Shipyard pricing observation (cunningFee)

[Capt. Murphy]

Not a bug, but a very minor cosmetic inconsistency.

I've noted that the purchase price of a new ship is subject to cunningFee rounding so that it tends to end up being a multiple of 10, 100, 1000 credits etc. The trade in value (apart from the missing subEnts modifier) isn't. Just seems a bit odd that the trade in value is calculated to the credit, whilst purchase price isn't. Would it be worth applying cunningFee rounding to the trade in value at the last stage of it's calculation?

[Eric Walch]

Not a bug, but a very minor cosmetic inconsistency.

Would it be worth applying cunningFee rounding to the trade in value at the last stage of it's calculation?

Maybe an other rounding, but not cunningFee. I just tested it: In the old situation my tradeInValue was 416 945.0 ₢. With cunningFee it becomes 400 000.0 ₢. Rounding is a bit to harsh as new ships sometimes have 3 significant digits. cunningFee only uses one or two significant numbers.

cunningFee already starts skipping the remainder when the remainder is less than 5% of the total. 5% of 400 000.0 ₢. is 20 000.0 ₢. The remainder is less, so it is skipped. For ships I would think 0.5 % would be more appropriate but that would need a new rounding formula.

EDIT: Creating a new cunningFee formula with a rounding at 0.5% returns me 417 000.0 ₢ for the ship. Sounds as a better rounding for ships.

although in real live, sounds an estimated refund value for second hand stuff within 5% as more reasonable than within 0.5%.

EDIT2: In the end, I did not create a new cunningFee, but added a precision parameter to it. The formula is now even more cunning.
I'll wait a bit for the general opinions about rounding ship return value before adding it.