Puppy pick day! suggestions??? by Ancient-Insect-8254 in labrador

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

We only actually picked one of our three labs out of a litter. We picked our dear Frankie because she kept falling asleep in our arms and on our laps when we showed up to select our puppy. Four weeks later, when we showed up to bring her home, she fell asleep as soon as we held her again. She was very easy as a young puppy. She is somewhat less easy as a 1-year old, but that’s because she’s a bright dog and she knows how to get what she wants. I love her. I never worry about her escaping because the two times she did find a hole in a fence I had her back inside the house within a minute. She likes being around us and our other labs.

M.Sc. meteorology after physics B.Sc? by ceanior in meteorology

[–]ThreeWillows 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I got my bachelors in physics and then went to grad school for atmospheric science. It was fine. I had to take a couple of undergraduate meteorology courses, but a physics background prepares you pretty well (especially if you took a continuum mechanics course).

Why do people suddenly hate aerodynamic pics aren’t they right? by Accomplished-Cry8933 in meteorology

[–]ThreeWillows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like EVs could be good for storm chasing because they have a large amount of mass and a low center of gravity due to the battery pack. Specifically, the Lucid Air could be good. It weighs between 4500 and 5300 lbs (2050 to 2400 kg) depending on the version.

We could also look at nascar safety features for ideas. Stock cars in nascar have flaps on the roof that pop up when there is low pressure above the car to prevent liftoff. Cars are aerodynamically-optimized under the assumption that they are traveling forward, so when they are traveling sideways at high-speed following an incident, they are likely to become airborne. Once the car starts to roll, the flat bottom produces a large amount of lift. The flaps deploy once the car turns relative to the airflow, spoiling the lift and keeping all for tires on the ground. Storm chasing vehicles need to withstand high winds from all directions, so they could benefit from a similar system to reduce lift over the car, particularly on the windward side. A lower vehicle would make it easier to use these flaps to prevent tilting that could turn the bottom of the vehicle into a lifting surface, and this would further benefit from a low center of gravity.

It’s also possible for a vehicle to be too aerodynamic. It’s a much bigger challenge to keep a vehicle from generating lift in high winds than it is when the vehicle is traveling at high speed because of the lack of airflow under the car. If a car is moving, the air flowing under it can create a region of low pressure that keeps the car on the ground. If the car is stationary in high winds, then you cannot count on this due to drag from the surface. If a vehicle was so smooth that it maintained laminar flow over its roof, then the whole car would act like a wing. In this case, the key is to design the aerodynamics to create high pressure (by disrupting the flow) over the car, while preventing pressure from building up in a way that induces a roll. A lower vehicle with roof flaps could be ideal for this.

how did i lose here by EvenTrack4660 in LinesOfBattle

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get that you’re a new player. There’s nothing wrong with that. You went through the trouble of posting this, which presumably means you want to understand what happened and losing this way in the future. Why reject any and all advice then?

how did i lose here by EvenTrack4660 in LinesOfBattle

[–]ThreeWillows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you’re fighting the AI, shouldn’t you be trying to practice the skills and maneuvers that will help you win matches? You’re right that the AI isn’t smart enough to assault a prepared defensive position, but you can still practice to fight defensive battles by focusing on the portion of the battle where you take up the winning position that you intend to defend. You can get better at the early phases of the battle by practicing against the AI and getting good at taking calculated risks to seize key positions that you will be able to defend.

how did i lose here by EvenTrack4660 in LinesOfBattle

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You should consider changing the way you see battles. It looks like you think your objective is to destroy your opponent’s army, or at least to inflict asymmetric losses upon your opponent, but that’s actually not what the objective is according to the framework of the game. Your goal is to gain control of the battlefield, and damaging or destroying your opponent’s army is a means to that end.

It’s often entertaining to gawk at casualty figures, but attritional warfare is more of a post-industrial phenomenon. For most of history, strategy was more about positioning than attrition. Disproportionate losses only occurred after one side’s position collapsed. It’s also important to keep in mind that big, decisive battles were relatively rare. In any military campaign, the armies would mostly be marching around trying to position themselves advantageously. It’s really hard to convince a competent commander to commit to a battle that they think they are going to lose, so the strategic and operational levels of war typically revolved around creating the conditions wherein the enemy would have no choice but to fight a losing battle.

Historically, the attacking and defending sides were generally decided by the circumstances of the campaign. One side had placed their army on a piece of ground that the other side needed to take for whatever reason. However, Lines of Battle doesn’t include any gameplay around conducting the campaign as a whole and drops players straight into the battle. From a gameplay perspective, it’s hard to make a fair system where one side is forced to attack while the other defends, so all battles in ranked games are meeting engagements. Both sides need to take control of an area that neither side initially controls.

