The Wiki for Tale 7 is in read-only mode and is available for archival and reference purposes only. Please visit the current Tale 11 Wiki in the meantime.
If you have any issues with this Wiki, please post in #wiki-editing on Discord or contact Brad in-game.
Difference between revisions of "User:Roi"
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
|} | |} | ||
<googlespreadsheet height="700" style="width: 110%">14CDn8qm5rTvJgKmDwX4TTJQkodI546uPm5t64Q6f1J4</googlespreadsheet> | <googlespreadsheet height="700" style="width: 110%">14CDn8qm5rTvJgKmDwX4TTJQkodI546uPm5t64Q6f1J4</googlespreadsheet> | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Stat Calculator == | ||
| + | <iframe src="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_7IuoZKhAlqYIr9eQsACjd3N0FfHHcKXahgWTczLS4k/pubhtml?widget=true&headers=false"></iframe> | ||
== Cooking in More Detail == | == Cooking in More Detail == | ||
Revision as of 17:51, 25 May 2016
Quick Links
Ariella and Pascalito Cooking Tutorial
LuluDivine's Cooking Stats Guide
Roi's Stats - Additions to Lulu's Page
Welcome to my Cooking page.
I live in 7 Lakes, just south of the Chariot Stop at 1410, -1163. I have 21 kitchens, one of which is reserved for sink food. Most of my time in game involves those kitchens, whether it is preparing MP's, testing pairs or trying to maximize potential recipes. It is what I enjoy doing. If you want some gastro points, need ideas for recipe creation or simply want to talk cooking, open a chat with me.
All of my testing and recipe creation is included in the spreadsheet window below. If you find any discrepancies, please let me know.
I have created a modified version of Odis' T7 cooking grid. It includes stats for many of the ingredients. It is on my website at Cooking Grid with Stats
The grid can be moved around by clicking and dragging or using keyboard arrow keys. You can control zooming with mouse wheel. If you grab a point and move it, don't panic, just refresh. :)
After each ingredient, a 7 character addition is in place to show stats. G = Good or positive stat. B = Bad or negative stat. x = no stat. This makes it much easier to find pairs with the appropriate stat for the recipe that you are creating. My stats page is at Roi's Stats. These are from LuluDivine's original hard work with my additions.
I'm going to go into more detail as I develop the page, but keep in mind that just because an ingredient has a good stat, does not mean that you are going to get that stat when you combine it with another ingredient.
What Can You Find in These Sheets?
Throughout the sheets, the MP's (Masterpieces) have been grayed. On the Cooking 5 Sheet, there is a tally on the right side showing current total mp's that I have created.
The first sheet, Pairs Sorted by Base, includes all pair testing. These pairs are sorted by the ingredient used as the base of the pair. How each pair of ingredients reacts with each other determines how good or bad our recipes are going to be.
The 2nd sheet is identical to the first, but has been sorted by the Additive. There are many pairs where I have tested using both ingredients as base and additive. There are many possible results that can occur when cooking a pair of ingredients. There are, potentially, many unknown factors influencing these results.
Added sheet 3. This sheet shows each base/additive pair together with each as the base. Will this help someone see what interactions are determining the stat outcome?
Added sheet 4. This sheet shows cooking 1 recipes, using 2db of the base with 5 different additives. Some might be at 3db base with 4 additives or 4db base with 3 additives.
Since there is no sorting function, sheets 5-11 are for each sorted stat.
The 12th sheet is any Cooking 2, 3 and 4 recipes that I have prepared. Most of these were early tale preparations and not very useful. However, as potency/duration has increased to the point of creating MP's from single pairs, there will be MP's here and other useful recipes.
The 13th sheet is the reason that the sheet window expands beyond the page width. It would not display correctly without the 10% additional width :) This page is not for recipes - it's sole purpose is to display MP attempts (failed and successful). For those who want to try their own MP creation, it will give you the basic idea of how to go about it.
The 14th sheet is the contents of my herb warehouse. I don't ask for donations for serving MP's, but if you see something that I might be short on and want to donate, I won't say no. :)
The last sheet, Recipes, is a list of my current useful recipes.
Other than the very early listings, most everything is dated. Why is this important? Potency and duration are constantly improving - the older the listing, the more likely that it has changed. A recent example: On the Special Food sheet, there is a +30 speed recipe, created on 12/28/15. Recreated that food on 1/5/16 and it is +32 speed (and -22 str - it works both ways...)
