Official Everybody Edits Forums

Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?

You are not logged in.

#1 2018-01-20 23:56:51

brynda1231
Member
Joined: 2015-02-17
Posts: 21

World size

250x250 worlds. Bigger than 200x200, smaller than 300x300

Offline

#2 2018-01-21 00:14:16

TaskManager
Formerly maxi123
From: i really should update this
Joined: 2015-03-01
Posts: 9,463

Re: World size

brynda1231 wrote:

Bigger than 200x200, smaller than 300x300

you forgot to mention its also bigger than 249x249 and smaller than 251x251!


i8SwC8p.png
signature by HG, profile picture by bluecloud, thank!!
previous signature by drstereos

Offline

#3 2018-01-21 00:40:00, last edited by LukeM (2018-01-21 00:53:31)

LukeM
Member
From: England
Joined: 2016-06-03
Posts: 3,009
Website

Re: World size

maxi123 wrote:
brynda1231 wrote:

Bigger than 200x200, smaller than 300x300

you forgot to mention its also bigger than 249x249 and smaller than 251x251!

You forgot that it is also

Hidden text

Anyway, is there a time when you need more than a 200x200 world, but dont need a 300x300 one? If there is a 250x250 because 1.5x as big is too much, then there should also be a 125 world shouldn't there? (as 150 is 1.5 x 100)

Offline

#4 2018-01-21 11:56:46

peace
Member
From: admin land
Joined: 2015-08-10
Posts: 9,226

Re: World size

just a customable world size setting (to a limit ofc) and the game calculate steh energy neededfor it


peace.png

thanks hg for making this much better and ty for my avatar aswell

Offline

#5 2018-01-21 12:20:40

Anatoly
Guest

Re: World size

If the world is a * b, we need a formula with f(a, b) = c Energy. Let's take ideas what we need to know:

200x200 should have another payment then 100x400. Reason: Different amount of border blocks, more space.

a*b - (a-2)(b-2) = Blocks not border:
ab-(ab-2a-2b-4) = 2(a+b+2)

Scaling 2*18 is not really better then 6x6.

We can get this square world with the same blocks amount by √(ab) * √(ab) = √a√b * √a√b

|a - √(ab)| = Difference in x
|b - √(ab)| = Difference in y

So:    ab / (|a - √(ab)|)(|b - √ab|) = 1

Maybe anyone know how to edit this for a good formula?

Wooted by:

#6 2018-01-21 12:45:36

LukeM
Member
From: England
Joined: 2016-06-03
Posts: 3,009
Website

Re: World size

If there was a formula, it would have to cost more than any of the preset world sizes (as it would be better than them), and tiny worlds can't cost almost nothing, otherwise you could buy hundreds of them, so there would have to be a constant first term (or some other means of having a fairly large intercept).

Also I don't think border blocks should cost less, because 1. You can now remove them, and 2. The more rectangular the world is, the more 'specialised' it is, so perhaps it should cost more instead possibly?

Offline

#7 2018-01-21 14:21:13

peace
Member
From: admin land
Joined: 2015-08-10
Posts: 9,226

Re: World size

AnatolyEE wrote:

200x200 should have another payment then 100x400. Reason: Different amount of border blocks, more space.

can u di maths? 200*200=40K 100*400=40K


peace.png

thanks hg for making this much better and ty for my avatar aswell

Offline

#8 2018-01-21 15:07:40

LukeM
Member
From: England
Joined: 2016-06-03
Posts: 3,009
Website

Re: World size

peace wrote:

can u di maths? 200*200=40K 100*400=40K

AnatolyEE wrote:

Reason: Different amount of border blocks, more space.

Offline

#9 2018-01-21 15:25:17

Anatoly
Guest

Re: World size

LukeM wrote:

If there was a formula, it would have to cost more than any of the preset world sizes (as it would be better than them), and tiny worlds can't cost almost nothing, otherwise you could buy hundreds of them, so there would have to be a constant first term (or some other means of having a fairly large intercept).

