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

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:i said that what makes 2 states different is their properties

    I'm literally selling you balance changes and an immaculate coffee machine based on their properties...You don't want Burn Guardian Meta? How bout' instead I sell you Necro Lich Form Meta! That's meaningfully different then Burn Guardian Meta now isn't it? There is meaning to my changes!

    oo so you acknowledge that burn guardian meta is different than necro lich meta? Nice man you start catching up . keep going you are getting closer.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:@razaelll.8324

    Better yet i'll just become a balance dev and sell you balance changes instead.

    When i become Dev, I'm just going to nerf all classes, and buff the kitten out of warrior. Then 3 months later I'm going to nerf the kitten out of warrior, and buff the kitten out of Revenant. I'm sure the state of balance in the game will be better and better with every patch!

    ! My guy you are way out of your depth here. I can run circles around you right now because your logic is so flawed that I can sit here all day and come up with counterpoints on the top of my head that just show how bad the logic is.

    No one clamed that, this sentence only proves that you don't understand at all what i and Ragnar explained to you. i will again STRONGLY ADVICE YOU to read the conversation again since you obviously don't understand it at all

    My guy you are way out of your depth here. I can run circles around you right now because your logic is so flawed that I can sit here all day and come up with counterpoints on the top of my head that just show how bad the logic is.

    what are you doing is making your self look stupid. But its okay not everybody can understand what he reads.. Keep trying i am sure you will understand it 1 day or another ;)

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @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

    Therefor I can sell you a cup of coffee that is completely homogenous, because a homogenous cup of coffee has meaningfully different properties then a heterogenous cup of coffee. Think you actually need a cup of coffee man.

    Where exactly did i said "meaningfully different". you again start the tactic with shifting peoples words.... that dont work on me

    you are hopeless case mate. see you around ;)

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @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 ...

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    You can even pretend that Pink in the above example is Mesmer, and Blue in the above is Guardian. So tell me, how are either states qualitatively different from one another? And here's I'll give you a head start on your response:i already did, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES if you fail to understand that that's your problem not mine.

    This is the equivalent of saying that your coffee isn't actually coffee until the milk and sugar have been completely dissolved and dispersed evenly in your cup, which would take only the age of the universe to reach true homogenous state.

    that makes no sense at all.

    Anyway, i already addressed this in the counterpoint.

    Counterpoint: Now show of hands...who truly believes that State B is qualitatively any different then State A with respect to the system as a whole. Really I would like to see anyone come forward and assess that State B is a better or worse state of the game then State A.

    no you didnt. that does not prove that the states are the same ....

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    (As an example, think of the human race on planet Earth...as of right now we are the most optimal path in a heterogenous system, and as we continue into the future, lets just say humans completely remove all other life except other humans on earth. The system has gone from Heterogenous, to homogenous.)

    That example is not entirely correct. If all other life is removed and only humans stay , the system wont become a homogenous yet, because the humans are not the same so you need to first make all humans same (high, weight, strenght, age and etc.) and THEN the system will become homogenous ...

    My guy, this has already been established way earlier in the thread. Half the thread was spent explaining this concept to Ragnar or did you miss that? The system will NEVER become homogenous because there are an infinite number of metrics one can use to define the equality of two or more things, and when two or more things are equal, they are descriptions of the same object (truly homogenous, and aka equivelence) . Here I quote one instance of myself saying exactly the same thing, and there are many instances where i repeat the same thing in much greater detail from earlier in the thread :

    ! > > @Ragnar.4257 said:! > > This is still nonsense....! > @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:! > ...Something to also understand, is that Perfect Homogenous systems don't truly exist . All systems are imperfect, and lay on a spectrum between homogeneity and heterogeneity, and as you get closer to making a system more and more homogenous, it simply gives you more and more homogenous properties...likewise in the reverse direction. Gw2 is no exception....

    You're essentially contradicting yourself in your response to me because you are struggling to understand this concept that you either don't understand or seem to not want to understand, how invariance effects the macroscopic properties and behavior of systems.

    No they are not they are completely different types of system with different properties and i will give a very very simple example. is the Rain water same thing as rain water with rocks in it? the answer is no , Rain water is homogenous system but rain water with rocks in it is heterogenous system both systems have some same properties but also some in difference which makes them different to one another.

    Why the different properties has any meaning? What will happen if you drink rain water and what will happen if you drink rain water with rocks in it?

    Now how changing the type of the system have meaning ? Well if you remove the rocks from the rain water (change it from heterogenous into homogenous ) and then you drink it will the effect be the same as if you drink it with the rocks in it?

    ...as long as a operation changes the state of the system it is meaningful even if it is not unique operation (having counter operation). Meaningless is which exactly operation you chose to use in order to change the state of the system, but the change it self is meaningful because it leads to different state of the system.

    with other words it is meaningless do you choose to increase guardian to 1M hp or reduce all other classes to do 1 dmg because both lead to same state of the system. but executing one of this operations is meaningful for the system because it changes the system state.