Unfortunately, Google Docs does not allow for published spreadsheets to display their locked or frozen headings. The following table allows you to see the stat headings as you scroll through the pairs.
| ............................................................................................................ | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER |
|---|
<googlespreadsheet height="700" style="width: 110%">14CDn8qm5rTvJgKmDwX4TTJQkodI546uPm5t64Q6f1J4</googlespreadsheet>
Stat Calculator
<iframe src="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_7IuoZKhAlqYIr9eQsACjd3N0FfHHcKXahgWTczLS4k/pubhtml?widget=true&headers=false"></iframe>
Cooking in More Detail
I'm not going to go into the basics of cooking. A very good guide for beginning chefs is Ariella and Pascalito Cooking Tutorial. That guide will get you started.
One of the things that I notice when peeking into kitchens throughout Egypt, is that many meals are prepared at a 6:1 ratio, regardless of the number of servings created. So I see recipes that are 18:3, 30:5, 60:10 or other combinations trying to maintain that 6:1 ratio. It is not necessary and quite often a waste of valuable rare herbs. The duration is what changes as you increase the number of servings.
Here are the results of a recent test using royal jelly and myrrh:
| Base | Additive | Ratio | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 6:1 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 35m 57s |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 30:5 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 35m 57s |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 19:2 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 28m 53s |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 15:1 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 24m 1s |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 30:1 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 19m 31s |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 100:1 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 | 16m 12s |
Notice that the stats do not change. While the duration decreases with more servings, the effect of the individual pair duration is lessened on the overall duration of the recipe as you increase the cooking level.
If you are creating a recipe where you don't need all the servings that a 6:1 ratio will produce, such as 5 servings with cooking 5, decrease the base amount.
At Cooking 5:
- 2:1 = 2 servings
- 3:1 = still 2 servings but 1 additional additive to one of the pairs will give 3 servings.
- 4:1 = 3 servings
- 5:1 = 4 servings
2:1 also has the additional advantage of the longest duration in meals where there is only 1 of each additive.
You will see a 4:3 ratio used quite a bit in my pairs and recipes. There are 2 reasons for this ratio. First, it is the typical best duration - longer duration can be had for better ratios such as 11:10 but diminishing returns for higher servings. Second, it's just a matter of quantity on hand - if using rarer herbs as base and additive it might be advantageous to go to 4:3 or 5:2 instead of 6:1.
Does the duration of a 6:1 ratio recipe really differ from a 4:3 ratio of the same recipe? A cooking 5 test using the same ingredients, one at 6:1 and the other at 4:3 was completed on 2/5/16, with the 4:3 giving a duration of 2h 50m (and an mp) and the 6:1 had a duration of 1h 47m. As these are the exact same stats, 1 hour could be a huge difference, depending on the purpose of the food.
While on the subject of ratio, here is a result that is quite perplexing. This is a cooking 5 recipe at 4:3. However, I had lower quantities of 2 herbs and decided to use 4:1 on those two pairs.
| Base | Additive | Ratio | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Camel Milk | Drapeau D'or | 4:1 | 0 | 7 | -7 | 7 | 0 | 3 | -7 |
| Common Basil | Trilobe | 4:3 | 9 | 0 | -8 | 9 | -9 | 0 | -4 |
| Harebell | Lythrum | 4:3 | 0 | 0 | -8 | 11 | -7 | -7 | -4 |
| Leeks | Bay Tree | 4:1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | -10 | -7 | 8 |
| Royal Jelly | Myrrh | 4:3 | 0 | 9 | -8 | 8 | 0 | -1 | -8 |
Here are the results for this recipe compared to the expected results, which test correctly:
| Recipe | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This recipe using 4:1 on 2 pairs | 4 | 7 | -7 | 15 | -13 | -10 | 7 |
| This recipe with equal additives (2:1, 6:1, 4:3 etc) | 9 | 11 | -17 | 21 | -15 | -10 | -9 |
The 2 most noticeable issues here are the strength and perception. I will discuss how the expected results are computed after this, but just understand that if a recipe has 5 pairs and one stat is zero in four of the pairs, the ending result will be the stat in the 5th pair. In this case the +9 str of Common Basil/Trilobe should be the ending result. Not 4 str.
In the perception column, the +8 and -8 will give 0 as a result, leaving three negative perception pairs and giving a +7 per as a result! Just doesn't make sense.
It appears that different additive amounts affect recipes adversely by having a reaction with other additives OR there is a problem in the computation. Either way, be cautious with using different quantities of additives in your recipes. Then again, getting +7 perception from four negative pairs may not be such a bad thing...
