|
Forgive me if something like this has been posted already but I'm yet to have seen it. I'm a huge fan and just want to thank you for your contributions.
I'm a player with almost literally no RTS fundamentals and I'm definitely not the only one. Well, I guess if playing multiplayer 4 hour games of starcraft on the N64 during the 90's counts, maybe I do have some fundamentals. 1aing full food carriers into a terran base wall to wall turrets was always worth it!
I've got maybe 150 games played since beta, and I've spent 2, 3 or maybe even 4 times that time spent playing games doing research, watching VODs, streams and just in general using other readily available resources. My knowledge of SC2 is above average and this only carries me so far.
I've just recently hit low diamond on NA, it's not something I'm satisfied with and my game sampling post-beta has been small. My APM averages 55 or so in any given game, my macro is absolutely cringe-worthy, past the 30 food mark there's almost always gaps in my probe production and on 2 bases I very frequently hit the 2k minerals mark. My micro, while ok could also use some work, I've made some terrible blunders.
What I'd love to see from you day9, is a daily discussing practice, how to go about it, how to best utilize this time, goal setting and the like. If not asking too much, perhaps a separate daily discussing macro and another for micro.
All the same, thank you again.
|
On September 03 2010 20:32 Shakes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +This is why I don't like his answer. Day9 went on about people making assumptions like the string burns at constant speed, but his preferred answer relies on lighting both ends causes it to burn twice as fast, which is not specified in the problem and hence also only an assumption. For example the extra heat from both ends being on fire might cause it to burn faster.
Sorry, but that's asinine.
+ Show Spoiler +Of course it burns at a constant speed. This isn't an applied engineering problem, it's a frickin riddle.
My only problem with the riddle is that he didn't specify that I can't cut the string, so my solution was "cut a quarter off the string" :D
EDIT: to clarify, I mean it's not going to magically burn faster than 30 minutes because it's lit at both ends.
|
|
|
On September 04 2010 04:46 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2010 20:32 Shakes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +This is why I don't like his answer. Day9 went on about people making assumptions like the string burns at constant speed, but his preferred answer relies on lighting both ends causes it to burn twice as fast, which is not specified in the problem and hence also only an assumption. For example the extra heat from both ends being on fire might cause it to burn faster. Sorry, but that's asinine. + Show Spoiler +Of course it burns at a constant speed. This isn't an applied engineering problem, it's a frickin riddle.
My only problem with the riddle is that he didn't specify that I can't cut the string, so my solution was "cut a quarter off the string" :D
EDIT: to clarify, I mean it's not going to magically burn faster than 30 minutes because it's lit at both ends.
+ Show Spoiler +I agree on your disagreement with Shakes post, if the riddle is to not give the answer away in and on itself, it can't provide every detail, and you have to overlook the small problems with the answer. However, your own problem with the riddle is something day9 himself addressed  There is no guarentee that the string burns uniformly, so the first part of the string might burn in 35 minutes while the rest burns in 25. So cutting the string is not a solution.
|
I tought this was a starcraft 2 forum ...
|
On September 04 2010 07:08 Tili_us wrote:
I tought this was a starcraft 2 forum ...
Nah. It's a flame forum. Oddly, this time its weird that instead of talking about Terrans we're talking about... fire. Wacky.
|
+1 waiting for 170!
Also just wanted to say thanks for all the work you've been doing in various places, enjoy both your casting and your dailies a great deal.
I'm sure he has answered it somewhere, but is Day actively practicing? I would assume so much casting/dailies would make it nearly impossible to train enough to play at the highest levels, but I would love to see Day9 in some tournaments etc in future, and am curious about his intentions.
|
On September 04 2010 04:46 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2010 20:32 Shakes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +This is why I don't like his answer. Day9 went on about people making assumptions like the string burns at constant speed, but his preferred answer relies on lighting both ends causes it to burn twice as fast, which is not specified in the problem and hence also only an assumption. For example the extra heat from both ends being on fire might cause it to burn faster. Sorry, but that's asinine. + Show Spoiler +Of course it burns at a constant speed. This isn't an applied engineering problem, it's a frickin riddle.
My only problem with the riddle is that he didn't specify that I can't cut the string, so my solution was "cut a quarter off the string" :D
EDIT: to clarify, I mean it's not going to magically burn faster than 30 minutes because it's lit at both ends.
I really don't intend to be a jerk here, but...
+ Show Spoiler +Day[9] specifically mentioned that it was a bad assumption that the string burned at a constant speed. His answer relies on the string burning at a constant speed.
