I noticed that the B/F/W combinations tended to be consistent when given to the same child multiple times, so looked at these first.
Assuming that noise is a summed contribution from both toys, then it looks like B usually contributes 6, with some discrepancies consistent with it sometimes contributing 12 instead.
F meanwhile always contributes 4, 8 or 16.
amd W contributes 5(only if F is 8 or 16), 9 (only if F is 4 or 8), 10 (only if F is 8), or 18 (seen with F=4).
Note: it is always possible to make such an attribution with 3 variables, regardless if it really is a sum, but it seems to have worked out in view of subsequent results.
Next, I looked at T, combinations with which seem to be inconsistent but not so as to suggest an age relationship. It looks like T is for some whos 5 or 10 (inconsistently) and for other 10 or 20 (inconsistently).
G and S vary usually from about 5-11 (Note—I wrote this before finding the numbers for the latest Whos!), with G dropping by 1 every 2nd year, and S rising by one every second year for any particular Who.
Comparing to actual recent results we can fill in expectations for how much noise our current Whos will make next year with different toys:
Who | B | F | G | S | T | W
1550 Andy Sue | 6 | 4 | 5 | 1822 | 5 or 10 | 9
1551 Betty Drew | 6 | 16 | 11 | 10 |5 or 10 | 5
1552 Sally Sue | 6 | 16 | 6 | 10 | ? 5 or 10 | 5
1553 Phoebe Drew | 6 | 8 | 7 | 18 | ?5 or 10 | 5
1554 Freddie Lou | ?6 | 4 | 7 | 17 | 5 or 10 | 9
1555 Eddie Sue | 6 | 4 | 7 | 9 | ? | ?9 or 18
1556 Cindy Drew | 6 | 8 | 8 | 8 | ?5 or 10 | 10
1557 Mary Lou | ?6 | 8 | 1916 | 8 | 5 or 10 | ?5
1558 Ollie Lou | ? | 8 | 8 or 9 | 7 | ? | 9
1559 Johnny Drew | 12 | 4 | ? | 7 | ?5 or 10 | 9
And whoops, looks like something’s wrong since Andy Sue had a huge jump in noise from toy combos including Sloo-Slonkers between the ages of 3 and 4, looking like he enjoys S to the tune of 14 noise at age 4 and 16 at 7. Something’s also up with Phoebe Drew. But, I continued to project forwards in both cases to 18 at the current year anyway as if nothing is wrong.
Also something wrong with Mary Lou and Gah-Ginkas, again I press forward assuming it’s all OK.
While we have seen combos with Sally Sue, Phoebe Drew, Eddie Sue, Cindy Drew, Ollie Lou and johnny Drew involving Trum-Troopas, they’ve all had a 10 contribution from T, so we don’t know if they get 5⁄10 or 10⁄20 from them.
Now for the solutions:
we have 4B, 4F, 2G, 3S, 3T and 4W to distribute.
In order to try to maximize noise, I’ll distribute as follows:
1550 Andy Sue S + W
1551 Betty Drew F + G
1552 Sally Sue F + T
1553 Phoebe Drew F + S + T
1554 Freddie Lou B + S
1555 Eddie Sue F + T + W
1556 Cindy Drew F+ W
1557 Mary Lou B+ G
1558 Ollie Lou B+ W T
1559 Johnny Drew B+ W
In order to try to minimize noise, I’ll distribute as follows:
1550 Andy Sue F + GT
1551 Betty Drew B + W
1552 Sally Sue B + W
1553 Phoebe Drew B + W
1554 Freddie Lou F + T
1555 Eddie Sue F + G
1556 Cindy Drew B + S
1557 Mary Lou T + W
1558 Ollie Lou G + S + T
1559 Johnny Drew F + S
edit: in view of abstractapplic’s observations, we can fill in some of the ?’s in the chart, added in above. The information that a doubling is involved with the anomalies also changes how we project forward the high Gs or Ss. This also led me to reinterpret some results above, also I noticed I had accidentally projected upwards instead of down for G for Mary Lou. Whoops. Since we don’t know what Ollie Lou has doubled, I’ve now avoided giving him T when minimizing noise, even at the expense of a less optimal G allocation. Also fishing for more upside when maximizing noise.