The following chart uses the same base recipe, but changing the quantity of the additives:
| Base(s) | Additive(s) | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 3 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 3 Dusty Blue Sage, 3 Sweetsop, 3 Digweed, 3 Sandy Dustweed |
15 | 15 | -15 | -15 | 16 | -16 | -11 | 2Hr 16min 13secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 2 Digweed, 2 Sandy Dustweed |
11 | 13 | -15 | -11 | 10 | -12 | -8 | 1Hr 52min 48secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 3 Digweed, 3 Sandy Dustweed |
11 | 13 | -15 | -11 | 10 | -12 | -8 | 2Hr 1min 32secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 2 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 2 Dusty Blue Sage, 2 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 1 Sandy Dustweed |
13 | 10 | -13 | -15 | 14 | -7 | -6 | 1Hr 53min 53secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 2 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 2 Sweetsop, 2 Digweed, 2 Sandy Dustweed |
11 | 7 | -9 | -11 | 7 | -2 | -8 | 2Hr 7secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 2 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 2 Dusty Blue Sage, 2 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 2 Sandy Dustweed |
13 | 7 | -13 | -15 | 13 | -7 | 1 | 1Hr 58min 48secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 2 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 1 Sandy Dustweed |
15 | 12 | -12 | -16 | 16 | -13 | -11 | 1Hr 47min 1s |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 2 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 1 Sandy Dustweed |
13 | 15 | -17 | -16 | 16 | -13 | -6 | 1Hr 40min 36ssecs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 2 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 1 Sandy Dustweed |
15 | 13 | -13 | -15 | 14 | -14 | -11 | 1Hr 47min 18secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 2 Digweed, 1 Sandy Dustweed |
11 | 15 | -15 | -11 | 12 | -12 | -11 | 1Hr 47min 18secs |
| 4 Fish Oil, 4 Phagrus, 4 Grilled Onions, 4 Mindanao, 4 Morpha | 1 Crumpled Leaf Basil, 1 Dusty Blue Sage, 1 Sweetsop, 1 Digweed, 2 Sandy Dustweed |
15 | 13 | -15 | -16 | 15 | -16 | -8 | 1Hr 48min 37secs |
The first line is the base recipe at 4:3. The stats are the expected stats for this recipe, whether 4:3 or 6:1. All of the rest of these lines should have the same stats, but they don't.
The next 2 lines are to confirm that changing the highest quantity additive doesn't change the stats --- 4:1,1,1,2,2 is the same result as 4:1,1,1,3,3.
The next 3 lines are using different additives in quantities of 1 or 2.
The last 5 lines each take a different additive at a quantity of 2 and the other 4 additives at a quantity of 1.
I don't have an answer, do you?
Here are the base stats of the pairs:
| Base | Additive | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fish Oil | Crumpled Leaf Basil | 4 | 8 | -8 | 0 | 0 | -9 | -3 |
| Phagrus | Dusty Blue Sage | 10 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | -10 | -8 |
| Grilled Onions | Sweetsop | 0 | 8 | -8 | 0 | 5 | -5 | -5 |
| Mindanao | Digweed | 10 | 0 | -9 | -14 | 14 | -5 | 0 |
| Morpha | Sandy Dustweed | 0 | 10 | -7 | -7 | 7 | 0 | 1 |
I ran one test with the additives paired together. The results "almost" supports the idea that the additives are bonding. Not enough herbs to test further.
Using the line above with 2 Crumpled Leaf Basil and 1 of each of the other additives, I did individual pairings at 6:1 with Crumpled Leaf Basil as the base.
6 of the stats are ok with the assumption that the additives are pairing and reflecting a proper change in the total stats. But, there is still a mystery because of the positive dex that resulted from these pairings. With +2 and +4 dex, the original stats should have increased by (about) +4. Instead it decreased by 3 (From 15 to 12).
| Base | Additive | STR | DEX | END | SPD | CON | FOC | PER | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crumpled Leaf Basil | Dusty Blue Sage | 0 | 2 | -1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 16m 20s |
| Crumpled Leaf Basil | Digweed | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16m 49s |
| Crumpled Leaf Basil | Sandy Dustweed | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 24m 30s |
| Crumpled Leaf Basil | Sweetsop | 0 | 4 | -4 | 0 | 0 | -4 | 0 | 23m 37s |
OK, so how do we estimate what the stats should be for a given recipe?
LuluDivine has an explanation on her page. Hopefully, the following will help those who may be mathematically challenged.
The basics are: take the square of the stat for each pair, add all the squares of that stat together and take the square root of the total to get the approximate final stat.
Using the recipe above for strength: 0 squared = 0, 9 squared = 81; 81+0+0+0+0=81; the square root of 81 is 9. Meal should be +9 str. Each stat is handled the same way and the result will be approximate due to rounding.
From the recipe above for speed, the 5 speed stats are: +7, +9, +11, +10 and +8.