Now that that is over with, I think the INTENTION of the riddle makes a lot a sense, and I really appreciate the work you are doing to help players of all skill levels "become better gamers"
Cheers man!
|
I was going to remark on the riddle. Because as soon as you allow his answer, you can also measure 45 minutes quite easily by folding a string in half, then folding it in half again to get quarters.
|
The last time I played the day9 drinking game with a friend we came up with something that was pretty hilarious for us at that moment. We are big fans of sean and really admire his work so don't take any of this as an offense (:
Advice[9]
+ Show Spoiler +
It even helps reminding important lessons 
|
|
|
|
|
Say things twice, say things twice.
Funniest thing I've seen today.
|
On September 04 2010 10:45 PaprikaSpice wrote:
I was going to remark on the riddle. Because as soon as you allow his answer, you can also measure 45 minutes quite easily by folding a string in half, then folding it in half again to get quarters.
NO. It's been said here before, and he mentioned before disclosing the answer: the string might not burn evenly. So if you chop off 25%, that part might burn instantly and you're left with almost an hour of burn time in the other 75%. His solution gets the right answer regardless of the strings' uniformity.
|
Lol at scream like velociraptor
|
On September 04 2010 12:41 therealmeal wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2010 10:45 PaprikaSpice wrote:
I was going to remark on the riddle. Because as soon as you allow his answer, you can also measure 45 minutes quite easily by folding a string in half, then folding it in half again to get quarters. NO. It's been said here before, and he mentioned before disclosing the answer: the string might not burn evenly. So if you chop off 25%, that part might burn instantly and you're left with almost an hour of burn time in the other 75%. His solution gets the right answer regardless of the strings' uniformity.
To be honest, that answer is kind of BS too. Depending on where you light the string, there are several different times the string could burn out. If you can just light it in the middle, then you can cut it in half too.
At least, that's what I thought. I could be missing something.
|
On September 04 2010 12:45 Nephrahim wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2010 12:41 therealmeal wrote:On September 04 2010 10:45 PaprikaSpice wrote:
I was going to remark on the riddle. Because as soon as you allow his answer, you can also measure 45 minutes quite easily by folding a string in half, then folding it in half again to get quarters. NO. It's been said here before, and he mentioned before disclosing the answer: the string might not burn evenly. So if you chop off 25%, that part might burn instantly and you're left with almost an hour of burn time in the other 75%. His solution gets the right answer regardless of the strings' uniformity. To be honest, that answer is kind of BS too. Depending on where you light the string, there are several different times the string could burn out. If you can just light it in the middle, then you can cut it in half too. At least, that's what I thought. I could be missing something.
He didn't light it in the middle, he always lit it at the ends. The only information you have is that the strings each take exactly an hour to burn through, and may not burn through evenly. You line up both strings side by side and burn them at three of the four ends.The one string that is burning at both ends will burn up in exactly half an hour, regardless of how unevenly it burns from end to end. That means that when the string that is burning at both ends burns out, the other string that was lit at only one end will be half an hour burnt, and have a half hour left. At that point you light up the fourth end. Thus the remaining half hour on that string is burnt up at a double rate, and it burns out after fifteen minutes. That is forty-five minutes after lighting the first three ends.
On September 04 2010 10:25 Anty wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2010 04:46 kojinshugi wrote:On September 03 2010 20:32 Shakes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +This is why I don't like his answer. Day9 went on about people making assumptions like the string burns at constant speed, but his preferred answer relies on lighting both ends causes it to burn twice as fast, which is not specified in the problem and hence also only an assumption. For example the extra heat from both ends being on fire might cause it to burn faster. Sorry, but that's asinine. + Show Spoiler +Of course it burns at a constant speed. This isn't an applied engineering problem, it's a frickin riddle.
My only problem with the riddle is that he didn't specify that I can't cut the string, so my solution was "cut a quarter off the string" :D
EDIT: to clarify, I mean it's not going to magically burn faster than 30 minutes because it's lit at both ends. I really don't intend to be a jerk here, but... + Show Spoiler +Day[9] specifically mentioned that it was a bad assumption that the string burned at a constant speed. His answer relies on the string burning at a constant speed. Now that that is over with, I think the INTENTION of the riddle makes a lot a sense, and I really appreciate the work you are doing to help players of all skill levels "become better gamers" Cheers man!
