I'm not quite sure when you mean with this, since I lack some mathematical knowledge, but it seems that 14 vs 12 indeed is a smaller difference than 4 vs 2.
Yes, it seems. I was half-way wrong with it. You might better understand the logarithmic thing as decremental performance. An example, suppose you are studying for a test, everybody starts with qualification 1 and the max is 10, if you study 1 hour you get a 4 (this means 1 hour equals an increment of 4-1(minimun)=3), if you study two hours you get a 6 (2 hours equals an increment of 6-1(minimun)=5). But, while the first hour gives you an increment of 3 in your qualification, the second hour only gives you 2 (6-4(qualification with 1 hour of study)=2). That is a decremental performance.
In my general idea I had an understanding of decremental performance
in the difference of skills. When It seems that
skill levels itself have decremental performance and not their difference as I thought.
So, yes. It seems that 15 vs 14 is a smaller difference in performance than 5 vs 4. I was wrong when stated the opposite. But when looking in my idea, I was pointing the right direction when thinking that somehow skills (or his difference) needed to have decremental performance.
But this is about to bring another issue. If in the simulation the increase in performance from 18 to 19 is not as high as from 10 to 11 and you start to consider the cost in salary of 19-18 compared to 11-10, you realize you are paying much more money for less performance.
This is something I will start to consider when planning training and searching the market.
Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 9/25/2009 8:25:24 PM