justdaveisfine@piefed.social to Gaming@lemmy.worldEnglish · 19 hours agoA cold take on balancingmedia.piefed.socialimagemessage-square13fedilinkarrow-up186arrow-down15
arrow-up181arrow-down1imageA cold take on balancingmedia.piefed.socialjustdaveisfine@piefed.social to Gaming@lemmy.worldEnglish · 19 hours agomessage-square13fedilink
minus-squareDreamButt@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·16 hours agoare these not the same just changing who’s good vs what?
minus-squarePeruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·15 hours agoIn the first panel, each class is considered in its interactions with each other class. In the second, each class is strong against one, weak against one and their relationship with the others isn’t considered.
minus-squareDreamButt@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·15 hours agoI read it as the adjacent ones being neutral or a 50:50 odds. But it sounds like ur interpretation might be the intention
are these not the same just changing who’s good vs what?
In the first panel, each class is considered in its interactions with each other class. In the second, each class is strong against one, weak against one and their relationship with the others isn’t considered.
I read it as the adjacent ones being neutral or a 50:50 odds. But it sounds like ur interpretation might be the intention