Profile for Slarty
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Displayed name | Slarty |
| Member number | 261 |
| Title | Raven v. Writing Desk |
| Postcount | 3560 |
| Homepage | http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/slartyvsdesk/ |
| Registered | Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
Recent posts
Pages
| Author | Recent posts |
|---|---|
| Questions about collection quests and timer. in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 13 2007 20:39
Profile
Homepage
I did some intensive testing of this -- there's a topic somewhere where I had a good discussion with Thuryl about it. Anyway, the short of it is that 1) resistances are multiplied together, so two 50% pieces of armor reduce by about 75%, and 2) the actual damage reduction granted to a given attack varies somewhat. In tests, 25% armor gave reductions of about 10% to 40%, with more closer to 25%. Thuryl's idea, which makes sense, is that each individual point of damage has an X% chance of being eliminated, where X is your armor/resistance score for that type of damage. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Best Class and Faction to Play in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 13 2007 09:34
Profile
Homepage
Repairing Moseh is 100% unnecessary to keep any areas open whatsoever. It's a myth. Even if you kill Moseh, reporting to Alwan will still earn you the pass that you need to get into the Shaper areas in the Fens. The problem is that many people kill Moseh, then assume there is no reason to report back to Alwan. The game really does reward indulging in diplomacy with the side you aren't helping. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Best Class and Faction to Play in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 13 2007 08:50
Profile
Homepage
The combat skills are really not a big deal -- you only save a few points over those in classes that actually care about combat. And the trainer isn't available until halfway through the game. So they are only worth fussing over if you are playing on Torment and really want to optimize every last point. You will however want to hold off training Spellcraft, as a Spellcraft trainer shows up very early. The Warrior and Shock Trooper are universally acknowledged to be sub-optimal classes... though the difference is not huge. The Lifecrafter is best with creations due to higher essence and will have the most raw offensive power. The Servile is the best fighter and potentially the most versatile and survivable. The Infiltrator is extremely similar to the Servile -- slightly less survivable, but with slightly more essence -- with most seeming to feel the Servile and Lifecrafter are preferable. As far as sects go, you are somewhat better off if you pick one side and stick with it. The Shapers have somewhat better rewards, though there are exceptions. The link in my sig and in the forum header will have more detailed information about that. Otherwise, there aren't any major surprises / realizations that you should have done X 20 hours of playing ago. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Weapon types?.. in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Monday, February 12 2007 19:56
Profile
Homepage
The missile attack used by Shock Tralls stuns, as do Stun Wands, Submission Batons, the Stunning Blade, and the melee attacks of Glaahks and Gazers. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Geneforge Political Spectrum in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Monday, February 12 2007 09:15
Profile
Homepage
This new chart looks very nice too. I still think having a single dot for each sect is an extremely poor way to represent the Awakened and the Rebellion. Also, there is no way the Shapers are as pro-shaping power as the Takers are. The Takers aligned with Trajkov, and were the origin of the Rebellion and its self-shaping Drakons. Maybe one dot is too little for the Shapers, but the strong Loyalist Shaper perspective is about where the Obeyers are, perhaps slightly less restrictive and slightly further from creation rights. Evaluating both spectra, the sects should probably go in an order something like this (IMHO): Shaping power (most to least restrictive): * Trakovites -- eliminate entirely * Obeyers (Rydell) -- restrict very strictly * Loyalists (Aodare) -- restrict very strictly * Shapers (Alwan) -- restrict strictly (halfway point) * Shapers (Zakary) -- restrict when necessary * Awakened (Ellhrah) -- restrict when necessary * Awakened (Tuldaric) -- unleash when necessary * Takers (Gnorrel) -- unleash when useful * Trajkov -- unleash with little regard for the world * Rebels (Greta, Litalia) -- unleash with little regard for the world * Barzites (Barzahl) -- unleash with little regard for the world * Rebels (Akhari Blaze) -- unleash with NO regard for the world Creation rights (least to most supportive): * Barzites (Barzahl) -- Shapers dominate creations with cruelty * Loyalists (Aodare) -- Shapers dominate creations * Shapers (Agatha) -- Shapers dominate creations * Shapers (Diwaniya) -- Shapers dominate and support creations * Obeyers (Rydell) -- Shapers dominate and support creations (halfway point) * Trakovites -- Peace and equality * Awakened (Ellhrah) -- Peace and equality * Trajkov -- Equality * Takers (Gnorrel) -- Freedom at any cost * Rebels (Greta, Litalia) -- Freedom at any cost, destroy Shapers * Rebels (Akhari Blaze) -- Drakons dominate (and support?) other creations, destroy Shapers I think the easiest way to handle this is to recognize creation rights as a continuum that is not a simple gradient between two extremes. Thus, Shaper domination, equality, creation power, and Drakon domination of everyone else are all different points. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Weapon types?.. in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Monday, February 12 2007 05:57
Profile
Homepage
The Stunning Blade doesn't have a better chance of stunning. It *actually* adds several levels of stunning directly. This is significant because unlike G1-3, where every attack had a good chance of stunning if it did a lot of damage, stunning is rare. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Going back to beat A4... in Avernum 4 | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Sunday, February 11 2007 20:21
