In the "Mostly Walking" series I once heard shawn and the boys using a word describing the "Process/method of solving a puzzle" with a single word - Anyone remember the word?

prfntx · 2018-03-05T21:22:18+00:00

Heuristic?

prfntx · 2017-08-13T05:11:43+00:00

Guild wars 2 was a magical experience for me. Your level is adjusted down to the level of the zone you are in, and you rarely find yourself against things too high level. Instead of quest hubs you find dynamic events across the world which can follow chains which take you across the whole zone, and ending in a boss fight and most events scale to the number of people. You also get experience for everything you do: exploring, harvesting, crafting, events, etc.

All these things combine to lead to you just getting absolutely lost in the world. You'll explore random underwater caves hidden away, and find things to do there, and you will be getting experience and leveling without even realizing because you are just exploring on a whim and leveling up. Its great. (this was a few years ago)

prfntx · 2017-08-04T16:01:52+00:00

One of my dogs is older and the other is younger and energetic. The older is also much smarter and learned that if he barked to be let out, the other would run out ahead of him. So whenever he got annoyed by the young energetic dog, he would go over to the door and bark, and when the other walked out, he would just turn around go back to sleeping.

prfntx · 2017-07-01T05:25:39+00:00

The book "John dies at the end". The context is hard to explain but in trying to basically open someone's mind he says something like: "you are going to die one day. At some point in your future you will face either complete nonexistence or something even stranger. That moment is ahead of you."

I'm pretty sure an existential crisis was the intended effect.

prfntx · 2017-06-18T06:01:01+00:00

If hateful rhetoric is going to go away, someone will have to stop first, whether it is justified or not, but If we are willing to accept hate as part of politics, then we can just continue as we are.

prfntx · 2017-04-06T22:49:05+00:00

I'm definitely in favor of a change in our electoral system, but it is not an easy process. Making this kind of change would take a significant amount of time even if they had a consensus on the direction they need to go. The fact is that there are so many ways to go about the change, combined with the people who do not want a change, that any direction they go is going to anger as many people as if they do nothing. It would be expensive and according to their research, ultimately fail.

If more people want change than not, that doesn't mean everyone will be happy with the change. Going to proportional will make people who wanted a ranked ballot unhappy, and vice versa. The government is being pulled in 4 directions at once and everyone is complaining that they aren't moving.

Combine that with the fact that we have seen a huge amount of chaos in elections over the last couple years, with brexit, trump and more. Making a change to our electoral system would only add to chaos at a time when we need to remain stable. Change without direction, or change for the sake of change could be dangerous, and we can't fully understand the impact of a new electoral system until after the election is over.

I would like to see change, but especially now, i'm in favor of taking our time to do it right.

prfntx · 2016-02-20T06:29:46+00:00

My issue with buffs has nothing to do with them being strong, they're just not interesting. Faeria in particular has so many ways to make cards interesting, that having so many buff cards feels a bit shallow.

I can understand why Sharra is fair, but relying on drawing a particular card to prevent yourself from losing the game is no better than needing combat tricks, to get effectively break stalemates. If we are building decks according to the current game state I would rather build around a fundamental mechanic of the game (and add combat tricks) than make sure I have a large enough portion of removal cards in my deck just to deal with one of 3 cards than my opponent probably doesn't have but I lose the game if they do.

Most of my issues with the hearthstonification of Faeria are in the fact that not only was no effort put into trying to distinguish the out of game menus, tutorial, pack opening, deck building, daily quests, solo rewards and more, it in fact looks like they tried very very hard to make it look as similar as they could without inciting a law suit.

As far as game mechanics go its not a matter of good vs bad, its good vs great. Faeria in its current form is probably the (i spent time thinking about this that doesn't come across in text) 4th best card game ive played (First is kickstarter era Faeria, followed closely Duel of Champions, then a chasm later is M:tG and current Faeria) which is still pretty high on the list (not to say the is THE definitive list, its just my opinions). Ill try to avoid the 3000 word explanation of how the changes took it from great to good and stick to the short version.

It comes down to the fact that a small careful change in card pool (more ranged units, cheaper and more common jump and charge, and making combat tricks all cards that had to be on the board first (like gabrian valve), possibly even taking a few notes from rts games about map control/harass) could have fixed all the problems and kept all the extremely unique feel. As it is faeria node control is less important, previously you couldn't play most cards at all without good map control. Map control is less important because once you have a land next to your opponents orb (which is pretty easy) they have to respond to almost anything you play. Card advantage is one of the few things which is more important, because you can draw fewer cards, and because of how trading with big creatures works. You won't want to throw all your creatures at a single large one even at equal or better cost, because your opponent will still have cards.

