Hi disappointed, I’m dad.
I mean you knew that rant of yours was crazy stupid, right?
Like you were saying it ironically just because you knew it was so stupid that it was funny
right? /padme
https://i.chzbgr.com/full/9621283584/hA3CF4924/clothing
1 Like
I’m taking that as an unequivocal “yes, yes I did”
1 Like
Srsly tho, that was “I like my Jesus in a tuxedo T-shirt” levels of comedic writing. Criminally underliked post, you get all my awards, I’m a little jealous
You’re still wrong about no wrong threats tho
Edit: oh shoot I didn’t even like it somehow. No wonder you’re confused. I am the criminal. Fixed
1 Like
In case there are any lingering doubts, let the air be cleared here: I absolutely was trying to take the punch out of this topic by saying something intentionally nonsensical. I’m also a casual marvel fan (I’ve seen all the movies but I’ve never dabbled in the comics) so I used Deadpool and Wolverine as inspiration.
I also interpreted your “disappointment” as a subtle play on how the topic had shifted towards ambiguity regarding online social cues, hence why I responded with lighthearted snark. It’s all good over here as far as I’m concerned.
Eh. Might could be. But then again, I’m only here until my laundry finishes.
And who told you that you being annoyed is incorrect behavior of mine? I’m annoyed by your behavior: what makes your behavior better: just because you don’t “feel comfy”?
E.g. you had trouble deciphering what Hypocrisy means; I told you that you overthink it; if you got offended I don’t care: it’s what I thought is right: I didn’t say it to make you feel good.
1 Like
You don’t get the basics here. I know you are annoyed sometimes: who told you that when I post my sole purpose is to not annoy you?
Has it ever crossed your mind that YOU being annoyed doesn’t necessarily mean others are annoyed or that I’m wrong?
1 Like
Don’t ever change, Carnivore. You keep it real around here.
Not sure if sarcastic· you come here preaching that I’m somehow not in tune about how you feel and what you mean.
I’ve very aware that someone may feel hostile when someone else says something,
The most common theme on the internet is to be annoyed when you’re corrected.
Right now, I am genuinely:
- Not annoyed
- Not sarcastic
- Wanting to wish you a pleasant evening
1 Like
Wish you a pleasant evening too.
1 Like
Do you really think that’s how it works?
I can count the few people who are annoyed by me on the fingers of my left hand. You, on the other hand, annoy everyone, or almost everyone, with that part of your behavior.
Now, even though I’d prefer it wasn’t that way in general, unfortunately this is how it works: if you don’t fit in the majority, you’re going to get mocked, avoided or bullied. And that’s why we try to fit in, and that means adjusting our behavior if we notice most people are annoyed with ours.
Nope, sorry, but that’s not nearly what happened. What happened was I quoted two distinct, but both valid, definitions of “hypocrisy” from online sources, both highly esteemed. In light of that evidence, you’ll have to forgive me for ignoring your nonsense.
As I said above, no, I wasn’t offended because I’m used to occasional nonsense from you, so I simply ignored it.
However, that sentence of yours which I just quoted offends me.
I might sometimes sound like I don’t care, but I do care. Truth sometimes hurts, but what hurts more in the long run, is not knowing something because noone had the cojones to tell you.
I know you will agree with this, but you will think I’m projecting. That’s ok. You’ll learn some day, if you decide to.
I surprised folks actually plan something.
Hearthstone is a tempo based game so the best way to make your opponent not have an answer is to just overhelm they with boards to answer.
The only planning you can do is with your spare tempo if you can do something like a draw cards or prepare something for next turns if your deck allow you to.
Hearthstone is about doing things on the fly and before anyone say anything about ranks. I at the border of top 1k NA at the momment.
Somewhere around 950-1000.
– Every top Hearthstone player, ever.
These words need to be immortalized.
Not get me wrong.
It is just that this isn’t the type of skill i’m envision on hearthstone when playing.
The sheer amount of randoness makes the best player to be the one who better adapts to situations and knows when to take risks regardless of winning or losing that single game.
The idea that you can slowly get things to go your way just not fits into modern hearthstone.
I’m more of a gambler than a planner. I see the routes i can take and decide based on some things:
- Risk
- Reward
- My humor on the day. Yes, sometimes i take wild and unnecessary risks just because i feeling like it.
1 Like
This reasoning, while sounding tantalizing simple, actually doesn’t work.
Let me give you an example.
A lot of high rolls may result in a game win, thus, if you use this simple bayesian utilization maximising approach, you immediately hit a problem.
You should score winning a game with effectively infinite value. Therefore, even if the high roll is 1e-12 (ie lower chance than winning the Powerball lottery) you should always go for the high roll, since infinity multiplied by any positive number is infinity.
The subtlety your missing is that the set of possible outcomes is finite, albeit incredibly difficult to compute. The correct way to reason is to enumerate all possible outcomes after performing an action, and scoring that action by the percent of those outcomes that result in a won game.
What I described above is a very well understood problem known as estimating the partition function, where the partition function is the normalization constant for the probability density of the set of outcomes conditioned on the current move under consideration.
This then needs to be repeated for all possible branches or moves.
I hope this shows you and other readers how complex this task is, oversimplify it using Bayesian utility maximization is reductionist.
I was thinking more about this, and although I mostly stand by what I’ve said before — what I said before was that planning for worst case is always wrong — I think I was exaggerating a bit. Allow me to elaborate.
I think an important principle here, which I also mentioned earlier, is that you shouldn’t try to play around something that you can’t play around. For example, let’s say that you’re in a bad spot, and you’re worried your opponent might have a great answer. There’s a good chance that if you play into it and “take max damage” from it you lose, and if you play around it and “take half damage” you still lose. So the right play, almost all the time, is to play into it so you’d take full damage if they have it, because realistically that’s your only decent chance of winning — them not having it. Bad spot, play to good case. This was my focus earlier in the thread.
However, this principle applies in the other direction when you’re in a good spot. In a great spot for you, if they don’t have the great answer, then you’re almost certainly going to win. So you should assume that they do have the answer and try to only take “half damage” if they have it, because taking full damage is the only way you could lose from being so far ahead.
In other words, when you’re in a better than average current position then you want to play towards worse than average futures, but when your current position is worse than average then you want to play towards better than average futures. The core idea being that the close matches are the ones where choice matters most, so you assume that the current situation plus the future situation equals a close game; if it’s a blowout, one way or the other, your choices probably don’t much matter, either you’ll win either way or you’ll lose either way.
So I guess the one case where playing to the worst case makes sense, is if you’re currently in the best case scenario. You have almost a complete lock on the game as is, so some ridiculous comeback is the only thing to be genuinely concerned about. But having the best case in the present is pretty rare, really; it’s still an almost never kind of deal that the worst case future is worth seriously considering.
TLDR knowing what future to play towards, in terms of best to worst, is dependent upon evaluating the present, in terms of worst to best.
1 Like
Honestly this game has no strategy left in it… so arguing whether to play around this or that is silly. Dump your massive mana cheat stat board on turn 5 and hope your opponent cant remove it.
Thats hearthstone… theres nothing to think about. “but I dont have the stat cheat combo” then you lose. Simple.
That’s just a dumb goal to have in your life. Maybe the majority are wrong; by conforming to them you become wrong; also you just legitimized bullying which is funny in itself.
You also contradict yourself; you had announced you are here to educate the masses; if the masses need education why would you become uneducated to fit with them?