[X] My Assistant

7/18/11 (Version 1.3) Update:


Download:
- You can get it: [www.starfleetplatoon.com] Here

Changelog:

- Version 1.3:
- Added new formulas to calculate the EXP required to level up and for leveling a primary attribute.
- Max level has been increased from 300 to 999.
- Max stats have been increased from 360 to 999.

Notes on usage:
- You can only simulate a character up to level 999 (max level).
- Max stat you can simulate up to is 999 (max?).
- If you accidentally type out of those boundaries, it will automatically adjust to the min or max values accordingly.
- When you use up more EXP than is available, it will be shown as negative.


In progress:
- Add a GUI.
- Add an algorithm to predict higher unknown values above the known set of data.
- Implement an Archaeologist training evaluator. - Not sure if this is even useful so I'll cross it out for now.
- Need a better host. Anyone know a good host besides Megaupload?
- A new icon for the simulator. I think people are bored of seeing the same old piece of sushi. If you are good with art and would like to help make an icon for the simulator, then post here or send me a PM.

Special thanks to:
- Tenboro for creating the never-ending time sink known as Hentaiverse.
- Sonic for his generosity in allocating some of his bandwidth for my mediocre application.
- Random people that I've stolen data from in various threads.
- Everyone else that has provided useful input.


As always, suggestions and comments are welcomed.


An example of how the character simulator is used:
(IMG:[img543.imageshack.us] http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/4548/charsimulation71811.jpg)

This post has been edited by sushi0: Jul 19 2011, 05:55

There are lots of values posted in this thread. No one has yet worked out the formula, AFAIK.

i don't do balanced stats...

There are lots of values posted in this thread. No one has yet worked out the formula, AFAIK.

Thanks Sayo, I'll read that thread once I get home. I skimmed through it and there's lots of useful data in it. By the way, how did you find threads that are more than a year old? There are only 2 pages of threads in the HV system discussion section and the thread you linked is not listed there.

This post and the one after it have pics of my char screen from level 151 to 255, you can get some numbers off that I'd guess.
https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?s=&am...st&p=873314

Already saw that. To be precise, most of my 200 level stats that I have was gotten from you (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I've been using a spreadsheet myself to try to predict this very thing. Here are the numbers I have:

0 4
1 8
2 14
3 21
4 31
5 41
6 54
7 68
8 83
9 101
10 120
11 141
12 164
13 189
14 216
15 245
16 277
17 310
18 346
19 384
20 425
21 468
22 514
23 562
24 614
25 668
26 725
27 786
28 849
29 916
30 987
31 1061
32 1138
33 1220
34 1305
35 1395
36 1489
37 1587
38 1690
39 1798
40 1910
41 2028
42 2150
43 2279
44 2412
45 2552
46 2698
47 2849
48 3008
49 3173
50 3344
51 3524
52 3710
53 3904
54 4106
55 4316
56 4535
57 4762
58 4999
59 5245
60 5501
61 5767
62 6043
63 6330
64 6628
65 6938
66 7260
67 7594
68 7941
69 8302
70 8676
71 9064
72 9467
73 9885
74 10319
75 10769
76 11236
77 11720
78 12223
79 12744
80 13284
81 13845
82 14426
83 15028
84 15653
85 16300
86 16971
87 17667
88 18388
89 19135
90 19910
91 20712
92 21544
93 22405
94 23298
95 24223
96 25181
97 26173
98 27202
99 28267
100 29370
101 30512
102 31696
103 32921
104 34191
105 35505
106 36867
107 38276
108 39736
109 41248
110 42813
111 44433
112 46111
113 47849
114 49647
115 51510
116 53438
117 55434
118 57500
119 59640
120 61855
121 64147
122 66521
123 68978
124 71521
125 74154
126 76880
127 79701
128 82621
129 85644
130 88773
131 92012
132 95365
133 98835
134 102427
135 106145
136 109994
137 113977
138 118101
139 122369
140 126786
141 131359
142 136092
143 140991
144 146062
145 151311
146 156744
147 162368
148 168189
149 174215
150 180452
151 186908
152 193591
153 200509
154 207669
155 215082
156 222755
157 230698
158 238920
159 247431
160 256242
161 265364
162 274806
163 284581
164 294701
165 305178
166 316024
167 327253
168 338878
169 350914
170 363375
171 376277
172 389635
173 403465
174 417785
175 432613
176 447966
177 463863
178 480324
179 497369
180 515020
181 533298
182 552226
183 571827
184 592126
185 613148
186 634919
187 657466
188 680818
189 705004
190 730055
191 756001
192 782875
193 810711
194 839545
195 869413
196 900352
197 932402
198 965603
199 999999
200 1035632
201 1072549
202 1110795
203 1150421
204 1191478
205 1234017
206 1278095
207 1323767
208 1371092
209 1420133
210 1470952
211 1523616
212 1578193
213 1634754
214 1693373
215 1754128
216 1817097
217 1882363
218 1950012
219 2020133
220 2092820
221 2168168
222 2246276
223 2327250
224 2411196
225 2498226
226 2588458
227 2682011
228 2779011
229 2879589
230 2983880
231 3092024
232 3204169
233 3320465
234 3441071
235 3566150
236 3695874
237 3830420
238 3969971
239 4114719
240 4264863
241 4420610
242 4582175
243 4749780
244 4923659
245 5104053
246 5291213
247 5485400
248 5686885
249 5895951
250 6112891
251 6338010
252 6571626
253 6814068
254 7065680
255 7326820
256 7597857
257 7879179
258 8171188
259 8474301
260 8788953
261 9115598
262 9454704
263 9806763
264 10172284
265 10551797
266 10945855
267 11355030
268 11779922
269 12221153
270 12679368
271 13155244
272 13649481
273 14162809
274 14695989
275 15249812
276 15825102
277 16422717
278 17043551
279 17688534
280 18358634
281 19054860
282 19778263
283 20529936
284 21311021
285 22122702
286 22966217
287 23842855
288 24753956
289 25700918
290 26685198
291 27708314
292 28771846
293 29877442
294 31026819
295 32221766
296 33464147
297 34755907
298 36099069
299 37495747
300 38948140
301 40458543
302 42029347
303 43663047
304 45362241
305 47129641
306 48968073
307 50880485
308 52869949
309 54939673
310 57092998
311 59333411
312 61664550
313 64090209
314 66614344
315 69241085
316 71974739
317 74819799
318 77780956
319 80863101
320 84071340
321 87411000
322 90887644
323 94507072
324 98275344
325 102198780
326 106283980
327 110537835
328 114967535
329 119580590
330 124384839
331 129388468
332 134600026
333 140028438
334 145683025

This post has been edited by miwabe: Dec 31 2010, 21:43

Derp.

6th order polynomial, still not quite accurate. Might need a higher order or a different method of linear regression. I've looked at analyzing other relationships, such as the difference between levels and the amount of XP to level up. The formula could be using more than one variable, which would definitely throw a wrench in the gears.

It's very likely to have more than one variable. I doubt TB would fool around with only one variable and make a 51 character expression out of that.

Edit:
On second thought, it should only have one variable. I forgot he only passed in one variable in his function.

This post has been edited by sushi0: Dec 3 2010, 00:53

By the way, how did you find threads that are more than a year old? There are only 2 pages of threads in the HV system discussion section and the thread you linked is not listed there.

I found the thread by using the forums search. Since I already knew it existed, all I had to do was remember roughly what was in the title. But if you want to list threads older than a certain forum's cutoff date, just change the option at the bottom of the page from "From: 90 days" (or whatever) to "Show all".

6th order polynomial, still not quite accurate. Might need a higher order or a different method of linear regression.

I suspect it uses an exponential function (or functions), though I have no idea how to analyse it.

Derp.

6th order polynomial, still not quite accurate. Might need a higher order or a different method of linear regression. I've looked at analyzing other relationships, such as the difference between levels and the amount of XP to level up. The formula could be using more than one variable, which would definitely throw a wrench in the gears.