Also I don't think border blocks should cost less, because 1. You can now remove them, and 2. The more rectangular the world is, the more 'specialised' it is, so perhaps it should cost more instead possibly?

Yes point 2 is what I tried to explain:

AnatolyEE wrote:

Scaling 2*18 is not really better then 6x6.

Maybe there was a bit confusing to understand me.

I've joined EE to check the prices:

  • Wide World (400x50, 1000 Energy)

  • Big World (150², 1000 Energy)

  • Ultra Wide World (636x50, 1500 Energy)

  • Large World (100², 500 Energy)

  • Massive World (200², 2000 Energy)

  • Medium World (50², 250 Energy)

  • Small World (25², 100 Energy)

  • Great/ Vertical Great World (400x200, 4000 Energy)

  • Huge World (300², 4000 Energy)

  • Tall (100x400, 2000 Energy)

Firstly let's sort them per the product of a and b and specify whether they are a square a : b = 1 : 1 or a rectangle e.g. Wide World a : b = 400 : 50 = 8 : 1

Sorted by Product

  • Huge World (90000, 4000 Energy, 1:1)

  • Great/ Vertical Great World (80000, 4000 Energy, 2 : 1 or 1 : 2)

  • Massive World (40000, 2000 Energy, 1 : 1)

  • Tall (40000, 2000 Energy, 1 : 4)

  • Ultra Wide World (31800, 1500 Energy, 318 : 25 ~ 127 : 10 ~ 25 : 2 ~ 12 : 1)

  • Big World (22500, 1000 Energy, 1 : 1)

  • Wide World (20000, 1000 Energy, 8 : 1)

  • Large World (10000, 500 Energy, 1 : 1)

  • Medium World (2500, 250 Energy, 1 : 1)

  • Small World (625, 100 Energy, 1 : 1)

Now let's, for being sure, sort out the 1 : 1 worlds and check them single:

Sorted by Product, Only square worlds

  • Huge World (90000, 4000 Energy)

  • Massive World (40000, 2000 Energy)

  • Big World (22500, 1000 Energy)

  • Large World (10000, 500 Energy)

  • Medium World (2500, 250 Energy)

  • Small World (625, 100 Energy)

Let's divide the product by 625, so every number is as small as possible and stays natural. Divide energy by 50.

Sorted by Product, Only square worlds

  • Huge World (144, 80 E)

  • Massive World (64, 40 E)

  • Big World (36, 20 E)

  • Large World (16, 10 E)

  • Medium World (4, 5 E)

  • Small World (1, 2 E)

Can we do anything with this information? The problem is that the current square worlds are also unregularly build.







I am suggesting for a and b: Haven't view many values currently but seems to work.

E = 5 * |(√(ab) - ( | a - b | + | b - a | )²  )|

Wooted by:

#10 2018-01-21 16:35:29

LukeM
Member
From: England
Joined: 2016-06-03
Posts: 3,009
Website

Re: World size

I decided to imput all the world sizes into a spreadsheet and see what it looked like, and see how well it could be modelled, heres my results:
Kb6XmRA9TNCtcpNvEnhMtQ.png
The original google sheet

The red data series is just the auto-calculated trendline, the green is that with a small decrease in cost the closer it gets to square, and the yellow is somewhere in-between

Offline

#11 2018-01-21 16:47:13, last edited by Slabdrill (2018-01-21 16:47:35)

Slabdrill
Formerly 12345678908642
From: canada
Joined: 2015-08-15
Posts: 3,402
Website

Re: World size

I actually just said area^0.735 was a "good enough" formula for this. It's actually rly bad but works for what it's made to do

also get back on topic? I have https://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewt … p?id=39231 if needed i guess


suddenly random sig change

Offline

Slabdrill1516549633693330

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

[ Started around 1714939875.1246 - Generated in 2.453 seconds, 10 queries executed - Memory usage: 2.77 MiB (Peak: 6.3 MiB) ]