this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
1241 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

11299 readers
3692 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

×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?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

In video games they commonly use that to mean they are multiplying by 25. We know it's not correct in stats. This is why game wikis commonly put the actual formula for things rather than the tooltip the developers wrote.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I was asking for clarification. Do many games really add the % to x25?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes. Just off the top of my head, I see any kind of Diablo-like game doing it a lot. Shows everything as a percentage, but some items are just adding that number (not a percentage) or multiplying the number (also not a percentage). It's like they just treat the % as meaning "alters number in mysterious ways."

Warframe has a mod card will say like +200% but you don't want that one, because it's adding, while there is a multiplying one that will say +4, and it's just multiplying it by 4 instead of the +200% which is only adding twice as much to the base value. If you had 100, the +200% thing gives 300. But the +4 is 400. And the way this is displayed in the game does not make sense so you'll always think the +200% is better unless you check the wiki (or put it on your gun and play around with it).

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Biggest lie in a game's tooltip/description of an item 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.