Talk:Ore Smelter
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ore Smelter article. | |
|---|---|
|
|
Random discussions
8 lime 8 ore: you now have 8 ore with a 9% chance to turn into a bar each.
This means if you do this an infinite amount of times, for every 100 operations you get 9 bars per slot * 8 slots = 72 bars. In other words, the average chance to get a bar per smelting is 72 / 100 * 100% = 72%.
Any information about getting 1+ bars is useless, as it does not take into account the value of getting e.g. 10 bars at the same time.
Stats don't work that way I'm sorry. The average isn't useful in this situation, what you want is the probability of actually getting a result from your smelting.
The change of getting 1 or more iron ingots per trial is calculated as follows:
100% - Probability of getting nothing.
Probability of getting nothing is calculated as follows:
Probability of failing ^ Number of trials.
so to calculate the change of failing 8 times in a row when you have .91 ^ 8.
This gives you 47.03% and 100% - 47.03% gives you 52.97% which is the change of getting 1 or more iron ingot if you use 8 of each. --Sparkky 15:31, 5 May 2012 (CDT)
As said before, you assume getting 10 iron bars has the same value as getting 1 iron bar.
Any information about getting 1+ bars is only useful if all you need is 1 iron bar and don't care about getting more. This is a highly unlikely, rarely used situation.
Most people want the most optimal ore/lime combination for the highest average output.--Aixler 09:32, 6 May 2012 (CDT)
That's not what you're calculating though Aixler, what you are calculating is the number of bars you will average per trial, which is for example .7 bars, that does NOT mean that you have 70% chance at anything.
Saying you will get .7 bars on average doesn't say what the chance of actually getting a bar is, that's the definition of a probability.
--Sparkky 16:42, 6 May 2012 (CDT)
Ah so I'm glad we come to the conclusion that it simply had the wrong name, so now we can change the name and have the table everyone wants.
If you feel so strongly about adding the change to get 1+ bars, there is room for both.--Aixler 07:45, 8 May 2012 (CDT)
I think we should remove the reference to Jorb's spreadsheet
The math is wrong for the smelting section, and the rest of the spreadsheet is irrelevant to the page. I just don't see a reason on having it linked here. --Sparkky 23:41, 8 May 2012 (CDT)
All current math on spread sheets to date is WRONG
The math on the current spread sheet is wrong as well. I will conduct more trials over a series and garner more proof then revisit this issue. Fortunately Jorb's is the closet one to being consistently right. --Illian.amerond 18:02, 1 June 2012 (CDT)
Can you explain why? or is this issue dead Sparkky 19:46, 12 August 2012 (CDT)
