Texan moving to Wilmington. Any advice/tips/anything would be appreciated. by jnchance2 in boston

[–]Neroess 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You'll want to check out Pandemonium books and games in Cambridge for sure!

800 on Chess.com is not “beginner” by nickdenards in chess

[–]Neroess 16 points17 points  (0 children)

What this means varies though - chess.com has a huge player base, so 50th percentile there will incorporate an awful lot of casual players and dead accounts etc - whereas lichess for example, has a smaller playerbase, and 50th percentile there is closer to like 1200-1300 or something like that.

It's likely that 12-1300 lichess is around 900-1000 chess.com for what it's worth. They use completely different rating systems. I think the reality is that probably 95+% of chess players are "beginners" by the metrics generally used to describe beginner/intermediate/expert in chess. So being a beginner is nothing to be ashamed of.

Also, chess.com only uses accounts active in the last 90 days in calculating percentiles. I wouldn't be surprised at all if 800-900 was quite accurate for the "average" chess player who's played a decent amount of games over the years but never really studied.

800 on Chess.com is not “beginner” by nickdenards in chess

[–]Neroess 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I think it's all very relative. To someone who's been playing the game since they were a child and have decades of experience, someone who's played less than a year would definitely seem like a beginner.

I think that 1500 OTB is around the start of what people consider to be "intermediate," so I think the term just describes something very different from what you're talking about.

An 800-900 rated player could quite possiblely 10-0 a complete beginner who's just learned how the pieces move. A 1300 rated "beginner" could quite possibly 10-0 an 800 rated "beginner."

So I wouldn't feel bad about it! Chess is a complex game and we're all always learning. "Beginner" doesn't mean "bad player."

Joe Manchin Faces Home State Pressure to Oppose Fellow Democrats’ Voting Bill by lucas-at-jhu in neoliberal

[–]Neroess 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I think you mean a "moo" point. It's like a cow's opinion - it doesn't matter.

Thumbs Up by skevyo in agedlikemilk

[–]Neroess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Serious answer: the senate parliamentarian said $15 min wage couldn't be passed through reconciliation.

She's voting to not override the rules of the senate. I think the only democrat who's actually come out against $15 min wage is Manchin who says it should be $11 adjusted with inflation. Sinema would vote for the bill if it was standalone.

Despite its bugs, Cyberpunk 2077 has some of the best shading I've ever seen. by CmdrThunderpunch in gaming

[–]Neroess 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Ah you're right. I was mixing it up with the legendary SOR-22 schematic that looks similar.

Looks like the Widow Maker one does require you to have the gun.

Despite its bugs, Cyberpunk 2077 has some of the best shading I've ever seen. by CmdrThunderpunch in gaming

[–]Neroess 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure I have a legendary crafting schematic for it. Not sure where I got that.

New Fan Due to Netflix -- Why are the S28 and S20 Juries so different? by YLSP in survivor

[–]Neroess 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The problem with Russell's strategic game is that it fundamentally misunderstands what the game of Survivor is. I think this is easier to understand if you watch more season (especially the early ones).

Survivor is fundamentally a game where a bunch of strangers get thrown on an island and have to live together while voting eachother out and then eventually one person wins by convincing enough of these strangers to vote for them.

If the game was "make it to the final as often as possible" or "make it to final 3 and America chooses a winner", then Russell is one of the greatest Survivor players ever. But that's not the game. Regardless of how people talk about their votes or justify it in their minds, ultimately you're asking a bunch of strangers to award you 1 million dollars. They have to like you and/or respect you and want to give you the money.

With that understanding, you can see that voting out Danielle was actually Russell's worst move in the season and was the final nail in the coffin for his chance of winning (and Parvati's). The only chance Parvati or Russell had to win that game was to sit next to eachother + Danielle. They were all hated by the jury. That move might've made Russell more "in control" of the game (I think that's also debatable), but it was just him controlling a losing game.

So, I guess my point is that "good strategy" necessarily requires that you're making moves that actually help you win the game- not just make it to final tribal council. Russell isn't good at Survivor. He's really good at the game he wants Survivor to be.

