oops. Calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle at 67 MP is 8 MP, with corresponding autofire 2 MP/shot. We'd like 66 MP, for a calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle of 8 MP, with corresponding autofire 1 MP/shot.		This checks in as 85 encumbrance; calculated MP is 66.58, in-game 67. Oops. Calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle at 67 MP is 8 MP, with corresponding autofire 2 MP/shot. We'd like 66 MP, for a calculated/actual aimed shot with a Marsec rifle of 7 MP, with corresponding autofire 1 MP/shot.

	<table {{StdCenterTable}}>		<table {{StdCenterTable}}>

Zaimoni: In-progress snapshot

2008-04-14T01:59:27Z

In-progress snapshot

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Tentatively (needs more testing):
 * Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength
 * Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum: the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item.  I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming same as elsewhere.  Contrary to appearances, each armor unit only has one square.
-The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A.  Multiply this by maximum speed, then truncate.
+The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A.  Multiply this by maximum speed, then "do something" (both truncation and rounding are sometimes off by one).

Zaimoni at 21:59, 4 June 2007

2007-06-04T21:59:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:59, 4 June 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Tentatively (needs more testing):		Tentatively (needs more testing):
	* Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength		* Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength
	* Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum: the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item. I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming one square.		* Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum: the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item. I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming same as elsewhere. Contrary to appearances, each armor unit only has one square.

	The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A. Multiply this by maximum speed, then truncate.		The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A. Multiply this by maximum speed, then truncate.

Zaimoni at 21:22, 4 June 2007

2007-06-04T21:22:45Z

New page

Tentatively (needs more testing):
* Encumbrance allowance (A): 4 x Strength
* Encumbrance (E) is calculated as a weighted sum: the listed weight is multipled by the number of squares of the item. I'm not sure how items in the hand work yet, tentatively assuming one square.

The scaling factor for actual speed is then the square root of (A-E)/A. Multiply this by maximum speed, then truncate.