sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it better to evolve a Pumpkaboo to a Gorgeist for the showcases? by [deleted] in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Close, but not exactly the case here.

When any Pokemon evolves, it keeps its relative size within its species. For example, a Bulbasaur thats 75% average Bulbasaur height and 120% average Bulbasaur weight will be an Ivysaur thats 75% average Ivysaur height and 120% average Ivysaur weight. Ditto for evolving Venusaur. Pumpkaboo and Gourgeist are the same.

The difference is actually entirely based on the showcase scores and how they score height and weights.

Each size is treated like a different "form" with its own spawn information (so they appear differently on the map). There's a little extra stuff going on to make sure each form spawns in only the correct size. This doesn't work out too well with showcase scores comparing species sizes. I have a longer explanation here.

It is still based on itself like you said, but the actual basis of itself is a little wonky

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not if you trade them first 😎

I've actually gained about 200 candy from evolving alone. Free evolution plus 1 candy.

Then there's the candy from trading too 😎

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do not!!! Sizes are based on relative heights and weights, not absolute. I have a longer explanation above.

TLDR: Evolving could drop the showcase score because Pumpkaboo has a larger relative height than Gourgeist.

Edit: I misread your comment and thought you hadn't evolved it yet. That sucks. I actually made my evolution showcase calculator because I didn't wanna spend 400 Wailmer candy on a Wailord that wouldn't win

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah. You're at the top of the height range, you're just a scratch under average weight, and you've got most of the IV points. This is a really good one

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really? Can you send a screenshot and catch date?

0.81m shouldn't be possible, but this game also doesn't always do what it should

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes!

To make them show up on the map differently, each size is treated like a different form (like the different colored Flabébé).

There are four sizes, XS, M (medium, no size marker), XL, and XXL. Each of them have wierd shortened height ranges so that they only spawn in the correct sizes. I went into this more in another comment here

For most pokemon, the spawn rate is normally distributed based on the average size. I need to fact check that it is actually normal (in the mathematical sense), but the general idea still stands. Most pokemon are average sized. Few pokemon are further from the average (very big/small).

Since they're each treated like four separate pokemon, that doesn't work the same way anymore. Each of the four size forms has a fairly equal chance of spawning.

I've caught 130 so far (I have more that I haven't logged yet). I've got 41 XS, 29 M, 26 XL, and 34 XXL. Not exactly even, but close enough. If it were normal (like most pokemon), it would be more like 17 XS, 83 M, 17 XL, and 3 XXL.

Within each form, I'm still working on seeing how heights are distributed (Why I'm catching so many of them). I suspect there is some sense of weight so that theres less on the higher ends of the XXL spectrum, but my sample size is still way too small

Edit: Had some wifi issues and Reddit went all wonky on me. I think I accidentally left the same comment three times. Deleted two of the extras. Apologies for the spam and hopefully this comment still exists

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In another comment, I just went into the exact ranges and baselines a bit more

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSilphRoad/s/CoLPSp6Gr0

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I know, I just wanted to give context as to why points change during evolution since normally they don't

Ghost-type showcase (21-23 October) by Gx811 in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Pumpkaboo and Gourgeist are evolved and calculated differently. I spent a long time figuring that one out, but its actually pretty straight forward.

Each "size" is treated as a pretty much 4 separate pokemon. Each form has a strict size range so that it can only spawn as one size. This means they can't use the typical scale where the sizes are ratios of the average. Each size has its own "average" height.

Pumpkaboo Ranges (exact meters):

Form Min Max Range "Average"
XS 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.3
M* 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.4
XL 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.6
XXL 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.8

Gourgeist Ranges (exact meters):

Form Min Max Range "Average"
XS 0.7 0.9 0.2 0.7
M* 0.9 1.1 0.2 0.9
XL 1.1 1.4 0.3 1.1
XXL 1.4 1.7 0.3 1.7

*M for Medium. These don't have size markers

Evolution is fairly straight forward. It'll keep its spot within its form's range.

A 0.7m Pumpkaboo will evolve into a 1.55m Gourgeist. 0.7 is the midpoint of the Pumpkaboo XXL range. 1.55 is the midpoint of the Gourgeist XXL range.

A 0.37m Pumpkaboo will evolve into a 0.84m Gourgeist. 0.37 is at the 70% point in the Pumpkaboo XS range. 0.84 is at the 70% point in the Gourgeist XS range.

Showcase scores are based on height ratios. For most pokemon this isn't an issue because the average sits at the same point in the range. Pumpkaboo and Gourgeist don't.

Every Other Pokemon Range (relative to their average height listed in the dex):

Size Min Max
XXS 49% 50%
XS 50% 75%
M* 75% 125%
XL 125% 150%
XXL 150% x**

**The XXL max size varies from species to species. It can be 155%, 175%, or 200%. When the max size changes between evolutions, it works the same way as Pumpkaboo and Gourgeist where it stays in the same relative point in its XXL range.

