Jump to content
  • Sign Up

razaelll.8324

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    453

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by razaelll.8324

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    make it seem like i was debating that 1 equals 2, which is definitely not what I was saying.

    I am glad that you see how the conversation looked like now and why i even decided to take a part of it. I think we can now end it here. Do you agree?

    Edit: And by the way i was serious about the ingame duel , i know that i will probably loose , but i am always up for a challenge and every duel is experience which helps me learn and improve.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:by answering on that dump question that 1 equals 2 you did exactly that

    Do you really think Ragnar asked me if 1 = 2. I mean this is probably the dumbest question in the history of the universe. Ragnar is not that incompetent man. If you think he asked this, then really your just throwing massive shade at him right now.

    If he admits that this is what he meant to ask, then okay, I'll be dumbfounded by why someone would ask such a dumb question.

    for me there are no "dump" questions thats your description of the question.

    Ask him mate, if thats not what he asked you then i will admit that i misinterpreted the conversation.

    What led me to believe that is what he asked you is that he asked you that same question multiple times also his answer to your response also lead me to the same conclusion.

    @Ragnar.4257 said:

    @Ragnar.4257 said:Exactly, we're NOT making a change that's equivalent to something else.

    We're NOT buffing A by 100, and also buffing B by 100. We're ONLY buffing A by 100. So yes there is a difference.

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:

    Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You do accept that scenarios 1 and 2 are different, right?

    zzz. Listen they are not different.

    Thanks for once again not addressing the scenario I posited, and making up one of your own.

    Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    I fully accept that +100 to A and -100 to B are equivalent and interchangeable. But that is not the scenario I am positing. Can you please address the scenario I am positing.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @razaelll.8324 said:

    so you are having a dialog with someone and you dont care what he is asking you? - - thats explains why it took you 4 pages of text to understand what we disagree on.

    Dude this is like if I asked you if 1 equals 2. how dumb do you think that kind of question is? If i assumed that Ragnar purposefully asked me such a dumb question, I would be doing him a disservice.

    by answering on that dump question with 1 equals 2 because 1+1 equal 2 and 2-1 equals 1 you did exactly that, namely:"doing him a disservice"

    Thats why i am telling you that you chose the wrong words to prove your point and what you wrote was not correct in terms of the question he asked you

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    so you are having a dialog with someone and you dont care what he is asking you? - - thats explains why it took you 4 pages of text to understand what we disagree on.

    Dude this is like if I asked you if 1 equals 2. how dumb do you think that kind of question is? If i assumed that Ragnar purposefully asked me such a dumb question, I would be doing him a disservice.

    by answering on that dump question that 1 equals 2 you did exactly that

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:he is asking you are this 2 specifically are equivalent and NO they are not equivalent to each other.

    They are NOT unique in respect to the system because both scenarios have equivalent counter scenario which lead to the same result.

    Every scenario has a equivalent scenarios that does not make all scenarios equivalent to each other it only shows that there is no unique scenario

    Dude this is what i said like 3 pages ago :

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said :His claim that buffing one class is meaningfully different operation then nerfing another class (or just leaving other classes alone), and that because he believes it's different, that this has meaning. I'm saying it's not different or a unique change, there is an infinite number of changes that give you the same resultant state of the system as a whole.

    literally spitting back verbatim...word for word what I explained to you over 3 pages ago.

    His claim that buffing one class is meaningfully different operation then nerfing another class

    He never claimed this.

    .I don't care if Ragnar specifically wanted to ask me 3=/=45 cause nobody cares about that it's irrelevant.so you are having a dialog with someone and you dont care what he is asking you? - - thats explains why it took you 4 pages of text to understand what we disagree on.

    But i am really done with you. this gone way beyond off topic and ridiculously stupid argument.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:Ragnar asked you specifically are A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0. He is asking you ARE THEY EQUIVALENT TO EACH OTHER

    He asked if the
    scenario's
    are equivalent, which they are...did you not read his words or do you need to take reading comprehension class again? The act of nerfing or buffing something literally makes no difference what you decide to do, as they both yield the the same end state of a system...so yes the scenarios are equivalent.

    @"Ragnar.4257" said:You're actually saying that
    Scenarios
    1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable.

    Scenarios

    And I said the "scenario's" are equivalent ...which they are... They aren't indistinguishable, you can clearly distinguish one scenario from another scenario...but they both will end up doing the same thing and changing the system with the same level of meaning.

