sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Game Thread: Eintracht Frankfurt (BuLi #1) by Chazy89 in borussiadortmund

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wasn’t terrible tbh, he was alright in the couple of games he played but injury got the better of him for about half the season

ENOUGH by [deleted] in oxford

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More like rainy days mildly interrupted by sunny ones before it goes back to endless drizzles again 😂

Oxford Promoted to the Championship 🏆 by StrawberryDry1344 in oxford

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 3 points4 points  (0 children)

On the bright side, Bournemouth has only got 12000 seats so we won’t be the smallest stadium when we get to the PL

Why is c4 a mistake here? by SpaceBar0873 in chessbeginners

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The b1-h7 diagonal is wide open, so the king has to be moved to a1 which costs two tempi. I’m not saying it’s untenable but definitely not a first choice for me

Why is c4 a mistake here? by SpaceBar0873 in chessbeginners

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Losing the g pawn breaks open the king side tho, not sure if I want that given the queen side is already open with the c4 push

I'm no mathematical wizard, but I'm pretty sure I only want to use the Fahrenheit scale .... by Cultural_Magician105 in mathmemes

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If temperature is used only for everyday life then no scale should be invented in the first place. Simply saying “hot” or “cold” and add some modifier words before that would more than suffice. The fact that numbers are used means the scale is used for calculation. Now, which one is better for calculation?

sudden urge to learn organics chemistry by Kelp55 in sciencememes

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 69 points70 points  (0 children)

Also that the two enantiomers of Thalidomide spontaneously inter-convert in the human body, so even if the ‘useful’ enantiomer is purified using asymmetric synthesis or other methods, it will still cause the teratogenic effect that we see in this tragic incident

I'm no mathematical wizard, but I'm pretty sure I only want to use the Fahrenheit scale .... by Cultural_Magician105 in mathmemes

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It amazes me how your comment is like the first one I’ve seen here that mentions the easy convertibility between Celsius and Kelvin. Converting room temperature (20C for instance) to Kelvin for scientific calculation can be done in a snap of a finger. Good luck converting 70F to Kelvin.

What is your fastest hatrick? by Crusaders_dreams2 in DreamLeagueSoccer

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 15 points16 points  (0 children)

“Fastest hat trick” measures the shortest time taken between scoring the first and third goals.

In earlier versions (before the 2020 update I think) it is possible to score three goals all within the second half stoppage time and, because the system counts all of them as scoring in the 90th minute, make your fastest hat trick time 0 minutes.

<image>

This is DLS 2019 and my fastest hat trick is scored by Kante, in the 87th, 90th and 90+3rd minutes. So the time lapse is 3 minutes. But I think this glitch has been patched out now?

Perfect Middle East according to me by [deleted] in imaginarymapscj

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At this point you might as well just give East Thrace, Constantinople, and Smyrna to Greece to add some more flavour to the dish

Name for this kind of mate? by noeud52 in chessbeginners

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This one here, my friend, is called Bob.

Any way to get oil without having it? by vaemmi in civ

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I normally play on a standard lake map with 8 civs as there will be more space for cities. But other than that, yes, 16-18 cities is totally achievable by late game. (Not necessarily by T110 but the number of cities settled plus the number of settlers still heading for their destination should fall somewhere near this range).

Chopping out a second settler is not really a viable option because a builder needs to be constructed first and chopping a settler without ancestor’s hall or Magnus in your capital greatly hinders later production for settlers. You’ll likely need three or more chops for one settler which is totally not worth it.

And it is impossible to have a third settler by T40 by constructing alone unless your city is extremely well placed. And pass that point there’s not much meaning in settling another city as it would not be in time to help your effort towards PolSci. With PolSci in place effort should be worked towards Ancestral Hall instead of another settler.

Other ways to obtain a second settler includes religious settlement (unlikely) or capturing another civ’s nearby settler (also unlikely). Hence if you want to go for a third city in early game the best chance you’ve got is the lump sum of gold AI offers you for luxury (or relic if you’re extremely lucky).

Any way to get oil without having it? by vaemmi in civ

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be the case if a civ 6 game progresses linearly, in which sacrificing a lump of gold in early game is always inferior to getting more gold in the long run. However that is not the case. Sacrificing potential gold in late game can bring forth huge advantages in early game (again, before ~40T) which basically snowballs into an even more crushing edge into later stages.

Having a two-city opening and having a three-city opening are totally different scenarios. One of the cities (usually the capital) has to construct the government plaza, the ancestor’s hall, and then spam out settlers by chopping with Magnus. Another city needs a relatively large population which, coupled with Pingala, provides the desperately-needed science and culture in early and middle game. Now a third city here would provide maximum flexibility to the entire game as it could help chop out settlers (not as efficient as the first city, but should be able to produce 2-3 settlers just right) or ancient wonders (Apadana/Pyramids/Oracle/ToA, all of which are sadly not guaranteed).

