|
|
metadata
[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v4GZM9NvPtK3IjAlV3YqAerzCiGXfsKt48EXfPZJJ0M](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v4GZM9NvPtK3IjAlV3YqAerzCiGXfsKt48EXfPZJJ0M)
How to use:
1) Fill in your information in the green section, levels and costs.
2) Orange section will show production information; make sure the total production matches your in-game production.
3) Yellow section will show analysis information. Most efficient purchase is shown with a green background.
\*Can only be used by one person at a time. If too many people are trying to use it simultaneously, then sign in to google docs and make a personal copy.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
interesting. seemed way too complicated for me- 1 just divide cost of new solar by 5, new windmill by 10, and relector by 20. Which ever is lowest, I buy that.
Or even easier- buy reflectors. If windmill is less than half reflector, buy that instead. If Solar is less than half windmill, buy that..
I am guessing some of the other stuff is how efficient your research is, etc. (ie, when it makes more sense to buy a 10% increase to a paticular type of equipment, rather than just 5% overall). Congrats on figureing all that out, my general rule has been to keep all the equipment fairly even, but to leave the 10% solar bonus one tier behind, research 3 tiers ahead, money 2 tiers ahead, and refectors before windmills.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
An inaccuracy in the formula for calculating 5% production boosts was fixed. Please update if you have made a copy or downloaded.
This is not guaranteed to be accurate. I would appreciate if people would double check the formulas.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Your efficiency section is wrong in k12, k13 & k14, your only factoring off of a single type, yet they take all 3 into account.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[jott](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9486832):***
>
> Your efficiency section is wrong in k12, k13 & k14, your only factoring off of a single type, yet they take all 3 into account.
Yes, this is the inaccuracy that I mentioned. It has been fixed now.
my b
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
delay in my post i see you’ve already fixed it. My apologies
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
i made a copy of the file, but as i change to my numbers, i don’t see the number on yellow to change. they are the same from when i downloaded it
it works now thanks :)
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[xeno24seven](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9487283):***
>
> i made a copy of the file, but as i change to my numbers, i don’t see the number on yellow to change. they are the same from when i downloaded it
Should be resolved now.
My b again
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Updated with automatic costs calculation. Update for increased convenience.
Thanks to Gafferking and TribalSeedlings for formulas.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
something to think about. Is time playing any role in this? I meen buying a 20k panel at t=1 and buying a reflector with 100k at t=2 will meen that you lose this productivity a panel would give you at the t1-t2 or something like that :P
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Zipakos](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9487906):***
>
> something to think about. Is time playing any role in this? I meen buying a 20k panel at t=1 and buying a reflector with 100k at t=2 will meen that you lose this productivity a panel would give you at the t1-t2 or something like that :P
It currently optimizes for best cost/production. Time is not accounted for, because it would add a lot of complexity. In the scenario you described, most likely you will end up buying both the reflector and the panel eventually so the production missed can be at most constant.
Since the event will run for several more days, it is unlikely that the improved income from the reflector will not break even with the constant missed production. The only time this might matter would be during the last 12-24 hours, but by that point everyone will be focusing entirely on power generation anyway.
It would definitely make it more accurate though and I am open to including it in the formulas if someone wants to work on it.
EDIT: Added statistic for hours to break even. Not very meaningful for the most part, except for research production level since that both costs and produces research.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Am i supposed to be Purchasing the Lowest Number or the Highest? I am seeing alot of Green backgrounds and regardless of which i purchase and put into the formula only that sections numbers goes up not the numbers in the other sections. Normally i would assume as i purchase 1 over the other then that would would become less cost effective but i am not sure if i am reading the chart correctly on this.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[Valorean](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9490671):***
>
> Am i supposed to be Purchasing the Lowest Number or the Highest? I am seeing alot of Green backgrounds and regardless of which i purchase and put into the formula only that sections numbers goes up not the numbers in the other sections. Normally i would assume as i purchase 1 over the other then that would would become less cost effective but i am not sure if i am reading the chart correctly on this.
Yes it works exactly as you assume. The highlighted column shows how many assets or research it would cost to increase your production by one, so the lowest number is the most cost effective upgrade. When you buy it the cost effectiveness changes and the number goes up.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Thank You for clarifying.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Request, Is there anyway someone could do a similar for Upgrades? I have been trying but sadly I lack the skills. Would be really awesome to know which upgrades to purchase to get the most of my Idle and Clicking Upgrades. Instead of Base Production i could be base attack speed and Base Damage.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Updated for new patch. Base production of all buildings has been doubled.
> *Originally posted by **[Valorean](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9497630):***
>
> Request, Is there anyway someone could do a similar for Upgrades? I have been trying but sadly I lack the skills. Would be really awesome to know which upgrades to purchase to get the most of my Idle and Clicking Upgrades. Instead of Base Production i could be base attack speed and Base Damage.
Someone is working on this in the damage and challenge calculator. Do not know when it will be finished.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
FYI: The Deconcentration Formula is changed for Lv51+ – 51 is at 130,050k (nope.. not too many zeros – 130,050,000 Research) RIP my Strategy
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Upon trying to access the calculator now, it says that I require the owner’s permission in order to access it, even though yesterday it was working perfectly fine
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[eggman68](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9503287):***
>
> Upon trying to access the calculator now, it says that I require the owner’s permission in order to access it, even though yesterday it was working perfectly fine
This.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
> *Originally posted by **[eggman68](/forums/11060/topics/518176?page=1#posts-9503287):***
>
> Upon trying to access the calculator now, it says that I require the owner’s permission in order to access it, even though yesterday it was working perfectly fine
Sorry, i’m new to this spreadsheets thing. My guess is that even though the spreadsheet itself is protected other people are able to change the sharing options somehow because I swear I have never touched them. Spooky, but it should be fixed now.
Recommended to sign in to Google Docs and make a personal copy as backup in case it happens again. Maybe someone else will know what settings I need to change to prevent this.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
now it is in, thx astrocat
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Windsmills values are wrong ;(
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
Just so you know, after you reach 50, the deconcentration skyrockets; at 51 it requires 100 times what the rest would need.
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
i just upgraded deconcentration to lvl 51 NOTHING HAPPENED
|
|
|
|
|
metadata
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
|
 "Astrocat"){kind=small}
 "Kevlar33"){kind=small}
 "jott"){kind=small}
 "xeno24seven"){kind=small}
 "Zipakos"){kind=small}
 "Valorean"){kind=small}
 "Iluya"){kind=small}
 "eggman68"){kind=small}
 "Angried"){kind=small}
 "adit1996"){kind=small}
 "Mattpds"){kind=small}
 "Tannu119"){kind=small}
 "Snow_W"){kind=small}