    I just proved to you mathematically in the previous comment, how no state is any different then any other state (I showed that all states are equivalent). And, In fact there is no state you can show me in the example I provided, that shows it being qualitatively different then any other state. Just because you refuse to believe something doesn't mean it's not true. Don't want to believe me you can read the wiki article...it's not like I pull this information from the ether...this is established science and math and I did my homework. Everything I have said so far, is logical, backed by mathematics, and has been cited by sources, each one of them you've dismissed.

    Now I challenge you to go head and show me a state of a system that is qualitatively different then any other state in the example...in fact I will give you a head start and do one for you.
    OmPsztl.png

    You can even pretend that Pink in the above example is Mesmer, and Blue in the above is Guardian. So tell me, how are either states qualitatively different from one another? And here's I'll give you a head start on your response:

    • Argument : "Well Guardian(Blue) is now the optimal choice, therefor that change was meaningful because a Guardian has different skills (properties) then a Mesmer."

    • Counterpoint: Now show of hands...who truly believes that State B is qualitatively any different then State A with respect to the system as a whole. Really I would like to see anyone come forward and assess that State B is a better or worse state of the game then State A.

    • Argument : "Well you made the bar smaller so all the choices are "closer" to being balanced though right?"

    • Counterpoint : And as all bars approach the same height, it becomes more homogenous, meaning you lose diversity in exchange for making things equal. Even in an "almost homogenous" state, there will STILL be a most optimal path after 9 computations. Make the bars as big or as small as you like, it will lead to the same story in every and all states, again this was proved by taking a heterogenous state and a perfect homogenous state, proved at the boundaries of the problem, and thus proves it for all states within the boundary.

    Now, you don't have to take my word or my proof that both states are qualitatively the same...you can just read the article on wiki and it will tell you the same thing, that the reason all states between a homogenous system and heterogenous system are the same, is because it is invariant with any and all scales....That a system at one scale can be homogenous, while at the same time, on another scale be heterogenous, and that the properties you CHOOSE to observe are just observations of local properties that are relative to the system as a whole. :

    SXgzD9D.png

    Looks like you cannot handle when people don't agree with you ...

    No I have no problem with people who disagree with me especially if it's an opinion. What I do have a problem with is when people dismiss logic, proof and mathematics due to their own bias. @"voltaicbore.8012" is the perfect example of standup citizen...someone I have no issue with at all...because he/she was able to assess the argument and provided their stance and position on the argument with at the very least a logical assessment...and was able to make a good joke too... Do you see me raging at him because he disagrees with my position? Go and read up the thread and see my response.

    Again, this entire conversation between me and Ragnar and now you apparently, it's like saying Entropy doesn't exist...it's simply not true, and by going around saying that it doesn't exist, you are doing a disservice to anyone who would naively believe that to be the case. This is why my disappointment in your position is exacerbated, by someone whos also "apparently" studied math...I mean... at least you KNOW what homogenous and heterogenous states of a system are and their properties. I had to EXPLAIN this to a certain someone who spent pages bickering that they can just shove an equal sign between two classes and think that makes them equal...we couldn't even get to complexity because we were stuck on why two different things cant be equal FOR PAGES. Am I frustrated...sure, like anyone who would be frustrated with someone's denial to do just a LITTLE bit of research on something to see if what they are saying is actually not true. Now I've done my research, years of it, and I provide sources, reading material, mathematical proofs, and detailed examples. Nobody can tell me i don't know what I'm trying to say, because I know exactly what I said, and i know exactly what other people have said in response to what I've said, and I've got an arsenal of counter points and proofs to support it.

    You fail to understand your own chart mate. I dont know what research you did but obviously you don't understand it at all.

    Now I challenge you to go head and show me a state of a system that is qualitatively different then any other state in the example...in fact I will give you a head start and do one for you.

    check what is written at the end " No particular state is in more significant than any other" which does not mean " no particular state is any different in any other" making a difference here?

    You can even pretend that Pink in the above example is Mesmer, and Blue in the above is Guardian. So tell me, how are either states qualitatively different from one another? And here's I'll give you a head start on your response:i already did, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES if you fail to understand that that's your problem not mine. Looks like you dont understand what a property of a system is let me help you Rain water is homogenous system also air is a homogenous system are they the same systems NO BECAUSE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES.

    I just proved to you mathematically in the previous comment, how no state is any different then any other stateyou proved nothing but your own ignorance.