Profile
Homepage
I agree with Alorael about thrown weapons and uniqueness. Makes me think of Angband and the sad lack of artifact throwing knives. (Though I suppose you can turn Grond into a throwing weapon.) I actually have a hard time thinking of ANY turn-based RPG in which thrown weapons are as useful or as powerful as melee weapons. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Brain Teaser(s) in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Sunday, February 11 2007 20:17
Profile
Homepage
Doh!!! It seems so obvious now. Nice one SoT. The odd case should be quite simple, shouldn't it? Tossing non-dual-positive pairs will always toss at least as many bad chips as good. The remaining dual-positive pairs plus the odd chip out will be at least 50% good chips, so tossing one from each pair will maintain that ratio. So you can just keep the odd chip out. The only circumstance in which it would require you to go to a new iteration with greater than 50% of the remaining chips is if you have an odd number and every single pair is dual-positive -- so, unless I'm mistaken, the "small constant" the problem asks for can be one. [ Sunday, February 11, 2007 20:23: Message edited by: Hashi the Drug-Sniffing Canine ] -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Geneforge Political Spectrum in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Sunday, February 11 2007 07:16
Profile
Homepage
Interesting graphic. There are definitely two spectra involved. I think you could further generalize from "self-shaping" to "regulation of shaping." This would add some precision to the spectrum, as the Trakovites are stricter in that regard than the Obeyers, etc. It would be interesting, and more telling I think, to do this exercise with particular leaders rather than whole sects. Some of the sects aren't well represented by a single dot. Consider the Awakened. In G1, Ellhrah is horrified if you use the Geneforge. Obviously, Tuldaric is more liberal with shaping power. Similarly, the Rebellion: the humanoid rebellion supports creation rights and (G4 implies) has at least a modicum of concern for preserving the world (i.e., restricting shaping power at least slightly). The drakon rebellion doesn't do either of these things as much. Edit: I suppose I would be somewhere around the Trakovites. [ Sunday, February 11, 2007 07:18: Message edited by: Hashi the Drug-Sniffing Canine ] -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| A Year and a Day in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 10 2007 13:49
Profile
Homepage
That doesn't seem too bad, Aran. I can think of numerous examples of people who started out much worse. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Quick action in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 10 2007 11:28
Profile
Homepage
Except that the chance of Quick Action getting an extra strike in has nothing whatsoever to do with the enemy's level. Whereas the chance of Assassination working was based directly on the enemy's level. Also, certain secondary weapon effects (but not all of them) can be activated on both hits. (Disclaimer: I tested this in G3, but haven't noticed it to be different in G4.) Edit: Maybe "strategically analagous" would be a better way of putting it. [ Saturday, February 10, 2007 11:29: Message edited by: Hashi the Drug-Sniffing Canine ] -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Graphics Request. in Blades of Avernum | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 10 2007 10:29
Profile
Homepage
Jewel of Arabia has some nice musical instrument icons as well. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Help me plan my character in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 10 2007 10:27
Profile
Homepage
I'm still confused as to why you are making Drayks with a Servile. The combat bonuses a Servile gets are not very useful if you are running strong creations, so you are better off with a Lifecrafter (or an Infiltrator). -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Brain Teaser(s) in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Friday, February 9 2007 18:15
Profile
Homepage
This was fun to work on. I think I've got the idea, but there is a major hiccup. For each iteration, 1. Perform [N/2] pairwise tests with each chip being involved in exactly one test. If there are an odd number of chips, one chip will be left out. 2. Throw out ALL chip pairs that do not produce mutual positive results. You are guaranteed to be left with a set of chips that meets the original criteria -- more good chips than bad chips. This works because mutual positives are produced by either good-good pairs or (sometimes) bad-bad pairs. With an even number of chips, it is impossible to have as many bad-bad pairs as good-good pairs. (Try it -- match up as many bad-good pairs as you can, and you will have one good-good pair left. If you make a bad-bad pair, you also have to make an extra good-good pair.) With an odd number of chips, the same thing is true except for the possibility of getting zero mutual positive pairs -- only good-bad pairs. In this case, the leftover chip is good and you are done. Special cases also need to be defined for when you have only 3 chips left (a mutual positive result means you need to throw out the leftover chip) and only 2 chips left (both must be good chips). In practice this will usually work since the bad-bad pairs will only produce mutual positive results 1 in 4 times. In theory, however, you could encounter the problematic result, in any given iteration, of ALL mutual positive results -- or even mostly mutual positive results, which is not efficient enough for the spirit of the specifications given. The solution is to set a quota of mutual positive pairs, equal to half the number of tests you can perform, rounded up. If this quota is full, put the untested chips aside and begin peforming tests that treat the tested chip pairs as whole units. (i.e. choose two chips from different tested pairs. If those chips test mutual positive, all four chips involved are either good or bad. If they don't test mutual positive, you either have 2 good and 2 bad