Simple math about merits

[CMDR Beltane]

Then riddle me this... When i put the weekly merits from reddit into my app , itgives out the same data and end result as is on that reddit. When i use the reddit formula (Formula A to be precise) with my own numbers it matches exactly the merits i have. Now when i put YOUR numbers into that formula and/or use his numbers with YOUR formula, the end results dont match with those on reddit, nor do they match with, get this, each other...

So i would advise you to re-read your posts and correct them, before you mislead people further.

Because you are still using the wrong formula... so, for you - the relevant part. If that doesn't make you understand, nothing will...

 

[Zulu Romeo]

It's funny to see how you all speculate rather than just look at your merits in game... CMDR Beltane already posted the way merits work. First week you carry over ALL merits you earned last week, next week you carry over half of that, etc. to four weeks when the merits are gone. So you need cca. 3500 merits per week to keep rank 5, which can be achieved by 1 hour of game play a week (everyone saying how is that possible, is not even in the position to aim for rank 5, sorry... you can grind it, but you're not there, aim lower ;P)

This also is consistent with the data I learned from Athan in one of the patch notes threads. He earned 40 merits in one cycle (zero previously), then next cycle he started with 40 merits and earned 80 merits to get 120 merits. This cycle, he started with 100 merits (80 from the last cycle plus 40/2 or 20 merits). The manual then states that three degrees of halving occur, which is also in keeping with your model Beltane mentioned.

From this, I concluded that the absolute minimum needed to maintain rating 5 once you got there was 3480 merits. Which is the equivalent of 232 undermining kills, or 33-34 kills per day on average (or, for haulers, about 498 commodity deliveries per day).



Later, it was pointed out that the most optimal way was to grind out 10000 merits in the first week, doing just less than three times the amount you'd do as before (95 to 96 undermining kills per day, or about 1429 commodity deliveries per day). Even with this, regardless of your earnings prior to this, you can still drop to a maintenance of 3480 merits afterwards and still stay in rating 5, as long as your running total is 10005 by the end of the cycle. (You do not need to worry about merits dropping below 10000 merits through decay: your rating remains, as do the benefits.) The benefits of hitting rating 5 are twofold: earlier bigger credits, plus for haulers your outgoings for commodity allocations purchases are greatly reduced at rating 5 with 50 free commodities per half hour compared to 10.



However, to ensure your merits never drop below 10000 through decay, then 5334 merits is what you need (356 kills per week, or 51 per day; 762 commodities delivered per day). The benefits of making sure you never decay below 10000 merits at the start of a cycle are not clear at this point: the game seems to favour hitting the goal by the end of the cycle instead.

 

[Quineloe]

Why good luck with that?
-
It's easy to get merits, I've earnt 3000 in one evening easy
I can easily get 10,000 + in one week

If you spend millions getting them I guess. Combat at best gives you ~300 merits per hour, which is a very generous estimation, and trading caps out at 100 merits for free per hour.

 

[majogl]

Because you are still using the wrong formula... so, for you - the relevant part. If that doesn't make you understand, nothing will...

Are you being intentionaly dense? It is stated RIGHT THERE in that picture that Formula A is the one that is correct and one that should be used.

For simplicity's sake i'll give an example:
You make 800 merits a week

Week 4 just before the end of cycle.
Carried over from cycle 0: 50
Carried over from cycle 1: 100
Carried over from cycle 2: 200
Carried over from cycle 3: 400
This cycle: 800

Week total: 1550

<<<END OF CYCLE>>>

Carried over from cycle 1: 50
Carried over from cycle 2: 100
Carried over from cycle 3: 200
Carried over from cycle 4: 400
This week: 0 (so far)

Week total: 800

Now let me apply this same algorhytm to one of your numbers form post 5 for example 3500:

3500 (current week) + 3500 (previous week, not cut) + (3500/2) + (3500/4) + (3500/8)

Now lets see:
Acc to formula A it should be:
f(x) = n + 0.5m + 0.25m + 1.25m = 1.825m
Uh oh, seems you have 1 more participant in that wild addition of yours (the GREEEEN one), like ive said before, but that you are obviously blind to. So, algorhytm:

Spoiler

You make 3500 merits a week

Week 4 just before the end of cycle.
Carried over from cycle 0: 218
Carried over from cycle 1: 437
Carried over from cycle 2: 875
Carried over from cycle 3: 1750
This cycle: 3500

Week total: 6743

<<<END OF CYCLE>>>
Carried over from cycle 1: 218
Carried over from cycle 2: 437
Carried over from cycle 3: 875
Carried over from cycle 4: 1750
This week: 0 (so far)

Week total: 3280

NOW are you ready to correct your damn math?? There is no such thing as "Uncut merits from previous week"

 

[CMDR Beltane]

Now lets see:

Acc to formula A it should be:
f(x) = n + 0.5m + 0.25m + 1.25m = 1.825m
Uh oh, seems you have 1 more participant in that wild addition of yours (the GREEEEN one), like ive said before, but that you are obviously blind to.

In case you copy a formula - make sure to do it right... it says:

f(x) = n + (m) + (0.5m) + (0.25m) + (0.125m)

If you would have read any further you might have also noticed the conclusion...

"In order to have 10000 at the end of each Cycle, thus guaranteeing you the payout the following week, you will have to earn 3479 merits per week."

