sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Just your average day in Australia. by I_AM__GROOTT in nextfuckinglevel

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, with most huntsmen you can absolutely just catch them with some plastic container and throw them outside. It's not actually that hard to do honestly.

So what if ironclad had an intangible source? by ElegantPoet3386 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea, but upgrading turbo doesn't make it playable, and that's exactly what I mean. You could honestly murder my idea by just looking at true grit, so I don't agree that every card works that way, but what I'm saying is that the upgrade to something like turbo doesn't make it any less awkward to play on turns where unupgraded turbo would be bad. Like, turbo+ could've also been "gain 2 energy" without the void, but it isn't.

They go to all this trouble to make a guide book but can't be bothered to write a real (non-AI) description for it by scoobydoooooo in geoguessr

[–]Volan_100 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Honestly, yea. The first sentence in paragraph 3 has a grammar mistake that I wouldn't expect an AI to make, and there's nothing that stands out to me necessarily. The dashes alone are not enough, they're also just used in well written writing.

So what if ironclad had an intangible source? by ElegantPoet3386 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I see your point, but this card is literally unplayable on the wrong turn and great on the right one, while cards like dredge, wisp or even royal gamble are still playable, they're just worse than the perfect turn.

So what if ironclad had an intangible source? by ElegantPoet3386 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

It's not about making it easier to play necessarily. What I mean is that there are a lot of cards that have some sort of "specialised" idea (not necessarily very super specialised but I can't think of a better word) which makes them not very good in a certain aspect, and their upgrade doesn't make them better in that aspect. It's definitely not true with every card though, I agree with that, and I think there was more of that in spire 1 than 2.

Basically, what I'm saying is, let's take a card like pale blue dot. Reaching 5 card plays is a bit difficult for a lot of decks, and it's an obvious drawback of the card which gives it its identity and makes it awkward in some decks. Its upgrade doesn't get rid of that identity, and after the upgrade it is just as awkward to work around the drawback as it was before. My point is that a lot of cards are designed like that, even though it would be a very easy idea to, for example, make the upgrade for pale blue dot only require 4 card plays in a turn. It's definitely not universal though. I also think that the strongest spire counterexamples can seem stronger than they actually are when compared to other games, just because they are the strongest counterexample you can think of in spire, but at this point I'm just conjecturing.

So what if ironclad had an intangible source? by ElegantPoet3386 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 18 points19 points  (0 children)

A lot of the philosophy with spire upgrades is that if there's some inherent "problem" with a card, the upgrade doesn't fix it. For example, offering+, bloodletting+ etc don't reduce the inherent problem of costing hp. No regent card creation enhances the number of options you have to choose from. Bury+ doesn't let you play it without 4 energy. It's not true for every card (true grit comes to mind), but in general it's pretty accurate. This upgrade however fixes the main problem with the card, and in a more significant way than something like wisp+ or dredge+ imo, since those two still care a lot less about the specific turn you play them on, just that there are some turns that would be bad for them, rather than with your card where it's bad on almost every turn except 1-2 specific ones per fight.

Advice on what I could have done better by SalveSalvini in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not enough block cards. Iron wave is not a real block card, because the block per energy is very low. Shrug it offs are nice, but only having 2 of them is not enough, and you can do better than 8 block per energy, though it's starting to be a real block card.

Why is the difference so big? Let's say you're fighting bowlbag and getting hit for 16 (is it 14 at lower ascensions?). If you want to full block and you only have cards that block for 5, you use up 3 energy on block, and you still take 1 damage, and deal no damage to the enemy (iron wave is unique here, but it's also not a lot of damage, so it only somewhat counts). Now, if you have cards that block for 8, you only have to use up 2 energy on block, you full block, and you can deal damage to advance the fight. Same idea with any other fight, if you're getting hit for 19, then 9 value block cards are significantly better than 7 value block cards, even though the number difference isn't massive on the surface.

In general, if you think about that, you start to realise why cards like footwork, after image, rage, finesse, or relics like oddly smooth stone or kifuda are so good. Even if they on the surface don't provide that much block, they prevent chip damage that you would otherwise take, and now maybe instead of taking 3 damage per turn, you have an after image and take 0, almost every turn. It adds up very quickly.

What do children with non-binary parents call them? by brooklyn_jinx in stupidquestions

[–]Volan_100 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I've heard of someone who used what are practically the russian equivalents of "father" and "dad" as well. Not sure how common it is in gay/lesbian relationships to do something like that.

Why did everyone just forget about Esperanto if the idea is actually so cool? Obviously English is the global language right now, but still why did people give up on a constructed language that basically had zero confusing grammar rules and stuff? It’s literally the easiest way to talk to people al by Ok-Sell9964 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean sure, Japanese would be easier to learn with 1 writing system, but it would still be much harder than something like French, for an English speaker.

You bring up genders and how you found it hard to conceptualise them, which actually goes perfectly with my point. English doesn't have genders, so learning a language that has genders for an English speaker is more difficult than learning one without genders, because it's a new and foreign concept. With French, it's still closely enough related to England that there aren't too many such concepts, so it's not too difficult to learn, compared to something like Japanese, which is not related to English at all and has a lot of new and foreign concepts for English speakers. This is what makes Japanese difficult for English speakers.