If that's the case, you're not likely to figure it out without getting the function directly from Tenboro. I'm willing to bet it's single variable but there are hidden decimal places throwing off the regression. At any rate, 0.999 is plenty good enough to approximate the actual progression, unless you're really hellbent on getting the exact numbers.

This post has been edited by hitokiri84: Dec 3 2010, 20:41

what software are you guys using to figure out the equation?

what software are you guys using to figure out the equation?

My hand and my calculator, nothing too fancy.

Derp.

Does that equation correspond to the graph? Plugged in some numbers and the results are planets apart from the actual data.

This post has been edited by sushi0: Dec 3 2010, 23:34

The equation would be the line, and the points would be the empirical data.

what software are you guys using to figure out the equation?

Pretty much any spreadsheet or database software can be used to make that trendline in about 2 minutes.

The equation would be the line, and the points would be the empirical data.

Taking y to be the exp required for the next level and x to be the level, his equation y = -0.001x + 0.259x^2 -31.94x^3 + 1751x^2 - 32242x + 4 doesn't give anything close to the actual data, assuming he's using miwabe's data.

That's just an Excel graph that I plotted a trendline to. I've got MATLAB on my laptop, but I need to reread my notes on linear regression. The "basic" linreg function doesn't give me anything better than what Excel gave me, so I need to do the more involved analysis using advanced methods, and I don't remember them because I don't use them often (I mostly use the matrix and linear algebra functions for modeling and controls problems).

Right now, I'm thinking the formula might use the value from the previous level, and then it does some voodoo with the difference.

Taking y to be the exp required for the next level and x to be the level, his equation y = -0.001x + 0.259x^2 -31.94x^3 + 1751x^2 - 32242x + 4 doesn't give anything close to the actual data, assuming he's using miwabe's data.

I'm not, I'm using my data that I've gathered. And its not accurate for all values. If you know what the graphs of polynomials look like, then there are going to be areas on the curve where the line isn't going to match up with the actual data. There'll be places where its really close, and there are places where its not.

This post has been edited by cmal: Dec 4 2010, 00:21

MATLAB is the bane of my school life right now. I have to do almost everything on it. Lately it's been coding basic CFD and FEM methods. Thankfully most of it is simple enough to use MATLAB, which is good since MATLAB is slow as hell. I've got my own pirated copy too of course. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by hitokiri84: Dec 4 2010, 00:29

I'm not, I'm using my data that I've gathered. And its not accurate for all values. If you know what the graphs of polynomials look like, then there are going to be areas on the curve where the line isn't going to match up with the actual data. There'll be places where its really close, and there are places where its not.

Can you double check your equation? Accuracy is not even the right term here, the results are off the charts. For 160, your equation returns -26278716 and 260 returns -455962516. Either your equation is wrong or I made a huge mathematical error.

That is odd. Sometimes Excel does stupid things to the trendline equation if you mess with the graph settings (in that case, that's the equation for a fifth order poly). I refreshed the equation and that gives a similar answer. When I used it before, it was close, so something got broken somewhere since. I'll have to look at it.

Just an update on this project.

No, I've not forgotten about it, just that I was too busy/lazy doing various things. I'm still googling tutorials on how to make an actual executable since my programming knowledge is very limited. I'll resume working on it after Christmas.

It also seems like Miwabe is hard at work, being the only one that remembers this thread, updating and providing all that useful data. Just a quick question, what happened to the numbers that had ?? on them that you weren't sure about? Is your current list accurate for every number? I'm asking because I remember a few numbers that had a ? on them, such as 291.

That is odd. Sometimes Excel does stupid things to the trendline equation if you mess with the graph settings (in that case, that's the equation for a fifth order poly). I refreshed the equation and that gives a similar answer. When I used it before, it was close, so something got broken somewhere since. I'll have to look at it.

Have you found out what was causing the Excel issue? If so, do you have a new trendline equation?

If things go as planned and I come home early enough tomorrow from the family outing, I might be able to release this as a Christmas gift, but don't hold me on that. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)