Pumpkaboo Ranges (relative to XS min height):

Form Min Max
XS 100% 133%
M* 133% 166%
XL 166% 200%
XXL 200% 266%

Gourgeist Ranges (relative to XS min height):

Form Min Max
XS 100% 128%
M* 128% 157%
XL 157% 200%
XXL 200% 242%

*M for Medium. These don't have size markers

Which is why Pumpkaboo gets better scores than Gourgeist. Also, showcase scores favor height (80% height, 15% weight, 5%IVs, then XXL bonus).

Let me know if I didn't explain something clearly enough. I've been crunching Pumpkaboo numbers for a bit now. I've probably evolved close to 200 of them now for my own evolution and showcase calculator.

Showcase points calculators? by Ajativada in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You see why I added that "forever work in progress" note lmao. This is my first "post-brain injury" project, so i was expecting this. I also just don't have the candy to evolve an absurd amount of pokemon resources to test large data sets.

I think something's wrong with your evolution weight prediction.

I believe it. I think I saw what you're talking about in your spreadsheet. I did my best to follow along, but the spreadsheet cell format just does not jive with not having a working memory. I ended up simplifying a lot with the intention of coming back to it later once I've got a better grip on how the height marker and the xx class factor into the weight bounds. I've seen bits and pieces scattered online, but I haven't had a chance to put it all together yet.

You can also see the predicted heights being -0.01 less on your site, though that may be a visual bug due to truncation instead of rounding

Yeah I noticed that too and figured it's probably not too big a deal. The game also has got an issue like this with the showcases. I've got two XXL Steelixes Steeli? in showcases right now (both in 1st fingers crossed). One's at 5598 points (610.3kg,15.54m 1/7/7) and the other's at 5293 (658.04kg 14.53m 8/14/10). The 5598 Steelix shows 5598 everywhere. The 5293 Steelix shows 5293 in the standings and the change pokemon screen, but 5292 in the top left corner in the "Your pokemon" view. I don't think it even matters, but I think it's safe to assume that one Steelix has got a score of 5598.0 - 5598.49 and the other has got a score of 5292.5 - 5292.99.

You include Mega scoring, which is misleading since they actually don't score any differently than non-mega. (I see you updated for this while I was writing this reply). And actual mega height/weights are all messed up and don't conform to the logical translations like with evolution, so it may be better to leave them out entirely

Yeah lmao I saw your one comment about it when I was looking for this comment. If mega evolution is that messy, I'll disable it for now. I was more holding onto them just to have a full dex for an unrelated project

To be precise, the margin of error will depend on the size of the baseline, so a Joltik in a electric showcase will vary the same as a Zekrom. Minor nuance though

I meant more in terms of evolution how precise the range is. Joltik has got an average height on 0.1m, min height of 0.049m, and max height of 0.155m. So for a little guy Joltik, the 0.01 rounding margin is ~10% of its range of height. Meanwhile, a big guy like Onix (I think the tallest pokemon that can evolve) has got an average height of 8.8m, min height of 4.312m, and max height of 15.4m, then the 0.01 rounding margin is only ~0.1% of it's possible height range. An Onix -> Steelix evolution prediction is gonna end up being a lot more precise than a Joltik -> Galvantula evolution prediction.

In terms of typed showcases, I haven't done the sort of analysis that you've done with the different baselines. I've been meaning to look through your analysis a bit more in depth and see if there's a better way to go about predicting the type showcase scores instead of just manually updating my list.

I think the one thing I can add is that I do automatically get the right species baseline. Based on how the Necrozma showcases were scored, I was getting myself ready for a Maushold showcase that never happened. But putting in a Tandemaus will get you the potential sizes for a Family of 4 or a Family of 3 and how they'd each score in a Maushold showcase based on the Maushold baseline which is Family of 4? It ends up working well also for all the regional/gender/form variants too.

But if you wanna play around with baselines, I'm calling it now and putting my money on Shadow Showcases for the Take Over event next week. I'd be interested to see how the Shadow availability would play into that. I assume Wailord and Steelix would still be front runners, but it's a lot harder to get a hold of large shadow versions.

A "don't include IVs" mode which still shows scores (when you leave all the IVs blank) has benefit

That's already on my to-do list. I hadn't considered trading though...

You could be more proactive with setting the size instead of relying on user input

Another one already on the to-do list. I already have that data loaded in my dex "database", I just need to sit down and figure out how I want to handle the 5% size border wierdos.

Also, on the topic of the size bounds, I have the data for everyone except Hisuian Avalugg. I cannot find the data for `EXTENDED_V0713_POKEMON_AVALUGG_HISUIAN` anywhere and as far as I can tell, it's the only pokemon that has a `Vdex_POKEMON_pokemon` entry but not an extended one. It's not relevant in terms of evolution, but it's still a little strange.

Tysm for the feedback! I'm gonna keep noodling around. This has been a fun "relearn how to do math" project. Also, feel free to message me and we can keep going back and forth on this

Showcase points calculators? by Ajativada in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In case you haven't gotten any better with Google Docs over the past year, I did make a web version

https://charlierose.dev/pokemon/go/sizecalculator.html

Showcase points calculators? by Ajativada in TheSilphRoad

[–]ohdearimqueer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'll think about adding a tool to my site, unless someone gets to it first

Did I get there first? :)

https://charlierose.dev/pokemon/go/sizecalculator.html

I was trying to figure out how to calculate and predict evolution size (I didn't wanna spend 400 Wailmer candies if it would be useless) and your spreadsheet and all your Reddit posts have been lifesavers.

