25,784
edits
User talk:Eridanus: Difference between revisions
→Formula conversions
Nescientist (talk | contribs) (→Formula conversions: new section) |
|||
| Line 524: | Line 524: | ||
And when I'm already here, I think I can also explain my OHKO edits. You can either think of move accuracies as "Tackle has 100% accuracy" (A) or "Tackle has 100 accuracy" (B); note that the percantage sign isn't actually being used in-game. That means that, if whatever the accuracy calculation yields is somewhere between 1 and 100, you can add a percantage sign (A) or omit it (B). However, in math a percentage sign reads as "over 100", so if the calculation is in the hundreths already, you need to "artificially" multiply by 100 (either way) to get accuracies in the expected range. (I remember seeing Tiddlywinks explain this way better somewhere a long time ago.) [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 17:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC) | And when I'm already here, I think I can also explain my OHKO edits. You can either think of move accuracies as "Tackle has 100% accuracy" (A) or "Tackle has 100 accuracy" (B); note that the percantage sign isn't actually being used in-game. That means that, if whatever the accuracy calculation yields is somewhere between 1 and 100, you can add a percantage sign (A) or omit it (B). However, in math a percentage sign reads as "over 100", so if the calculation is in the hundreths already, you need to "artificially" multiply by 100 (either way) to get accuracies in the expected range. (I remember seeing Tiddlywinks explain this way better somewhere a long time ago.) [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 17:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Fair enough, if you want to fix the formulas back you can do that. Though the % versus 100% is... the pages being inconsistent, because Sheer Cold didn't multiply it by 100%. [[User:Eridanus|Eridanus]] ([[User talk:Eridanus|talk]]) 18:11, 23 April 2021 (UTC) | |||