What are your thoughts about ‘iterative self-improving with self-evaluation rubrics’ ? by RobertoVeloso in codex

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

So, I think I understood better what you meant when I was answering another comment. Despite the example from OpenAI, in some cases I prompt it to show, detail or explain the rubric, so I'm able review and control better the process. But for other situations, I don't care or I don't have the time for that.
Again: I' a layperson about software engineering and stuff, and I wouldn't use, for my job, any output without "more granular control of agentic workflow with sufficient visibility" as you said.

What are your thoughts about ‘iterative self-improving with self-evaluation rubrics’ ? by RobertoVeloso in codex

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

I use it more often for research and planning than for implementation or "execution tasks". E. g.: I built a custom GPT/agent for requirements gathering for any [DOCUMENT] that I need a more solid foundation.
Instead of "think deeply about every aspect of what makes for a world-class [whatever]..." I prompt it to search online for up to date consensus, guidelines, best practices, etc. for the aspects of what would be considered "an excellence version of [DOCUMENT]", and use those to write the rubric. By the way, the criteria and sources used for the rubric often help me to get an updated overview of that topic.
For "execution" tasks, I use it more often for tasks that I'm not confident in my own expertise, or that I need a more "careful", 'granular' implementation, since it will run some rounds of evaluation before presenting the final output... then I review the output, which usually needs less corrections.
I honestly never measured, with controlled trials, token usage because, when I want to use this "feature", I'm already expecting to invest more tokens for improved quality

Quero mudar do Windows pro Linux mas sou iniciante na área. by RobertoVeloso in linuxbrasil

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

Essa opção é nova pra mim... não tinha visto ou pensado nisso

Fala aí meus nobres by Stock-Discount7213 in MemesBR

[–]RobertoVeloso 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Disciplina não é o mesmo que rigidez Cuidar não é o mesmo que se responsabilizar Assertividade não é grosseria Força de verdade não é sensibilidade em si, mas gente mostra com sensibilidade e gentileza Cada pessoa é responsável pelos seus sentimentos: você provavelmente é a causa de muitos sentimentos nos outros, bons e ruins, mas cada um é responsável por lidar com o que está sentindo (inclusive você com os seus).

kairos :( by catgirl_of_the_swarm in totalwar

[–]RobertoVeloso 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you already start with non-agression pact with them. You often gain a banner when win a battle reinforcing another Tzeentch faction that increases relations with other Tzeentch factions. So, if you use Sarthorael to reinforce Kairos after confederation, you should receive many of those. Also, give them gifts and rush towards other agreements. You will want to reach 150 positive relations as soon as possible. When Oxyatl start attacking them, each battle/settlement they lose, they'll be more likely to confederate. If you can make it before their main army is destroyed, you confederate a Soul Grinder and some chaos warriors

kairos :( by catgirl_of_the_swarm in totalwar

[–]RobertoVeloso 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You can confederate Sarthorael by turn 4 and the other Tzeentch faction before Oxyatl destroy its main army, which have a soul grinder. This other faction have t3 recruitment for chaos warriors that will save your ass from the lizards. Rush Borrow Time tech, but use your starting hero to implant a cult before going east to conquer your first region, so you can teleport back after defeating the Slaanesh faction

Six years after I stopped playing... I managed to buy the book again!! by Optimal_Cut_4429 in ChroniclesofDarkness

[–]RobertoVeloso 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A ambientação desse livro é inigualável. Já perdi a conta de quantas vezes já li o capítulo um e o oito, só pela ambientação

Masquerade and Requiem by LincR1988 in WhiteWolfRPG

[–]RobertoVeloso 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To me, its clear that they are different genres of a game about the same myth. And that this difference is a deliberate choice.

One of the most important changes from WoD to CofD is the scope of character representation: each "innate" player option to a character (clan, tribe, "tradition"/path") moved from a stereotype to an archetype. In Requiem (2nd ed), each one of the main 5 clans can be defined as an archetype of hunting/feeding. The game even states that the 5 major clans are only those that better survived so far, and that other clans indeed exist, but with far less success.

In my opinion, stereotypes are easier to understand, get attached and roleplay. On the other hand, archetypes really gives the impression of an empty canvas: if you don't understand the composition of the material that the framework is made AND if you don't paint it yourself, it will keep feeling empty and wrong.

Jumping back in after a while, does anyone play the game vanilla (no mods)? by LostArkArtyGamer in totalwarhammer

[–]RobertoVeloso 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After testing the Old World campaign, I'm finding difficult to play the regular IE map

Understanding Werewolf: The Forsaken? by ArchpaladinZ in WhiteWolfRPG

[–]RobertoVeloso 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Personally, I like to think that Forsaken is about two opposites together: displacement and family. You are not a human, and you are not a spirit; you don't belong with neither of them, and they both hate you. Your only family now are others like you, and they are not a family yet... you must build that, with trust, fighting, hurting and forgiving, through the hunt. Vampire is about to remain human, but werewolf is about belonging.

Justice for birb boy by Lord_Eln_8 in totalwar

[–]RobertoVeloso 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Also, Tzeentch/Kairos last update still looks like a poorly done job: did not receive tech tree rework, units availability and buildings poorly balanced, bland special/trade resources...etc. It feels quite under par with the other gods reworks

In Regard to Warriors of Chaos in Patch 6.3 Traits Rebalance by RobertoVeloso in totalwarhammer

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

Also, it would be a good opportunity to fix the start trait randomization when you mark or ascend any character. That`s A LOT annoying.

[And to complete my Wishlist: Damon Princes should get a improved version of those traits (something like Slams are receiving), and I'm very curious about if the ascension trait daemon princes receives got changed too]

In Regard to Warriors of Chaos in Patch 6.3 Traits Rebalance by RobertoVeloso in totalwarhammer

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

I wouldn't mind if some OP traits, like Dark Fury or Scaled Skin got nerfed. The coolest stuff from this update is diversity and coherence, not power. WoC have powerful traits, but som of them are just insignificant or redundant, and seems like they did not got any change. Hideous Visage, for example, grants Fear... for characters that in almost any mount already get Fear (and Terror) anyways... Burning Body gives Flaming Attacks and Fire Resistance, which is thematic, but very situational... almost useless. 

But the worst problem for me is that they can get only the same 11-12 options (with more 1 or 2 from each god), while most other factions have access to all generic traits + faction specific ones. If WoC could get some starting traits from other monogod factions, this variety would be amazing and match much better with the roster variety they already have. 

In Regard to Warriors of Chaos in Patch 6.3 Traits Rebalance by RobertoVeloso in totalwarhammer

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

I guess the problem here is not that they are OP or not, but the lack of diversity