Redwall

Since you can use binomial distributions to obtain exact expressions for the probabilities of reaching certain stat benchmarks in random mode, I wouldn't say that this is more fun to argue with (if anything, it's less fun and more work), or that it's more arbitrary.

Dislike of Awakening is necessary, but not sufficient, for being a hipster. You also need thick-rimmed glasses and form-fitting jeans.

Hmm, someone hasn't visited any university libraries during finals season...

There are plenty of people who enjoy Awakening (or any piece of media, really) for some period of time and then enjoy it less after the novelty wears off; there are also plenty of people whose disappointment in Awakening is exacerbated by their high expectations. It's not accurate to paint all these folks as hipsters.

judging by the time of edit of the OP, i can only conclude that you thought i was being facetious (hint: i wasn't). the 2003 nobel prize in chemistry was awarded to two researchers who studied aquaporins, which are basically proteins that permit water flow into cells. there are all sorts of things you can write about them. also this probably shouldn't be in serious discussion

aquaporins imo

If it's too easy you can always just play competitively (Pokemon Showdown) or make up some set of restrictions.

Half of what I say is meaningless But I say it just to reach you, Julia Bonus poll suggestion: Revolver vs. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band

Someone should do a simultaneous speedrun of FE9 and FE10...and maybe another FE if the enemy phases permit.

^This. Also Olwen and Interceptor

Which map is your favorite in FE, accounting for things like music and atmosphere in addition to gameplay? Which map do you consider to be the most well-designed for strictly gameplay purposes (for example, LTC)?

I miss the bonus questions.

SF has a decent number of users, though. If you assume that 60% of males masturbate and there exist 500 SF males sampled randomly from the globe, the odds that only half or fewer of the members in the 500-person sample masturbate is about 1 in 262,000; in other words, the odds are extremely high that the majority of males in that sample masturbate.

Ice-types in general are difficult to justify in competitive OU/uber teams unless you're talking about Cloyster/Kyurem-B/W. And even those guys are susceptible to Stealth Rock/Spikes/Toxic Spikes.

Yeah, that's exactly what I did; the issue is that this prevents Lucius from starting Chapter 2 with the Shine and Physic, though I guess it's possible this doesn't slow down the Chapter 2 completion.

Doing a playthrough of dondon's hack. I'll record videos or make screenshots if there is interest, but for now, I'll just type some notes. Chapter 1: 8/8 turns Recruited Barth on turn 1 and set up a Rescue-chain to send Hector up the left, following the hint in dondon's topic, to recruit Dorcas on turn 3. Barth and Astor went up the right, but I needed Astor to slow down a bit to take a Vulnerary from Barth; I can't see a way of otherwise getting a Vulnerary to Astor without taking an extra turn. Back towards the LHS, I set up another Rescue-chain on turn 4 to get Hector a bit further up. I used Matthew to Rescue Serra during turn 6 and pass her to Oswin for Hector to recruit on turn 7. Dorcas and Oswin teamed up for five attempted hits on the boss (two Short Bow hits during turn 7 EP, two more during turn 8 PP, and one Short Spear from Oswin on turn 8), with four needing to connect. Hector recruited Lucius on turn 8 from the escape square. I picked up all the chests and got all the conversations, but was not satisfied with the item allocation: Matthew and Astor ended up with the Shine and Physic, respectively, at the end of turn 8, forcing me to start Chapter 2 in an uncomfortable way. For this reason, I'll redo the level. In dondon's topic, Silith's posts and screenshots suggest it is possible to recruit Lucius on turn 6 (while sending Hector up the left) and get both the Shine and the Physic on him by the end of the clear on turn 8. Hmm.

John Boehner: That fight [against the ACA] will continue. But blocking the bipartisan agreement reached today by the members of the Senate will not be a tactic for us. In addition to the risk of default, doing so would open the door for the Democratic majority in Washington to raise taxes again on the American people and undo the spending caps in the 2011 Budget Control Act without replacing them with better spending cuts. With our nation’s economy still struggling under years of the president’s policies, raising taxes is not a viable option. Our drive to stop the train wreck that is the president’s health care law will continue. We will rely on aggressive oversight that highlights the law’s massive flaws and smart, targeted strikes that split the legislative coalition the president has relied upon to force his health care law on the American people. Well, thank Ashera we've got a guy like him on Team Amurrica.

Of course there's still some subjective component as to what constitutes the "best/worst" FE game; that doesn't mean it's more subjective than the question of what your favorite FE game is. When people discuss, say, who the greatest composer of all time is, they also consider things like composers' creative influences on others (something that is less subject to disagreement than taste is).

A lot of people are conflating "worst" with "least favorite." The latter is a bit more subjective than the former (which is also pretty subjective). My least favorite that I've played is probably Shadow Dragon, though I can see it being interesting for LTCs once you look past the terrible hit rates near the beginning of the game. Furthermore, you could argue that its H5 paved the way for the Lunatic difficulties in the subsequent games. I wouldn't consider Shadow Dragon the worst FE by any stretch (I haven't played Gaiden, but from what I've seen of it, it certainly seems like a contender for worst FE since it doesn't seem to have many thought-provoking maps or some sort of meaningful influence on subsequent entries).

You shouldn't just take my word for it. You should attempt to confirm or falsify my claims by performing some analogous experiments: for example, try rolling a die six times. There is only about a 1.5% chance that in that set of six rolls, all six numbers (1 through 6) will be observed. The actual odds are very close to 5/8192; you can see why if you write a Taylor expansion of BBM's expression. The first-order term is 5/8192. The higher-order terms make the probability, well, not quite 5/8192 (but still close).

You're still wrong. You generally add things when they are mutually exclusive: for example, if I wanted to find the probability of getting a one, two, or four when rolling a fair die with six faces, in that case it would simply be 3/6 = 0.5. Rolling a one is mutually exclusive from rolling any other number. In this Pokemon example, having one Pokemon in a horde of five be shiny is not mutually exclusive from having another Pokemon in that horde of five be shiny. Independent events are different; two events are independent if the occurrence of one doesn't influence the odds of the occurrence of the other. Events A and B are independent iff P(A and B) = P(A) * P(B), where P(blah) denotes the probability of blah occurring. Going back to the Pokemon example, then, if the probability of any given shiny Pokemon appearing is p_s, then the probability of a non-shiny occurring is 1-p_s. If we look at a set of five Pokemon, assuming that their shininess is independent, the probability that none are shiny is (1-p_s)^5 going by the P(A & B) = P(A) * P(B). The probability that at least one is shiny is 1 - (1-p_s)^5, which is what BBM has written. For a simpler example, note that flipping a fair coin twice does not guarantee me a heads, even though heads will occur on 50% of attempts.

you don't multiply 1/8192 by 5 because the pokemon in the horde of five are presumed to be shiny/un-shiny independently of each other. pokemon 1 (of five) being shiny does not preclude pokemon 2 (of five) from being shiny. bbm's calculation is consistent with what we understand of X/Y at this point, though it is entirely possible that, for example, the shininess rate has changed from 1/8192 for any given pokemon, or that the developers have coded something preventing multiple shinies from appearing in a horde, etc.

Mathematicians? Ironically, their discreet, but physicists are continuous. Its such a random fact.

We shouldn't have to ask for the odds of something happening if the likelihood of the event is not governed by the in-game RNG. It is preferable in my opinion to simply assume perfect play for any given team composition without necessarily assuming that the same team composition will always be used; by doing things this way, characters will receive less credit for certain action(s) if a specific team composition is required.

spoiler='P-1'