Bio Engineer Archive
Thread: Hmm makes no sense
Page 1 of 1
Joilhath
Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:41 am
#1
Ok I'm making some nutrient food additives with different ingredients and got a surprising result.
using 658/993/999(fl/pe/oq) 874 weighted avg organic and 986/854/1000(fl/pe/oq) 937 weighted avg meat I get an x8 ie 58/88/118 nutrient, but if I use 970/968/841(fl/pe/oq) 917 weighted avg organic with the same meat I get x7 nutrients in fact this is a case where throwing in wood actually raises the percentage from a 91% to a 93%. So the traits get averaged together before the 33/33/33 I assume, but even that doesn't really explain it someone have a formula that does?
Message Edited by Joilhath on 06-15-2004 09:04 PM
Akelan
Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:06 am
#2
In my experience, there seems to be two separate calculations to make the final outcome of the item. The OQ combine determines the initial success level of the materials. (the amount you get by the combine, without experimentation)
After this combine, the PE/Flavor seems to then determine the "range" that is possible with experimentation. A high OQ will produce a good base result, but low PE/Flavor will limit the upper end of the possible result, where a less stunning OQ combine will be lower at the initial combine, but have a greater upper limit on the experimentation range. You'll max out the possible stats of a low PE/Flavor with points left, but may, depending on your success rate, get much better final results from the PE/Flavor being high than from the OQ, even starting at a lower "base".
BTW, I have found the PE to be slightly more effective in the experimentation range than the Flavor, though a severe deficit in either will be a major limiting factor.
I have not done all the math and repeated the calculations on this to fully substantiate the theory, but it seems to be a good working premise for me for the present, and someone with better attention to detail and willing to do the multiple combines needed might be able to further refine and either prove or disprove these observations.
LLan
Joilhath
Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:41 am
#3
Well that kind of bears with my data as the 58's started out as 38's and the 57's started out as 37's and it was the flav that was lower in the 88's so didn't seem to affect how much exp could be done much.
Joilhath
Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:54 pm
#4
Well thanks for pointing me in the right direction was rather disconcerting as this is the first time I've had a higher weighted avg come out with a lower product. Why they couldn't code it the way it says it is ie 33% on all three is beyond me but knowledge is power so know what to look for now anyway.
Joilhath
Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:38 am
#5
Just wanted to add one quick thing got my hands on some 995oq wood that was enough to bump the nutrients to 38 before experimentation and get them to 94% and 58/88/118 final product.
Page 1 of 1