Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

SergeantMatt

Contributing Members
  • Posts

    180
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by SergeantMatt

  1. Stellaris. I got off home from work at 6:30 and suddenly it's 1:00 in the morning. This game makes time disappear

    I'm excited to see what they'll add with expansions in a few months. Obviously more events and anomalies with every one, more endgame catastrophes, more techs. Ground combat seems likely to get an overhaul, very bare bones right now.

  2. It's probably a symptom of them being fucking stupid

     

    oh look we have this virtually carbon neutral power source with ridiculous energy density

     

    let's not use it

    If you believe Jill Stein, nuclear power plants are weapons of mass destruction waiting to go off. I guess we're still building Chernobyl-like reactor designs staffed by imbeciles in her mind.

  3. Irrelevant Green Party candidate Jill Stein hosts AMA on reddit, posts uninformed hippie screed about how nuclear power is bad and should feel bad, gets downvoted to hell.

     

    Post

     

    Ah, the Green Party, pandering to hippies with ravings against nuclear power and for woo like homeopathic medicine, and accomplishing nothing of any benefit for the environment. Hilarious.

  4. Looks exciting

    Yeah, I've been playing the hell out of it. An interesting mix of 4X and grand strategy, with probably my favorite tech system I've seen in a strategy game. Instead of the usual tech tree, techs are more like cards in a deck, weighted based on their rarity, so every game is different and every faction unlocks different things. And being a Paradox game, it's extremely moddable, so I expect complete overhaul mods for Warhammer 40K, Star Wars, Star Trek, Mass Effect, etc. to come out within a few months. Highly recommended.

  5. I wouldn't be so confident about Trump's chances against Hillary.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/?tid=sm_fb

    If Clinton wins the 19 states (and D.C.) that every Democratic nominee has won from 1992 to 2012, she has 242 electoral votes. Add Florida's 29 and you get 271. Game over.

    The Republican map — whether with Trump, Cruz or the ideal Republican nominee (Paul Ryan?) as the standard-bearer — is decidedly less friendly. There are 13 states that have gone for the GOP presidential nominee in each of the last six elections. But they only total 102 electorate votes. That means the eventual nominee has to find, at least, 168 more electoral votes to get to 270. Which is a hell of a lot harder than finding 28 electoral votes.

  6. Yeah. And they had Cruz ahead until a couple days ago. The Democratic polling seems to have been a bit more problematic in predicting than the Republicans. I'm not sure why. 

    Running theory I've seen around is that when the polls have Clinton ahead by a lot, her supporters get complacent and stay home, while the Bernie voters turn out regardless of the polls.

  7. And holy shit, Bernie Sanders is now BEATING the Hillary-Beast in Indiana?!?

    538 had Clinton at 90% chance of winning too, ha. The Clinton supporters I've spoken to all seem very confident about Clinton v. Trump, but if Clinton has turned a battle against a relatively unknown 74 year old Vermont senator who openly calls himself a socialist in America into this close of a contest, it does not bode well for her campaign strategy against Trump. If anyone can fail to beat Trump, it's Hillary Clinton.

  8. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/clinton-campaign-says-no-more-debates-until-bernie-starts-be-nicer

     

    "Clinton Campaign: No More Debates Until Sanders Starts Being Nicer"

     

    Forget about watching comedy shows, I should just keep an eye on this election.

    Man if she think "everybody's friendly grandpa" Bernie Sanders is mean, how on Earth is she going to handle Donald Trump in a debate.

  9. Isn't it possible for someone in the US to become president with a minute amount of the vote anyway, given how screwy the electoral college is?

     

    In any case; Brone, for your own sanity I'd suggest that you leave it. Otherwise these dudes will spend all day telling you about the five thousand-and-one rooms of the heavenly maze that is the US political system. You're better off using the neurons to understand transonic flow over non-rotating projectiles.

     

    A presidential candidate could be elected with as a little as 21.8% of the popular vote by getting just over 50% of the votes in DC and each of 39 small states. This is true even when everyone votes and there are only two candidates. In other words, a candidate could lose with 78.2% of the popular vote by getting just under 50% in small states and 100% in large states.

    The optimal set of states to take (the one that lets a candidate win with the smallest popular vote) is not the N states with the smallest population. It's also not the N states with the smallest value for (population/electors), which would be optimal if you could get exactly 270 electoral votes that way.

    The optimal solution happens to get exactly 270 electoral votes. In this solution, the winner takes DC, the 37 smallest states, the 39th smallest state, and the 40th smallest state. (The winner takes Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.)

×
×
  • Create New...