Archive: 11 posts

---

OK so I have a situation where I'm using less then 1% battery's for a feed back loop this works well for its intended propose how ever..... let me brake this down and give some background on what I'm doing. I have a limiting feed back loop set to 40% now if you take 40% and add about 7 0's to the end of it essentially moving the decimal point from 0.40 to 4000000.00. now anyone who knows, doing this causes rounding errors if you start at .59 and work your way up to 10 you will end up with 10.13 (god I hate this game) so adding 10.13 to its self 8 times you gain 1.04 so instead of 80 you have 81.04, so about ever 8 times you gain 1 point this would not be so bad if the addition didn't occur every to every other frame. so I created a sanity check to check if at any point there was a value greater then the .59 and subtract .59, this worked because at 40.59 or 50.66 it would subtract the .59 giving you 50.06 but at the price of 3/8 the therm this inst very cost efficient(or so I don't think)..... so everyone caught up to speed I will now ask my several questions: 1: is it that important to have a precise number.(I think so) 2:has anyone found a method that can do a sanity check on such a low number 3:when checking to see if a % contains a number is there a better why then checking all 7 digits 1 at a time 4: going back to 3 is there a way to check the 7th position past the decimal by its self it seems this has been pledging the lbp community for sometime now any advice will definitely help...............

2013-02-02 17:39:00 Author: JKY Posts: 119

---

I use whatever the game allows, and if anybody asks, that's what I wanted it to do.

2013-02-03 00:43:00 Author: Brannayen Posts: 438

---

there are quite a few zero latency probes out there that check all digits within the same frame (including a few i have made), you should be able to modify one of those to do what you are asking. if you add me on psn i can give you a couple if you want (if you can catch me on lbp2, havnt been on much of late)

2013-02-03 02:26:00 Author: evret Posts: 612

---

will do everet, but do you know of a way to skip all digits except the ones needed to check ?

2013-02-03 02:29:00 Author: JKY Posts: 119

---

no, every probe i know of involves checking the larger digit then removing it b4 multiplying the remainder to check the next

2013-02-03 03:56:00 Author: evret Posts: 612

---

so you think its pointless to do the check and just let it add up? I'm thinking once you get to the 4000000 range you will have added 52000 and there is no way for the player to see this with out increasing the amount of logic used. using the probes to work with is one thing but using them to display in the game is not so therm friendly

2013-02-03 05:11:00 Author: JKY Posts: 119

---

all depends on what it's used for, there are other methods to use other than smaller signals, for example you could try larger than 100% signals which are available in a community level, you can use a single very large signal to allow you to add numbers that will exceed the 100% cap. you could also look into methods that use multiple feed back loops to manage a larger number without having to use smaller or larger captured signals

2013-02-03 07:23:00 Author: evret Posts: 612

---

all depends on what it's used for, this is used to store player score and use it as a currency. there are other methods to use other than smaller signals, for example you could try larger than 100% signals which are available in a community level, you can use a single very large signal to allow you to add numbers that will exceed the 100% cap. it was my understanding that the larger signals could not be used in a loop.( i must have assumed this because i have never gotten a probe to be able to read it)..... I'm not so sure this would even work as I have no way to see what the greater then 100% analog signal is doing you could also look into methods that use multiple feed back loops to manage a larger number without having to use smaller or larger captured signals the issue is there are 4 players 4 scores from 0 to 4000000 to do that with more then 1 loop per player i think would be worse then with 1 loop and a sanity check I'm in the middle of wiring this up right now to see what it would take. i will edit this post when I'm done with it. Edit: WOW the game don't like having 400 loops 400*100 = 40000. So I cant add enough loops to the game in order to hold that large of a number (unless I'm missing something) and after 800 I cant add anything more because the level over heated

2013-02-03 08:50:00 Author: JKY Posts: 119

---

you should only need 4 loops per player to get 4000000

2013-02-03 12:47:00 Author: evret Posts: 612

---

I don't think I understand, when you get some time I sent you a friends request would you mind showing me what you are talking about?

2013-02-03 14:29:00 Author: JKY Posts: 119

---

i havnt received a request from you, you sure you didn't send it to "evert" instead of "evret" (it's surprising the number of people who read it wrong)

2013-02-03 19:43:00 Author: evret Posts: 612

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.