poach

You have proved yourself honorable during war, and generous during peace. On behalf of DAWN, thank you IAA.

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' date='07 April 2010 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1270688724' post='2252421'] Ultimately I started a global conflict..whoops. Like it hasn't been done before and like it wont happen again. [/quote] You deserve some kind of badge for that. Right or wrong, good or bad, it's not everyone who can make that claim and back it up.

[quote name='Corbetto' date='01 April 2010 - 04:02 PM' timestamp='1270152144' post='2244234'] [*]Fireguy911, err FireGuy90210, err FireGuy8675309, ahh, you know who I mean. [/quote] Tommy Tutone is a fireman in Beverly Hills?

[quote name='Sir Paul' date='13 February 2010 - 09:56 PM' timestamp='1266116163' post='2180117'] Not exactly... [b]IF[/b] ODN became involved, [b]THEN[/b] GOONS would attack you. Sort of like the Karma war where you planned out who was going to attack which alliance when they became involved. [/quote] That's the best summation I've seen. I do have to say that we really thought we were going to be attacked anyway.

Good sir, would you please tell me what exactly you have against poach? And why are you grouping poach in with ghosts and rogues? Sincerely, Government of Poachland

I can't speak for DAWN (just like Puppet Master can't speak for anyone but Puppet Master), but I wish good luck to everyone. I wasn't too big of a fan of OUT. It was a grand idea that it seemed relatively few were interested in. Even then, it had such great potential that it is sad to see it have to go. I can only hope that someone with initiative and infinite patience can make another attempt at a unity treaty, whether color based or not.

Where is Templar's hyperkill smilie when you need it?

Actually, we are currently operating as a direct democracy. The 'Triumver's' are just those the rest of us decided would sign the documents until we're ready to shift our government structure.

As long as you make sure and post about it here. As to the small movement of the hotspot, I was disappointed. I wanted to try out my updated idea for finding it, but I don't think it'll be accurate much higher than 95%, so there's no point in trying.

New month means new hotspot. It looks like the hotspot moved, but not very much, so I won't be moving anything. Here's what I have: 97% -68.18, 76.49 98% -73.60, 69.17

It does change population, but I would ask that at your next earliest opportunity to buy a little bit of land. That does not directly affect the environment number on your nation screen (the way I said it earlier wasn't quite correct), but it changes the population density, changing the citizen count.

That's only true if you don't have enough land (as the population density starts affecting environment)

In the very beginning, in a very few cases, it can be better to have a lower tax rate. After the very beginning, you get more by just leaving your tax rate maxed. If you look at the wiki, next to the government names are stars. Those tell you if the government has a positive or negative affect on the environment.

I spend about 90 seconds a day on the actual game. Much more time is spent on forums, but usually you can decide how little or how much time you want to spend with that aspect.. During war time, I'll sometimes spend as much as 3 minutes on the game. NearX gave the general answer on war. Usually, war isn't profitable for a nation, and war usually occurs due to politics. There are raiders out there, the kind that do it for fun, and the kind that think they'll profit (until they raid the wrong person and get a beat down). If you like the war aspect, tournament edition will probably be more fun for you.

Just a quick not on why graphing in this manner is acceptably accurate: 1 radian = arc length / radius To convert that to degrees, 1 rad = 180 / Pi Latitude is the angle from a point on the earths surface to the equatorial plane as measured from the center of the Earth (sphere) Longitude is the angle east or west of the reference meridian. This means that as long as you are graphing the angle, and not the distance, the plot is accurate. Of more interest to me is the error in calculating distance. I compared all three of the great circle equation, haversin equation, and vincenty's formula and had differences between the 3 of less than 1km (yes, I was using metric since it's generally easier to do math with). I had trouble getting open office / excel to sufficiently iterate vincenty's so I'm not sure if I have good numbers for that (and I'm not about to go through it 100+ times by hand). The moon is much more spherical than the Earth is (0.00125 vs. 0.0033528) so the great circle equation should be sufficiently accurate here anyway.

Ah yes, I remember that. I also remember the complete lack of coordination and communication with ODN during the fighting. Oh, I also remember trying and pretty much failing to talk to any CDS government as well. Besides, ODN entered the war because of information that GOONS was probably going to attack ODN (this information later became questionable). The joint declaration was for convenience. There's plenty of 'more legitimate' troll material out there. Try spinning something actually worth spinning next time.

Just an fyi, I figured out why this doesn't work. With the level of error, you can't construct a true triangle, and thus you can't get an accurate angle for C, making the equation set fall apart.

It looks like that equation is correct. From playing around with a spreadsheet, it looks like 50km per percent. I was playing around with determining the hotspot, but kept getting my butt kicked by the math. Here's what I'm trying to do, maybe one of you math types can tell me what I'm doing wrong From the law of cosines for a spherical triangle C = acos [ (cos(.c) - cos(.a)cos(.b.))/(sin(.a)sin(.b.))] Latitude=asin(sin(lat1)*cos(distance)+cos(lat1)*sin(distance)*cos(.C) dlon = atan2(sin(.C)*sin(distance)*cos(lat1),cos(distance)-sin(lat1)*sin(lat2)) Longitude = mod( lon1-dlon +pi,2*pi )-pi [all decimals above were to defeat the bbcode from changing the variables -- not actual decimals) any takers? If this will work, then from 2 points > 50% efficiency, we should be able to get the position for the hotspot.