But yea... the rest of the world is dense...

Anyways - either you believe it and you admit that the creator of said formula and others that confirmed it (including myself) have a point, or don't. Enough sheets and data avaiable that people can make up their mind themselves. Therefore, regardless of what you decide to do - i'm done with this discussion as theres no point in continuing it.

 

[Crowax]

NOW are you ready to correct your damn math?? There is no such thing as "Uncut merits from previous week"

Have you even LOOKED at your merits? First week you get full merits from previous week (earned). But yes, it's easier to rant here than just checking the game I guess. I earned 1600 merits on the first week, 9000 on the second, third week I had 9800, that took me to Rank5 (previous week I had 10600 merits, rank is based on end of week merits). On that week I earned another 3000 merits for total of 12800, which on next week will be 7900, from there on I only need the said 3480 per week to maintain top rank... (numbers rounded for simpler calucaltin, don't know exact numbers from my head).

So yes, you must be right, I guess my game is just bugged and I'm the only one that gets uncut merits for the first week...

 

[HurstLlama]

I think this is more typical; I do about 500 a week as well (usually over the course of 2 evenings), though I'll probably drop PP for a while soon, until I have enough money and a large enough trader to buy my way in to higher ranks.

Struggling along at a slow pace and having progress wiped out every week isn't much fun. Pretty clear it was designed for Anaconda pilots rather than Type-6/Cobra pilots, which is fine... just took a while to realize it's not intended for my level of player.

I don't think PowerPlay is meant for rich players, I am certainly not wealthy and I am very much enjoying it. I suppose if you want to reach high ranks then having lots of money you are prepared to sink into it will help tremendously, but then I am not that sort of player. What on earth would I do with 50 million a week? I make enough to keep me flying and have fun, aiming for silly numbers of merits would just turn my game into the dreaded G word.

 

[JoeShmo]

I am sorry but those numbers are very wrong. look at your example for 3.000 merits for example... Your way, if a person earned 3.000 merits a week, he would eventually exceed double the weekly amount (which is a matematical impossibility) Correctly it works as such:

1. 3000 = 3000
2. 3000 + 1500 = 4500
3. 3000 + 1500 + 750 = 5250
4. 3000 + 1500 + 750 + 375 = 5625
At this point you come to week 5 so the last number from previous week disappears. So for any week above the fourth it will always be:
4.+ 3000 + 1500 + 750 + 375 = 5625

Or, short version (15/8)x<WEEKLY AMOUNT>



And if you read what i wrote more carefully you would find out that what CMDR Beltane wrote is incorrect and doesnt even conform to the redit source he himself listed.

Don't get me wrong, I totally get where you are coming from. I said pretty much the exact same thing last week because I couldn't fathom that FD would make the decay based on your total points earned, instead of what you earned that week.

And that is why I stated "and my understanding of how the PP decay is accepted in interpretation" .

FD, and a huge sum of people involved with these caclulations, point out that the decay is based on what your total points for that week were, not how many points you earned that week; there is a very distinct difference.

Your example of my example:

1. 3000 = 3000
2. 3000 + 1500 = 4500
3. 3000 + 1500 + 750 = 5250
4. 3000 + 1500 + 750 + 375 = 5625

Should read:

1. 3000 = 3000

2. 3000 + (3000/2) = 4500 ( Not because the first week's merit decayed i half, but because it WILL decay in half at the end of week 2, and if you want to maintain a rank, you need to make sure you take into account what the decay is going to be when it transitions over...not what you currently have )

3. 3000 + (4500/2) + (1500/2) = 6000 ( Again, following the plan that your total value of that week is going to decay, and continue to decay every week ).

4. 3000 + (6000/2) + (2250/2) + (750/2) = 7500 ( See? Continuing the trend of adding your total from last rollover being cut in half...not the 3000 you earned that week )

But then, we get to the point of another interpretation, when they talk about the "4th week". This was never explained properly, but for the sake of my post I went with the accepted "1250 to maintain" formula. That means that decay happens 3 times and then falls off.

(10,000/2) + (5000/2) + (2500/2) + ______ ( 1250 ) = 10,000 for the week. Or ' 5000 + 2500 + 1250 + (Earn 1250 that week to maintain 10k ) = 10,000.

Something you are confused with, is the initial week of earning, and as a result, the "earned that week" amount; which never gets touched or decayed itself. It is only the total you had that does. A very specific distinction. Since you had 0 merits the first week you earn, that 0 merits never gets cut in half...or decays. It's not until the next week you see decay...because at that moment you had merits to decay.

With taking that into perspective...your "Earned that week" is not decaying...but your total from the previous week. I understand the confusion on this, because rankings and such are based on what your total value was that week...even though they don't reward you until the following week...which is mirrored by the decay system as well.

You have to think of things as "not taking into affect until a week later".

Hopefully I explained that better.


Edit: But, I mean, IF we went with your model...then my statement is still true..and in fact it's actually more grave with your model than mine.

 

[andrak]

Now let me apply this same algorhytm to one of your...

I find it hard to take seriously anyone who cannot spell the thing that it is they are so proud of... "algorithm" let's say it together now algorithm

 

[majogl]

This is pointless. It's like trying to teach etiquetette to a donkey...

 

[Robert Maynard]

Closed at the request of the OP.