Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Clatius

WURM Math

16 posts in this topic

In WURM math is different. It works in strange and wondrous ways. For instance:


 


(59.02 + 59.36)/2 = 58.70


 


Just looking at that you KNOW it will be at least 59. But no, not in WURM. In WURM things work differently. Maybe it's Wogic. Maybe it's Rogic. Regardless of what you want to call it, there is a definite difference between real math and WURM math.


 


I'd like to see it fixed but it won't be. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have not played  game made buy Hungarians. ie perpetuum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In WURM math is different. It works in strange and wondrous ways. For instance:

 

(59.02 + 59.36)/2 = 58.70

 

Just looking at that you KNOW it will be at least 59. But no, not in WURM. In WURM things work differently. Maybe it's Wogic. Maybe it's Rogic. Regardless of what you want to call it, there is a definite difference between real math and WURM math.

 

I'd like to see it fixed but it won't be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_point

TL'DR version - real numbers (including all decimal ones) are not 100% accurate and due to form of representation (in case of computers usually significand * 2^exponent) is unable to represent some numbers precisely.

Simplest example is this line of code in Java:

System.out.println(1.2-1.0);
Result? 0.19999999999999996

On the other hand, result from OP post is VERY different from how it should look like.

Edited by Warlander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wondered about the math of Wurm.


 


I have the feeling for example that when casting spells the numbers behind the comma do count more than the wholeskill level.


 


So with 83.01 channeling you're casting far worse than with 82.88.


 


Could be just my imagination of course.


 


 


 


Edit: Edited the numbers for clarification.


Edited by Tekari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Casting is very strange. Why is it harder to get a high AoSP cast than a high CoC cast even though AoSP is a lower skill cast? Why do I feel like my vyn priest has gotten worse and worse instead of better and better the more I skill up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Casting is very strange. Why is it harder to get a high AoSP cast than a high CoC cast even though AoSP is a lower skill cast? Why do I feel like my vyn priest has gotten worse and worse instead of better and better the more I skill up?

 

I've been thinking the wiki is not correct anymore on the difficulty on some of the spells and some items like weapons and armor are harder to cast on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(59.02 + 59.36)/2 = 58.70


 


what is this supposed to represent?  something averaging in a bsb?  (remember it is affected by weight as well when it does the averaging).  Can you explain what this is so it can be replicated on the test server, otherwise I'm not sure what you are trying to say.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The random effect associated with progressive skill number integers generated within Wurm as a repression of continued consistent expectations of said resulting actions, introduces a distortion which can not be quantified by accumulated combinations of the same; thus, the confusion results in expectations of clarity which are inversely unapproachable by logical deductions, even if they be subtractions. Quite simple really...


 


=Ayes=


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this when I was imping oars. I assumed that the reduction below an expected average was some hidden decay (I remember reading somewhere that decay can accumulate but not actually display). But how that applies to a set of oars that were just acted upon before dropping them [undamaged] into a BSB or crate is beyond me.


 


For the record, all oars were identical for all intents and purposes save for the actual ql.


And yeah, it's been a bit since I did them but it was after the announcement of the change to BSB averaging math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is most likely about the way the QL averaging in bulk containers works, as they are the only known places it works like that.  There are actually different averaging methods used for different things.  For groups in normal containers, simple unweighted averaging is used to determine what to show for the groups themselves.  For combining items using the "Combine" option, simple weighted averaging is used to determine the QL of the resulting combined item.  For bulk containers (bulk storage bins, food storage bins, and crates), modified weighted averaging is used to determine QL of bulk items as contents are added.


 


The modified weighted averaging used for bulk containers tends to reduce the result, and it tends to cause greater reduction when there is a greater difference between the QL of what is already in the bulk container and what is being added.  This averaging is done for each item added to a bulk container, whether it is normal sized or not.  As such, combining items before adding them to a bulk container can impact the result.  Due to the way the modified weighted averaging works, the order in which items are added to a bulk container can also impact the result if 3 or more items of the same type are added separately.


 


The reduction in average QL in bulk containers was (and as far as I know, still is) intended and was announced in the 2010 server release notes when storage bins were added.  The way it was described back in the 2010 release notes was as follows:


 



There is a small loss in average quality level because otherwise they can be somewhat exploited.



 


2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same kind of averaging seems to apply to combining dyes iirc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The random effect associated with progressive skill number integers generated within Wurm as a repression of continued consistent expectations of said resulting actions, introduces a distortion which can not be quantified by accumulated combinations of the same; thus, the confusion results in expectations of clarity which are inversely unapproachable by logical deductions, even if they be subtractions. Quite simple really...

=Ayes=

Lol wtf, impossible to understand and u call this quite simple..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol wtf, impossible to understand and u call this quite simple..

 I think that was the point  :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0