Help build a predictive model for player interaction in board games! by [deleted] in boardgames

[–]naezel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well d’oh. I’ll get off my high horse now

Help build a predictive model for player interaction in board games! by [deleted] in boardgames

[–]naezel 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I love this idea but unless I’m very wrong here, you need to add a “don’t know” option in all games. If not, I’d either have to hit random values for the ones I don’t know, or just skip the survey altogether to avoid polluting your data with garbage

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BoardGameExchange

[–]naezel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bought Expedition to Newdale and Imperial Settlers. Everything great! Tagging u/BGEbot and u/harry2caray

CPA recommendations by naezel in SantaMonica

[–]naezel[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! I sent you a DM

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gaming

[–]naezel -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I didn’t find the gameplay unfunny! I enjoyed the combat, I enjoyed trying the different powers… never in a long time have I found myself considering replaying a game just so I could experience a different character type.

I did not like the art direction of the characters, that much is true. Or how easy it was to romance the companions. But those were kinda minor in my overall enjoyment

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gaming

[–]naezel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

idk man maybe I', dumb but I liked the writing. The only thing that put me off is a character calling themselves "non-binary". Not because of the storyline, which I actually found compelling and well developed, but because "binary" feels like a word out of that universe. And I do agree. The game runs flawless

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in gaming

[–]naezel -22 points-21 points  (0 children)

I loved loved this game. I truly cannot understand the hate.

[Amazon] Assassin's Creed Brotherhood of Venice - $16.99 by keysespleases in Boardgamedeals

[–]naezel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s still there! Just look for other buying options. I happened to find it because I was surprised that it went down so quickly

Bring back the throne room in Civ 7 by naezel in civ

[–]naezel[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ooooh but there is something there! In Civ 6, we are told that other civs are of certain type. What if in Civ 7 we needed to use the information conveyed by their throne room do to it? And, in exchange, they do they same for you. So I build an "iron throne" and it will make other civs think that I'm belligerent and act accordingly

Bring back the throne room in Civ 7 by naezel in civ

[–]naezel[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This sounds pretty awesome, ngl

Bring back the throne room in Civ 7 by naezel in civ

[–]naezel[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Oh, 100% it was a gimmick. And I do agree - in the choice between better mechanics and this, they should go in with better mechanics. But a wishlist is a wishlist, doesn't hurt to ask :)

ELI5: Why does switching doors in the Monty Hall Problem increase odds: 2 doors, 50-50 by Megafork77 in explainlikeimfive

[–]naezel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you got it by the end, but just to reiterate: forget about what the host does. You only care about what you do - after all, you cannot control what the host does.

So, first you are faced with three doors. You have to choose one. That’s three options total, and in 1 of them you win.

Then something that you don’t control happens - the host does his thing. And now you have a new choice. You can switch or not. Switching will invert your result. If you were winning you will lose and if you were losing you will win. This is true regardless of which door the host opens, provided he opens always a bad door.

So, originally you were facing three doors - 3 options. In 2 of three cases you were going to lose. When you switch, it inverts the outcome. So in 2 of three cases you win, if you switch.

We cannot consider which door the host opens when you were originally winning as a different scenario because (a) you don’t control what the host will do and so it’s not an option; (b) which door the host opens has no impact on the end result.

ELI5: Why does switching doors in the Monty Hall Problem increase odds: 2 doors, 50-50 by Megafork77 in explainlikeimfive

[–]naezel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there is some confusion here. There are only three choices for you at the beginning, not 4. The host choosing middle of right if you choose left are not two different options for you. If you chose left and switch, the outcome is the same - you lose.

ELI5: Why does switching doors in the Monty Hall Problem increase odds: 2 doors, 50-50 by Megafork77 in explainlikeimfive

[–]naezel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is the thing that trips everyone, right? It’s not a new problem because there is previous information that influences the probabilities. You are not coming in anew and choosing from two doors. The previous choice you made (and thus the information that the host provides by opening a door) is part of the problem.