[Solved] Looking for a function for factor based number series thingy, whatever its called.

[zorg]

5/2*(n²+n)
gives for n=1:
5/2*(1²+1)=5/2*(1+1)=5/2*2=5
for n=2
5/2*(2²+2)=5/2*(4+2)=5/2*6=15
for n=3
5/2*(3²+3)=5/2*(9+3)=5/2*12=30
for n=4
5/2*(4²+4)=5/2*(16+4)=5/2*20=50
so you calculated wrong
and i did not want make an solution before i clear the problem about your question. You asked for an exponential increase but you example series has square increase.

But that's your equation, he didn't have one; he was giving you an example, and the series of numbers was, i believe, picked to approximate a curve he wanted to achieve. A bit unfair, calling him out on calculating anything wrong...

Then all solutions showed here only make square, cubic or polynomial like increase. So there is no solution with has exponential increase. That would be the case if you have something like factor^n and not n^factor.

Given that my pseudo-code was "slope-agnostic" in the sense that you could damn well put any function in there, be it logarithmic, exponential, polynomial or trigonometric (or anythin else, really); i find this assessment false.

[MasterLee]

But that's your equation, he didn't have one; he was giving you an example, and the series of numbers was, i believe, picked to approximate a curve he wanted to achieve. A bit unfair, calling him out on calculating anything wrong...

Nope he believed that
5/2*(n²+n)
will result in a curve like
5,10,15,20
and that is obviously wrong. Also i put the formula only there because he said he wanted exponential while example was polynomial.

Then all solutions showed here only make square, cubic or polynomial like increase. So there is no solution with has exponential increase. That would be the case if you have something like factor^n and not n^factor.

Given that my pseudo-code was "slope-agnostic" in the sense that you could damn well put any function in there, be it logarithmic, exponential, polynomial or trigonometric (or anythin else, really); i find this assessment false.

Except that there is an formula named expSquare. Which maybe named wrong. But the problem here is that when meaning polynomial growth i should say square polynomial and not exponential growth. As in opening post was done. For example in an RPG polynomial cost growth per attribute is OK while exponential growth can lead to an situation where it makes no sense to raise any attribute more than other.

[zorg]

Nope he believed that
5/2*(n²+n)
will result in a curve like
5,10,15,20
and that is obviously wrong. Also i put the formula only there because he said he wanted exponential while example was polynomial.

Again, nowhere in the initial post did he mention any explicit formula or equation, that was you assuming that the number series evaluated to that (because it did, but that's completely irrelevant, since that wasn't the original question, only a shitty example that no one should get hung up on this much).

I do agree that initially, it'd be hard to guess what kind of slope he really wanted, but that's moot now since a solution has been found which he accepted. Be it exponential or polynomial (or anything else, really).

Then all solutions showed here only make square, cubic or polynomial like increase. So there is no solution with has exponential increase. That would be the case if you have something like factor^n and not n^factor.

Given that my pseudo-code was "slope-agnostic" in the sense that you could damn well put any function in there, be it logarithmic, exponential, polynomial or trigonometric (or anythin else, really); i find this assessment false.

Except that there is an formula named expSquare. Which maybe named wrong. But the problem here is that when meaning polynomial growth i should say square polynomial and not exponential growth. As in opening post was done. For example in an RPG polynomial cost growth per attribute is OK while exponential growth can lead to an situation where it makes no sense to raise any attribute more than other.

He did state that he didn't know correct terminology, and calling any of the inputs "exponent" was probably wrong as well. Also, you can't really say that using an exponential function is "wrong", even if *most* RPG games use polynomial curves instead.

I'm willing to write all this off to a language barrier though, the end is a happy one, so there's no reason for debating further.

[BorhilIan]

MasterLee is a bit rude, still though thanks for correcting my terminology.