    Anyway you are just trying to pick apart my argument with lingual semantics. Just because I didn't specify the word "scenario" doesn't mean I wasn't talking about the scenario...and just cause I didn't specify the word "indistinguishable" doesn't mean I said the two are exactly identical operations. If I wanted to say that, then I would have done so.

    The two operations lead to equivalent resultant states of the system therefor they are equivalent operations. End of story period. Is that exact English enough for you bud or do you want to specify that I'm speaking to you on Planet Earth, with a computer, typing on a keyboard, and that the year is 2021 and not 1980...How exact do you want me to be huh? Or is extrapolating context not enough for you?

    he is asking you are this 2 specifically are equivalent and NO they are not equivalent to each other.

    They are NOT unique in respect to the system because both scenarios have equivalent counter scenario which lead to the same result.

    Every scenario has a equivalent scenarios that does not make all scenarios equivalent to each other it only shows that there is no unique scenario

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:@razaelll.8324 K guess I'll just dunk on you instead since you don't know how to math anyway:

    Σn₁n₂...nₙ = 1

    Evaluate the Summation Σ as the limit approaches 1 obviously.

    Example : n₁(+100 -300) + n₂(+200-500) + n₃(+200+300)

    (-200 )+(-300)+(500)

    500-500 = 0

    500 = 500

    1 = 1thereforeΣn...nₙ = 1

    No matter what each individual operations give you as a result, and no matter which one you choose to do or exclude, all operations in totality HAVE to add up to 1, therefor all operations are equivalent with respect to the system as a whole. Get dunked on.

    ?????you are showing that every scenario have a counter scenario which leads to same result we AGREED on that long time ago i dont not why you continue repeating it as if we dont agree on it? Do you just feel joy to repeat your self and be toxic to people? What are you trying to achieve here?

    Ragnar asked you specifically are A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0. He is asking you ARE THEY EQUIVALENT TO EACH OTHER NOT ARE THEY EQUIVALENT TO THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE and your answer was YES which was WRONG and you already acknowledge it.

    You can continue posting math for fifth grade (on which we agree I never said your math is wrong) and claim that i dont understand math all you want mate, but you cannot prove that so it is just an empty claim.

    Get dunked on.

    you are dunking your self mate not me :D

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:ragnar: are A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0JusticeRetroHunter: yes they aremath: no they are notJusticeRetroHunter: MATH you are right BUT you are misinterpreted my words i mean something different.

    If the resultant state of the system is always the same, then all the operations one could do to that system are equivalent, and the state of the system is always the same based on if the maximal complex state is the same. The maximal complex state is the same whether the operations add up or not...do you not understand this? You just said you agreed right? That the maximal complex state of both systems are always equal to 1.

    @razaelll.8324 said:I agreed with you that nerfing and buffing are the same, i agreed with you that there is no unique operation which can be done i agreed with you that there is only 1 maximally optimal state .

    So what are you going on about.

    Simple math here, All you have to do is have a set of operations and make all operations have to equal to 1. Now go head take any set of operations, they have to equal to 1.

    I told you what i go on about mate.

    ragnar: are A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0JusticeRetroHunter: yes they aremath: no they are notJusticeRetroHunter: MATH you are right BUT you are misinterpreted my words i mean something different.

    We didnt misinterpreted your words you just chose the wrong words to describe your point and you continue to refuse to accept it.

    Have a great day and be healthy

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:No mate you just chose wrong words to describe what you mean and you don't want to say it. Your answer to him was very clear

    You are stuck on one thing that nobody actually cares about. Who cares if 0 doesn't equal 100 this is not what the conversation was ever about. And you definitely misinterpreted what I said because no I'm not saying that 100 apples is equal to 4 apples...think your just grasping for straws and bickering over semantics.

    hahaha okay mate as you say ... you know best.. ;) Keep refusing that you made a mistake ;) As you kept refusing to acknowledge that i agreed with you on almost everything :D and you tried to convince me and ragnar on something which we already agreed on with you...

    I understand now you are just never wrong, even when you are proved wrong you are not wrong but the other people just misinterpreted you.

    ragnar: are A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0JusticeRetroHunter: yes they aremath: no they are notJusticeRetroHunter: MATH you are right BUT you are misinterpreted my words i mean something different.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    You're just misinterpreting the answer I gave to him.

    If A has 100HP and B has 200HP and if the end result we want to reach is 300HP, then one operation you can choose is A=+200 and B=+100.