    No I have no problem with people who disagree with me especially if it's an opinion. What I do have a problem with is when people dismiss logic, proof and mathematics due to their own bias

    You fail to prove anything and you get angry because someone challenge you to do so. I proved you wrong with just a simple example in my previous post and you decided to post a char which you don't even understand and then claim that you proved something mathematically, well a wakeup call you didnt mate. Try better next time or don't get angry to people which challenge your statements

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:

    complete homogeneity to complete diversity there is and always will be a single optimal "choice" or optimal path that determines the eventual collapse of that system to return it to a homogenous type.

    that is true

    (As an example, think of the human race on planet Earth...as of right now we are the most optimal path in a heterogenous system, and as we continue into the future, lets just say humans completely remove all other life except other humans on earth. The system has gone from Heterogenous, to homogenous.)

    That example is not entirely correct. If all other life is removed and only humans stay , the system wont become a homogenous yet, because the humans are not the same so you need to first make all humans same (high, weight, strenght, age and etc.) and THEN the system will become homogenous ...

    "So all states of the system are equivalent in that no state is any different then any other state because they all still have one optimal "meta-choice" path"

    the states are different from one another if they have different properties ( which means they are not same states), but i agree that they all have one optimal "meta-choice" path as you called it.

    Homogenous and Heterogenous systems are not different, they are the same thing, and that changes from one type into another don't mean anything.No they are not they are completely different types of system with different properties and i will give a very very simple example. is the Rain water same thing as rain water with rocks in it? the answer is no , Rain water is homogenous system but rain water with rocks in it is heterogenous system both systems have some same properties but also some in difference which makes them different to one another.

    Why the different properties has any meaning? What will happen if you drink rain water and what will happen if you drink rain water with rocks in it?

    Now how changing the type of the system have meaning ? Well if you remove the rocks from the rain water (change it from heterogenous into homogenous ) and then you drink it will the effect be the same as if you drink it with the rocks in it?

    that changes from one type into another don't mean anything

    dont mean anything for who or what? Changing a system type is very meaningful for the system , because the properties of the system are changed this way, check example above.

    Honestly I'm disappointed. You have a math background and you've yet to contribute any insight into the conversation. Was hoping you'd actually say something useful but you dip out instead because you can't seem to handle a debate of two ideas...great job. This conversation that you and I have had so far has been meaningless we may as well have never had it.

    The disappointment is mutual. You are shifting the words of Ragnar to serve your point in very inconsistent way

    Example:

    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.

    where exactly did Ragnar claimed that you can make "UNIQUE local change with numerical changes " ?He never said that giving 1M HP to guardian is not the same as nerfing every other class to do 1 dmg , never claimed that giving 1M hp to guardian is unique change

    I assume you understand that unique and meaningful are not the same thing.

    The debate is NOT about whether a system can change, it's whether that change has any meaning, and if that change has no meaning, then what is the point of the change in the first place. I then go on to debate with Ragnar, over the course of 2 pages, how numerical change makes no meaningful change to the system as a whole, with the reasoning that every operation one could do, has an infinite number of counter operations that could have been used instead, making any particular change you made, irrelevant to any change you could have done instead.

    End of example.

    with the reasoning that every operation one could do, has an infinite number of counter operations that could have been used instead, making any particular change you made, irrelevant to any change you could have done instead.

    as long as a operation changes the state of the system it is meaningful even if it is not unique operation (having counter operation). Meaningless is which exactly operation you chose to use in order to change the state of the system, but the change it self is meaningful because it leads to different state of the system.

    with other words it is meaningless do you choose to increase guardian to 1M hp or reduce all other classes to do 1 dmg because both lead to same state of the system. but executing one of this operations is meaningful for the system because it changes the system state.

    so if you are claim that it is meaningless which operation you choose (increasing guardian hp to 1m or reducing all other classes to do 1 dmg)that is correct because both operations lead to the SAME state, but if you are claiming changing systems state is meaningless then that is false and i already proved why that is false.What Rangar is saying to you is no matter which of this operations(changes ) you execute this will be a meaningful change for the system it self because it will change its state, which correct.

    I dip out because the debate is pointless and does not contribute for a better state of the system (sPVP) at all, which makes it meaningless to me. Looks like you cannot handle when people dont agree with you ... Anyways i am really ending this here , because of the reasons pointed above.

    Have a great day and be healthy!

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:I will tell you again i believe you are getting this wrong.... he is claiming that if you buff 1 class without buffing the other this will change the local system, which is correct.

    You're distorting his argument and mine by filling it with things nobody really argued about, and that's also why you are confused. The argument isn't about whether the local state of a system can change or not... it's about whether the change has MEANING or not. The reason it has no meaning is because when you change a system locally, you are doing so at the expense of some other local subsystem somewhere else, therefor the system AS A WHOLE doesn't change. Again, buffing Guardian here, is an indirect NERF to something else elsewhere in the system. You might have changed the local system of guardian, but you did so at the expense of
    insert whatever class here.
    And again, the change you made is irrelevant because you could have done another set of operations and yielded the same result...You could have nerfed Warrior which was SUPPRESSING Guardian which inadvertently buffs Guardian , which is an inadvertent nerf to
    insert whatever class here
    So if you made a change at the expense of negating that change somewhere else in the system, then the change doesn't MEAN anything and therefor you didn't really CHANGE anything.