You are misunderstanding his answer then. You don't have to rely on the string burning at a constant speed to know that lighting it at both ends will cause it to burn out in half an hour. That is true regardless of which part of the string burns faster. That's why his answer works and "cut off a quarter of the string" doesn't work.
|
On September 04 2010 13:01 GGQ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2010 12:45 Nephrahim wrote:On September 04 2010 12:41 therealmeal wrote:On September 04 2010 10:45 PaprikaSpice wrote:
I was going to remark on the riddle. Because as soon as you allow his answer, you can also measure 45 minutes quite easily by folding a string in half, then folding it in half again to get quarters. NO. It's been said here before, and he mentioned before disclosing the answer: the string might not burn evenly. So if you chop off 25%, that part might burn instantly and you're left with almost an hour of burn time in the other 75%. His solution gets the right answer regardless of the strings' uniformity. To be honest, that answer is kind of BS too. Depending on where you light the string, there are several different times the string could burn out. If you can just light it in the middle, then you can cut it in half too. At least, that's what I thought. I could be missing something. He didn't light it in the middle, he always lit it at the ends. The only information you have is that the strings each take exactly an hour to burn through, and may not burn through evenly. You line up both strings side by side and burn them at three of the four ends.The one string that is burning at both ends will burn up in exactly half an hour, regardless of how unevenly it burns from end to end. That means that when the string that is burning at both ends burns out, the other string that was lit at only one end will be half an hour burnt, and have a half hour left. At that point you light up the fourth end. Thus the remaining half hour on that string is burnt up at a double rate, and it burns out after fifteen minutes. That is forty-five minutes after lighting the first three ends.
Ah! Now I get it, thanks!
All the "Third end and fourth end" Stuff confused me. Would have helped if he just said "Second string."
|
On September 04 2010 10:25 Anty wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2010 04:46 kojinshugi wrote:On September 03 2010 20:32 Shakes wrote:+ Show Spoiler +This is why I don't like his answer. Day9 went on about people making assumptions like the string burns at constant speed, but his preferred answer relies on lighting both ends causes it to burn twice as fast, which is not specified in the problem and hence also only an assumption. For example the extra heat from both ends being on fire might cause it to burn faster. Sorry, but that's asinine. + Show Spoiler +Of course it burns at a constant speed. This isn't an applied engineering problem, it's a frickin riddle.
My only problem with the riddle is that he didn't specify that I can't cut the string, so my solution was "cut a quarter off the string" :D
EDIT: to clarify, I mean it's not going to magically burn faster than 30 minutes because it's lit at both ends. I really don't intend to be a jerk here, but... + Show Spoiler +Day[9] specifically mentioned that it was a bad assumption that the string burned at a constant speed. His answer relies on the string burning at a constant speed. Now that that is over with, I think the INTENTION of the riddle makes a lot a sense, and I really appreciate the work you are doing to help players of all skill levels "become better gamers" Cheers man!
Not to drag it out..
+ Show Spoiler + His answer does not assume constant speed at which it's burning. He only said from one end to the other it takes an hour. That's fine.
One string can burn 90% of the way in 10 minutes, the other 50 minutes could take that last 10%. If you burn that particular string on both ends, it still does not assume constant speed. The other side clearly is more "dense" or however you want to phrase it, and will burn slower. It still will take it 30 minutes total to completely burn up.
So burning three ends. All is well. All we're doing is measuring 45 minutes of time, as if this was some really bad and convoluted clock. You burn the first string on both ends and the second string on 1 end all at the same time. The first string will burn out in 30 minutes (yes this does not mean the fire meets in the middle. It can meet at the 90/10 %age marks.
As soon as the first string is completely burnt, you immediately light fire to the second string. Regardless if the second string has burnt through 99% of itself, it will still take 15 minutes for that last 1%. It could have burnt through only 10% of itself, leaving 90% to burn in 15 minutes. (15 because it's going twice as fast since you're now burning both ends with half of it's time elapsed. Same idea as in the first string burning up in 30 minutes).
Also, you have no idea about the length of these strings, size, weight etc. Because that doesn't matter. You know regardless if it's a foot or a mile, it will burn up in 1 hour. Same with the other string, which could be a centimeter in length for all we care. You have all the information that is relevant and it's a damn clever riddle.
Just wanted to throw that out there to hopefully finally clear this confusion.
Edit: I was beaten to the punch.. ahhh oh well. Hopefully it's clear!
|
Riddle's funny because it plays on the intuition you have that distance is the value you need to work with. It's an absolute value and it's easy to math it out. But to get past the "unevenness" problem you have to think out of the box first in a practical way by burning at both ends and second, theoretically this time, by working with time in a relative way.
Day didn't deliver the riddle that well in the daily. I was confused by a lot of things he said including the "left to right" part where I thought that implied the candle could only burned in that direction. I even think he did that on purpose. He also criticizes people who "try to find that extra bit of information" when that pretty much invites you to close your mind, to try to work with the information as unimaginatively and mechanically as possible. The problem is that the riddle he proposes IS in fact one where there is critical information withheld and needs to be found in imaginative ways. Makes the solution look just as cheap as the "short girl" solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9%20give%20up.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9%20-%20stuff.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9%20twice.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9scream.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9%20template.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/1.png)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/2.png)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/3.png)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/4.png)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/5.png)
![[image loading]](http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/Lordbobble/6.png)
![[image loading]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1614723/advice9/advice9%20sleep.png)
