Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Freeciv? (Score 1) 38

by Culture20 (#49593591) Attached to: The Battle of 100 Freeciv AIs

I'm not sure what you were expecting; you must have been aware that human players were moving concurrently, so why did you expect things to somehow be different in battle?

I wasn't aware of this, because when I played, there were actual turns. Not concurrent movement. I would take my turn, then I would have to wait a long time for the others to take their turns. My guess is that you're remembering a later version of Freeciv. All I know is that they changed a great turn-based game into a "My connection to the server is faster than yours" game for no good reason.

Comment: It's like this: (Score 1) 161

by Culture20 (#49584259) Attached to: The United States Just Might Be Iran's Favorite New Nuclear Supplier
Michelle Obama: "Iran, you're eating unhealthy. Your food purchases are questionable. If you buy from us, we'll make sure you only buy good foods without processed sugar and trans-fats."
Iran: "Oh, this is an excellent idea!" *buys healthy food from FLOTUS, then sugar and trans-fats from usual suppliers*

Comment: Re:Freeciv? (Score 1) 38

by Culture20 (#49578357) Attached to: The Battle of 100 Freeciv AIs
I remember when I first discovered it; I was playing an online game back in 2003ish and enemy dude planted a stack of catapults outside one of my cities. I thought to myself: okay, I can bring several horsemen via my roads from this other city to kill that stack... WTF? How are all his catapults attacking my city on my turn? He couldn't occupy the city, but he could attack any adjacent square. I totally thought he was cheating. And it sort of is cheating; if you're faster on the draw, a stronger attack power beats having a defender in the stack.

I stopped playing freeciv once they stopped being turn based.

Comment: Re: Nonsense (Score 1) 125

The point is, prior to now, we've had stuff called "VR" that we'll look back on decades from now and will refer to as a "precursor to VR". We're one year into what history will consider true VR.

the "pong level" VR out now has only two improvements over the "pong level" VR from twenty years ago: resolution and faster computers. I remember playing a shooter game in a VR headset at an arcade that was quite immersive. They put you in a waist-high ring that prevented you from walking around, which is what a lot of people naturally tried to do when they saw the virtual 3D game. So Valve is right: they're at pong level. But they're also wrong: VR has been at pong level for decades, and might never improve much without Holodeck style tech.

Comment: Re:"How did the teacher fail these students?" (Score 1) 353

by Culture20 (#49572339) Attached to: University Overrules Professor Who Failed Entire Management Class

I can sympathize with number 1, and partially with number 4, but 2 and 3 hold no water at all. They should not be the concern of the professor. These undergraduates are supposedly a subset of adults.

And supposedly a subset that is more competent than the rest. I sympathize with number one only for first year students. After that, if you can't handle the course load, drop the course early and retake it next semester with easier classes. Barring emergencies or accidents, no external pressures should matter to what the professor is teaching in a course. An adult who is more competent than average should be able to manage their time for all responsibilities.

Disraeli was pretty close: actually, there are Lies, Damn lies, Statistics, Benchmarks, and Delivery dates.