    Mathematically, the above is the only way such a system can remain homogenous, which it has to be. All things have to add up to their constituents, if they don't you did something wrong. This is HOW entropy and
    . There is no free energy, no free pizza, no free balance changes.

    I strongly advise you to re-read the conversation. I think i will end the conversation here since it is becoming pointless.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:I am sorry but i think you are getting this wrong. From what i read Ragnar does not claim " he can make UNIQUE local change with numerical changes". He does NOT even once talk about UNIQUE local change. The only thing which he claims is that he can make a numerical change to the subsystem which will be meaningful for the subsystem it self , that is completely correct as we discussed in the example above . @Ragnar.4257 correct me if i am wrong please.

    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.

    His claim is one of the idea that nerfs and buffs have meaning because they have impact on the local system (being unique) I'm saying any and all changes are not unique therefor have no impact on the system as a whole. This is the entire argument please re-read the thread if you have to so you can understand the positions clearly.

    Just a quote here

    @"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.

    ...Okay guys, we've reached peak idiocy.

    It's totally fine to give guardian +10k HP, because we COULD have added damage to Warrior, even though we didn't. But we COULD have done (but we didn't). Giving >guardian +10k HP and giving warrior nothing in compensation, is totally fine, because it's all relative and systems and nothing matters and blabla.

    Just..... lol.

    I will tell you again i believe you are getting this wrong. He is not clamming that "His claim that buffing one class is meaningfully different operation then nerfing another class". he is claiming that if you buff 1 class without buffing the other this will change the local system, which is correct. Same if you nerf 1 class without nerfing the other this will also change the local system. He is not claiming that buffing is more meaningful than nerfing nether the opposite. Making a change to a part of a local system without making the same change to the rest of local the system will change the local system that is what he is saying exactly just with other words. And i believe we already agreed on that.

    His claim is one of the idea that nerfs and buffs have meaning because they have impact on the local system (being unique)

    he claims that nerfing or buffing have meaning because it impacts the local system exactly, and we are talking only for the local system and changes on the local system not for the system as a whole. i think that is what you are missing the topic here is the LOCAL SYSTEM not the system as a whole. Buffing and nerfing changes the local system and they are meaningful for the local system it self not for the system as a whole.

    I believe i understand the positions well enough and reading the conversation led me to the conclusion that you do not understand what he is saying exactly , thats why i decided to write you.

    Also in the previous post you say "

    Changing one thing, changes the entire system in some way at all scales

    and now you say

    I'm saying any and all changes are not unique therefor have no impact on the system as a whole

    ... i am confused what you are trying to say exactly.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:

    So in other words, "Our universe" for all intensive purposes is these 9 classes, the thousands of possible skills and trait combinations on these 9 classes, and the 4 or 5 attributes that describe these thousands of skills and traits. Again, just because we have a finite number of subsystems, doesn't mean that the system isn't still invariant at all scales...its just a finite system; There are an infinite number of changes one could make in any of the subsystems that is equivalent to any other change elsewhere in the system. Changing one thing, changes the entire system in some way at all scales. 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.

    I am sorry but i think you are getting this wrong. From what i read Ragnar does not claim " he can make UNIQUE local change with numerical changes". He does NOT even once talk about UNIQUE local change. The only thing which he claims is that he can make a numerical change to the subsystem which will be meaningful for the subsystem it self , that is completely correct as we discussed in the example above . @Ragnar.4257 correct me if i am wrong please.

    even you just admit it by saying " Changing one thing, changes the entire system in some way at all scales" which is exactly what Rangar is claiming

    Personally, you would enjoy looking into Complexity theory. I also firmly believe (but has yet to be proven) that complexity theory is the possible theory of everything. It's one reason why I've studied it for so long. When looking at complexity theory, it's like a theory that simply describes how systems work...how they evolve from simple systems into complex ones and why. It's an amazing area to study if you are into mathematics, and it applies to basically everything, including this game. In fact one day i was just walking home, i looked up at all these birds in the sky flying around like they do in the morning...and then just out of nowhere randomly I though "huh...why does that look like WvW zerg lol" Ever since I went on a 3 year long journey to understand how complexity theory explains both behaviors and why they look so similar. Didn't think it was going to be a 3 year long journey....I honestly though I could just googled something and find some cool fact about why they are similar but nope...it was a rabbit hole that kept going deeper and deeper and deeper. But sure if i ever log on in game (i haven't really logged in months because i kind of quit ages ago and just appear now and then to see if anything has changed) ill give you a whisper.

    I totally agree that complexity theory is an amazing study, but i dont think that its necessary to involve it in the discussion, because we are discussing a system with finite number of subsystems which can be simplified well enough.