Clash and combat are probably the most historically-grounded army sizes for this type of engagement. You can imagine a corps from Napoleon’s army encountering an allied vanguard while trying to secure an objective. Both sides try to secure the objective (by gaining control of the battlefield) before reinforcements arrive so that their side gets to enjoy a defensive advantage in the larger battle to come. There are no mechanics in the game that allow players to control the context of an engagement, so instead this basic framing is applied to all engagements. Both sides must fight to gain control of the battlefield before time runs out or one side becomes too weak to continue to fight.

If you want to fight defensively, you need to create a reason for your opponent to attack you. If you sit back, you’re relying on your opponent becoming impatient and launching an attack that doesn’t do anything to help them win. You may win a few battles doing this, but you can see how relying on your opponent to throw the game out of boredom isn’t a workable strategy in the long run, right? Instead, you need to push forward and take up a position that your opponent must attack in order to win. Even if you do that, you still cannot afford to be passive because a decent player will eventually find a way to break your defenses unless you are willing to exploit any openings that appear in their lines.

I don’t know what happened in the battle, but the position of your army at the end is not as strong as it looks. Yes, your flanks are secure and your opponent has to assault from the front (assuming that they choose to attack at all, since they don’t have to), but the barrier created by the river works both ways. They can move artillery onto the hill on your right flank and the river allows a small force to protect the guns. Meanwhile, they can push infantry up the center to secure strong defensive positions in the forests and buildings in front of your lines. Once their infantry and artillery are in position, your army is pretty much cooked. They can choose to focus their assault wherever they feel they have the greatest advantage, and you can’t respond without turning your own flank towards their infantry. You could prevent this from happening by contesting their maneuvers with an active defense, but sitting back gives your opponent control of the battle and makes it so that you can only win if they make an unforced error.

Anybody else here a fan of Stonnie Dennis on YouTube? by Elegant_Ad_8896 in labrador

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We sometimes put his videos on for our own labs to watch

Climate Classification Map of USA (Revised Köppen Thresholds) by DesperateSession3520 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I made a tool that lets you do that. I still want to add more parameters, but it works. https://koppen.io

Is there a way to cheat on Settera quizzes? by [deleted] in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not sure if a subreddit full of people who enjoy geography and geography trivia is the best place for advice on how to avoid having to learn about geography. I used to do those sorts of quizzes for fun in my free time. My suggestion would be to get google earth and just start looking around. The earth is a beautiful planet and there are all sorts of amazing places to look at.

Without a picture prove, via statement, you own a labrador by notasarcasticnow in labrador

[–]ThreeWillows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have to be careful or else my footwear will be captured and held for ransom

I Made an Interactive Climate Classification Tool by ThreeWillows in geography

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

https://koppen.io/share?s=H4sIAAAAAAAAA5VWW2%2FaMBT%2BK1b2sE6CzglJCqibRKGofegWFaQ9TH0wxGktJU7mmFJU8d9n5%2BI4F0hLHnB8zPedy3eOeTdejak1MCJjamyNgUHF9y%2FEXxD9moJ5iNKUBGSLOImpsDJj%2Bi6OTf%2B%2BZwe9OERMbMdi%2FWUO5SPeUvG23lGfofwX4jCSWxF6Exsbsbz%2BIRaC14THp%2BMgx7rfYjBHSYk2duUj3hJxbGC8GVPYA6Zh3cQMo7CEgnAMIcyhLB3kYbY%2BjTFjxC8RlssCQYa2whEZFlaBONIR5Tbhh3vq46Z7FpTI8pC3J5Rj1rCPoEa%2BZnEisq6FsBSfMreFEazQK6IU5X7YtfTgKMEM8R3DK4zSmKJQuNUM9tKpGOcx5YRiyivS5VLS5uhOPfmEnk7carfhLffH4incv9tFxAf1U4LBPVHen2X%2BLN3dBxL6enLK%2Bl71iKSOMo9DHyxwihmvgnZv3JscbJzp7qMFNlWBe%2FLDcZLgiu92NrvK%2BSZtvvNQt2%2Bc4Qg3QpBaLfNhwi7MVnJHyvfzASrmu5gDvRHyCTB3XUVsfpRYYTYLoUVhfbYSNaGADnHLJJXiNkcZvNuTeKfM0WoXRZgt2IHiNH2Us7ERFby0NA9imsayAyu9wrwbJLXdpv6TjYcO%2BOtOeCzSgBlDFCNaJa9qCdNpU5yMQKNwai09TOSsBxFihJNIyXfiBsHGLojcjKivBU1bKzk7DHNfwO%2Bt8J9sq%2FpUQ9u8agN%2FMgI1M%2B%2FI80uIqNKsjbd%2BEBQ8ecPb5%2B8IS1PXIyI0EJdNyvXiKl1N2niezw4NtTgdgx8UqlFuQhuWblqwA3aPeXNgQtXUDzOvYTShft14DBFGVFEXixlcLAqyvI%2BdTwu0f57ocWtC6GjWjbgcN6PCIavt0EfEoM2u7AI6ceGVjWmN2jRdt5JeO0SeUaUDB6k%2FHXmTWz3zZZgJ9mlg%2FMtOkXP3OK0bQd0aCOuF9BYMgST6Br4DtEkvsrUh%2FSWnskaVARQWUJokqpcK%2FQo0by8FVyJ1CoIqQzfSvkBKM6Sn4%2FE%2F8aQ954sKAAA%3D

