It chooses the longest "shortest-path" between worlds, crossing only UCGWs and trade ports. If that doesn't make any sense, well that's why nobody tries to explain it. So for a concrete example, let's take a trade route currently going from A to B. Now, at C you build a port. However, A, B, and C form a triangle (there's a phase lane from A to B, one from B to C, and one from A to C) so the shortest path between any two of those gravwells will always be 1 and y
JediLennier
The scientific method in 4 easy steps: 1) observe some phenomenon. 2) create hypothesis that explains this phenomenon and makes further predictions about the system 3) perform experiment to test a prediction and observe & record results 4) discard/revise the hypothesis if experimental results disagree with prediction. So please, tell me again how weak a hypothesis based on observational data is. Too bad Darwin's dead, we need to inform him all that stuff he wrote about
So your definition of "anecdotal evidence" includes repeatable experiments that produce quantifiable observational data? Hmm, then I think, by that definition, every branch of science is based on anecdotal evidence.
Umm, I wasn't calling the devs liars; I was calling the people blindly ignoring everything else simply because that statement existed fools. There are any number of reasons that one line may not be applicable to the state of the game as it exists today, and I didn't really care if it was due to intentional misdirection or not. As for the proof, had anyone in the other camp put forward the argument that we never proved an unfair bonus, only that hard was earning more income, I would hav
My tests were performed with 1.05 (should have mentioned this)
Not all, silly. Just the ones you have contradictory evidence for.
[quote]this statement is definitive. Once you start arguing with this, you're saying that a few screenshots of strange behavior is enough to nullify the developers' statements.[/quote] Coming from a too-long stint on WoW, I find this statement quaintly amusing. Do you honestly think that the person who wrote that is the same one who wrote the income distribution system or that there could have been no miscommunications and that all statements in the entire changelog were thoroughly fac
I think you have it backward there Mazuo. We HAVE been providing proof, and he chooses not to believe it based on faith in "official" posts and accepted common knowledge. I, and Legerdemain before me, have already pointed out that his supposed counter proof doesn't actually counter the argument as there is ambiguity in what his numbers represent, but he chooses to ignore those comments. I'm still waiting for an actual verifiable counter argument here, but I won't be holding my breath....
FoePa, your debug screenshots do NOT necessarily conflict with the evidence provided by the endgame graphs. All we see in your screenshot is a "value" of 10.1. So what are the possibilities for what this 10.1 is? 1) # of credits received last tick. 2) # of credits to be received next tick. 3) internal "credit income rate" which could undergo further transformations in order to determine actual credits received by the player. Honestly, I think (3) seems logical and makes se
[link="https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/305565"]Combat Mechanics Post[/link] says that armor mitigation for damage is multiplicative: actual damage = ( 1 / ( 1 + armor * 0.05 ) ) * damage Let's call the ( 1 / ( 1 + armor * 0.05 ) ) factor "A". Cykur you're claiming that: 3 * ( A * ( damage / 3 ) ) < A * damage