I think rekindling this discussion in this forum would actually be quite good, to add to this forum's variety of post types.
Until the people are complaining about terrible headaches again xDDD
minimize the overall actual XP cost over all turns and leave the most XP available after the final turn of mansion repair.
Have you seen my initial analysis? This was more or less what I tried to achieve even though the data is not that advanced as it should and could have been. Yeah, I did not invest into the dumpster so I might re-do this scenario and see how it compares to yours.
I ultimately opted for maximizing remaining XP left on the final turn.
Which is a case that I haven't emphazised enough, but surely a legit approach. Even now that we have the work data, the flexibility this approach provides us with, is hard to measure. We might need to look closer to the overall XP generation relation between rounds to see where the turning point from "force-spend all XP" towards "minimize XP spent for flexibility" actually is. Let me think about that one, there might be great insights in there, thanks a lot for pointing this out!
I actually lean towards a lower mansion score, at least purely with respect to the mansion repairs and not the jobs portion of the game
Yeah I like the efficiency approach as well, but my initial analysis was too limited to implement this properly. BUT you just raised another idea: Since we now have the work data (thanks to
Meushi and to
ename144 for pointing at him
), we can simply expand the analysis a little bit. Maybe your approach does not really lower the total mansion score, maybe the work part actually is stronger (i.e. yields more points) providing solid evidence for the superiority of your approach. Maximizing the total mansion score might not be the most reliable measure and of course we also have to account for the numbers of job re-rolling (however to do that... actually, with a function?) ...
This might be an interesting and insightful thing to do now!
Total Generation: 110 + 120 + 130 + 180 + 290 = 830
Indeed you are right. I tried to reproduce the error and couldn't. Both, in my spreadsheet and the one I have uploaded, the corresponding calculations are correct (it is because the odd numbers are not added). So for some reason I have updated the spreadsheet later on without updating the screenshot. LOL. Don't know how this could happen, I must apologize.
840 = Rounddown(22.700+24.600+26.390+36.550+58.370)/1000*5
Thats the reason why I have included the odd numbers in the "Bonus Points" column and in the spreadsheet the calculation is working. But obviously not in the screens............ Cannot explain why.
since the additional amount of XP generated you can optimize to get is not significantly much greater
...
13.2 + 0.5*13.2 = 13.2 + 6.6 = 19.8 = ~20
Yes. This is what I meant based on my "educated" guess.
And do you consider 840XP your balanced "middle" output of your algorithm over the range of potential decently optimized cases, with the XP generation ranging up or down by 20XP?
More the balanced middle, yes. 20XP as a cap and not a floor. Less is always possible and way more than 20XP additionally is not feasible with my assumptions. But this doesn't mean that they are the best as you have nicely outlined in your post
Since there are a number of different areas one could optimize the mansion game in (number of turns to complete mansion, total mansion score, total XP generated, total XP Cost, final XP left after mansion repairs for work, etc.)
Thanks for the nice discussion even though my pride suffered a little bit from realizing I made a rush mistake........
I will analyze your proposed optimum as well and take a look at the food of thought you have provided me with right now.
Looking forward to expanding this discussion and maybe one day, we will come up with best practices for each different objective functions.
