Came to the comment(s) looking for this game. I've played this! Fun!
It's interesting to explore the spectrum of what people find fun. In large groups, it seems like games that tilt heavily towards luck can be a great deal of fun for everyone, while "board gamers" (like me) enjoy games where you can learn and leverage strategies to gain advantage, and the role of luck is diminished (to varying degrees).
As a board game host, you have to get that spectrum, gauge group size and preference, and pick a game that will work for them. Strategic games, in particular, take learning the rules, learning the strategies, practicing them, learning your opponents... it can take a dozen games before you're competitive. And for a lot of people, almost none of those games will be any fun.
A few games kind of nail this with an unexpectedly even playing field, where strategy helps, but luck offsets it. If luck really offsets it, very strategic players will also find that it's no fun.
Some luck-based games I really like include Lords of Vegas (not to mention... just Vegas), Bunny Kingdom, and Flip 7.
A lot of card-based strategy games like Terraforming Mars and Wingspan certainly have some amount of luck in them, but it can be dwarfed by good synergy / strategy.
I think for big groups it’s not so much luck/randomness that is the key but complexity. Low complexity games are going to play better. They can be pure skill games. Many drinking games are (beer pong etc).
Luck/randomness is directly against determinism. A way of making feel less mechanical and opening up the combinatorial state space? Essentially increasing the fun/interest without introducing high complexity necessarily? As well as narrow the skill range as you say, but not necessarily over longer time horizons.
Like you can do a 2d matrix of luck and complexity.
I'm not sure we read the same parent comment. There is almost nothing in there about emotional intelligence beyond learning self-regulation, but emotional intelligence is at least as much about understanding others' emotions, understanding social cues and etiquette. But the bulk of the parent comment is about adaptability, general self-awareness and self-examination.
You then make an argument that education does, in fact, teach those critical skills indirectly through basic subjects. Having given such a bold premise, you would need to back it up with at least some supporting evidence. Given that you provided none at all, you shouldn't be surprised that no one sees reason to agree with that premise.
If you're just looking at the numbers, it's worth doing the math. Obviously many things will be estimates.
Most people don't do apples to oranges comparisons, because a 2-bedroom, 1.5 bathroom you're living in is not comparable to a 3-bedroom, 2 bathroom, quarter acre house on a lot you're considering buying.
So it's obviously not just math, but also preference, or need.
Local house prices, tax rates, utility rates, services for maintenance and upgrade... they'll all vary greatly depending on the area. And if you're moving from an urban apartment to a suburban house, you're changing how much you'll drive, maybe even need an additional car. But maybe you turn in your rail pass, and decide to cook at home more, and eat out less.
If you think you can decide this based on a formula (or some folk wisdom), well you probably can, for yourself. But of course there's no one universal right answer that applies to most people, because there are too many variables and too many options.
If the AI-generated content doesn't push out all the good stuff, the absolute flood of accusing everything written everywhere as being written by AI will.
> There is a headphone jack, but it's on the top of the phone.
They say that like it is a bad thing. I've always preferred the headset jack on the top because if I'm using the device while sitting and the jack is on the bottom it interferes with resting my phone holding hand the table if I'm at my desk or on my chest or leg if I'm the couch.
The main argument I've heard for jack on the bottom is that most people normally put their phone in their pocket with the top down, so if the jack is on top you have to flip it.
Google is telling me that jack on top was the norm in the early days of smartphones but gradually changed as the pocket argument won out.
Of course this wouldn't matter at all if more phones rotated the screens so that the display was upright even if the phone is upside down. Then everyone could have the headphone jack where they want.
I think it's about when you put your phone in your pocket, you have to have it top-up while most people put it top-down, shortening the lenght of the cable and pushing against the connector. In that optic top jack is worse, I believe
They went instead with "Assembled in the USA" printed on the box, which means that the phone was put in its box in Florida.
"Official" MAGA hats now say "Made in PRC" as if their wearers are too stupid to realize that means People's Republic of China, after the backlash against "Made in China". It's not a bad bet, actually: a media outlet back in the day polled a bunch of Republican voters and asked "If the government were to introduce, instead of Obamacare, some form of Affordable Care Act, would you be opposed?"
(And the number one Google query on the last election day? "Did Biden drop out?")
Because the 6 devices on 5Ghz: laptops and smartphones.
The rest are "smart" devices that work perfectly on 2.4Ghz.
reply