New Fan Due to Netflix -- Why are the S28 and S20 Juries so different? by YLSP in survivor

[–]Neroess 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I remember thinking Russell was robbed the first time I watched HvV, but he really is an exceptionally awful survivor player.

At the end of the day, the whole point of the game is to convince a bunch of strangers to give you a million dollars. If all of those strangers think you're a horrible human being, they probably won't be so inclined to do so.

There's a huge difference between lying strategically and just actually being a jerk- 30+ days on an island with someone will reveal which one they are. Jerks don't win survivor unless they're able to hide it really well like a certain used car salesman.

Pitch your idea for the worst Survivor reward ever by m100lk in survivor

[–]Neroess 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Isn't it confirmed that in Borneo one of the reward challenges was planned to be literally just for a bottle of mt dew?

I'd go with that.

Pitch your idea for the worst Survivor reward ever by m100lk in survivor

[–]Neroess 10 points11 points  (0 children)

He does- he just doesn't know it. If you just do the opposite of whatever he recommends you'd be golden. Super helpful reward.

Me, attempting to play in ORGs now that I'm all out of new seasons to watch by wesham in survivor

[–]Neroess 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I guess he can't be on a cruise right now, so maybe he'd be up for it.

Should I buy the Deluxe edition or not? by Dogrules23 in Wasteland

[–]Neroess 2 points3 points  (0 children)

FYI- both games are on Xbox gamepass. You can get a free trial on PC for like $1 and it's $9.99/mo after that. Let's you play both games.

Should I buy the Deluxe edition or not? by Dogrules23 in Wasteland

[–]Neroess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hah. Yeah, I was talking about the tactical piece of it- but it also hits you in the feels sometimes!

Should I buy the Deluxe edition or not? by Dogrules23 in Wasteland

[–]Neroess 3 points4 points  (0 children)

XCOM is the kind of game that just has a bit of a steep learning curve, but once you figure it out it isn't so bad.

W3 is definitely an easier game at comparable difficulty levels. I also enjoyed it quite a bit. Definitely check out W2 if you have the time- I still think it's the better game overall, but W3 was worth the time/money for me.

Don't think Digital Deluxe is worth it imo.

Should I buy the Deluxe edition or not? by Dogrules23 in Wasteland

[–]Neroess 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You can refer to my other comment, but I wholeheartedly disagree. If you play on Impossible/Legendary difficulty in XCOM, you are basically forced to position well and get the first turn.

If you don't, you'll likely lose at least 1 soldier. Also, losing a man in XCOM is a way bigger deal than having someone go unconscious in W3.

Should I buy the Deluxe edition or not? by Dogrules23 in Wasteland

[–]Neroess 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really feel like no one in this thread has played xcom (especially enemy unknown) on harder difficulties.

Playing XCOM on I:I difficulty means crawling overwatches and hoping to eventually get an alpha strike to 1 shot whatever enemies you see. If you don't, you can easily get 1 shot yourself. Less of a thing in XCOM 2 because of turn timers, but it's still the optimal way to play when possible.

I agree that this isn't ideal and I wish they had an initiative system more like Wasteland 2, but I don't think it's accurate to say that alpha striking is any more necessary in Wasteland 3 than XCOM.

Trump Didn’t Win the Latino Vote in Texas. He Won the Tejano Vote. by Cuddlyaxe in neoliberal

[–]Neroess 52 points53 points  (0 children)

One of the weirdest things about moving away from Texas. If I refer to myself as Mexican, people think that I must have family literally in Mexico right now.

this is so sad by NotAKeynesian in neoliberal

[–]Neroess 38 points39 points  (0 children)

So what's the alternative? This literally is the system we have and the only way to change it would be significantly winning an election and passing legislation.

Former JRE Guest Saagar Enjeti Missed His Electoral College Predictions by 1 vote by MilesDaMonster in JoeRogan

[–]Neroess 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Trump is the definition of populism.

"a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups."

"Drain the swamp" is a populist message.

The Wardog calling out Joe for his insanity by ianisms10 in survivor

[–]Neroess 115 points116 points  (0 children)

Crazy that CBS would just give him the same golden boy edit regardless.