schurick Posted December 3, 2009 Report Share Posted December 3, 2009 get out of my head! I was about to do that when I got home, checked this thread from work just because and there you are... in my head Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted December 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2009 I really suck at this but here's another try at 125 50 (corresponding to the order in the link) If it is another 66% I can only find the percentages I already have lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 I'm getting a lot of PMs asking for help finding the Mars hotspot. I think it would be cool if you guys could figure it out for yourselves, but I'll post the answer in a couple days if no one else has. Here are links to my posts in the Moon Hotspot thread which describe how to find it: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1879412 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1879493 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1885515 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrilobyteMan Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 I'm getting a lot of PMs asking for help finding the Mars hotspot. I think it would be cool if you guys could figure it out for yourselves, but I'll post the answer in a couple days if no one else has.Here are links to my posts in the Moon Hotspot thread which describe how to find it: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1879412 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1879493 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1885515 Alternatively, you could just post it because not everybody has the means/knowlege/time to work it out and the ones that do may not be on at the this current time where some of us need to collect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted December 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Don't have the programs you are using... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatnikita Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 (edited) well since i got bored of guessing i decided to go crunch some numbers(2nd year physics should help eh?) however one question that i cannot answer is whether the efficiency is linear to distance from hotspot in 100->50 region, and if not, then any idea what is it? exponential decay? by simple trilateration in mathematica i got 72.98, 65.32(e.g. plot data point as circles of radii (1-eff/100) in respective relative positions and then scale until 3+ intersect). Will test it out tomorrow when i can move my 3 mars wonders again. I wish i knew the hotspot location. Then writing an algorithm would be super easy. For now if you guys could post all your attempts it would be much appreciated. P.S. I know provost made some wicked formula but I really wanna try to come up with my own method, maybe even improve accuracy. Edited December 7, 2009 by Great Nikita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henkie Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 Two relatively random attempts: Mars Mine: Location: 29.84064, 102.30469 94% Mars Base: Location: 30.14513, 113.55469 94% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted December 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 (edited) 45 110 = 94% 35 105 anyone? Edited December 7, 2009 by Sande Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caribbean ghost Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 35 105 = 97% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ugly guy Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 34.99 105.51 is 98% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrilobyteMan Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 35, 110 = 98% 35, 115 = 95% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan2680 Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 This might sound like a totally stupid question but... is there a way you can enter in the coordinates you want to go to? like lets say if i want to go to exactly 35, 110 can i do that? or do i have to guess? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Been a couple days and I see no one has posted it yet, so as promised I will try to calculate it... lat, lon 37, 107 ? Someone see if that works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrilobyteMan Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 This might sound like a totally stupid question but... is there a way you can enter in the coordinates you want to go to? like lets say if i want to go to exactly 35, 110 can i do that? or do i have to guess? Yes. Move your base/mine/whatever somewhere random. Then right click and copy the link to move it. Then, edit the URL to say the exact co-ordinates. However, in the URL, they are in reverse order, so be careful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neuromancer7 Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Been a couple days and I see no one has posted it yet, so as promised I will try to calculate it... lat, lon 37, 107 ? Someone see if that works. I just relocated using those coordinates. I'm getting 99% :-( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 I just relocated using those coordinates. I'm getting 99% :-( It might be one of those spots which requires a weird decimal place correction. I've been going by Rich333's correction table (found here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...&p=1930324) and it has worked until now, but we were never 100% sure if it was correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schurick Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Thank You, Provost Zakharov Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Miller Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 If you add 1 to PZ's longitude, you'll be on the hotspot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 If you add 1 to PZ's longitude, you'll be on the hotspot. Interesting, has anyone confirmed this? According to my formula and the data in this thread, it isn't possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted December 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 (edited) lon=108.0000000000&lat=37.0000000000 Works for me. Edited December 9, 2009 by Sande Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Where's that guy who knows the formula? 53% @ 4, 43. Base Effectiveness: 57%Last Moved: 12/2/2009 Location: 2.00000, 52.00000 Location: 70.61261, 86.48438 gives me 75% These are the three datapoints I used. And I am reusing the efficiency formula found for the moon. Assuming the hotspot is (37, 107), the efficiencies, respectively, are: 53.4936, 57.3661, 75.4756. Rounded down -> 53,57,75 Assuming the hotspot is (37, 108), the efficiencies, respectively, are: 52.9526, 56.8477, 75.3616. Rounded down -> 52,56,75 So it seems that 37,107 matches while 37,108 does not. Where is the calculation going wrong? Would Matt Miller or someone else explain? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Miller Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 If you round up or down based on the values instead of just rounding down, all your data points match with the current hotspot. Does the Moon calculation always need to have efficiency data points rounded down for some reason? Mars MineOwner: Matt Miller Mine Effectiveness: 100% Resource: Sodium Last Moved: 12/9/2009 Date Purchased: 9/25/2009 Expires: 825 Days Location: 37.00000, 108.00000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Well, if efficiencies get rounded to the nearest integer instead of rounded down, then 99.51% would round to 100%, meaning the 100% region would be a circle (roughly speaking) instead of a point. We conclusively proved that is not the case, for the moon at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted December 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 Location: 70.61261, 86.48438 gives me 75% Maybe the problem is in this location. Not integers and I guess it is also rounded up/down a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Zakharov Posted December 9, 2009 Report Share Posted December 9, 2009 I've been playing with it a bit and my conclusion is that perhaps one of the constants in the efficiency formula needs to be tweaked. The formula I determined experimentally for the moon is: eff(hs,p) = 100*(1 - k/pi*d(hs,p)) with k = 1.25. I chose k=1.25 based on curve fitting and because it's equivalent to 5/4 which is a nice number which I thought admin might type by hand. However, I went back and looked at it more closely, and it appears that the real constant isn't 1.25, but rather something which lies in the interval (1.2287, 1.2446). Any number from that interval works for both the old moon data and the new mars data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.