Comment on Percentages

Kolanaki@yiffit.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  ×25% gives you 1/4 the original value, whereas +100% is double the original value, let’s say 8/4 to keep it consistent. ×125% (in case a 1 is missing) is still only 5/4 the original value.

  Is there a typo in your comment?

  source

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    In video games they commonly use that to mean they are multiplying by 25. We know it’s not correct in stats.

    source

    • Kolanaki@yiffit.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Biggest lie in gaming was how the formula for Armor Piercing rounds in Fallout 1 and 2 was bad, so instead of being stronger than regular rounds, they were weaker.

      source
    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Games use x25% or x25? Technically the first divides the score by 4.

      source

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        We are aware of what it actually does mathematically. Please re-read what I wrote.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Sas@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I feel they might’ve left something out. If you’re at base value still an additive 100% increase (1+1=2) is better than a multiplicative 25% (1×1.25=1.25) increase but in games where bonuses stack another additive 100% increase would raise the effective value by 50% instead (1+1+1=3) whereas another multiplicative 25% would still raise the total by that much (1×1.25×1.25=1.56) so if you’re stacking a lot of bonuses, eventually the multplicative ones are more effective. As for how many steps it would take to be equal in our example… 1+1×X=1×1.25^X I’m not gonna do this in my bed on my phone but that equation should already tell you that the right side grows faster when X -> infinity

    source

    • sukhmel@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      It’ll become greater after 12 applications:

      1. For 11 times 1.25¹¹ ≈ 11.64 < 12 = 1+ 1×11
      2. For 12 times 1.25¹² ≈ 14.55 > 13 = 1 + 1×12

      There’s no need for a precise solution since it’s integers anyway.

      source