    If we want to reach a system of 100 HP, then A=+0 and B=-100. The system where the HP is 300 across A and B and the system where the HP is 100 across A and B are qualitatively the same system...All agents in this system have the same HP....therefor both states of this system are the same, and both operations are equivalent in this regard.

    So first you claimed that nobody talked about that

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:Dude nobody ever cared, asked or talked about if A+100 and B+100 is equal to A+100 and B+0.

    Now when i proved that wrong i am just misinterpreting the answer you gave. hahahahah

    No mate you just chose wrong words to describe what you mean and you dont want to say it. Your answer to him was very clear and wrong in the way you formulated it

    The system where the HP is 300 across A and B and the system where the HP is 100 across A and B are qualitatively the same system...All agents in this system have the same HP....therefor both states of this system are the same, and both operations are equivalent in this regard

    Me and Ragnar agreed with that multiple times

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:EQUIVALENT can be A+100 and B+0 to A+0 and B-100 AND I AGREED ON THAT BUT A+100 and B+100 IS NOT EUIVALENT to A+100 to B+0 are you really not understanding what is written here or you just purposely ignoring it?

    Dude nobody ever cared, asked or talked about if A+100 and B+100 is equal to A+100 and B+0.man you are hopeless i will quote it for you again.

    @Ragnar.4257 said:Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    Here Ragnar is asking you ARE A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 and B+0. So he ask you SPECIFICLY are this 2 operations equivalent to one another and you responded that they are which you now acknowledge is NOT true. Finally ! THANK YOU!

    WE AGREED with you that this 2 operations are not UNIQUE and they have EQUIVALENT counter operations which will lead to same result, but he asked you are this 2 SPECIFICLY equivalent to one another and you responded yes... wtf? Maybe you didnt understood the question i dont know but you cannot hide what mistake you did there and that's where the argument started.

    If A+100 and B+100 is |200| then any operation that will yield you |200| is going to be equivalent, and there are an infinite number of equivalent operations that will yield you |200|.

    Me and Ragnar AGREED with that multiple times i dont know why you keep bringing it!

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    I agreed with you that nerfing and buffing are the same, i agreed with you that there is no unique operation which can be done i agreed with you that there is only 1 maximally optimal state .

    Then what the kitten are you even going on about. The conversation isn't about whether 0 doesn't equal 100...stop trying to pretend like this is what the convo was ever about.

    i will ask you again are you blind? Thats where the argument between you and Ragnar started .... WTF

    You said that 0 is equal to 100 (indirectly by claiming that A+100 and B+100 = A+100 to B+0), probably by mistake or just choose wrong words and you STILL DONT WANT TO AKNOLEDGE IT.

    equivalent -> A+100 and B+0 = A+0 and B-100NOT equivalent -> A+100 and B+100 =/= A+100 and B+0 (you claimed that this 2 are equivalent and they are NOT the ones above ARE)

    And you failed to even see that i agreed with you on most of the stuff and just decided to troll without even understanding where do we disagree at....

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:

    I literately said in that comment what I said just now... I think you need to go back to middle school and start yourself there.

    "Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100. If you make both A and B equal through your operation, you are just >moving the basic (universal) power level, and any operation you could have chosen would suffice to do just that. if you are not making them equal then you are >purposefully im-balancing the system."

    Is this not what i just said in the comment above?

    "This conversation isn't about whether 0 is not equal to 100 . We are talking about THE OPERATIONS and their usage. An ADDITION OPERATION you use is just as >equivalent as any other sequence of operations If it gets you the SAME result. Therefor an operation of +100 and an operation of +0 is just as equivalent of an >operation of +0 and -100, for a result : |100|"

    Tell me what school you go to so I can call them to revoke your degree, cause this is actually nonsense right now.

    I agreed with you that nerfing and buffing are the same, i agreed with you that there is no unique operation which can be done i agreed with you that there is only 1 maximally optimal state .

    READ CAREFULLY what Ragnar asked you.

    Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    He asks you is A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 to B+0

    And you answer is Yes.

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100.

    that is mathematically NOT true and i proved to you.

    EQUIVALENT can be A+100 and B+0 to A+0 and B-100 AND I AGREED ON THAT BUT A+100 and B+100 IS NOT EUIVALENT to A+100 to B+0 are you really not understanding what is written here or you just purposely ignoring it?

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:You DID do i need to quote where you DID again? Why dont you just say that you made a mistake there and end it?