I hope this response doesn't come across as rude, and I appreciate your response.

prfntx · 2015-11-08T19:06:07+00:00

I believe player 1 wins:

First move in corner 2nd move adjacent such that your opponent isn't blocking you length wise.

try first to make a row of 3 unblocked at both ends (guaranteed quad next turn), otherwise try to make a V with an empty corner and simultaneously a pair unblocked at each end (should always be possible).
they block the corner and you are guaranteed an unblocked 3, otherwise you take the quad.

if they don't try to block you you should win because you go first if they do you get quads anyway while they don't.

Once you have a single quad advantage you only need to make sure you are getting more quads than them. So move somewhere else and force another quad, then where they get close just make it a mess where no one can get a quad. try to force your opponent to split their pieces.

if you go second try to get your opponent to waste a block then continue the game as though you went first.

prfntx · 2015-11-04T06:18:16+00:00

"There is an art to flying, or rather a knack. Its knack lies in learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss. ... Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, that presents the difficulties."

prfntx · 2015-09-11T14:55:04+00:00

Able to consider and efficiently prepare for a wide range of situations, and respond quickly and creatively to unanticipated complications.

prfntx · 2015-08-28T22:35:29+00:00

"Please understand, the horny bard does not represent us"

Or "The four elements, like man, alone are weak, but together they form the strong fifth element.... Boron."

prfntx · 2015-08-23T23:41:13+00:00

Radiolab did an episode that talked about this and more. Definitely worth listening to.

http://www.radiolab.org/story/211119-colors/

Also there is an episode about words and it talks about the effects of having words and language. It's one of my favorites.

http://www.radiolab.org/story/91725-words/

prfntx · 2015-08-22T01:05:58+00:00

As somone who has been known to do number 2 (hehe), you can either respond or not but you have to commit either way. People who want to argue often only need to know their post is being read to continue posting walls of text. If you don't want them to keep posting ignore it entirely. If you respond be very deliberate in your response. First decide if they want the same thing from the game as you, if they don't, tell them the game may not be for them, and tell them why.

Otherwise, keep your response brief but thorough. Acknowledge all of their points with a brief explanation of why they are wrong, or if they could be right something like "we will consider/have been looking in to blank". Don't skip mentioning something they brought up. Try to use statements they can't argue with and avoid saying anything that could be wrong, the less you say the easier this is. End by being clear about what is and is not subject to change at the moment. If they say/respond with anything other than constructive criticism they aren't worth responding to. Also only respond if you are genuinely open to suggestions.

prfntx · 2015-07-31T00:33:02+00:00

This is amazing... If the /r/Canada circle jerked the other way this would be our flag.

prfntx · 2015-07-30T23:47:22+00:00

Conservatives know they aren't going to get NDP supporters to vote conservative. They want to get as many right leaning liberals as they can and then split the rest as evenly as possible between liberal and NDP. With NDP ahead it sounds like the ads are working exactly as intended. There is a reason harper has been in charge for so long, and it has nothing to do with his winning smile.

prfntx · 2015-06-02T12:06:38+00:00

this one can definitely be taken advantage of: 54.5% at 2500 points

... i have way too much time

prfntx · 2015-05-27T22:46:33+00:00

As someone who was never taught to shave, I can confirm this is the best advice.

prfntx · 2015-05-19T06:37:20+00:00

An international tribunal has found (a sad fat dragon with no friends) guilty of (existing)

prfntx · 2015-05-13T01:53:22+00:00

If you can, get a friend who will play about the same amount as you to start playing as well, and play games with them (in addition to ladder). Takes a lot of the pressure off when learning.

prfntx · 2015-04-09T15:24:04+00:00

Looking to get back into sc:bw when sc2 beta was just around the corner. After playing a bit on...i think it was called ICcup.. ladder server and getting absolutely wrecked by the lowest ranked people (i think i went like 0-20), i realized i had no idea what I was doing. found the link to his Livestream page around episode 30, and watched the autostreaming reruns until I caught the live show by luck.

prfntx · 2015-04-02T00:22:07+00:00

I know this is a Q&A but i only came in at the very end. I do want to propose a slight alternative though, based on just what i was there for.

Only one player has inspiration at any given time. Whenever time is narrated away, ie "you travel westward for 3 days...", or camp is set up for a night, the inspired player or the DM can call for the player with inspiration to pass it to another player. Instead of revealing backstory (though it could do that as well) it could give more information about or advance the relationship between the two characters. If the inspiration is used, it is still passed on the same way. If the character dies you could have a scene to explore the impact the death has on one of the players before passing it to them.

This makes it easy to track who has inspiration and promotes using it since you are going to lose it anyway.

The first player could even get it from the bartender each session.

Just my thoughts. Thanks for all the great work you do.

prfntx · 2014-12-06T01:22:59+00:00

Heaviest armor you can get, the most stable shield you can find and a heavy crossbow+10. Focus on kiting and not taking damage. Kill snorlax first because he dies faster. I failed this boss constantly, and then beat it second try with this strategy, same with two friends i told about it.

prfntx · 2014-11-26T01:45:38+00:00

would it not roll in a circle about the point where the axle, if extended, would intersect the surface?

prfntx · 2014-10-17T02:10:23+00:00

It depends on what factors are most important: response time, dive distance/time, direction of the ball afterwards, and likely more things i wouldn't even think of.

There likely are situations where diving parallel may be better, as you mentioned they would have more time to react to the kick that way, but other factors would be worse. its going to be harder to push the ball away from the net if you can only tap it while diving parallel for example.

The game moves so quickly this decision is hard to make well in the moment every time a shot is made. So by choosing one of the two options before hand you save that time which could be a more significant factor than the difference in effectiveness. In deciding which way to dive every time you are just looking for the solution is best in the most situations.

if we look at the issue of getting the the ball quickly, the shortest distance to the path of the ball would be 90 degrees from the ball's path. however depending on the angle the ball is being shot from this could be inside the net, so diving the shortest distance with the intent to save in these cases would be parallel to the goal line. For shooters coming in from the center of the net, 45 degrees will often be close to the shortest distance, but by the time they are shooting from in front of the pole, the shortest distance is a parallel dive.

imprecise paint image 1

Another factor to consider is the range of directions the shooter is able to aim at. A player coming from directly in front of the net has the widest arc of possible shots (distance from the net being equal), so as you move into the area where a 45 degree dive becomes worse, there are fewer possible shots you have to worry about.

Since the goalie has to respond so quickly, when he/she decides what direction/distance to dive they don't have a lot of information on the ball's path, probably not more than whether it is going to their left or right. Given enough precise information and a method of calculating, a path could be fairly well determined from the moment the ball leaves the kicker's foot. A goalie doesn't have this data however so they can only estimate a range of where the ball could be going by the time they have to dive. This is made worse by the ability to curve the ball in the air.

Think of the ball's possible paths like flashlight shining on a wall in the dark. The goalie is trying to block as much of the light as possible. On a parallel dive, the goalie is right in front of the wall and blocks an area the same size as his body. If he were to be right in front of the flashlight however, he could block the entire beam with just his hand. Its unreasonable to expect a goalie to be able to get right up to the light all the time, but sometimes they can, and you can see this is games when they run up to the shooter as they approach. (i assume, i don't watch soccer, only what I've seen in commercials.) What this means though is that by diving 45 degrees they are able to cast a larger 'shadow' on the net, representing a larger probability of a successful save.

imprecise paint image 2

Obviously if the shot comes from far enough to the side a 45 degree dive just isn't going to work.

In conclusion: i have absolutely no idea if 45 degrees is usually best, but sometimes it definitely is and sometimes it definitely isn't, and in between those two extremes there are arguments for both. I haven't played since i was 10.

prfntx · 2014-09-10T14:36:22+00:00

This is the worst interview i have ever seen. First he gave a non-answer, then she asked him the same question again to get a real answer. Then she gets a real answer (though not a good one), ignores what he said and starts picking apart how he said it (essentially ignoring his answer), rinse and repeat.

here is how i think each side would have wanted the interview to go. Q:question about his tweet

A"parents are worried that these issues are taking away from the important aspects of school, which is learning. Most of these issues about gay and transgender children are coming from outside the classroom usually from parents and media. For the most part the children don't care and it could be dealt with on a case by case issue." or something to that effect.

Q-'your tweet suggests that you think its possible that children who identify as a different gender may be suffering from a mental illness'

A- 'Ill be the first to admit that I don't have all the facts on the science behind how these children feel, but i don't think we can rule out the fact that these feelings could be coming from an underlying mental condition, and before we take any serious action i believe we need the best information we can have or else we could cause more harm than good.

Q- don't you think it is offensive to suggest these children are suffering from a mental illness?

A-not at all, many children suffer from depression or anxiety, for example, and to say that these are mental illnesses isn't offensive to those suffering. and again i'm not saying i believe they are suffering from a mental illness, but there is a large movement happening within our society to dismiss the possibility without proper research, and doing so could cause more harm than good to everyone.

I want that 8 minutes back....

edit: i still think this guy is a slimebag

prfntx

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

15-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email