With the new data, my 'paper method' has broken down and can't get any more accurate. Measuring distance from 99%, we get this: 90.00 408.6779815523 -1.4198951600 1.3440000000 90.00 389.3700052567 -.9612988548 1.3591069781 91.00 373.3578047334 -1.3993825405 1.4448053714 91.00 359.0929109946 -.9787521473 1.3591069781 91.00 340.2302337869 -.9896803237 1.3575729973 92.00 309.1207733328 -1.0079464224 1.3499030933 94.00 219.8657791893 -1.3114539758 1.3989904786 95.00 198.0383920255 -1.2985626626 1.3621750269 96.00 201.8612005043 -1.2846146893 1.2072428473 97.00 76.6660386086 -1.1408665796 1.3962634016 98.00 117.9273818012 -1.2290000000 1.2450000000 99.00 .0000000000 -1.1849331762 1.3904427285 (percentage, distance in KM from 99% point, location in radians) With the placement of each point, even throwing in the maximum error, plotting no longer works. The only thing I am somewhat certain of is that the hotspot is with a circle with centerpoint (-1.21, 1.335) and a radius of 0.105 radians. That circle contains every point above 95%, but distances from that point look like this: 90.00 432.5076356480 90.00 364.6897724789 91.00 402.2037121581 91.00 383.1757016104 91.00 332.3635721306 92.00 351.2289404303 94.00 179.4165749398 95.00 154.5556758722 96.00 147.3558529350 97.00 126.8655688224 98.00 63.0970559637 99.00 55.9405500987 The distances, on the other hand, seem to match up. (percent, distance from -1.21, 1.335) On paper, it doesn't work, but until we get a couple points at 100% (or a few more at 99% so we can triangulate from there), this is about as accurate as I can do. Already though, We can see some patterns. The range for 98% seems to be about 100km. For 95% seems to be about 150km. and for 90% is in the neighborhood of 500km. The 75% point is around 1000km. The diameter of the moon is around 3475 km.

I'm at work atm, so I won't be able to do anything with data. The problem I have is that I'm using open office, and I couldn't get it to do a decent plot. Anyone know any free software that will do a x,y plot and that you can draw circles on? Also, message me and I'll email you the open office file with the data points I have. Also, for the percent ranges, I don't think they are linear, but I don't have enough data points yet to really decide either way. Having said that though, I think we're looking at around 25km or less for 100, going to at least 200km for the 91% (which I had the most data points for). Then if elevation is indeed a factor, it'll make it harder to figure. Best thing to do: More data points.

Well, at first I just wanted to get a feel of the distance between the points, so I used the great circle equation to come up with distances ( r * acos[sin(lat1) * sin(lat2) + cos(lat1) * cos(lat2) * cos(lon2 - lon1)] ). This equation uses distance across the surface. Second, I decided to plot all of the closer points at the 90+ percent range. I found that I had a few data points, and using a compass, was able to connect the points with a circle. The center point of the compass was my prediction. I then drew a circle around every data point I had, and everything (except as noted) seemed to match up. A couple of the data points should have had different percentages though. So there is something else at work here, which is why I suspect elevation is a factor. And before you start on the 2D doesn't translate into 3D (Golan already gave me this argument), remember the plot I did was in radians, so each given fraction of a radian had a different distance associated with it, making the plot "good enough for government work".

Considering the accuracy of the data (since every percentage has a certain range around it), I'll take that as a victory

I predict the hotspot to be around (-70.4165, 71.333). I'm concerned that elevation also affects this, so I was trying to keep on a 0km elevation point while searching for the coordinates when I 'submitted' prematurely. Even so, (-73.603, 69.16992) got me 96% efficiency. My method was to plot all of the locations in this topic (in radians), and had enough approximate points to construct a circle with my prediction as the center. A couple of data points (which I consider reliable) don't quite match which is why I'm thinking there is a modifier with the elevation. This was evident if you calculate the distance from my predicted center point using the great circle equation (which assumes a sphere) 1400.71 67.00 1152.55 72.00 976.12 76.00 813.58 80.00 768.80 84.00 585.87 85.00 589.40 88.00 333.91 90.00 (Golan's point on an 8KM rise) 473.23 90.00 307.46 91.00 (OS's 91% point on a 2-4 KM+ rise) 424.25 91.00 443.23 91.00 391.77 92.00 163.31 94.00 98.71 96.00 (distance in KM vs percent. Unless otherwise noted, the 85%+ points are all on a 0 +/- 2 KM rise)

I echo these sentiments

Excuse me, that stick is too brown. We only use orange sticks thank you