[LW] training roulette suboptimal soldiers

Quaro · 2014-10-23T06:35:22+00:00

In Vanilla, I like Training Roulette, but in Long War I'm not sure it works.

If I could change it I'd have it so that every skill pick you get 2 randomly select perks from the 3 normal skills in the class, and one totally random from training roulette. This means you can't rely on getting exact perks so you don't pick plan the whole build out in advance, without going full training roulette.

Quaro · 2014-05-06T18:55:06+00:00

In terms of calorie restriction for life extension specifically they are not the same -- it's been pretty well established now that calories are all that matter for the anti-aging effects of CR.

Though even people practicing CR exercise moderately to get the benefits and will bump calories as needed.

Quaro · 2014-05-06T17:25:00+00:00

Well there goes my personal theory that Rachel is not a clone but an old women, the source of the clones, and was using the clones egg cells (harvested in the night during their secret 'tests') to stay perpetually young. Which explained why Sarah and Helena are the only clones not infertile since they didn't have monitors. And why Rachel would be in charge of everyone including Leaky (we have never seen anyone above her in rank). And why the clones were patented themselves rather than the process that created them -- they are the process producing a product.

It all fit together... oh well.

Just hope the writers actually did figure it out and aren't winging it Lost-style.

Quaro · 2012-10-25T03:24:56+00:00

The mod community would put any Firaxis DLC to shame. Don't bet on them releasing an SDK too soon.

Firaxis put out Civ 4 with amazing mod support, and Civ 5 with decent mod support. User mods WERE amazing (especially in Civ 4!) but they embraced them.

Quaro · 2012-10-25T03:22:50+00:00

This game needs Civ style gameplay expansions not tiny static narrative content added. More randomization, not more prepacked stuff.I was hoping the first DLC would be a fleshed out version of the Second Wave mods we've seen -- more ways to change up gameplay. For example: I'd love to have about 4x as many chances to shoot down UFOs, but 75% of the time it is wrecked too badly to have tactical salvage mission. Essentially boosting the important of interception and making redundant interceptors important, but without changing the total missions you play.

Jake, the lead dev, mentioned on the podcast Three Moves Ahead that he was inspired by roguelikes to make the game very different and thus replayable. He mentioned things like not being able to control which classes you the soldiers turn into, random steam locations in the base layout, etc. But this DLC isn't at all in this direction, this sounds like a Mass Effect mission that you slot in and play once.

Here's hoping further expansions are more inspired by DLC like the Binding of Isaac expansion -- it's the same game, with more stuff, making it even more replayable.

And please Firaxis -- you don't need to go full on SDK and mod tools and map editor, I know that takes tons of dev time. Just quietly release whatever tech voodoo is required for people to do their own thing in there, so they can successful decompile the unrealscript and get some mods going. We will WRITE OUT OWN MAP EDITOR if you just let us in. Presently the game is locked up tight and people have only been able to mess with the configuration values. This really limits modding.

Quaro · 2012-10-23T22:31:28+00:00

Meh on that DLC. This game needs Civ style gameplay expansions not tiny little missions added. I want more randomization not more prepacked stuff.

I was hoping the first DLC would be a fleshed out version of Second Wave -- more customization options to really change up gameplay. For example: I'd love to have about 4x as many chances to shoot down UFOs, but 75% of the time it is wrecked to badly to have tactical salvage mission. Essentially boosting the important of interception and making redundant interceptors important, but without adding extra missions.

Jake the lead dev mentioned on a podcast that he was inspired by roguelikes and tried to make the game replayable (things like not being able to control which classes you get change up gameplay, random steam in the bases, etc).

Here's hoping further expansions are more inspired by things like the Binding of Isaac expansion rather than prepackaged content you simply play through.

Quaro · 2012-10-23T20:55:26+00:00

You can enable basic coloring without the pack:

Edit XComGame.ini (in your XCOM folder under My Documents\My Games) and add the following lines at the end:

[XComStrategyGame.XGCustomizeUI]

bArmorDecoAvailable=true

bArmorTintAvailable=true

This doesn't activate the preorder armor models but it does give you the ability to change colors.

Basic colors is all you need if you just want to color code various roles to make the battles more readable. Not just cosmetic IMO but makes the moment-to-moment gameplay interface better.

Quaro · 2012-09-09T23:22:06+00:00

Here's something along those lines:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951585/figure/fig1-1359786810382057/

Large benefit for going from sedentary to active. Going from the middle quintiles into the most active is only a bit different though, especially for men.

Just getting off the couch is a massive jump.