    You are shilling. This conversation isn't about whether 0 is not equal to 100 . We are talking about THE OPERATIONS and their usage. An ADDITION OPERATION you use is just as equivalent as any other sequence of operations If it gets you the SAME result. Therefor an operation of +100 and an operation of +0 is just as equivalent of an operation of +0 and -100, for a result : |100|

    Stop shilling so hard dude cause this is now a huge waste of my time.

    I agreed with you that nerfing and buffing are the same, i agreed with you that there is no unique operation which can be done i agreed with you that there is only 1 maximally optimal state .

    READ CAREFULLY what Ragnar asked you.

    Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    He asks you is A+100 and B+100 equal to A+100 to B+0

    And you answer is Yes.

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100.

    that is mathematically NOT true and i proved to you.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:You DID do i need to quote where you DID again? Why dont you just say that you made a mistake there and end it?

    You are shilling. This conversation isn't about whether 0 is not equal to 100 . We are talking about THE OPERATIONS and their usage. An ADDITION OPERATION you use is just as equivalent as any other sequence of operations If it gets you the SAME result. Therefor an operation of +100 and an operation of +0 is just as equivalent of an operation of +0 and -100, for a result : |100|

    Stop shilling so hard dude cause this is now a huge waste of my time.

    @Ragnar.4257 said:Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100. If you make both A and B equal through your operation, you are just moving the basic (universal) power level, and any operation you could have chosen would suffice to do just that. if you are not making them equal then you are purposefully im-balancing the system.

    Are you blind?

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:you don't know my view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" is because i never talked about it.

    It's not subjective. it's systems analysis and you are not using the appropriate tools to analyze it correctly...it's like trying to describe Newtonian Mechanics without Calculus...you simply aren't using the right tools to describe what is ACTUALLY happening.

    Here example of equivalent 25 × 5 = 10 x10 + 5 x 5 -> 125 = 125so A+100 and B+100 does not yield the same result as A+100 and B+0 which means by definition they are not equivalent mathematically.

    You are repeating over and over that 0 does not equal 100...this is toddler level math your trying to convey and nobody ever talked or cared about this as you took the discussion out of context...What we are talking about is the operations themselves, and whether the usage of those operations are equivalent, which they clearly are. You even show how there is more then one way to get to the same result, and there are an infinite number of operations to get the same result. Stop trivializing the discussion with nonsense toddler level mathematics and trying to prove that 100 doesn't equal 0 it's actually ridiculous and I'm starting to believe you're just a shill, lying about your degrees, cause you already caught not knowing anything about the game we are actually playing.

    I am not even trying ... because i disagree with you on something else ...why are you keep ignoring it??

    @razaelll.8324 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:so to be perfectly clear is A+100 and B+0 meaningful?
    1. If before applying the change B>A then after it A will be either closer to B or A will be equal to B and in both cases it is meaningful because it either lowers or completely closes the gab between A and B
    2. If before applying the change B < A then after it the gap between A and B become even bigger which is meaningful because it disbalance them even more;
    3. If before applying the change A=B then after it A>B so the change is meaningful because it changes the the system from balanced to unbalanced.

    See this is your problem here. You have no definition for what "balanced" and "unbalanced" actually means, and your using basic toddler level math to ignore it and this was the same mistake Ragnar made. When you say that a game is "perfectly balanced" it is critical to understand WHAT this actually means. It means that all choices are the same choice...again because if things are perfectly equal, then they are no different to each other. Qualitatively what does that mean if the game is perfectly balanced? It means all choices are just the same choice and no class is different then any other class in any way. This means that if we were to define it in terms of a complexity metric, this state of the game would be considered as having a maximally optimal state of 1 option.

    If you took a perfectly balanced game, and made one choice better then the other choices, you have not changed the maximally optimal state because the maximally optimal state is still just 1 option....it is the choice of whatever you decided to buff up...ALL players decide to choose that option...so the game stays in a maximally optimal state of 1 option...and qualitatively all players are playing this 1 option, so again, how is that qualitatively different then the previous state.

    Your view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" are is primitive, and doesn't truly describe what is actually HAPPENING in the game where one state is balanced and when one state is imbalanced. I show this in the proof on page 3, and I link a video of the proof being done in purely mathematical expression.

    When you say that a game is "perfectly balanced" it is critical to understand WHAT this actually meansI never talked about what a perfectly balanced system is and you still fail to understand that i don't argue with you about which state is balanced better or worse.

    I argue with you about is A+100 and B+100 equivalent to A+100 to B+0.

