Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 838
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Great Nikita
Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's that guy who knows the formula? :P

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 Mine

Owner: 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...