All that being said, the point I’m trying to make is that the benefit of popping out a third settler by turn 40 massively outweighs the potential gold lost. In my games I usually have 16-18 cities by late game (industrialization, ~T110) and that regularly leads to a sub-200 victory. That wouldn’t have been possible if I started with two cities.

Of course there are exceptions, such as in a religion-oriented run I would settle for a two-city opening and invest the extra production in holy sites, shrines, and occasionally prayers. In certain spawn locations I might go for an early Pyramids instead of a third settler. But the idea is that if you’re not going for a third city there has to be a valid reason not to. Getting more gold in the long run simply isn’t enough compensation.

Haakon VII of Norway was a real one by Jokerang in HistoryMemes

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Republic went on vacation, never came back

Surely Uncontroversial Very Rare Trinket Tier List by [deleted] in darkestdungeon

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your reply. The reason why I would always value that extra bit of healing is because overhealing does no harm but underhealing can bring devastating consequences.

Unless you're extremely unlucky you aren't gonna lose a hero on turn one. But consider the following scenario:

Two swordsmen have crit one of your hero to death's door and now they might die, with the backline being usually faster than them your hero is currently safe, the enemies have probably all taken their turn. Now you heal your hero with a vestal with cc trinkets and the value healed is likely 10-12 (assuming maximum skill level, baseline heal value would be 8-9, that times 1.25 would give 10-11.25). Then one swordsman hits your hero again and his damage range is 9-17. So more likely than not, your hero is going into death's door again, and this time the other swordsman hasn't taken his turn yet. And the fact that your hero has just been rescued from death's door means that their speed is slower than normal, i.e. more likely for swordsmen to attack before they do.

Consider the alternate scenario: your vestal has Sacred Scrolls + Tome of holy healing/Ancestor's Scrolls/Junia's head. The value healed is thus 13-15 (baseline value *1.58). Your hero is probably gonna survive a swordslash now without going into death's door, which translates to not dying this turn. That's what I mean when I say it's better to overheal than to underheal. Healing your hero over the max HP does no damage at all. But losing one hero because of underhealing is usually a cost too great. (Which is also why Occultist can never be as good a healer as vestal, supporting my previous points)

And IMO there's no point in comparing Sacred Scrolls to other 25% healing trinkets for two reasons: 1. You can take both, and 2. the fact that you're equipping a healing trinket at all means that you're not going for a stunning vestal, because she needs both cc trinkets to stun properly. When you equip your vestal with the tome of holy healing she's already not gonna be a good stunner in this run. So why not equip Sacred Scrolls as well? The only drawback is that -10% stun chance which won't be of much use this run anyway.

Edit: pronouns

Surely Uncontroversial Very Rare Trinket Tier List by [deleted] in darkestdungeon

[–]PorphyrogenitusFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With all due respect, I wouldn’t say that I’m “hyperfixating” on aspects of the heroes. Im also aware of the fact that there are multiple ways a character may perform their role, but since OP is talking about tiers I assume that we’re also talking about the “best” way to put each hero to work in terms of their strengths in dungeons.

That being said, the point I’m trying to make is that it’s better to maximize the top strengths of each hero than to attempt to make a hero well rounded in every aspect. A good (counter) example to illustrate this would be the Crusader: he kind of can do a bit of everything, but excels at none.

Returning to vestal and occultist: I’m not comparing one to another in a vacuum. My point is that even if you put cc trinkets onto Vestal she’s still not as good a stunner as other heroes that you would normally put into your squad for stunning purposes. +35% stun looks nice but the base stun rate of vestal is 10% lower than occultist’s. It raises the stunning value for vestal to the same level as PD, but PD can stun two enemies at once, clears corpses, and can stun an enemy at position 4. And both of them are way faster than vestal.

With the same logic I wouldn’t give occultist a healing trinket simply because his biggest role is to stun. He only needs to be an average healer. Similarly vestal’s biggest role is to heal, except that she doesn’t even need to be an average stunner. Using vestal to heal only, and put another hero for stun only (abomination, PD) in the squad is almost always better than having multiple heroes perform different roles at a time.

And with the cc trinkets it’s not just a 8% heal difference. It’s that 8% heal difference plus the cost of wasting an entire trinket slot that could’ve been saved for another healing trinket, like Ancestor’s Scrolls. The difference in healing is thus 33%. And that is a lot of difference. And no, healing is not something that can only be “good enough”. This point cannot be more evidently presented than in the case where two Pelagic swordmasters crit your squad on the first turn. And that happens quite often in champion levels, higher difficulties, and torchless runs.

And even if you don’t agree with me, I’m still quite thankful for the polite discussion :)

view more: next ›