    But sure if i ever log on in game (i haven't really logged in months because i kind of quit ages ago and just appear now and then to see if anything has changed) ill give you a whisper.

    feel free to do so , i will be glad to have a chat :)

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @NorthernRedStar.3054 said:If you don't care about winning at all, why are you playing PvP. Testing and honing builds is for the sake of them being effective, which in turn means more wins.Playing a competitive (even if unranked) game mode and not trying to win - what are you doing with your life?

    I aways play for the win and try to be as useful as i can for the team, but there are people which are joining unranked just for the kills not for the win which is completely fine in my opinion. So joining just for the fight not for the win is completely okay in unranked imo, but definitely not okay in ranked

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"razaelll.8324" said:The example which you are discussing (giving guardian 1M hp and NOT changing anything else) will result in exactly what you said namely everybody will play guardian which means that the system will change from a heterogenic into homogenic, which is pretty MEANINGFULL change NOT MEANINGLESS which is all Rangar is claiming.Claiming that this is NOT a meaningful change is simple false because at the moment the system is heterogenic (has diversity) and with such a big numerical change which leads to loss of diversity and everything will became guardian (which means same which means heterogenic ) you are changing the whole system type.

    It's meaningless because you can do the same operation elsewhere in the system and get a similar state of the system. The definition of meaning is what voltaicbore pointed out as to what me and Ragnar truly disagree on. He believes that the change has meaning because it has a
    local
    impact on the system. My position is that it's meaningless because there are an infinite number of operations you can do or could have done to the system that are just as balanced as that particular change you just did and so no other change is any more significant than any other...therefor u could have really done anything using whatever excuse you wanted and you can still get the same results. You could have buffed guardian with 1million HP or you could have nerfed everyone but guardian to have 1 HP. The difference between me and Ragnar is that math supports my position.

    Claiming that this is NOT a meaningful change is simple false because at the moment the system is heterogenic (has diversity) and with such a big numerical change which leads to loss of diversity and everything will became guardian (which means same which means heterogenic ) you are changing the whole system type.

    Okay, there's only one way to truly explain this, and it will make sense to you alright. Just read through the whole thing.

    Imagine you have two agents competing against each other in a game.

    In this system, there are 10 different abilities that each agent could choose from. The agents will sort through all 10 to compete with their opponent to find out which one is the most optimal choice. After some finite number of computations, lets just say 10 of them, the agents will have figured out the ability that is the most optimal. The state of this system can essentially be anything right....it could be that the most optimal choice is a million times stronger then every other choice, but the agent still had to do at least 10 computations to find out this information.

    Now imagine this game at different states of the system.1) If all options in the system were homogenous, then at the end of the computations, there is no optimal choice, because in fact all choices are the optimal choice...since they are all just the same choice.2) In another state of the system, all choices are different, and the most optimal choice is identified in a finite number of steps.3) Imagine now a state of the system where each choice was setup like Rock Paper Scissors. The most optimal choice for each agent is to pick a choice at random.

    So what do all 3 states have in common...or how are they different? The answer is that they are all the same. why? because It takes the same amount of computation to determine the most optimal state of the game. In other words, if you were to place any of the game types into a hat, you could pick any kind of state in this system, and always produce a game that will be solved in 10 steps. Yes changing one state to another state will essentially "reset" the computation, this is true, but eventually the optimal path will be found and the game will be "solved" until the next "reset."

    So in the above, all changes made in the game above essentially don't mean anything in terms of the system as a whole. You can tell, that the game state that fits the best with gw2, is the RPS state...the RPS state is essentially a state of maximum diversity, where all choices when picked at random have the same percent chance to win against the opponent.

    But aside from how this RPS state fits the best with gw2, it is still just as meaningless as any other change...so what can actually be done to give this system more meaning? The answer is increasing the number of required computations to reach optimal strategy. This is essentially the reason why systems are able to evolve in the first place. Essentially, the more the complexity of the system increases, the more computations required by the agents to reach optimal strategy, and NEW states of the system are explored with every computation. It's this key feature of exploring new states that gives the agents in this system a continued purpose to even play the game.

    So to directly answer your question, is that this meaningful change is derived from an understanding in how an increase in complexity increases the time it takes to find optimal strategy, which allows the system to evolve into NEW states rather then revisiting older ones, or states of the system that are the the same as other states of the system. It has nothing to do with change in system types because again, homogenous-heterogenous systems are basically the same thing with different properties.