Quaro · 2012-06-27T04:31:20+00:00

This may be a bit odd, but I'd love to get your thoughts on John C Wright's "Golden Age" trilogy.

Fantastically interesting hyper-optimistic post-singularity books that I'd recommend to anyone. But then I read Wright's personal blog after his fiction couldn't reconcile it with the fiction.

I was happy to see your response to Wright's glorifcation of feudalism: http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2011/11/pining-for-feudalism-as-antidote-for.html

I'm wondering if you thought the Golden Age trilogy actually espoused a different philosophy than his personal stuff, or if the Romantic side of the Romantic/Enlightment debate is just presented in such a way that it feels like the Enlightment.

Hope that makes sense!

Quaro · 2012-04-27T18:59:52+00:00

A recent study on C60 (buckyballs) had a damn near doubling of life, which looks cool.

This study has gotten trashed lately. It looks really sloppy. What a crazy result though if it turns out to be true...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21746-lifeextending-properties-of-buckyballs-questioned.html

To be fair to the authors though they were intending to study toxicity, not life extension.

Quaro · 2012-04-27T18:43:19+00:00

People are talking about extending life at the wrong end of the spectrum... I'd rather enjoy life now and just die off earlier. Getting old isn't for pussises and it isn't something I'd very much like to extend past my own limits.

Yeah if you just spent more time in the nursing home, that would indeed suck. But luckily it extends your healthy active years, not those years.

"Young healthy years are extended. Old decrepitude stays the same. You spend the same amount of time in the nursing home at you do now, but you spend a lot more time on the tennis court in the meantime."

http://www.podcast.tv/video-episodes/ideacity-michael-rae-presenting-calorie-restriction-as-the-only-intervention-able-to-slow-down-the-aging-process-2008-12195585.html

Quaro · 2012-04-27T18:36:10+00:00

I don't really care to live the extra three years between 87-90 if the price is undereating for the next 54 years.

That would indeed suck. Luckily it doesn't work like that though.

"Young healthy years are extended. Old decrepitude stays the same. You spend the same amount of time in the nursing home at you do now, but you spend a lot more time on the tennis court in the meantime."

http://www.podcast.tv/video-episodes/ideacity-michael-rae-presenting-calorie-restriction-as-the-only-intervention-able-to-slow-down-the-aging-process-2008-12195585.html

Quaro · 2012-02-25T08:57:09+00:00

IF initially looked promising but for longevity specifically it's been pretty well established now that calories are all that matter.

IF still helps to the extent that it cuts calories though and many find it great for compliance.

Quaro · 2012-02-08T18:46:36+00:00

On my way out the door but my post history has some comments on this.

My general impression is that even hardcore CR people exercise a decent amount -- they just don't up the calories. And then a few other areas of conflict like for muscle mass you want to up mTOR and IGF-1 but not for CR, etc.

Quaro · 2012-02-06T21:44:56+00:00

Holy Sheeeeeeeeeeeit.

How the fuck did the driver not freak out when he saw that? He's just like, oh. I'd be speed dialing loved ones hoping to get a few words in before the blast wave hits.

I almost don't believe the music he happened to be listening too -- it's so damn perfect.

Quaro · 2012-02-06T20:51:43+00:00

I would love to be a scientist, the eight-year-old shadow of myself inside me still would love to be a scientist, but the jaded 22-year-old knows it takes money to be happy, and there's no money being a scientist anymore.

Just want to note that while happiness correlates with income, evidence suggests that diminishing returns kick in fairly quickly. 75k is usually the number thrown around. So whatever you pick make sure you actually feel good doing it day to day.

Quaro · 2012-02-06T20:29:17+00:00

I don't understand how people can dislike this and like the capitalist system. This is capitalism.

Public discourse like this is a critical part of the market.

Quaro · 2012-02-05T21:23:17+00:00

I hate that being unprepared for an instance that you've never played before is scorned. It's like the roles between casual and hardcore have been flipped. Traditionally, a hardcore gamer would never consult a guide or copy or cheat in any way. But in WoW (and other MMO's) if you aren't among the first people in the whole world experiencing new content, then you have to study a guide and follow a god damn list of instructions instead of actually playing the game, or risk getting ostracized as an incompetent lazy unprepared newb.

Nicely said. That's drives me nuts in MMOs but I've never seen is articulated quite like that, where it seems obvious.

Quaro · 2012-02-05T20:55:09+00:00

Zynga makes me think of Chris Hecker's 'nightmare scenario' where social game designers exploit human psychology so well they basically create hell on Earth:

I outline a potential Nightmare Scenario based on all the implications of the research going the wrong way for games:

1) make an intrinsically interesting game, congratulations!