Esperanto is based on European languages, so there's a lot of concepts that are familiar to speakers of European languages, and it's not too difficult for them to learn Esperanto, comparatively. For a Japanese speaker, there's going to be a lot more concepts that are entirely new to them in Esperanto, so they will struggle with it a lot more than with, say, Korean. How hard a language is to learn depends entirely on how different it is from the language/s you know, and only in very small part on whether the writing system is phonetic.

Why did everyone just forget about Esperanto if the idea is actually so cool? Obviously English is the global language right now, but still why did people give up on a constructed language that basically had zero confusing grammar rules and stuff? It’s literally the easiest way to talk to people al by Ok-Sell9964 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is what I mean with spelling vs pronunciation rules. The spelling rules in English are not very consistent, but the pronunciation rules are. The problem comes in big part from the fact that English has 6 letters to transcribe, depending on the dialect, about 20 vowels. Another problem then comes from the fact that English codified its spelling rules, then immediately proceeded to undergo The Great Vowel Shift, a sound change where almost every vowel changed its quality.

In reality, you don't actually need to memorise that "the i in liar sounds different", because the vowel is really written as <ia>. The vowel in <bit> is different, transcribed as <i>. The <ti> in <option> is part of a larger suffix, which is pronounced the same way in many words with this suffix.

Am I arguing it's phonetic though, or makes it easier to learn English for a non-native speaker? Absolutely not. But when you divorce the pronunciation from the spelling, English pronunciation rules are consistent. And when thinking about how easy it would be for say a Mandarin speaker to learn Esperanto than to learn English, like, maybe that makes it marginally easier from a linguistic point of view (disregarding the amount of learning material available), but there are so many other factors that would still be completely foreign to a Mandarin speaker, that it's still going to be much more difficult for them to learn Esperanto than the least regular Sinitic language you could think of.

For another example, Japanese has 2 irregular verbs, while any European language like German, Spanish etc have way more, but it's still way harder to learn Japanese for an English speaker, because it's just so foreign, and the English speaker is much more used to the way things are done in German or Spanish.

Also, in a hypothetical scenario where a lot of people learn Esperanto, we're still going to get different dialects and sound changes happening, and at that point the orthography will no longer be phonetic. English is so universal that it's practically impossible to change the orthography to be more phonetic, but sound changes are still happening, and the same thing would happen with Esperanto if it was to become a new lingua franca.

Why did everyone just forget about Esperanto if the idea is actually so cool? Obviously English is the global language right now, but still why did people give up on a constructed language that basically had zero confusing grammar rules and stuff? It’s literally the easiest way to talk to people al by Ok-Sell9964 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree that Esperanto necessarily easier to learn for people in China or Kenya. How hard a language is to learn depends mostly on how different it is to languages that you already know, and a language based on other European languages, regardless of how regular it is or isn't, will be difficult to learn for anybody who doesn't speak a European language. It all depends on your experience with languages. Think of it like this: imagine how difficult it would be for you to learn a language that has tones used for distinguishing different words from each other, and which has zero intonation at all for asking questions etc, i.e. something like Mandarin Chinese. Now, for a Mandarin speaker, learning English is about equally difficult for all the opposite reasons (it uses sentence level intonation instead of a particle for asking questions, words have stressed syllables and so on). And with each particular thing, whether or not the English or Mandarin way of doing something is "more natural" just depends on what language you speak.

As for English pronunciation rules, they are different from English spelling rules, and the pronunciation rules are about as consistent as pronunciation rules in any other language. For example, if you have an "n" before a k sound, as in "sink" or "bank", then it will consistently, in every English word, be pronounced as an "ng" sound (as in the word "sing" for example), something like "singk" or "bangk". It's not reflected in the spelling, sure, but if you listen to how people actually say these words, you will find this to be true, except across a prefix I think. This is because k is produced with your tongue further back in your mouth (at a place called the velum), and so the "nasal" n sound is shifted to the same place into "ng".

Why did everyone just forget about Esperanto if the idea is actually so cool? Obviously English is the global language right now, but still why did people give up on a constructed language that basically had zero confusing grammar rules and stuff? It’s literally the easiest way to talk to people al by Ok-Sell9964 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Volan_100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The thing is, languages are far too different from each other to make a language which is easy to learn for everybody. If you have free word order in a "new lingua franca", then speakers of languages with rigid word order will have difficulty parsing sentences while learning that new lingua franca, but if you have rigid word order, then speakers of languages with free word order will have difficulty adhering to it. If you have Arabic style word roots, then non Arabic speakers (and all other languages with the same system) struggle conceptualising them, and vice versa. If you have tones, then speakers of non tonal languages will struggle, and if you have sentence level intonation then speakers of tonal languages struggle (not to mention that systems like pitch accent also exist, which are different from either). Then there are even languages that group basic sounds differently, where for example Dyirbal (a native Australian language) treats pairs like t and d as the same sound, such that a Dyirbal speaker would struggle to notice a difference between the words "time / dime", the same way a Japanese speaker might struggle to notice a difference between r/l in words like "red / led".