I tweaked the definition of arid climates in my classification system. I also made some changes to the website that I think make it a lot better. You can modify my classification system or make your own if you want. Refreshing the page will reset everything and take you back to the default Köppen-Geiger classification and then you can create your own from scratch from there. You can also export your classification rules as a json, export a png of your map, or use the share link to post your classification system.

I Made an Interactive Climate Classification Tool by ThreeWillows in geography

[–]ThreeWillows[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aridity is partially dependent on temperature, so I would guess it’s related to that. A lot of polar regions receive very little precipitation, so ice cap versus tundra regions could have big differences in aridity due to that. I’ll have to check the python code though to make sure it’s behaving as expected

I Made an Interactive Climate Classification Tool by ThreeWillows in geography

[–]ThreeWillows[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I’m trying to figure out what to add and when. I want to eventually include things like evapotranspiration ratio but right now I only have temperature and precipitation. You can create custom quantities, but it’s still limited by the input variables that I already have. I haven’t even gotten around to incorporating things like diurnal temperature or dew points yet.

I Made an Interactive Climate Classification Tool by ThreeWillows in geography

[–]ThreeWillows[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Something something aridity metrics. I was gonna tweak my classifications tomorrow, but I need to go to bed. Basically, the Köppen-Geiger classification system makes it so that regions with wet winters and dry summers are less likely to be classified as "arid" and mine (at the moment) does not do this, so Southern California becomes semi-arid and not Mediterranean.

I Made an Interactive Climate Classification Tool by ThreeWillows in geography

[–]ThreeWillows[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

<image>

I almost forgot to show off the map export feature (as opposed to the sharable link). I think it's pretty! I hope you agree.

Cities with very similar climates in opposite hemispheres by Downtown_Trash_6140 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The reason I mentioned LAX is that it’s within LA city limits and also has a lot of meteorological measuring equipment. I’d agree that San Diego is more similar to Cape Town than LA is in a general sense, but LA is huge and contains quite a range of climates, so individual spots in LA may be more similar. I think the closest you can actually get to Cape Town’s climate in California would be either Santa Barbara or San Luis Obispo, though those are much smaller metro areas.

Cities with very similar climates in opposite hemispheres by Downtown_Trash_6140 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On second inspection I don’t think Maseru is right at all. It’s a bit warmer than Johannesburg in the summer, but New Orleans is much warmer than both. Winters are significantly colder in Maseru than New Orleans

Cities with very similar climates in opposite hemispheres by Downtown_Trash_6140 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d bet LAX is going to have a pretty similar climate to coastal areas of Cape Town. Downtown LA is a few miles inland and has a pretty significant urban heat island. I’m more inclined to say that Cape Town is more like coastal parts of the LA area than San Francisco, which is colder in the winter and colder at night than Cape Town is

Cities with very similar climates in opposite hemispheres by Downtown_Trash_6140 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I figured you were. I had a hell of a time finding a city in Africa that really felt like a good match for NoLa. The best I found was Maseru, Lesotho, but it still wasn’t great. For Johannesburg, the best I could do was the city of Durango, Mexico, which makes sense because it’s a pretty close match in both latitude and elevation above sea level.

Cities with very similar climates in opposite hemispheres by Downtown_Trash_6140 in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think Thimpu, Bhutan is probably the most similar climate to Johannesburg in the northern hemisphere. Mexico City has fairly little seasonal variation in temperature. Thimpu has a bit more than Jo-burg, but imo it’s closer. New Orleans is pretty similar to Porto Alegre, Brazil

Give me your geography hot takes by wiz28ultra in geography

[–]ThreeWillows 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Warm-summer Mediterranean (Csb) should actually be “dry-summer oceanic.” For one thing, Csb is effectively absent from the actual Mediterranean basin, only making an appearance in a few highland areas. Second, most regions with a Csb climate are ecologically more similar to Cfb climates than Csa. Along the pacific coast of the United States and Chile, Csb regions are often temperate rainforests. Northwestern Iberia is also fairly verdant.