My current analysis and results:
I noticed that the B/F/W combinations tended to be consistent when given to the same child multiple times, so looked at these first.
Assuming that noise is a summed contribution from both toys, then it looks like B usually contributes 6, with some discrepancies consistent with it sometimes contributing 12 instead.
F meanwhile always contributes 4, 8 or 16.
amd W contributes 5(only if F is 8 or 16), 9 (only if F is 4 or 8), 10 (only if F is 8), or 18 (seen with F=4).
Note: it is always possible to make such an attribution with 3 variables, regardless if it really is a sum, but it seems to have worked out in view of subsequent results.
Next, I looked at T, combinations with which seem to be inconsistent but not so as to suggest an age relationship. It looks like T is for some whos 5 or 10 (inconsistently) and for other 10 or 20 (inconsistently).
G and S vary usually from about 5-11 (Note—I wrote this before finding the numbers for the latest Whos!), with G dropping by 1 every 2nd year, and S rising by one every second year for any particular Who.
Comparing to actual recent results we can fill in expectations for how much noise our current Whos will make next year with different toys:
Who | B | F | G | S | T | W
1550 Andy Sue | 6 | 4 | 5 |
1822 | 5 or 10 | 91551 Betty Drew | 6 | 16 | 11 | 10 |5 or 10 | 5
1552 Sally Sue | 6 | 16 | 6 | 10 |
?5 or 10 | 51553 Phoebe Drew | 6 | 8 | 7 | 18 |
?5 or 10 | 51554 Freddie Lou |
?6 | 4 | 7 | 17 | 5 or 10 | 91555 Eddie Sue | 6 | 4 | 7 | 9 | ? |
?9 or 181556 Cindy Drew | 6 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
?5 or 10 | 101557 Mary Lou |
?6 | 8 |1916 | 8 | 5 or 10 |?51558 Ollie Lou | ? | 8 | 8 or 9 | 7 | ? | 9
1559 Johnny Drew | 12 | 4 | ? | 7 |
?5 or 10 | 9And whoops, looks like something’s wrong since
Andy Sue had a huge jump in noise from toy combos including Sloo-Slonkers between the ages of 3 and 4, looking like he enjoys S to the tune of 14 noise at age 4 and 16 at 7. Something’s also up with Phoebe Drew. But, I continued to project forwards in both cases to 18 at the current year anyway as if nothing is wrong.Also something wrong with Mary Lou and Gah-Ginkas, again I press forward assuming it’s all OK.
While we have seen combos with Sally Sue, Phoebe Drew, Eddie Sue, Cindy Drew, Ollie Lou and johnny Drew involving Trum-Troopas, they’ve all had a 10 contribution from T, so we don’t know if they get 5⁄10 or 10⁄20 from them.
Now for the solutions:
we have 4B, 4F, 2G, 3S, 3T and 4W to distribute.
In order to try to maximize noise, I’ll distribute as follows:
1550 Andy Sue S + W
1551 Betty Drew F + G
1552 Sally Sue F + T
1553 Phoebe Drew F + S
+ T1554 Freddie Lou B + S
1555 Eddie Sue
F +T + W1556 Cindy Drew F+ W
1557 Mary Lou B+ G
1558 Ollie Lou B+
WT1559 Johnny Drew B+ W
In order to try to minimize noise, I’ll distribute as follows:
1550 Andy Sue F +
GT1551 Betty Drew B + W
1552 Sally Sue B + W
1553 Phoebe Drew B + W
1554 Freddie Lou F + T
1555 Eddie Sue F + G
1556 Cindy Drew B + S
1557 Mary Lou T + W
1558 Ollie Lou G + S
+ T1559 Johnny Drew F + S
edit: in view of abstractapplic’s observations, we can fill in some of the ?’s in the chart, added in above. The information that a doubling is involved with the anomalies also changes how we project forward the high Gs or Ss. This also led me to reinterpret some results above, also I noticed I had accidentally projected upwards instead of down for G for Mary Lou. Whoops. Since we don’t know what Ollie Lou has doubled, I’ve now avoided giving him T when minimizing noise, even at the expense of a less optimal G allocation. Also fishing for more upside when maximizing noise.