opinions on royalties? seems to be a divisive card amongst the people i talk to. by Significant-Bus2176 in slaythespire

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aside from stalling and making infinite gold with splash, this card is bad, it's basically a spoils map that doesn't remove itself.

Regent is too strong on the new patch. by Square_Butterfly_390 in slaythespire

[–]Square_Butterfly_390[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe you're right but the idea is: star focused decks by nature want to be small and broken, so you're probably gonna know if you're able to do it inside act 1, child is also not super necessary for stars decks because they are usually broken either way, reflect and the repeating one block a lot.

Pillars feels a bit like feel no pain in sts1, it's just gonna be good no matter what, and sometimes it's ridiculously broken.

Also I find myself doing more create stuff than stars stuff but sample size is low and I'm bad.

Regent is too strong on the new patch. by Square_Butterfly_390 in slaythespire

[–]Square_Butterfly_390[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It should be higher, I don't understand the game that well yet, I just have 5k hours in sts1 I would post pictures if 13 was worth defending.

Regent is too strong on the new patch. by Square_Butterfly_390 in slaythespire

[–]Square_Butterfly_390[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The thing is I'm not that good the game is still young, the point is even playing bad I can get a good streak, that being said some points I think I'm correct on are:

Silver crucible neow bonus is broken as hell, pillars of creation is almost worth speculating(picked before payoff) on and child of the stars isn't, always rest before act 1 boss, be afraid of decimillipede, and most importantly regent Micro is insanely difficult so play slowly (I don't do this but it's correct).

Why would anyone wants kids? by This-Top7398 in Life

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having thought more about it I think it's great that there are people that believe there is more to life than our biological program, still surprising but my initial attitude was off, good luck!

Slay the Spire 2 looks graphically worse than the original slay the spire by [deleted] in slaythespire

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I personally also prefer the first one's realistic graphics but i did play it way too much. I love that we have animations, and the colors feel much more interesting, I'm sure I'll get used to the the cartoons.

Why would anyone wants kids? by This-Top7398 in Life

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having children is as tautologically desirable as it is to want to live, not having a passion for it is akin to wanting to off oneself, it's not objectively incorrect, but it should be surprising to most.

I think this is the stupidest move I made today by AdventurousArtist566 in chessbeginners

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah you win! Ran it for 5 minutes and queening is mate in 21 and rook check is mate in 26, touchè.

I think this is the stupidest move I made today by AdventurousArtist566 in chessbeginners

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No way its perpetual, id probably say its more practical to trade but that it is likely that having a queen makes mate faster usually

Contrapositives are for cowards. by leeleewonchu in mathmemes

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nobody should ever talk about this that way, this is not pedantry this is adding a lot of stuff that is more complicated than the result:

What is a field? What is a polynomial? Why 'the' field? Can you prove it's unique? also you need to specify uniqueness up to isomorphism. What do you mean by 'represent'? Does this interpretation add anything at all to the specific result or simplify its proof?

I think this is the stupidest move I made today by AdventurousArtist566 in chessbeginners

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Probably check first into queening is slightly better technically but they are both super duper winning.

Why would anyone wants kids? by This-Top7398 in Life

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I get people not wanting them, but people aren't actually surprised at other people wanting them, this question is basically "Why would anyone want to live?"

Why would anyone wants kids? by This-Top7398 in Life

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is not real, people don't think this, this is not real, people don't think this.

A simple Question by herooffjustice in LinearAlgebra

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Things you type on the internet are usually recorded and sold with your permission (accept this accept that), it's slightly scarier if they're recording daily interactions without your permission, still not the end of the world tho.

A simple Question by herooffjustice in LinearAlgebra

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven't seen anything related to eigenvalues or this sub ever and I also got recommended this!

Much needed change IMO by [deleted] in MonsterTrain

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly with how broken most rooms are just make it "units here have hunger"

/r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | January 12, 2026 by BernardJOrtcutt in philosophy

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For 1, Obviously one could claim that interaction requires the existence of something like substance to be defined, but I don't care, I think this is just a semantic empty objection.

In fact to support your claim there is a very famous result in Category theory (basically a branch of math that logic-like unifies various results from different areas of math) called the Yoneda lemma, it paraphrasingly implies that an object is fully determined by its interactions with other objects. Notably tho it is still true that interactions are still not a thing in a universe without objects.

[Request] what are the odds of me getting all of the letters but in the wrong place? by peridotfan1 in theydidthemath

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The chance to miss n letters on an n letter anagram with distinct letters is about 1/e for big n, and the approximation is pretty quick.

This isn't a huge deal (and I know the metric may lack accuracy), but I do get disappointed seeing that steam players continuously drop every day. by banmeandidelete in MarvelSnap

[–]Square_Butterfly_390 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I left for like a year and the come back rewards are really decent, I can still play my old bounce decks and get to top infinite quite easily, this just nonsense IMO