On Jun 21, 12:00=A0pm, Anton <anton.txt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Hello, AngleWyrm
>
> =A0"And what is a logarithm? log_x(x^y) returns y, the =A0number =A0of
> =A0 dimensions. Taking the log of something implies =A0that =A0it =A0has
> =A0 multiple dimensions/variables."
>
> =A0 In my example experience is calculated as:
> =A0 Exp =3D Ta*K, K=3Dconst.
> =A0 -- just a value directly pro****tinal to the time the unit =A0has
> =A0 spent fighting. It is neither multi-dimensional =A0nor =A0consists
> =A0 of several variables...
>
> =A0"The assumption I am =A0making =A0is =A0that =A0the =A0center
=A0'diag=
onal'
> =A0 produces the highest number. =A0It =A0could =A0also =A0be =A0called
=
=A0the
> =A0 optimum price/performance ratio."
>
> =A0 It's a fact, not an assumption. What you assume =A0is =A0that =A0the
> =A0 various stats are correlated (hence every point =A0is =A0close =A0to
> =A0 the diagonal) and that the =A0overall =A0fittness =A0function =A0is
=
=A0a
> =A0 product thereof (so that being on the diagonal means being the
> =A0 best). I don't think either of these assumptions applies to =A0a
> =A0 considerable number of games...
I'd save my breath, facts are not going to sway him. The ending
point for me was when he 'creatively edited' one of my replies,
snipping out his mistake and most of my response to it, until
he was left with an appropriately contextless question that he
could use to wave vaguely at his web page and insist the
answer was in there. (Actually, the first time I saw this method
used was by Wally in a Dilbert cartoon. Next step, IIRC, is
to claim that the person misunderstood their own question.)
My personal guess is that either he either doesn't have the
patience, or is just not skillful enough at this style of game,
and the whole purpose of the page is to ****ft the blame
to someone else. The premise is flawed, the math
questionable, the logic laughable, the page is downright
embarassing for its creator.
But like most crackpots, I'm sure he'll insist that it is correct
and ****ft the blame to us for not 'getting it'.
-----
Geoff
|