From the Stat Squared column:+7 = 49, +9 = 81, +11 = 121, +10 = 100 and +8 = 64
The total is 49+81+121+100+64 or 415 ---- Now look at the Total column - 415 is between 400 and 441, so the expected stat from the last column is about 20 or 21. After preparing the meal the actual stat is 21.
| Stat | Stat Squared | ............................................. | Total | Square Root |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 9 | 1225 | 35 | |
| 4 | 16 | 1156 | 34 | |
| 5 | 25 | 1089 | 33 | |
| 6 | 36 | 1024 | 32 | |
| 7 | 49 | 961 | 31 | |
| 8 | 64 | 900 | 30 | |
| 9 | 81 | 841 | 29 | |
| 10 | 100 | 784 | 28 | |
| 11 | 121 | 729 | 27 | |
| 12 | 144 | 676 | 26 | |
| 13 | 169 | 625 | 25 | |
| 14 | 196 | 576 | 24 | |
| 15 | 225 | 529 | 23 | |
| 16 | 256 | 484 | 22 | |
| 17 | 289 | 441 | 21 | |
| 18 | 324 | 400 | 20 | |
| 19 | 361 | 361 | 19 | |
| 20 | 400 | 324 | 18 | |
| 21 | 441 | 289 | 17 | |
| 22 | 484 | 256 | 16 | |
| 23 | 529 | 225 | 15 | |
| 24 | 576 | 196 | 14 | |
| 25 | 625 | 169 | 13 | |
| 26 | 676 | 144 | 12 | |
| 27 | 729 | 121 | 11 | |
| 28 | 784 | 100 | 10 | |
| 29 | 841 | 81 | 9 | |
| 30 | 900 | 64 | 8 |
If you have a target stat that you want to achieve, say a +20 stat. Look in the last column for your desired stat. The total column for +20 is 400. Divide the total figure by the cooking level that you are using.
For cooking 5 that would be 400/5 or 80. In the stat squared column find the number closest to 80 and look at the first column value, in this case it is 81 with 9 in the first column. This means that to get a +20 stat, each one of the pairs should be 9 or average 9 for the 5 pairs. So, +8, +11, +9, +8, +10 would work.
For cooking 4, you follow the same procedure for a +20 stat. the total column is still 400. Now divide 400 by 4, giving you 100. the first column stat next to 100 is 10. Find 4 pairs that each have at least +10 for your stat or that have an average of 10. So, +11, +9, +10, +10 would work for an about +20 final result.
Something to be aware of when dealing with negative stats. It works the same as positive stats. Let's say you are trying to get a high dex food and want to have some str but not important how much just as long as it is not negative. All of your pairs have 0 str, except for 2 of them - One with +10 and the other with -11 or -12. Small difference so it looks safe. That -11 is going to give you a total of -121 (not real math but this is the way it works...). The difference between -121 and +100 is -21, which is going to be -4 or -5 for your stat. If you have 6 natural strength you will still be positive str. However, if you have 3 natural strength, you just got the negative str that you were trying to avoid. If the stat is -12, the food could be as much as -7 strength. That small difference in the pair stats could have a bigger than expected impact on your final result.
What can be expected from combining a pair of ingredients?
Do we know what determines the results of cooking a pair of ingredients? NO! So, what do we do? Test every possible pair of cooking Ingredients using ingredient A as a base and Ingredient B as an additive. Then switching them, using Ingredient B as the base and Ingredient A as the additive. Until we find out the "secret sauce", that is the only option.
Here are some of the possible results, using Ingredients A1-A6 with Ingredients B1-B6.
| Base | Additive | Stats | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | B1 | Combination of Stats | Big Duration |
| B1 | A1 | B Stats Only | Half the Duration |
| A2 | B2 | A Stats Only | Slight Increase in Duration |
| B2 | A2 | B Stats Only | Slight Decrease in Duration |
| A3 | B3 | A Stats Only | Big Duration |
| B3 | A3 | Combination of Stats | Half the Duration |
| A4 | B4 | Combination of Stats | Same Duration |
| B4 | A4 | Combination of Stats | Same Duration |
| A5 | B5 | A Stats Only | Slight Increase in Duration |
| B5 | A5 | B Stats/Slight Leak through of A Stats | Slight Decrease in Duration |
| A6 | B6 | A Stats Only | Slight Increase in Duration |
| B6 | A6 | Combination of Stats | Slight Decrease in Duration |
"Slight Leak through of A Stats" has only been a +1 and/or -1 for the stat(s) appearing in the completed test.
Thus far, I have not found any pairs that have changed their original interactions other than the constant potency change with the accompanying stat/duration change.
Basically, any possible stat/duration combination could happen for any given pair depending on which ingredient is used as base.
Bottom Line? Test all pairs with each used as base.
If, in looking through my pair tests or your own pair tests, you find a pattern or common denominator, I would love to know about it.