    And i proved you mathematically that they are not equivalent as you claimed

    @"Ragnar.4257" said:Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100. If you make both A and B equal through your operation, you are just moving the basic (universal) power level, and any operation you could have chosen would suffice to do just that. if you are not making them equal then you are purposefully im-balancing the system.

    Mathematically they are not equivalent because A+100 and B+100 =/= A+100 and B+0

    Here is the definition of equivalent "Two mathematical expressions are said to be equivalent if they yield the same result upon solving them."

    Here example of equivalent 25 × 5 = 10 x10 + 5 x 5 -> 125 = 125so A+100 and B+100 does not yield the same result as A+100 and B+0 which means by definition they are not equivalent mathematically.

    Your view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" are is primitiveyou dont know my view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" is because i never talked about it.

    If you took a perfectly balanced game, and made one choice better then the other choices, you have not changed the maximally optimal state because the maximally optimal state is still just 1 option

    I agreed with that multiple times and you still fail to acknowledge that

    You are repeating over and over that 0 does not equal 100...this is toddler level math your trying to convey and nobody ever talked or cared

    You DID do i need to quote where you DID again? Why dont you just say that you made a mistake there and end it?

    Why you keep trying to ignore a mistake which you did and just shift the topic to suit you?

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100.

    THIS IS MATHEMATICALY NOT TRUE AND THAT IS WHAT I ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT.

    I completely understand what you ment there but you choose the WRONG words to describe it.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:so to be perfectly clear is A+100 and B+0 meaningful?
    1. If before applying the change B>A then after it A will be either closer to B or A will be equal to B and in both cases it is meaningful because it either lowers or completely closes the gab between A and B
    2. If before applying the change B < A then after it the gap between A and B become even bigger which is meaningful because it disbalance them even more;
    3. If before applying the change A=B then after it A>B so the change is meaningful because it changes the the system from balanced to unbalanced.

    See this is your problem here. You have no definition for what "balanced" and "unbalanced" actually means, and your using basic toddler level math to ignore it and this was the same mistake Ragnar made. When you say that a game is "perfectly balanced" it is critical to understand WHAT this actually means. It means that all choices are the same choice...again because if things are perfectly equal, then they are no different to each other. Qualitatively what does that mean if the game is perfectly balanced? It means all choices are just the same choice and no class is different then any other class in any way. This means that if we were to define it in terms of a complexity metric, this state of the game would be considered as having a maximally optimal state of 1 option.

    If you took a perfectly balanced game, and made one choice better then the other choices, you have not changed the maximally optimal state because the maximally optimal state is still just 1 option....it is the choice of whatever you decided to buff up...ALL players decide to choose that option...so the game stays in a maximally optimal state of 1 option...and qualitatively all players are playing this 1 option, so again, how is that qualitatively different then the previous state.

    Your view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" are is primitive, and doesn't truly describe what is actually HAPPENING in the game where one state is balanced and when one state is imbalanced. I show this in the proof on page 3, and I link a video of the proof being done in purely mathematical expression.

    When you say that a game is "perfectly balanced" it is critical to understand WHAT this actually meansI never talked about what a perfectly balanced system is and you still fail to understand that i don't argue with you about which state is balanced better or worse.

    I argue with you about is A+100 and B+100 equivalent to A+100 to B+0.

    And i proved you mathematically that they are not equivalent as you claimed

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"Ragnar.4257" said:Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100. If you make both A and B equal through your operation, you are just moving the basic (universal) power level, and any operation you could have chosen would suffice to do just that. if you are not making them equal then you are purposefully im-balancing the system.

    Mathematically they are not equivalent because A+100 and B+100 =/= A+100 and B+0

    Here is the definition of equivalent "Two mathematical expressions are said to be equivalent if they yield the same result upon solving them."

    Here example of equivalent 25 × 5 = 10 x10 + 5 x 5 -> 125 = 125so A+100 and B+100 does not yield the same result as A+100 and B+0 which means by definition they are not equivalent mathematically.

    Your view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" are is primitiveyou dont know my view on what "balanced" and "unbalanced" is because i never talked about it.

    If you took a perfectly balanced game, and made one choice better then the other choices, you have not changed the maximally optimal state because the maximally optimal state is still just 1 option

    I agreed with that multiple times and you still fail to acknowledge that

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:1 word : delusional

    Delusional huh?
    wdZXYmg.png

    Ya I'm real delusional I must be seein' things. I think I have 3 words for you, Do some research.

    Learn to read!!!