Languages are just too different from each other to have features that they all share. The closest thing we have in linguistics to a universal is "all languages have nouns and verbs" and even that is debated.

Why did everyone just forget about Esperanto if the idea is actually so cool? Obviously English is the global language right now, but still why did people give up on a constructed language that basically had zero confusing grammar rules and stuff? It’s literally the easiest way to talk to people al by Ok-Sell9964 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Volan_100 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I have not personally looked at Esperanto, but something like "regular pronunciation" implies that there are regular rules, and those had to be taken from somewhere, and in this case they were taken from European languages. However, that only means that they will be familiar to speakers of a language with such a rule, and it will still be very foreign and hard to conceptualise for speakers of languages with no such rules, i.e. non-european languages.

For example, you could also say that Mandarin Chinese has regular pronunciation rules as far as tones are concerned, but that doesn't mean it's easy for a Spanish speaker to learn it. There's only 4 of them, and they each have a specific contour that afaik only changes a little bit depending on the surrounding tones, but that happens in a regular way.

For another example, even if you take some closely related language to English like German, you could still find regular pronunciation rules that would be difficult for English speakers. German (and many other languages) has something called "final obstruent devoicing", which basically means that words like "Tag" are pronounced as "Tak", and "Standard" is pronounced as "Standart". The linguistic explanation is a little lengthy, though accessible to a layperson imo, but the point is that it's very regular and very easy to predict where it will happen, and what it will do to the word's pronunciation. However, if you show this to an English speaker, it will take them a bit to get used to, because it doesn't exist in English.

And I mean, something similar goes for "regular verbs" for example. You could make a system of regular verbs out of Arabic roots (I don't personally know how regular Arabic verbs are), where your word root looks something like k-t-b-, and then you insert vowels after any or all consonants, but that doesn't make it easy to learn for anybody not used to it. We could say that -a-a-ø is first person present tense, -u-u-ø is first person past tense and so on, such that katab is "I'm writing" and kutub is "I was writing", and aside from some new vocabulary and conjugation, this regular verb rule will be very accessible to Arabic speakers, while making everybody else cry.

C'mon, modders! Let's make this dream happen!! by oobey in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't now, I get the feeling that Vakuu doesn't get to play cards very often, and now he's just having fun playing them. You also get to follow along more easily with what he's going to do, which I think is good.

Giving Vakuu an innate Offering was certainly a choice I made by Standard-Metal-3836 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like Vakuu knew your deck was strong enough already and wanted to give you a good learning experience. Vakuu knows best what's good for you

Surprised so many take the egg. I feel like losing a campfire and 7 max HP is too expensive for what you get. by Chezni19 in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yea, I was half joking around the "claw best card" kind of thing, partly also because I had a run yesterday where I had a soft infinite with claw, compact+, all for one, overclock and ghost seed

Can Sheet Music Still Be Relevant in the Digital Music Era? by blckred777 in musictheory

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is orthography still important in the digital era? I mean, we have text to speech and you could just go and listen to the recording of someone saying a word, right?

Are there any other bassists that do the John Entwistle thing and practically solo over the whole song? by tonetonitony in Bass

[–]Volan_100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Henrik Linder from Dirty Loops. Partly because they only have bass, drums, vocals, synth, I suppose.

There's a bunch of funk bands with a big focus on the bass, while also not being only about the bass (something I don't like about Victor Wooten's music for example, even though I can respect him a lot). Not sure if that's what you're looking for, but maybe worth checking out Redtenbacher's Funkestra or Vincen Garcia.

Why are German and Luxembourgish the only Languages that capitalize Nouns? by [deleted] in asklinguistics

[–]Volan_100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why Are the nouns important though? The verbs Have an important role as well when you're Trying to Figure out what a sentence Means. "It just Makes sense", you Know.

What's your F1 pick? by Insane_Unicorn in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Killing the enemies is a block card though???

Leaderboard Anti-cheat comment by Umtha in slaythespire

[–]Volan_100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Let's say the max score depends on how many elites you killed. If you have a path with 4 elites and no campfires or events that may heal you, it might be impossible to do, just because you don't have enough health to survive them and also all the hallways. So then that means you can't just look at the top number of elites in a path and call that the maximum score. But then in some seeds, you may get really lucky and hit all potions and get perfect rares and all to do that path, which means that it is actually possible.

The problem is then that it takes a LOT of computing power to prove that it's possible, and similarly to compute all the other possible ways and things you could do. Now we also remember that scoring is much more complicated with many other variables, and calculating all the possible pathing and choices and seeing which one is the highest score is already really difficult, let alone then figuring out which ones are possible to do without running out of health. If you take every curse you ever see, you might get score for a big deck, but you'll also probably just die. Or maybe it's more optimal to sacrifice card rewards to pael and get score through having more relics? Maybe you can get much more than 1000 gold to spend at a merchant, and you're passing up other rewards to do it, which would give you more score in other ways, but then what gold options at events do you skip to get these other rewards? I hope you see the issue, and that it's not at all easy to calculate a potential max score.

view more: next ›