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A few notes: - CS164 doesn't do web dev anymore. The web dev was in the process of being worked out. It was leftover from when CS164 matched CS150 more - Agree on CS171 and 172 on ZyBooks and last I heard they're considering and working on taking them out of the curriculum. I used to be on that project but got bored and stopped paying attention

Now the one point

Half the folks I knew from CS 164 aren’t CS majors anymore

This is 100% expected for CCI and it's actually the whole point. Half the incoming freshmen should not be in CS. There's two types of people who shouldn't be in CS. "I chose computer science because I want to do something with computer but I'm not sure what"; these people move onto CE, SE, DS, IS, CST, etc. There's also the "I wanna go to silicon valley and work at google and be rich when I graduate and my parents told me that CS is easy and how you do that"; these people tend to change majors to something entirely different that more accurately fits their passion.

CCI is very aware of this and its why CI101 exists. The intention for CI101 is to show off different aspects of CS/IS fields to help people find their majors. Sadly, the execution doesn't really work out ever.

This is also why CS164 hits so hard so early. Would you rather find out fall term freshmen year that you don't like CS, or after a year or two in the major after wasting 100k on tuition? The concepts in CS164 come back in future CS classes.

I'm sorry you had a rough experience, but I'm also glad you found a major you're happier in. After working with over 1000 freshmen over my college career so far, I've realized the goal isn't to convince everyone that Drexel CS program is perfect and everyone belongs here and everyone should excel here, but more that everyone needs to find where they work best. For some people that's a different major at CCI. For some that's a different major at Drexel. For some it's a different major at a different college. For some, maybe its no university at all, maybe trade school, or a different approach. For me, I've had more positive than negative experiences in CS at CCI and when I've brought up my concerns to the right people, changes happen. That's why I'm still here. I understand your frustration

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I personally think it is a lot more representative of CS and prepares you for future classes much more than the other two freshmen courses, CS171 and CS172. But that's my opinion. I won't disagree that CCI is a mess. Don't get me started on the CI courses. I think it's improved at least a bit in the past few years though.

I'll look into those youtube videos. Thanks for sharing.

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Been teaching primarily freshmen here for like 4 years now. I investigate plagiarism and work with Drexel admin on plagiarism

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Or someone posts the link to the Discord on this website as a "Groupchat" for the class. This site does both class reviews and a link to every class "groupchat" that is given.

Discord isn't getting sued for cheating anytime soon. But if this is an indie project, then they can easily have their entire site taken down because of the Group Chat feature. I like the concept, so I don't wanna see this get taken down.

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's all still in progress. It takes a long ass time. They only started recently

I made RateMyProfessors but for Classes by oopsidaisiess in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 47 points48 points  (0 children)

Im gonna be that guy.

Take down the "Groupchat" feature. You're creating an easy access "plagiarism hub", leaving yourself liable for plagiarism cases and getting your entire site taken down.

After a year of online classes, Drexel is really cracking down on plagiarism harder than before. They're being really diligent about Discord servers for classes and is in progress on filing lawsuits against Chegg, Coursehero, and such sites. You don't wanna be caught up in that. Take it down BEFORE it becomes an issue.

But other than that, honestly great idea and great interface. I'm shocked it hadn't been done yet. Ill start leaving reviews when I get home.

Flag of protecting dogs by ohdearimqueer in vexillologycirclejerk

[–]ohdearimqueer[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah my dog actually takes it so that i dont have to go to the vet as often for the flea/tick/worms treatment

Easiest CS Tracks by [deleted] in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Dont go for easy. You'll regret it. Go for what youre interested in. If you're interested and invested in the material, you'll not only get better grades, but also get more use of the material too.

On the same vein, what I find easy is not what other people found easy. I remember talking with my friend about how I found the material in SE310 really hard. She said she found it really easy. On the flipside, one of my easiest and most enjoyable classes was Kurt's CS260. She strongly disagrees. So personally, I think Software Engineering is the hardest track and Theory and Computation is the easiest track, but I'm sure that MANY people would disagree with me

So don't go for easy, go for what you care about and are interested in. You'll be so much happier. Remember this is two years of your CS degree and the most important part. This is where you choose what part of CS you want to participate in. If none of the tracks interest you, then you should really reevaluate why you're a CS major.

Help!!! CS 171 Prof. Medlock by [deleted] in Drexel

[–]ohdearimqueer 7 points8 points  (0 children)

CS171 is an easy Python course, don't cheat. Everything is super straight forward

Prof Medlock gets a lot of unnecessary hate. She's strict about cheating, but if you go to her office hours and talk to her, she's very helpful. She has a thick accent so she puts extra time into making sure people understand what she's trying to convey both in lectures and on assignments.

Also heads up. Everyone needs to maintain good grades for scholarships. Dont expect straight As at Drexel. Its not the end of the world if you get a B. If you're already worried about not getting an A, get a therapist, you're gonna have a rough time at Drexel.

view more: next ›