Forums-->Queries and help-->
| Author | no increase of creatures? |
|---|
I just finished my second fight against twilight dragons {2} and wondered if it counts as {4} ^^
01-11-11 01:13
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=494973074<=-1
01-18-11 21:52
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=495173654<=-1
thanks for watching, have a nice day | | because 30% of 2 is less than 1. im surprised it doesn't round up tho | im surprised it doesn't round up tho
that's my actual question behind it | | It will round up next time. | I was having this exact same discussion in clan chat the other day jahadad. shame you weren't there at the time.
The conclusion we came to, the only one that appeared to fit was that the base creature count starts at 1.5
So first fight 1.5 rounds up to 2
2nd fight 1.5 x 1.3 = 1.95 rounds up to 2
Next time you face dragons 1.95 x 1.3 = 2.535 round up to 3
It seems weird that the base count begins as a non integer value but this is the only conclusion we could arrive at. | | 5: Did you check hunts after that so you know its not 2.6 then 3.38 etc? | I was having this exact same discussion in clan chat the other day jahadad. shame you weren't there at the time
oops... | | 5: nvm, i see it goes 2,2,3,4,5,8,10.. if it was as I said it would be 2,2,3,4,5,7.. | The conclusion we came to, the only one that appeared to fit was that the base creature count starts at 1.5
If the pattern is as Xerfer said (2,2,3,4,5,8,10...), then your conclusion is way off, starting with the 6th number. | Start with two +30% = 2.3 + 30% = 2.99 which rounds up to 3
2.99+30% = 3.887 which rounds up to 4
3.887+30% = 5.0531 which rounds to 5
5.0531 + 30% = 6.5903 which rounds up to 7
6.5903 + 30% = 8.539739 which rounds up to 9.
ETC
so pattern is 2,2,3,4,5,7,9... | 2+30% = 2.3??
you are a little of base there. | 2+30% = 2.3??
yeah not sure where i got that :P | The starting number could be anywhere between 1.5 and 1.92 and still fit what appears to have happened so far. 1.5 was merely a convenient number to work with.
For a more accurate estimate of the approximate number more instances of Twilight Dragons appearing (and being defeated) would be required.
Have Fun
Grunge | The starting number could be anywhere between 1.5 and 1.92 and still fit what appears to have happened so far
No, not really. 1.92 might work. 1.5 is not even close.
Actual pattern: 2,2,3,4,5,7,9,12,16,21
If starting with 1.5: 2,2,3,3,4,6,7,9
If starting with 1.92: 2,2,3,4,5,7,9,12,16,20
So 1.92 doesn't fail until the 10th number. | Actual pattern: 2,2,3,4,5,7,9,12,16,21
Are you sure this is the actual pattern?
If it is, there must be a different way of counting somewhere, either with the way the number of monsters is rounded off or the formula for the actual pattern changes halfway.
Since 1.92 falls short at the 10th number, the actual starting number must be slightly higher. But the upper bound is 1.923 (taken by 2.5 / 1.3), which fails at the 10th number as well since 1.923 * 1.3^9 = 20.39 | Guys, AFAIK the only part of the sequence we have so far is 2, 2, ? (although 3 is a "lock" for the third part of the sequence given the number range we are operating in).
Without more info we can't figure out what the actual starting number is yet, just the range the starting number could be in.
The starting number must be at least 1.5 (I believe the game rounds up in this situation), otherwise there would have been less than 2 dragons to start with.
The starting number cannot be much more than 1.92 otherwise the second battle would have involved more than 2 Dragons.
I imagine Xerfer was speculating on a possible pattern sequence, rather than the actual sequence.
Does anyone have further numbers in this sequence, so we can refine the answer?
Grunge | thanks all for your answers, I found a player who had some more twilight dragons in hunts, in his log anyone can see the actual numbers
https://www.lordswm.com/pl_info.php?id=4355219 | That gives a sequence of 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 so far.
Player Roos, obviously found here https://www.lordswm.com/plstats_hunters.php (8 Twilight Dragons hasn't updated yet).
I think that limits our starting number range to 1.594 to 1.742
More information can still refine the starting number further.
Grunge | | seems to me I have all answers I was seeking so I will close this thread, thanks again for the helpful community, you are great!! | | closed by jahadad (2011-01-19 22:15:58) |
|---|
Back to topics list
|