    This duel was over before it even started. Technically this was finished on the last page, these are just the squirms that happen right before they accept their fate.

    what you say in the quote above is delusional because

    How do you expect to prove me wrong when you dont even know/understand what i have said...

    Didnt you ended the conversation, boss? It looks to me that you are really mad for loosing the argument ...

    Here another examle of you shifting things to serve your point..

    Fun fact this guy has played the game for 1 month according to his post history. I've played this game since launch, and gw1 since factions release. Do you really think someone who's played this game for a month can understand the history of the game's balance at all?

    I am new player and you can see there that i say:

    I see that a lot of ppl talk about the pvp balance, i am still too unexperianced to talk about it in details.

    Now the question for you is where exactly did we talked about the current state of the pvp balance or the history of the game's balance?

    Nowhere , because the discussion was about are numerical changes meaningful or not and we used hypothetical examples which were not related at all to the history of the game's balance neither the current balance state so you are just tryharding to make me look bad just because you lost an argument .... Very disappointing mate ....

    here i will remind you what me and Ranger disagreed with

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"Ragnar.4257" said:Let me ask once again:

    Scenario 1:Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100

    Scenario 2:Buff A by 100, leave B untouched.

    You're actually saying that Scenarios 1 & 2 are equivalent and indistinguishable?

    Yes, they are equivalent because you could do the same thing by just nerfing the other by 100. If you make both A and B equal through your operation, you are just moving the basic (universal) power level, and any operation you could have chosen would suffice to do just that. if you are not making them equal then you are purposefully im-balancing the system.

    Mathematically they are not equivalent because A+100 and B+100 =/= A+100 and B+0

    Here is the definition of equivalent "Two mathematical expressions are said to be equivalent if they yield the same result upon solving them."

    Here example of equivalent 25 × 5 = 10 x10 + 5 x 5 -> 125 = 125so A+100 and B+100 does not yield the same result as A+100 and B+0 which means by definition they are not equivalent mathematically.

    The rest which you claim namely:

    Because whatever Nerf you introduce you can instead give it an equivalent Buff to the other. Thus nerfs are no different then buffsThis is correct and agreed on long time ago

    so to be perfectly clear is A+100 and B+0 meaningful for the system it self?there are 3 possible cases:

    1. If before applying the change B>A then after it A will be either closer to B or A will be equal to B and in both cases it is meaningful because it either lowers or completely closes the gab between A and B (improved the balance)
    2. If before applying the change B < A then after it the gap between A and B become even bigger which is meaningful because it disbalance them even more;
    3. If before applying the change A=B then after it A>B so the change is meaningful because it changes the the system from balanced to unbalanced.

    Is A+100 and B+0 an UNIQUE or change of significance related to other changes NO because you can achieve the same results by doing A+0 and B -100.

    I would destroy him in an actual duelYou are right that you would probably win an ingame duel since i have much less experience and knowledge about the classes, but i am up for a challenge so if you want to duel in game you know how to find me.

    how I would in this forum.you would? hmm so you didnt already .... interesting ... well go for it .

    Lack of experience and research in the actual subject we're talking about and in mathWhat i really want to know is where exactly did you proved my "Lack of experience and research in the actual subject we're talking about and in math " since you dont even know/understand what exactly i said ? Are you dreaming or something?

    We had some fun mate, but at this point you are just trolling because you don't have anything better to say and you cannot prove me wrong since you dont even know/understand what i said or you just refuse to acknowledge it since it does not suite you, either way continuing the conversation with you is just pointless so if you dont want to end it i will end it for you.

    Have a great day and be healthy!

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @Sigmoid.7082 said:Can you just agree to disagree and move on...?Nah, nah let them fight that is some quality chat pvp, best in years, pvp in game might be boring but this kitten right here is the real deal.

    Honestly forget the in-game tickle duels.

    This
    is the real endgame content.

    This duel was over before it even started. Technically this was finished on the last page, these are just the squirms that happen right before they accept their fate. Doctorate degree in math but actually did no math? brah okay...Did you cheat on all your tests and sleep through your lectures? I'm honestly curious how this guy has a doctorate in math and has done no math so far. Hire him as a dev and guaranteed the game will be nerfed into the ground and we will all enjoy 1HP, 1DMG Stick Wars Meta.

