Percentage reduction at breakpoints
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm struggling to wrap my head around this problem I'm trying to solve.
n is a non-negative int, where
nmax is the upper limit of n, and
ncurrent ,
is the current value of n.
Condition:
If ncurrent is brought below 35% of nmax, then any all reductions in ncurrent will be decreased by 65% of the original reduction amount.
As such, if ncurrent is reduced by nmax + 1, then ncurrent remains greater than zero.
For nmax = 100, the initial reduction from 100 to 35 will be 1-to-1, while the remaining portion will be 1-to-0.65.
How can I express the "functional" value of nmax and ncurrent, as the expression of the real value of how much ncurrent can be reduced by, before hitting 0?
Does my question make sense?
Thanks!
calculus
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm struggling to wrap my head around this problem I'm trying to solve.
n is a non-negative int, where
nmax is the upper limit of n, and
ncurrent ,
is the current value of n.
Condition:
If ncurrent is brought below 35% of nmax, then any all reductions in ncurrent will be decreased by 65% of the original reduction amount.
As such, if ncurrent is reduced by nmax + 1, then ncurrent remains greater than zero.
For nmax = 100, the initial reduction from 100 to 35 will be 1-to-1, while the remaining portion will be 1-to-0.65.
How can I express the "functional" value of nmax and ncurrent, as the expression of the real value of how much ncurrent can be reduced by, before hitting 0?
Does my question make sense?
Thanks!
calculus
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm struggling to wrap my head around this problem I'm trying to solve.
n is a non-negative int, where
nmax is the upper limit of n, and
ncurrent ,
is the current value of n.
Condition:
If ncurrent is brought below 35% of nmax, then any all reductions in ncurrent will be decreased by 65% of the original reduction amount.
As such, if ncurrent is reduced by nmax + 1, then ncurrent remains greater than zero.
For nmax = 100, the initial reduction from 100 to 35 will be 1-to-1, while the remaining portion will be 1-to-0.65.
How can I express the "functional" value of nmax and ncurrent, as the expression of the real value of how much ncurrent can be reduced by, before hitting 0?
Does my question make sense?
Thanks!
calculus
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
I'm struggling to wrap my head around this problem I'm trying to solve.
n is a non-negative int, where
nmax is the upper limit of n, and
ncurrent ,
is the current value of n.
Condition:
If ncurrent is brought below 35% of nmax, then any all reductions in ncurrent will be decreased by 65% of the original reduction amount.
As such, if ncurrent is reduced by nmax + 1, then ncurrent remains greater than zero.
For nmax = 100, the initial reduction from 100 to 35 will be 1-to-1, while the remaining portion will be 1-to-0.65.
How can I express the "functional" value of nmax and ncurrent, as the expression of the real value of how much ncurrent can be reduced by, before hitting 0?
Does my question make sense?
Thanks!
calculus
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
edited Aug 26 at 13:48
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
asked Aug 26 at 10:20
Overload
11
11
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57
add a comment |Â
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2894890%2fpercentage-reduction-at-breakpoints%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Perhaps you should clarify what are $n_current$ and $n_max$. One seems like a function of time but can it take only non negative integer values?
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 12:17
@Keen-ameteur thanks for reading :) n is a number, where n_max is its upper limit, and n_current is its current value. It can be any non-negative integer. I'm trying to figure out what the function should be, that allows the behaviour I outlined under the condition, where making n_current less than 35% of n_max diminishes the value subtraction :)
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:00
Do you want to say that $n$ is a function from $[0,infty)$ to $ 0,1,2,3..... $, Or is $n$ a sequence of numbers? Your notations are confusing to me, and it would perhaps be beneficial to write the value of $n$ at $t$ as $n(t)$. Furthermore I assume that you want to say that $n_maxgeq n(t)$ for all $t$, which is called an upper bound and not an upper limit necessarily.
– Keen-ameteur
Aug 26 at 14:25
I'm not big on math, so it's hard to express with the proper terms :D f(i)=n. n is the output of a function. Where the output is a positive int. n_max is the upper bound of that function's return value.
– Overload
Aug 26 at 14:57