Feedback & Support

Is there a way to change rankings to something that eliminates port size from the equation? Panachevitz Apr 14, 13:04

Well stated. I had mentioned this when leagues were first made possible, but, it does hold for general comparisons. edzep Apr 14, 16:57

I will sugest a table ranking concept but if you care for an easy purely math solution what you need is expresion like this Guillo Apr 15, 04:14

quick solution didn/t bother to test values . Guillo Apr 15, 04:42

quick solution didn/t bother to test values . Guillo Apr 15, 04:42

A = 1/log(X, 10) * C abs(Y) (1+Z) or A = 1/log(X, 10) * C Y (1+abs(Z)) Guillo Apr 15, 05:20

A = 1/log(X, 10) * C abs(Y) (1+Z) or A = 1/log(X, 10) * C Y (1+abs(Z)) Guillo Apr 15, 05:20

A = 1/log(X, 10) * C Y (1+abs(Z)) will work better. {nm} Guillo Apr 15, 09:03

I'm going to take your word on it. If I tried math I could probably crash the virtual HSX economy. LOL! {nm} Panachevitz Apr 16, 19:18

Look inside... {nm} Guillo Apr 17, 05:52

once more. Guillo Apr 17, 06:10

I was thinking something a lot simpler. For instance, let's say on my H$1.25 billion port... Panachevitz Apr 17, 19:56

I see. However.... Guillo Apr 17, 20:39

The other problem is that large ports can not be fully invested. Market limitations force edzep Apr 18, 06:55

True...but that is compensate (offset) by the fact that they earn interest (crap interest but interest) in their cash part. Guillo Apr 18, 08:35

Interest doesn't even come close to an offset for sidelined money. edzep Apr 18, 13:31

Then again, that number is really small expecially considering the 100K increase in holding movies, like maybe less than a hundred ports . {nm} Panachevitz Apr 18, 10:27