Knarr quality formula?

[_Gunnar]

Bit of a long shot, since testing this is rather painful, but does anyone know

a) the formula for Knarr quality?
b) the way that Knarr quality translates to speed? Is it something like 8-4/sqrt(Q) ?

[Hrenli]

a) the formula for Knarr quality?

Not sure about exact formula, but seems to be something like average of all materials involved.

b) the way that Knarr quality translates to speed? Is it something like 8-4/sqrt(Q) ?

Again, not entirely sure, but something like 8 - 4/sqrt(Q/10). At least we know its 4 at q10, 8 at infinity according to devs. And I did a test during w9:

Well, as it's not much left to do I did some testing yesterday. It took 27 seconds for our 63q knarr to cross the nearest lake. The same trip in boat takes 40 seconds. So, it's just 1,5 times faster for 63q, though it feels much more. I might have messed up the timing a bit, but I don't think it's too much. And judging that knarr's theoretical limit is exactly 2 times faster than boat my measurements look to me not too much off...

[Omnipotent]

And I did a test during w9:

Well, as it's not much left to do I did some testing yesterday. It took 27 seconds for our 63q knarr to cross the nearest lake. The same trip in boat takes 40 seconds. So, it's just 1,5 times faster for 63q, though it feels much more. I might have messed up the timing a bit, but I don't think it's too much. And judging that knarr's theoretical limit is exactly 2 times faster than boat my measurements look to me not too much off...

How many times did you test this? Only once? Or several different times? How did you account for lag? Did you use a script to click in the same place? Or did you just click randomly? Did you click to move once or multiple times? If these two tests were not conducted in exactly the same way there could be some hidden factors influencing the final times.

For example, just taking into account lag can greatly affect time time it takes to get from one location to the other; not even considering the speed of the boat you're in. Ideally you should take multiple measurements, remove any irregular results, and then average the times together (ideally with it all being recorded so you know exactly how much time has taken place). That way your times will be much more consistent.

Theoretically I could be in a q30 knarr and get to my destination 'slower' than a rowboat if the lag is bad enough.

There's also other things to take into account like the possibility of clicking in multiple different areas when trying to repeat the movement. Even if it's 1 or 2 tiles off, the more it deviates from the other path the longer/shorter the trip will become. Maybe not by a huge amount, but it's important to take into account any possible differences. It all adds up. What may seem like an insignificant thing at first can play a much larger role than anticipated.

[_Gunnar]

Like all theoretical scientists, I'm inclined to believe his test since it closely agrees with the formula i pulled out of my arse

thanks a bunch!

[Hrenli]

How many times did you test this? Only once? Or several different times?

Three times from point A to point B, back and there again I think.

How did you account for lag?

I didn't. It was not a problem during end of w9.

Did you use a script to click in the same place? Or did you just click randomly? Did you click to move once or multiple times? If these two tests were not conducted in exactly the same way there could be some hidden factors influencing the final times.

No script, just minimum clicks along the same route. Of course it couldn't count as a proper experiment and I wrote that it's very rough estimates.

For example, just taking into account lag can greatly affect time time it takes to get from one location to the other; not even considering the speed of the boat you're in. Ideally you should take multiple measurements, remove any irregular results, and then average the times together (ideally with it all being recorded so you know exactly how much time has taken place). That way your times will be much more consistent.

Even though it was last century but I studied math and basics of statistics at uni. I know how it works.

Theoretically I could be in a q30 knarr and get to my destination 'slower' than a rowboat if the lag is bad enough.

Once again. It was w9. There was next to no lag. 40 seconds trip, several attempts. And I don't pretend to know the actual formula. Just an estimate what to expect. Back then it was the best I could do. Not happy - please go and do it yourself.

There's also other things to take into account like the possibility of clicking in multiple different areas when trying to repeat the movement. Even if it's 1 or 2 tiles off, the more it deviates from the other path the longer/shorter the trip will become. Maybe not by a huge amount, but it's important to take into account any possible differences. It all adds up. What may seem like an insignificant thing at first can play a much larger role than anticipated.

Important for what?

[Yorla]

Bah, we just had two different ql knarrs and raced in parallel - they had obviously different speed.

[Hrenli]

Bah, we just had two different ql knarrs and raced in parallel - they had obviously different speed.

That was in w10 and we did not time it though.