Calisius Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 Has anybody reverse engineered the production rate from mining units yet? I thought it was: base rate * (efficiency + adjacency) But that's wrong and I can't seem to find the right formula. Example; from one of my MU's: 123 L base rate * (113% efficiency + 20% adjacency) = 166,79 L ? So what is the correct formula? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huschhusch Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, the MU yield is calculated as follows: The base_rate or the displayed value for it (rest ore) times efficiency / 100 times calibration / 100 times adjacency / 100. This is valid as long as the calibration is greater than the optimum, from then on the value is to be used with calibration / optimum as calibration. Quote German (original) Hallo Calisius, der MU-Ertrag berechnet sich wie folgt: Die base_rate oder der angezeigte Wert dafür (Rest Erz) mal efficiency / 100 mal calibration / 100 mal adjacency / 100. Dieses gilt solange die calibration größer als das Optimum ist, ab dann ist der Wert mit calibration / Optimum einzusetzen als calibration. Die Waldfee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calisius Posted December 19, 2021 Author Share Posted December 19, 2021 3 hours ago, huschhusch said: English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, the MU yield is calculated as follows: The base_rate or the displayed value for it (rest ore) times efficiency / 100 times calibration / 100 times adjacency / 100. This is valid as long as the calibration is greater than the optimum, from then on the value is to be used with calibration / optimum as calibration. Die Waldfee Damn so it is actually 2 different formula's? 1 for when the calibration is 100% (or more and the first 48 hours) and 1 for after 48 hours and the calibration is under a 100%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huschhusch Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, Yes, there are 2 formulas. But I forgot that the value for calibration is 100% if it is equal to or above Optimal! Sorry. Quote German (original) Hallo Calisius, ja es sind 2 Formeln. Aber ich habe noch vergessen, dass der Wert für calibration 100% ist, wenn er gleich oder über Optimal liegt! Entschuldigung. Die Waldfee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huschhusch Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, It is best to divide calibration by optimal and save the result in calibration, check if it is smaller than 1, then multiply it by 100 or, if 1 and larger, set calibration to 100. Then the formula above can always be applied. Quote German (original) Hallo Calisius, Am besten teilt man calibration durch optimal und speichert das Ergebnis in calibration, prüft ob es kleiner als 1 ist, dann multipliziert man es mit 100 oder bei 1 und größer setzt man calibration auf 100. Dann lässt sich die Formel oben immer anwenden. Die Waldfee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accol6 Posted December 19, 2021 Share Posted December 19, 2021 (123 L base rate * 113% efficiency ) * 20% adjacency = 166,79 L You want to multiply efficiency then multiply adjacency. if you want to factor calibration/optimal I guess it would be (( base rate * efficiency) * adjacency) * (Calibration +(100-optimal)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calisius Posted December 22, 2021 Author Share Posted December 22, 2021 On 12/19/2021 at 10:25 PM, Accol6 said: (123 L base rate * 113% efficiency ) * 20% adjacency = 166,79 L You want to multiply efficiency then multiply adjacency. if you want to factor calibration/optimal I guess it would be (( base rate * efficiency) * adjacency) * (Calibration +(100-optimal)) This calculation is incorrect. (123 L base rate * 113% efficiency ) * 20% adjacency = 27,80 not 166,79. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calisius Posted December 22, 2021 Author Share Posted December 22, 2021 On 12/19/2021 at 4:48 PM, huschhusch said: English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, the MU yield is calculated as follows: The base_rate or the displayed value for it (rest ore) times efficiency / 100 times calibration / 100 times adjacency / 100. This is valid as long as the calibration is greater than the optimum, from then on the value is to be used with calibration / optimum as calibration. Die Waldfee I tried this but it doesn't work: 100% or more: The base_rate or the displayed value for it (rest ore) times efficiency / 100 times calibration / 100 times adjacency / 100. or 123 L * 100(%) / 100 * 100(%) / 100 * 20(%) / 100 = 24,60 instead of 166,79 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huschhusch Posted December 22, 2021 Share Posted December 22, 2021 English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, You are right, the mistake is that adjacency + 20% must be calculated. So (1 + adjacency / 100) instead of adjacency / 100. Also, your efficiency is obviously 113% and not 100%. Quote German (original) Hallo Calisius, du hast Recht, der Fehler ist, das adjaency + 20% gerechnet werden muss. Also (1 + adjacency / 100) statt adjacency / 100. Außerdem ist dein efficiency offensichtlich 113% und nicht 100%. Die Waldfee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calisius Posted December 22, 2021 Author Share Posted December 22, 2021 6 hours ago, huschhusch said: English (deepl used) Hello Calisius, You are right, the mistake is that adjacency + 20% must be calculated. So (1 + adjacency / 100) instead of adjacency / 100. Also, your efficiency is obviously 113% and not 100%. Die Waldfee Ahh now I got it! When above 100%: The added 20% is 120% Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now