    Also i would like to share with you something which one of my professors once told me - " If you cannot explain something with simple words then you probably dont understand it either"

    No offence to your professor, but tell him to go predict the weather or study complexity theory and see if he can explain that in simple words. Complexity theory is literally a field of science and math that explains how
    NOTHING
    is simple. Yes, I have studied this particular science for years and it also turns out that all modern physics is pointing to this field and it's procuring answers to big questions...don't believe me? Type in
    .... yes scientists are using complexity theory to solve the the gap between GR and QM. Complexity theory is definitely not easy to explain especially when it has everything to do with how all real world systems work in reality. Ask any systems engineer and they will tell you how they NEED to use complexity theory to solve real world applicable problems when making models or systems.

    I dont need to ask anybody about that because i have bachelor and master degree in electronics and doctor degree in math (development and design of electronic devices is my job) so I believe i understand well enough the complexity in design of a system ... i never said that everything is simple, and my professor claims that everything can be explained with simple words, and to back that up you can check how Einstein explains the theory of the relativity for example, anyways back to the topic. I agree on what you wrote up mostly.

    The different play modes in gw2 can be separated and threated as subsystems because making changes for spvp will not reflect in to the rest of the game. So here the change which we make is relevant to spvp only which means that for the game as a hole this changes are meaningless correct, but for the spvp mode (subsystem) it will be meaningful because it changes the subsystem type... And the discussion here is about spvp not about the game as a whole, because spvp is a separated subsystem because any changes in it will not reflect to the rest of the game .

    If the changes done for spvp also reflect to the rest of the game then that will become meaningful change for the whole system not only for the spvp subsystem.

    Edit: i believe this conversation is not very interesting for most of the people so i suggest to move it in PMs if you want to continue it since it is interesting for me. You can find me in game or in discord as beyolf#9079

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"Psycoprophet.8107" said:Honestly man u got way to much time on ur hands, I want u to read what u wrote than use that big brain u have and think hard about how u wrote it in a mmo video game forum lol.

    I mean sure. but can you imagine if we were to sit around and talk about the world as if the Earth was flat? This is essentially the equivalent to talking about balance and diversity without understanding that there's actual math and science to be understood when talking about these subjects...

    Noone is denying that there is " actual math and science to be understood when talking about these subjects"

    Balancing a MMOrpg is NOT a simple task at all and it involves a lot of science and math in it.

    PvP Fights Now Be Like:

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

    @"Ragnar.4257" said:This is still nonsense.

    And the reason, is that GW2 is not an equation. In an equation, I cannot add to one side without adding to the other, which results in the homogeneity you describe.

    But in GW2 it is entirely possible to add to one side without adding to the other. If we make guard stronger, we do not necessarily make rev stronger. We can decide to make rev also stronger, resulting in no net change, or we can leave rev where it is resulting in a relative nerf, or we can hard nerf it, or we can buff it even more resulting in a relative nerf for guard.

    You have simply declared GW2 to be homogenous. This a ridiculous assumption.

    You're saying that a situation where 90% of players pick guardian and 10% pick rev is equivalent to a situation where 50% pick both, because its still the same number of players. It is...... but that says nothing about balance. You're looking at the wrong equation.

    It's like declaring that the energy and mass of the universe is homogenous. True, you can't add or remove from the total. That doesn't change the fact that you can take actions to make certain areas much hotter or colder. This is almost a perfect example of this situation. I'm saying "if you turn the heating up, the room will get hotter", and you're saying "nope, because eventually the universe will reach heat death". Ummm....... that doesn't change that turning the heating up right now in this room will make it hotter. Bringing up the heat death of the universe is so irrelevant to tweaking the temperature of the room I'm in, that it's hard not to conclude that you're either a troll, or really want to show off about how you read a book.

    I am well aware of the concept of homogeneity. I am disputing its relevance to this situation.

    The main takeaway from this, is that this is a pictorial representation of the math, for how a system is and ALWAYS will be, homogenous, because it is invariant at all scales...no matter what state the subsystems are in. Even if you manipulate one of the balls in any of the systems to go in any direction, the system as a whole still remains homogenous. Its something that you simply CAN NOT change. with any operation and I've said this a hundred billion times now.

    Take your example, that you change guardian to have 1 million HP and 1 million damage and change nothing else in the game. What happens to the system as a whole? Everyone plays a guardian. The system REMAINS homogenous because EVERYTHING in the system is now a guardian. Such a state of the game, is "perfectly balanced" is it not...if everyone is just playing the same build on the same class as if nothing else existed...is this not the same state of a game where if all 9 classes had the same abilities, the same traits the same weapons the same everything? Would this not be equivalent to a perfectly balanced game of Ping Pong? This is the kind of thinking you need to be doing when trying to analyze the logic in your examples.