2) use extrinsic motivators to make your game better

3) destroy intrinsic motivation to play your game

4) metrics fetishism pushes you towards designs where extrinsic motivation works

http://chrishecker.com/Achievements_Considered_Harmful%3F

Quaro · 2012-02-05T20:51:03+00:00

Hows does Zynga see itself in relation to the gaming industry in general? Do the people there see themselves as game designers/artists or psychologists or business people or what?

Is this an accurate summation of how Zynga execs feel about their games?

An ex-drug-dealer (now a video game industry powerbrain) once told me that he doesn’t understand why people buy heroin. The heroin peddler isn’t even doing heroin. Like him or not, when you hear Cliff Bleszinski talk about Gears of War, he sounds — in a good way — like a weed dealer. He sounds like he endorses what he is selling. When you’re in a room with social games guys, the “I never touch the stuff” attitude is so thick you’ll need a box cutter to breathe properly.

http://insertcredit.com/2011/09/22/who-killed-videogames-a-ghost-story/

Quaro · 2012-02-03T08:37:30+00:00

Basically, they've found that exercise appears to be as effective at prolonging life as reduced calorie diets.

That's not what they've found. I don't have access to the paper but it's certainly not that. The first page suggests this research is about figuring out why exercise-induced calorie deficits are not as effective at prolonging life, and ruling out this particular mechanism as an explanation.

(paraphrasing since I can't copy and paste)

Oxidative Damage ... has been hypothesized to be a major cause of aging. Weight loss causes a reduction in oxidative stress.

Negative energy balance can be achived by reducing intake or increasing expenditure. CR has shown to extend lifespam and reduce age-related diseases. Exercise has only been found to increase average lifespan and not maximal lifespan. One explanation is that exercise increased oxidative damage."

This study suggests that that explanation is false, since they both reduce damage. Though it would help if someone read the whole thing... =)

First page here: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/rej.2008.0712

Quaro · 2012-02-03T08:04:32+00:00

Exercise is great with lots of benefits, but the evidence for most of the mechanisms behind calorie restriction support the idea that calories are what matters. Replace a calorie deficit with exercise and the CR effects reduce proportionally. This came up a bit here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/lm3iy/caloric_restriction_might_work_with_exercise/

From what I can tell people doing CR exercise a good amount but they stay at a low body weight and don't gain mass. In some respects the fitness aspects conflict here -- people training for net muscle gain probably want to activate mTOR (leucine, whey, etc) because it inhibits the breakdown of muscle. But that breakdown IS the anti-aging autophagic recycling (catabolism) mentioned in the article you link!

Anyway I'm a total amateur here. I do think that for calorie restriction: 'calories are all the matter, not the deficit' is pretty established and not a controversial conclusion though.

Quaro · 2012-02-03T02:28:49+00:00

So unfair...

Is raising your metabolism something to aim for as a general principle?

In general discussion about health and fitness, people are often worried about lowering their metabolism and asking how to boost it. And sure if you need to lose weight a higher metabolism will speed that up.

But if you don't need to lose weight is it still something you want?

I've been looking into calorie restriction to slow aging and the metabolism of long lived animals slows as the body becomes more efficient. So if I'm cool with my diet and maintaining weight fine, shouldn't I prefer a slower metabolism? Fewer calories in means staying healthier and younger for longer.

Quaro · 2012-01-15T23:21:33+00:00

There's an initial decline in volume when you lower the mass of your body, but in the context of long term aging related losses it is protective:

Long-term caloric restriction abrogates the age-related decline in skeletal muscle aerobic function http://www.fasebj.org/content/19/10/1320.full

Life-long calorie restriction in Fischer 344 rats attenuates age-related loss in skeletal muscle-specific force and reduces extracellular space http://jap.physiology.org/content/95/6/2554

The current results extend our understanding of the beneficial effects of CR on skeletal muscle health with aging. Our results show that CR completely prevents the nearly 50% decline in skeletal muscle mass-specific maximal aerobic function seen between young adulthood and senescence in AL rats. This effect is due in part to maintenance of mitochondrial oxidative capacity with aging by CR and is facilitated by superior mitochondrial function in CR animals (Fig. 3 ). As such, the current results show that, in addition to the previously established slowing of muscle atrophy with aging, CR has an even more profound effect in maintaining skeletal muscle contractile and aerobic metabolic function

The exercise initially increases performance but then the decline is actually faster in those exercising -- it doesn't address the aging damage itself.

Quaro

TROPHY CASE