Difference between revisions of "Talk:Invention Origin Enhancement Scaling"

Latest revision as of 23:53, 3 May 2007

Graph

The graph looks wrong to me. What is that red line? Common IOs should follow the curve shown by the black hand-drawn line, should they not?

- Protea

No. Set based IO's are more powerful than the commons, and have a higher base. The common-IO schedule A (last time I checked on test) were 1% per level up to 30, then 0.5% per level, so capping at 40% at level 50. This (and the set numbers) are subject to verification on live when I have some time. (probably this weekend) Catwhoorg 07:49, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on this. I looked at level 40 common IOs this morning and they were definitely 38.6%, which is the value listed in the table, not the value the graph would indicate. I believe you are quoting values from very early in closed beta before Castle bumped the numbers. Please double check, this is key for purchasing decisions people will make with respect to common IOs. --Kgiesing 17:16, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

yep they have changed since I last checked on test. 11.7 19.2 25.6 32.0 34.8 36.7 38.6 40.5 42.4 for scehdule A. I'll replot the graph (the software Sigmaplot if anyone is interested is not on this PC). Good catch Kgiesing, thanks Catwhoorg 19:53, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

Table Ordering

Is there any particular reason that the table of IO bonusses-by-level is ordered "B A C D", instead of "A B C D" ...? --PaxArcana 13:02, 23 February 2007 (PST)

Because when Iakona typed out the table on the CoH boards, he typed it in order of lowest bonus to highest bonus. Schedule B gives less bonus than schedule A. C and D give more. When I first moved the data over here, I left it just as Iakona typed it. When I later updated the column headers to show the schedule names and link to the schedule descriptions, I saw that they were out of order. But given the way that the data is formatted, reordering them would have meant shuffling around manually two columns in each of 40+ lines of data. More trouble than I thought the change was worth. Still think that. So basically, if you feel up to the effort of swapping the data in those two columns in all 40 or so rows, go for it. - Sister Leortha 13:13, 23 February 2007 (PST)

Done. Excel ftw. Took about 2 seconds. Catwhoorg 13:29, 23 February 2007 (PST)

Iakona has added updated numbers, but again the columns are out of the normally know schedule order. Cat? Can you work you column juggle magic again? I'm going to shuffle the column headers for now until the columns get swapped around. Similarly, Cat, you may want to re-generate your table pictures with the new numbers. - Sister Leortha 04:23, 8 March 2007 (PST)

done and done, Ive dropepd one plot so untyil the numbers stablise its a little easier to keep it up to date. Catwhoorg 04:55, 8 March 2007 (PST)