    Now something to also understand, is that Perfect Homogenous systems don't truly exist . All systems are imperfect, and lay on a spectrum between homogeneity and heterogeneity, and as you get closer to making a system more and more homogenous, it simply gives you more and more homogenous properties...likewise in the reverse direction. Gw2 is no exception. It is not a homogenous game. but you can still balance the game into homogeneity or heterogeneity. Balancing to either end will give you more and more properties that align with homogenous systems, or heterogenous systems. Homogenous systems exhibit equality, while heterogenous systems exhibit high differentiation (diversity). And lastly, you can't have both because they exhibit complementarity. You can't have a game that exhibits complete equality, while having a high level of diversity. In addition, Both systems can't exist WITHOUT each other. Homogenous systems evolve into heterogenous systems, and heterogenous systems become homogenous at a higher scale, triggering the same process over and over and over again at any and all scales.

    I am reading the discussion from couple of days and i really don't understand what are you trying to achieve here @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 .

    The example which you are discussing (giving guardian 1M hp and NOT changing anything else) will result in exactly what you said namely everybody will play guardian which means that the system will change from a heterogenic into homogenic, which is pretty MEANINGFULL change NOT MEANINGLESS which is all Rangar is claiming.

    Claiming that this is NOT a meaningful change is simple false because at the moment the system is heterogenic (has diversity many classes with many different skills) and with such a big numerical change which leads to loss of diversity and everything will became guardian (which means one class with same skills which means homogenic ) you are changing the whole system type.

    Please try to rethink what you wrote exactlyFirst "Even if you manipulate one of the balls in any of the systems to go in any direction, the system as a whole still remains homogenous. Its something that you simply CAN NOT change. with any operation and I've said this a hundred billion times now. " - so here you claim that the system cannot change then ". Homogenous systems evolve into heterogenous systems, and heterogenous systems become homogenous at a higher scale, triggering the same process over and over and over again at any and all scales. " here you claim that the system is changing from one to another.

    Let me try to clarify that simply, the system cannot change by it self , but it can be changed by third party, which is exactly what the example above will do if it was made.

    Also i would like to share with you something which one of my professors once told me - " If you cannot explain something with simple words then you probably dont understand it either" . Please dont get me wrong i dont want to offend you, but your attitude in the whole conversation is very cocky and such attitude usually does not lead to constructive conversation. Also when someone do not agree with you and you start your response with "i study it for many years so i know it" does not prove your point either.

    Have a great day and be healthy!

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    Couple of days ago i desided to try a new class and build so i started with some practise on the dummys and after that i went to test it out in unranked... Ofcourse i was bad since i play it for first time and a person started raging at me . I explained to him that i play this for first time and i am trying to learn the build and improve with it, he continued raging at me and told me that UNRANKED is not the place to test builds .... I was speechless.... Where to test a spvp build if not in unranked ?

    thank you arenanet for the glorious new pvp season, i drew you a picture as a thanks

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @georgessj.4198 said:

    @"Starbreaker.6507" said:I know botting has been an issue for some time now, but I swear to God that I have never seen more than I have during this 3v3 season.

    All of them seem to be Scourges too, and they all do the same thing:
    1. Run into the middle of whatever map it is
    2. Cast a couple marks from staff
    3. Proceed to auto-attack for the remainder of the match

    If one of your teammates goes down they'll try to run at them with the hard res, and they obviously make no attempt to try and kite or use any variance in skills.I know that PvP has been a complete dumpster fire for a few years now, but this really highlights what little ANet cares about the game and mode.

    And yet just today some 'weirdly good will folks' were telling me how exaggerated bots numbers are :D :D :D

    This is not good joke and you are not correct. I didnt tell you how exaggerated the bot numbers are. I told you that i FEEL like it is exaggerated, which means that i might be wrong and i told you also that neither i or you can be 100 % accurate on the numbers so because of that the coverastion wont lead to any meaningfull end since neither i can prove you wrong ,neither you can. So please dont make fun of people and shift their words in different topics. Thank you in advance!

    I also said that there are obvious bots and it is sad that anet do not do anything about them.

    You were not the only one that day and in case you havent noticed there are bot users in the forum defending their infinite gold source by saying things like 'i never met a bot' or 'stop calling unskill people bots'. Cant blame them though the things i spend 20-40 euros on the gem store they get by botting in a couple of days-weeks

    "weirdly good will folks" - refers for multiple people and in that conversation we were 2 people so you either refer to both of us or for another converastion , but i dont see many other "weirdly good will folks" . Neither of us denied the existanse of bots .... We just think that the numbers of bots are over exaggerated, but that dont mean that we are right.

    Which sPvP game mode should be supported the most in the future?

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @Sailorz.5426 said:make 3v3 perma with unranked/ranked option.balance the game around 3s - buff thieves and mesmer. Basically any class that rely's on +1/roaming/decapping in conquest.redo some of the TDM arenas (2v2 3v3) because they are a bit too small or just poorly designed for the games combat, auric basin being the worst design wise and halls being too small.make stronghold more like bg's in wow. 10+ players.

    the problem with balancing around 3s is you get bunker metas in conquest since if you need decent sustain to be effective in 3s/2s, so conquest becomes a mess.

    conquest is a tired gamemode. and for the most part the only people who enjoy it fully are the ones who actually know what to do and what all the different class/ e specs jobs are and that isn't an easy thing to learn and grasp for new players.

