That is correct, what I was trying to say is, that the playstyle of the professional players is not used to those rules. It takes them out of their comfort zone and they have to adapt. I would love to see the bot matched up with a high mmr player who is playing matches with these rules on a regular basis
While you are obviously right that it's not a "true" match, I have to disagree that it takes them out of their comfort zone. Especially Arteezy (playing one of best Shadow Fiends), Sumail are extremely good mid players and both have actually participated in the solo 1v1 tournament I've linked. There's even an official 1v1 game mode in-game - I would argue that they both play these matches "on a regular basis".
I love the bot, but not, those matched are not played in regular basis, even a great part of the community is not happy with tournaments when they include those modes, the best example is the TI, the first version have a small tournament to see which was the best mid player, it was not very popular, and was removed.
I still agree and think that you are somewhat correct. Nevertheless: the pros are training 5v5 exclusively. 1v1 is a just for fun gamemode, the money is earned in the 5v5 tournaments.
I am not saying the bot should be able to play 5v5, I am saying that he ist trained to play this one very specific 1v1 scenario. He is doing really well with that, but as soon as you pick a different hero, the bot will struggle.
I think this is a common misbelief. It has been proven again and again that this is not related to MMR - you will have pricks in every "tier". I can only vouch for the 3.5k range, but friends of mine in 4k-5k say the same thing. There are also a lot of threads on reddit which show that it's not exclusive to "the trenches".
My girlfriend is around 1k and her games are mostly friendly, which is interesting to say the least.
I think there is a point (after a certain amount of matches/playtime) where people start to believe they know everything about the game and start telling people how to behave and how to play, because they just "know it better". This is where it gets ugly.
I don't know. When I watch games of 4k on youtube, people seems more civil honestly. But maybe there is just a filter effect.
What's annoying is that I don't think you can pinpoint a factor that triggers rudeness. Yes, you have the typical insult following a failure to play up to the standard of some of the players. But you also have people just being uneducated: playing music with auto mic on, gaming like they are alone, feeding because they didn't get mid, trashing the enemy team... It's like being in high school all over again.
Calling it "lazy game design" is not only offensive to me as a game designer, but it's plain wrong. Here's a talk about AI in Civ from Soren Johnson, Lead Designer/AI Programmer on multiple Civ games: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJcuQQ1eWWI
Boo hoo, you're offended by people playing your games. What about us spending money on your game and then hours learning the mechanics only to get beaten by your AI violating the established rules and doing things we cannot.
I don't have have enough time with Civ to have experienced this there, but in Fifa watching defenders with speed and acceleration 10+ points below my strikers outrunning them or that magical switch flipping that says "AI will score now" and watching my own defenders actively run away from the ball or the ball even go right through their legs may not be result of "lazy" design but it's infuriating. Especially when I think of how much money I've laid down to have this experience.
I'm not offended by people playing "my" games - I'm offended by people who can't appreciate the amount of work which is channeled into making games. You can be certain that for every single feature within a (good) game, at least one person spent countless hours thinking about it.
You don't like a feature - that's totally fine. Talk about your grievances all you like, so we can learn and improve said feature. But don't call the people "lazy" if you don't know what you're talking about.
I think we all understand that making a game is a tremendous undertaking. But playing a game on a higher difficulty for the additional challenge should never result in that game cheating. That is lazy design. If you can't figure out how to make the game more of challenge without cheating then simply don't offer higher difficulty levels.
vim-airline requires you to use a patched font that replaces certain little-used unicode characters with shapes that airline uses to draw its UI. Specifically, those < and > looking dividers in the airline statusline. Although it's totally possible to use airline without this and it will look only slightly less fancy.
They're not little-used unicode characters. They're code points in the Private Use Area, which is an area of Unicode that's explicitly set aside and will never be assigned to "real" characters, specifically so they can be used for custom things. vim-airline's use of the PUA for its custom glyphs is quite appropriate, it's just annoying that it requires a patched font.
Incidentally, the Apple glyph (, or ⌥⇧K on macOS), is actually in the PUA as well (in fact, it's the very last PUA codepoint, U+F8FF). Which is why it may not render correctly in fonts that don't ship on macOS. Anyone reading this on Windows, Linux, or Android probably won't actually see the apple character.
The author seems to be under the impression that that set of glyphs not in the ASCII set is somehow special. That is not he case for any reasonable modern OS. Your font rendering engine does not care whether its painting a or a F or a . As long as it knows how to draw the glyph it will, and if it doesn't it will make one up.
If your browser could not draw the tub and pantheon above chances are neither would black-screen. The author seems to be an accomplished coder, but I can't see how the magic of JavaScript will make teaching your font engine how to paint a glyph go away.
It's not the font-rendering he's taking exception to. His argument seems to be that UI elements like the chevrons and icons in vim-powerline shouldn't be rendered using fonts at all. They currently are because traditionally terminals only have text-rendering to work with, but it's clear he'd rather have that UI be HTML instead.
I suspect that the author means you should just use graphically drawn elements rather that special characters that sort of look like what you want. Since electron is based on a browser, you could inline images and other graphics along with the text.
As terminals are basically text-only, to display symbols that powerline uses you have to create a font containing those symbols overriding some of the characters in it.
1. Nobody here works on weekends. In fact, it's not well received, but tolerated.
2. Everybody's time is valued here and on a individual basis.
3. I'm glad i had influence on whom i will be working with on a daily basis and have not regretted it either. My workmates are awesome. Why should the management decide this all alone?
Everybody here is free to openly make reservations about the companies strategies and decisions.
The project/task really depends on the position applied for. All i can say is, that the project is usually discussed in advance and things can be worked out here. There are some fine folks here who were given projects which took only a couple of hours.
Great to see this post here on Hacker News!
I work at flaregames and wholeheartedly agree with Klaas, we're asshole-free and that's not an understatement. :)