    Fun fact this guy has played the game for 1 month according to his post history. I've played this game since launch, and gw1 since factions release. Do you really think someone who's played this game for a month can understand the history of the game's balance at all? Let that sink in for a moment. I would destroy him in an actual duel just like how I would in this forum. Lack of experience and research in the actual subject we're talking about and in math . So what has this guy got I really wanna know

    I can go all day, and make an endless number of jokes and memes but frankly this is it, I don't wanna get banned for harassment. The video is all the proof anyone needs to see at this point. It proves everything I've said so far.

    ?????

    1 word : delusional

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:My guy this is over. Watch the video linked above, end of discussion.

    Here another example of you shifting my words

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    You just said that Homogenous and Heterogenous States have different properties and therefor, these properties make them meaningful... is that not what you said? Therefor I can sell you a cup of coffee that is truly homogenous and you would buy it, it'll just take you only until universal Heat Death to reach perfect homogeneity, so i'll just take your money first agreed?

    Where did i said that ?

    i said that what makes 2 states different is their properties, which is perfectly visible on the char you posted too ...

    I dont know are you just hungry for attention, but i am done with you.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:

    My guy, it's just a series of jokes based on your own logic. Yea, I'm using your own logic against you. It's a monster you created.

    Raz : i sell you glass of water for 1 dollar and glass of water with sugar in it for 1,20 dollars

    GW2 Einstein: i will take both for a dollar each because both of them are the same thing .... YOU CANNOT FOOL ME I READ GOOGLE

    The reason you can't even come up with any decent joke that actually works, let alone be an actual reflection of the conversation is because the basic logic you are trying to fight for is flawed....which is why it can be torn down so easily.

    The extra 20 cents your trying to charge GW2 Einstein, is for the sugar that you added, not how well that sugar is mixed in with the water. Like you could have just given GW2 Einstein a pack of sugar to mix it himself, he would have still given you 20 cents, no more no less.

    Like stated earlier, the Culinarian can sell
    YOU
    a Glass of perfectly homogenous water or coffee or water-vapor or whatever drink based on it's homogenous/heterogenous state, and you would buy it for a billion zillion dollars based on your logic. Course I can't slight you for having a refined taste in water...If you wanna pay the culinarian all your money, and wait for eternity for the water to become completely homogenous, then be my guest. You are welcome to the Complexity Café at all times, cause it's open for as long as there is a point in you being there.

    This is how the Culinarian would respond to you and your flimsy joke:

    Culinarian: They are both just drinks in different states. All states it can be in are equivalent, so stop bickering about the price, or whether it's a better drink or not, and enjoy your drink,
    because what's meaningful is the act of exploring all the different possible drinks we have here at the Café.

    He would then pour the water on the table.

    Raz : How can they both be worth $1 if the state of Sunnyside up is qualitatively better then the state of Scrambled.

    Quote where i said that 1 state is better than another because of the properties it has i dare you ....

    Qualitative...it's a word you should probably look up the definition to maybe...I mean it's not like the meme doesn't spell it out quite clearly for you. If you think something is Qualitatively different then another thing, you can then say which one is of better or worse quality. You believe state B is Qualitatively different then A, therefor you should be able to assess that it is either better or worse. I assessed it for you since you didn't say which one. Funny how one person can say something is better then another thing and yet another person can say it's worse at the same time...that's truly a meaningful argument to have isn't it.

    You cant because I never said it, so this is another example of you shifting peoples words to serve your point when you cannot prove it .... disappointing

    My guy, "shifting words" is not what's happening here. I'm just here applying your logic...because that's how this is supposed to work. If your logic works and argument is sound, you should be able to apply it. The fact that you are saying "well wait wait nooooo that's not what I said" Is just a proof that your logic can't be applied in the way you want without it looking ridiculous.

    My guy i proved you shift my words and making fool of your self, you can deny it all you want but its the truth. You didnt use my logic at all because you still fail to understand what i told you, but continue living in your dream world.

    I will do it again

    Quote 1 time where i said this:

    Raz : How can they both be worth $1 if the state of Sunnyside up is qualitatively better then the state of Scrambled.

    You cant because i never said it . I never said that 1 state is better ot worse than other because of different properties, so the quote above is not based on something i said nor my logic , but something which you wish i said. In fact i never talked about states quality so , which means the quote above cannot be based on my logic but only your imagination.

    As i said disappointing...

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"Vancho.8750" said:I'm not sure if this thread will become Legendary like "gf left me coz of ladderboard", but there thigh poetry of the writer was the selling point, here is the contents of the argument and the depths of depravity of mathematics. We need the red stamp of approval to hoist it up to the top.

