Report message to a moderator

If you email it to me with the html files that go with it ,I can put it up me@me.net (substitute where obvious)

[Updated on: Wed, 25 October 2006 23:10]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Fri, 27 October 2006 08:48]

Report message to a moderator

ninja_squirrel wrote on Fri, 27 October 2006 15:21

For some reason the calculations take a lot longer if it needs to consider all 3 hab categories. If you set one immune, however, everything speeds up considerably.

Its because it considers habs for about 4000 planets for races without immunities. For races with 1 immunity it considers about 11 times less planets.

Possibly Flash is too slow to calculate 4000 planets habs in a sole eyeblink.

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

Some comments/questions (if you don't mind).

First of all I love the idea. I'm working on a mac and sometimes when work is slow I like to play around with the race wizard ... which I can't do on my mac (or have to install some vitual pc thing).

Regarding the flash movie (in order of RW page):
No "1 in x" habitable? Or is that left out because of the slowing down problem? No values either ...
Why not let people drag the hab sliders?
When the band is pushed to the edge you can't expand it without first moving it a bit away from the edge.
I can't seem to find pop growth ...
Always "start at 4" even when not JoaT.
Reset button does nothing?

Are some of the things not displaying just not there? Or problems with flash itself, as in left out when compiling the .swf file?
Might be able to offer you a hand in some of the above things ... I know my way around Flash ... as long as it's not about the calculations. (unless maybe if it's not that pretty on the inside either <g> ... heh, I could pimp the outside in that case)

mch

Report message to a moderator

Micha wrote on Thu, 02 November 2006 14:22

First of all I love the idea. I'm working on a mac and sometimes when work is slow I like to play around with the race wizard ... which I can't do on my mac (or have to install some vitual pc thing).

Same reason why I've coded so many tools in html-wrapped javascript.

Reminds me that I got an almost-completely-functional RaceWizard code embedded into my old "hab & econ calculator" (the one based upon Henk Poell's idea) and if only I could find a couple hours for debugging and sidestepping the "4000 planets calculated every time you change an option " issue, it should be quite usable.

Report message to a moderator

given that the spread of planets within each hab type is known, it shouldn't be neccesary to perform a statistical simulation just to calculate the proportion of habitable planets.

..off to look up hab spreads..
Edit:

Given that:
grav and temp taper off linearly 10 clicks for each end and are flat in between
rad is completely flat
Assuming grav & temp are modelled by the spread: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,10,10,....,10,10,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 ,0 (borrowed from Craebild's Hab calc page)
and using click values 0-100

The habitable portion of grav & temp should be:
gravP=[ (hi-lo+1)*10 - if{ lo<10 , (10-lo)*(10-lo+1)/2 , 0 } - if{ hi>90 , (hi-90)*(hi-90+1)/2 , 0 } ]/900
The habitable portion of rad is:
radP=(hi-lo+1)*9/900 (or =(hi-lo+1)/100 )

And the overall portion of habs is habP=gravP*tempP*radP

or 1 in 1/habP

unfortunately this is based on the asusmtions of the hab distributions and doesn't exactly match those reported by the race wizard(which are known to be inaccurate anyway)

[Updated on: Fri, 03 November 2006 19:52]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

gible wrote on Fri, 03 November 2006 22:48

given that the spread of planets within each hab type is known, it shouldn't be neccesary to perform a statistical simulation just to calculate the proportion of habitable planets.

Unless you want more than just guess overall performance and average hab draw, perhaps.

For instance, our hab tool's intent was more in the line of showing exactly how bad, or how good, or how random would the hab draw be for a given race design. Get maximum and minimum envelopes, as well as giving some idea of what a successful testbed with the given race would look like, even if faced with other-than-average conditions.

True, it will never be perfect as long as we're using a different planet generator than Stars! own, but that's precisely what the RW is using, ain't it? So perhaps there's a reason why it does things the way it does.

Quote:

(borrowed from Craebild's Hab calc page)

Yep, that's the "old" version of our tool, indeed.

[Updated on: Tue, 07 November 2006 04:44]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator

m.a@stars wrote on Tue, 07 November 2006 22:36

Yep, that's the "old" version of our tool, indeed.

Where's the new version?

Report message to a moderator

ninja_squirrel wrote on Thu, 09 November 2006 05:05

Yeah I can't figure out another way to do it without the rounding rules changing the results. I was considering caching the results for each hab category after each generation, so that you would only have to calculate the one that was changed each time.

I'll have to take another look at that code. Optimizing that part would help my javascript version, too.

Also, there's a bunch of code in the calcPlanetValue function itself that could perhaps be optimized for racewizard purposes.

Report message to a moderator

gible wrote on Sun, 12 November 2006 09:20

m.a@stars wrote on Tue, 07 November 2006 22:36 Yep, that's the "old" version of our tool, indeed. Where's the new version?

Sleeping at my hard disk waiting until I fully debug / speedup it, I'm afraid.

Main changes with regard to the "old" one would be several minor optimizations and the RW code.

Now that I think of it, it should be changed to use the "real" planetValue formulas, too.

[Updated on: Sun, 12 November 2006 06:00]

Report message to a moderator

[Updated on: Mon, 13 November 2006 06:22]

Report message to a moderator

Report message to a moderator