    I agree with you about 3v3, but i disagree with you that the only people which enjoy conquest fully are the people which understands it completely. I am fairly new and i am really enjoying my experience in learning different builds, professions and roles in it , i put some effort in understading every role, strengths and weaknesses of each build i try and i love the experience which i get. I think conquest is a great pvp mode, but it would be awesome if there are some more competitive modes.

    What was frustrating for me as a new player was getting 1 shoted by just 1 person without even understanding how i got oneshoted and how to avoid getting oneshoted again. For example when a thief just comes out of stealt do tons of dmg and goes away, or a air weaver which jumps at me and i dont even had time to react , because my reaction times as a new player were very bad and also i didnt exactly know what really happened to me and what i had to avoid and so on and definitely that's something which takes some time to learn. So in my opinion getting oneshoted by a single person is driving new players away not the complexity of roles in conquest mode.

    Bots and MMORPGs

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    There are many bots in WoW , but they are mainly used for farming mats, for ESO i dont know since i left it too quick becuase of the pvp design

    In wow pvp there is no solo q for ranked so basically bots cannot enter in it, and boting unranked does not give any rewards so no point for boting, but bots in wow are ruining the whole economic system

    thank you arenanet for the glorious new pvp season, i drew you a picture as a thanks

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @georgessj.4198 said:

    @Starbreaker.6507 said:I know botting has been an issue for some time now, but I swear to God that I have never seen more than I have during this 3v3 season.

    All of them seem to be Scourges too, and they all do the same thing:
    1. Run into the middle of whatever map it is
    2. Cast a couple marks from staff
    3. Proceed to auto-attack for the remainder of the match

    If one of your teammates goes down they'll try to run at them with the hard res, and they obviously make no attempt to try and kite or use any variance in skills.I know that PvP has been a complete dumpster fire for a few years now, but this really highlights what little ANet cares about the game and mode.

    And yet just today some 'weirdly good will folks' were telling me how exaggerated bots numbers are :D :D :D

    This is not good joke and you are not correct. I didnt tell you how exaggerated the bot numbers are. I told you that i FEEL like it is exaggerated, which means that i might be wrong and i told you also that neither i or you can be 100 % accurate on the numbers so because of that the coverastion wont lead to any meaningfull end since neither i can prove you wrong ,neither you can. So please dont make fun of people and shift their words in different topics. Thank you in advance!

    I also said that there are obvious bots and it is sad that anet do not do anything about them.

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @georgessj.4198 said:

    The actual number of bots is very overexaggerated.Thats what someone who cant point out a bot whould say so.....

    That is not exactly true, not agreeing with you does not mean that we cannot recognise bots. we can speculate on the actual numbers, but without evidence both things are just claims... Since we cannot prove the exact number of bots and we cannot be 100 % acurate on who is boting or not i dont thing this conversation will lead to any meaningfull end.

    But as i said there are obvious bots and it is sad that anet dont do much about them

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:Hehe i have fought bots but actually not that many.Its because you are new and cant always tell who is botting

    In nearly 3 years this is probably one of the most rational people i've met on here. I'm sure they can point out a bot, new or no.

    Close to or over a thousand games and a below average winrate usually means bot. The actual number of bots is very overexaggerated as well.

    I too feel like the boting problem is over exaggerated, i see a lot of people which just dont know what to do and do the same obvious mistake over and over again, like pushing mid alone , facetanking everything , which can easely be mistaked for bots... Ofcourse i might be wrong on that, but i just feel like the boting problem is over exaggerated.

    Currently i am in gold 2 with a full premade team (solo q for 3v3 just dont work imo when you face premade groups) and so far from all of the games i did i have seen 3 bots very late(early morning) when there are not much people playing spvp

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @georgessj.4198 said:

    @razaelll.8324 said:Hello Anet devs,

    i never had so much fun in a fantasy mmoprg pvp in the last 10 years.

    Wait until you find out all these pvp fun moments you had were against bots.

    Hehe i have fought bots but actually not that many.Its because you are new and cant always tell who is botting

    There are obvious bots which are very easy recognizable, but there some which are actually very hard to recognize even from veteran players, nobody can recognise bots with 100% accuracy.

    PvP state opinion

    in Player vs. Player

    Posted

    @Multicolorhipster.9751 said:I'm glad you enjoy it, keep on keeping on buddy.

    Balance patches are also always going to be polarizing. Actual content would be cooler. New maps, new modes, etc. Like EoD on the horizon. Stuff most people can agree is more interesting.

    Thanks man.

    I agree with you, more pvp modes would be cool.

GuildWars2.com
ArenaNet

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

ESRB - Teen
×
×
  • Create New...