    Ha! I mean mathematics is unbiased and universal, but I have no problem using it as a weapon to tear down illogical arguments. It's like wielding Thor's Hammer, If you know how to do some math, you can wield it and use it as a weapon or a shield or an endless amount of jokes. Except I would be the version of Thor that doesn't GAF if someone's feelings get hurt.

    I don't wanna compare myself to Einstein, because I'm no where near as smart as him and I won't consider myself as being smarter then anyone else here.

    On a serious note, I think the pvp is kinda numerically balanced to the point where mechanical problems are more apparent

    Right exactly. the numerical balance changes don't amount to anything because the real way to make meaningful changes are to mechanics, because changes to those are what give rise to increases and decreases in the complexity of a system. I didn't touch on this at all, but if one follows the math, this is the inevitable conclusion one reaches about how to actually change the system in a meaningful way. Cheers.

    @"Kuma.1503" said:Hi, welcome to the Guild Wars 2 Forums. As you can see, the smart people are arguing right now. This might go on for a while, so, for now, a brief intermission!

    Ragnar be like: Look if I scramble up my food like this I get--

    Justice: A mess. And you could've just done that in a different way and gotten the same result.

    Ragnar: -Munch- . . . If I did it differently it would taste better... >_<

    Justice: Math doesn't care about your taste buds.

    Ragnar: Remind me not to hire math as my culinarian.

    lol, this sums up perfectly, the story of this thread.

    Culinarian : What would you like to eat today gentlemen.

    Ragnar : Hi I'd like a Scrambled Egg.

    Culinarian : And you sir?

    Raz : I'd like it Sunnyside up.

    Ragnar : Sunnyside up? Scrambled is Qualitatively better then Sunnyside up.

    Raz : Excuse me? Sunnyside Up is better because it's got qualitatively different properties then your scrambled egg.

    Ragnar : Culinarian, How much do they both cost?

    Culinarian : They are both worth $1.

    Ragnar : This means they must be exactly the same.

    Culinarian : They are both just egg's, in different states.

    Raz : How can they both be worth $1 if the state of Sunnyside up is qualitatively better then the state of Scrambled.

    Culinarian smashes the eggs on the table, the cold yoke dripping onto the floor.

    Culinarian : Enjoy your meals gentlemen.

    Ragnar and Raz look at each other and in unison they say "This is perfectly balanced."

    So you ran out of "smart" things to say and decided to start memeing with WORDS I NEVER said.

    Let me add into it then

    Raz : i sell you glass of water for 1 dollar and glass of water with sugar in it for 1,20 dollars

    GW2 Einstein: i will take both for a dollar each because both of them are the same thing .... YOU CANNOT FOOL ME I READ GOOGLE

    Raz : How can they both be worth $1 if the state of Sunnyside up is qualitatively better then the state of Scrambled.

    Quote where i said that 1 state is better than another because of the properties it has i dare you ....

    You cant because i never said it, so this is another example of you shifting peoples words to serve your point when you cannot prove it .... disappointing

    here is another example of you shifting people's words Rangar never claimed that he can make UNIQUE numerical change nor he talked about unique numerical change ..... disappointinghere i will even quote it for you to refresh your mind.

    Again the difference between me and Ragnar's position, is that Ragnar believes you can make UNIQUE local change with numerical changes, which is wrong btw, and my position is that ALL numerical changes have an infinite number of equivalent change, meaning NO change is unique at any and all scale, which is factually and mathematically correct.

    so here the difference between you and ragnar is that he believe he can make UNIQUE local change , then suddenly few post later the difference become about is a change meaningful or not

    The debate is NOT about whether a system can change, it's whether that change has any meaning,

    Hmm .... so at the end did Ragnar claim the he can make unique local change or that making a numerical change to the system has meaning?

    but I have no problem using it as a weapon to tear down illogical arguments

    It really blows my mind that you believe your self that you proved anything mathematically , wake up call YOU DIDNT. You post a char which you do not understand at all, you shift people's words and then pretend that never happened and then say "i use math as a weapon" ... Are you okay mate, i am staring to get worried about you... Stop making your self look like a clown and grow up ! You can continue be delusional and meme about me or what ever you want, but that wont change the fact that you DIDN'T proved anything at all and cannot handle a person who challenge you to do soo. I think i overestimated you and you are not that smart as i though you would be , disappointing...

    Have a great day and be healthy.

GuildWars2.com
ArenaNet

©2020 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

ESRB - Teen
×
×
  • Create New...