1 Topic by ~Wornstrum~ (edited by ~Wornstrum~ 04-Dec-2011 09:45:54)

  • Posts: 1,808

Topic: Networth formula

Okay, so I have been bored and so decided to make some Excel tables to work out some efficient building plans, etc.

I have noticed that the formula posted in The Guide doesn't seem to calculate the NW correctly:

NW = 1100 + (bombers *5) + (figs*3) + soldiers + droids + (transports *6) + wizards + agents + (buildings * 4) + (pop/40) + (RP/1000) + (planets * 800)

I made some changes to try and balance it, and came up with:

NW = 1100 + (bombers *5) + (figs*3) + soldiers + droids + (transports *6) + wizards + agents + (buildings * 4) + ((pop total - home system pop)/40) + (RP/1000) + ((planet total - 1) * 800)

Came to the conclusion that the 1100 NW is made up of the home system, population, and an unexplained 50 NW. (Did consider that maybe the portal plays a factor in the NW equation,

From here, things start to get even stranger.

There is a further unexplained NW discrepency that first apppeared constant, but looking at other empires, is not quite as constant as first appeared. I have looked at 5 different empires and the NW discrepency has no noticable corelation. 2 empires are doing nothing but researching, and the difference between expected NW and actual NW remain constant, but the amount of difference varies depending on empire.

Have uploaded the spreadsheet I have been using with the 5 examples (might not be the easiest layout to understand, but can work on it a bit more later and have some tick by tick data shown to show discrepencies in a bit more detail):

http://tinyurl.com/7h4b3u8

Username: imperialconflict
Password: opensesame

Edit: I also looked at the possibilty of NW from portals, but if there is any NW contribution from the portal, it would be the 50 unexplained NW in the starting 1100 NW. The differencce between empires with only 1 planet (with portal of course) changes (ie. a starting empire has a further unexplained 50NW, my current PW account has a further unexplained 40NW, my MW account has a further 35 unexplained NW.)

(When referring to "further unexplained NW" I am not including the unexplained NW in the starting 1100NW)

I give your invention the worst score imaginable. An A minus MINUS!
~Wornstrum~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

2 Reply by ~Wornstrum~ (edited by ~Wornstrum~ 09-Dec-2011 17:00:45)

  • Posts: 1,808

Re: Networth formula

Realised there was no question in the OＰ　(ａｎｄ　ａｌｓｏ　ｗａｎｔｅｄ　ｔｏ　ｂｕｍｐ　ｔｈｉｓ　ａｓ　ｈａｖｅ　ｈａｄ　ｎｏ　ｌｕｃｋ　ｍｙｓｅｌｆ　ｔｏ　ｗｏｒｋ　ｏｕｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｄｉｓｃｒｅｐｅｎｃｉｅｓ)　does anyone have an up-to-date NW formula?

I give your invention the worst score imaginable. An A minus MINUS!
~Wornstrum~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 5,595
  • Tag points: 241

Re: Networth formula

There may be an issue in the exact tick when a change in NW is realized by the NW calculation.  For example, I know that if you explore a planet, it doesn't realize that exploration until the tick after the exploration, I believe... it could be possible that the research doesn't get realized in the NW formula until the tick after the research actually takes place.

Make Eyes Great Again!

The Great Eye is watching you... when there's nothing good on TV...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,808

Re: Networth formula

> Zarf BeebleBrix wrote:

> There may be an issue in the exact tick when a change in NW is realized by the NW calculation.  For example, I know that if you explore a planet, it doesn't realize that exploration until the tick after the exploration, I believe... it could be possible that the research doesn't get realized in the NW formula until the tick after the research actually takes place.


Well that would make sense, but the problem is, the NW calculations are too low (ie. My NW is higher than it should be). Also the discrepency doesn't line up with population growth or research points (ie. if it was the RP not counting until the following tick, the difference would be lower (9500RP per tick = 9.5NW increase, doesn't explain the 40 NW discrepency). But good idea, will check it out though smile Thanks

I give your invention the worst score imaginable. An A minus MINUS!
~Wornstrum~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points