chips, or 4 bad chips.) At first glance this is like a new iteration with less information -- you know you have somewhere between 2 and all the good chips, instead of somewhere between half and all of them. However, there are also two new outs. If all these chips test mutually positive, they must all be good, as there couldn't be that many bad chips in the round; so you are done. And if all the links are not mutually positive, you can toss the whole pile and just keep the ones you put aside. If some of the links are negative and some are positive, you are in a new situation as well, because you have thrown out some additional bad chips. This is significant because it means the maximum length a chain of mutually positive testing chips can have without all being good is reduced. Link together all the tested chips in this way, throwing out any pair-pairs (or pair-pair-pairs, etc.) that do not test mutually positive. So all the chips that remain are the same, either all good or all bad. You should have one test left. Take any of the tested chips and test it with one of the chips you already put aside. If the result is a mutual positive, they exceed the max number of bad chips you could have left, so they must all be good, and you are done. If it isn't, then... ...then you're stuck. And I'm stuck. So this isn't a solution after all. But it might have some of the right elements, so I'll leave this here for the sake of collaboration. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Questions about collection quests and timer. in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Friday, February 9 2007 15:48
Profile
Homepage
G3 certainly wasn't a "big" improvement, though there were some small improvements made. The bigness of G2's improvement is debatable as well. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| need advice for Avernum 1 in The Avernum Trilogy | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Friday, February 9 2007 15:47
Profile
Homepage
Actually, I am beginning to think that Alorael's daily name changes are the waste product of the supercharged Angband name generator he's been working on all these years. The PDN changes when he is forced to reroll. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Not yeti another photo thread in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Friday, February 9 2007 05:16
Profile
Homepage
Google was happy to provide a picture of me:  And one from my life:  -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| E3: Woes of the magically inept singleton in The Exile Trilogy | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Thursday, February 8 2007 20:27
Profile
Homepage
I don't remember, but did Pacifist prevent summoning spells? If not, that's an obvious out. Granted, Garzahd would be pretty tough to deal with with summons, even with Simulacrum and a huge pile of energy potions. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Calling all empires in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Thursday, February 8 2007 03:47
Profile
Homepage
I'll go with the Akkadian Empire, founded by the infamous Sargon, which existed for about 200 years in the late 3rd millenium BCE and spanned from Mesopotamia to the Mediterrean. Linguistically, it brings a tear to my eye -- well, as much as anything does linguistically -- as Sargon's empire brought with it the replacement of the wonderful agglutinative isolate language of Sumerian with Akkadian. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Avernum 5 Early, Early Notes in Avernum 4 | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Wednesday, February 7 2007 08:46
Profile
Homepage
quote:No -- the most accurate representation of caves was back in Exile and Exile II, when the combination of frequent written descriptions with undetailed gaphics meant you had to use your imagination. Anyway, like Thuryl and Randomizer, I grew up on those old school dungeon crawlers, but I never liked that element of them. Regular 2-D mazes are one thing, but including lots of ups and downs just turns navigation into a headache without actually making it any more interesting. It's just taxing. I mean, who truly enjoyed the 32 x 32 x 10 labyrinths of the old Wizardry games? -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| I hate being sick. in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Wednesday, February 7 2007 06:00
Profile
Homepage
quote:Having kids, try working residentially with children whose hygiene is deleterious at best, and who all go elsewhere in the state at intervals in order to bring more infections to the facility. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Avernum 5 Early, Early Notes in Avernum 4 | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 6 2007 21:51
Profile
Homepage
The chitrach icon was, thank god, replaced with a new one someone on the boards designed in the later (I want to say 1.02, but I think I'm making that number up) releases of A4. Chitrachs were bad enough without looking like clawbugs. Hallelujah to a number of Jeff's comments, especially the one about no pylons. And I agree with Alorael about the seamless world. If it's a new area, it wouldn't be so bad; the caves of Exile simply weren't designed for those kind of maps and don't lend themselves to them well. To pick one example from the games, Upper Exile would work okay, I think. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Shield? in Geneforge 4: Rebellion | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 6 2007 19:48
Profile
Homepage
Better yet, play Nethergate. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Question for Geneforge Series veterans in Geneforge Series | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 6 2007 19:46
Profile
Homepage
TM isn't the only one not here. For a very long time before G4, the only GF posters whose PDNs I could easily recognize were myself, Delicious Vlish, and Student of Trinity. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
| Why? in General | |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Tuesday, February 6 2007 09:01
Profile
Homepage
I do believe that Nikki is finally moving on from Arancaytar. And onto Kelandon. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |