So I've been reading through this study and comparing it to modern health advice. For the most part, the 22% of energy threshold seems to be above 1.2-1.6 grams of protein per kg of body weight (for active individuals).

The functional advice is: following the guidelines from the FDA will keep you out of the risks outlined in the study.

I was visiting there in 2019. Of the hundreds of thousands of balconies there, I saw less than a hundred with lights on ~10pm.

It's far away too. ~18km to get there from Iskandar Puteri (not intensely dense, but sees some traffic due to legoland), and ~35km from Johor Bahru (the main city area of Johor).

They must have done the whole build it and they will come thing before realising no one wants to live in a ghost town.

At least it looked kinda impressive???

5.1 and 7.1 systems aren't all that widespread, even in the music industry. Surround kinda sits in the same place vr does for me. It's immensely cool, but it'll never become standard due to hassle and lack of support.

Most of the recent innovation in sound has been trickled down from the music and film industries. Just a general increase in the capabilities of soft synths and a better understanding of foley, alongside dedicated in house recording studios have raised the bar of audio.

To be honest I agree with you that sound is overlooked, sound engineers truly are unsung heroes. I mean even when people point out the sound in a game, it's usually directed at the composer.

I got curious myself and agreed, so I went looking.

A lot of sources specified that it was part of a technical requirements checklist, and...

Yeap. It doesn't explicitly require a "press any key" screen, but it gives a more pleasant screen to look at while you select a user. People online also say it's used to detect which controller is in use.

If you add a feature like this to a game, it becomes harder to maintain if there are discrepancies between builds. So presumably it's usually just left in rather than removed.

Most people here have already given you good answers. I'll just add to this by saying it depends on too many other factors, and add some of my own experience and calculating to support what other people are saying.

TL;DR : It doesn't matter, it's like around 1 DPR (damage per round) difference. If you care, use a DPR calculator to work out your ideal options

As far as I am aware, there are no agile attacks that have a damage dice higher than a d6 (for PCs), so my math will be done assuming that.

The Third Attack

The way the math works out, you should want to use an agile attack for the third attack. It will be very unlikely to hit or crit, but it grants a better DPR than using a non-agile attack.

The Second Attack

As for the second attack, it depends heavily on multiple factors:

1. What is the difference in dice size between the agile and non-agile attack, and how many damage dice do you have?

Higher differences in dice sizes will make the non-agile attack more preferable, as though you're 5% less likely to hit or crit, the damage if you do hit statistically makes up for that. Larger amounts of damage dice exacerbates this effect, as your non-agile weapon will pull a larger gap to the agile weapon.

2. What is your damage roll modifier?

A larger damage roll modifier rewards hitting more often, so agile weapons become more favorable if the modifier is larger. This also includes things such as the damage runes, where the damage dice of your weapon is irrelevant.

3. What chance do you have of critting or hitting the target?

If you have the chance to crit on rolls that are not nat 20s, your DPR with the non-agile weapon begins to trump the agile weapon. This is due to the crit doubling the difference due to damage dice size. The exact point at which this occurs depends on the above two factors as well.

Weirdly the DPR starts to swing the other way as the target's AC gets higher. As you exceed a roll of 9 needed to hit a target, your chance to crit is static at 5% (nat 20). This reduces the effectiveness of the agile weapon, but after that, the agile weapon starts to claw back its effectiveness as the non-agile weapon's ability to hit shrinks. Again, the exact point at which this occurs depends on the above two factors.

Graphs

I plotted a few graphs to illustrate the above considerations. The attack roll modifier refers to the attack roll without any MAP, and the DPR calculations have factored in the MAP for the agile and non-agile weapons.

The first is a graph with a d8 non-agile weapon, a d6 agile weapon, and a +4 damage roll modifier.

Note the scale of the axis on the left, it doesn't make a significant difference for this set of stats.

Now what about a level 4 character without any class bonuses to damage, with the same weapons with all the expected fundamental runes, doubling their damage dice?

Note the fact that there isn't even a window where the agile weapon is good against weaker enemies, but it claws back much more effectiveness. This is what we'd expect due to the larger amount of damage dice.

Lastly to illustrate the effect of flat modifiers, I put up a level 7 swashbuckler with an Dueling Spear (d8 finesse) against a Shortsword (d6 agile finesse). They will have panache, and are making these strikes non-finishers. The weapons both have the expected fundamental runes, and a flaming rune.

Note how there is a larger range of ACs where an agile weapon is better.

Conclusions

The answer is it depends, as it always does. I can't give you a definite answer for every single scenario, because there are way too many, and I'm not your dad. In general the following you should make the second strike with an agile weapon if any of these conditions are true:

• If you would crit on a 18-19 without MAP (usually creatures 3-4 levels below you if you are a non-fighter martial)
• If you are fighting a creature with an AC 10+ higher than your hit modifier (usually creatures on your level or higher)
• If you have large damage modifiers
• If the difference in dice size isn't too large

Otherwise, use you should use your non-agile weapon to make the second strike.

Note that the difference in DPR is small (it's like 1.2 at most), so it doesn't really matter which you choose. I'd go with an agile attack if I wanted consistency, and non-agile if I wanted burst.

That's it! If you read through all of this, thanks for reading my insane ramblings. There are many more things I probably forgot to account for, but I can't think of them right now, and I accidentally overwrote the sheet for the second graph. I'm gonna go do something more productive now.

I've been playing through it with a few of my pf2e group.

Larian did such an amazing job with this, and I am enjoying it, but I find myself wishing this game had the action economy from Div : OS2 or pf2e.

That said, I'm glad to see that they've continued the trend of their prior crpgs, and made something approaching the flexibility of a GM behind a screen.

Because they're effecfively measuring the change in the students' performance in the STROOP and ADD tests before and after a heat wave, baseline factors such as wealth and income should be controlled for.

They note in the results that in the initial tests there was no significant difference between both groups' results.

I never got it until I got Skyrim VR

So many soothing moments beneath an aurora, in a bustling tavern or just walking along a path

This is an amazing list. I will +1 Dexed cos FM is great, and add a few more music production apps to the list.

BBC Symphony Orchestra Discover - A great all-in-one orchestral vst with decent samples. Great for people wanting to bridge the gap between writing with sections and writing for specific instruments. Lacks articulations like Legato and Marcato, but is ridiculously good for the price of jack shit

SPAN - An excellent mixing and mastering vst that gives you a highly configurable fft spectrum analyzer, with a few presets for translation checks. My favorite feature is the correlation meter, which helps me visually check interference in stereo mixes

Kontakt free library - Has some solid samples for a selection of instruments, but I mostly use the Jazz Guitar and Bass Guitar from here for basic sketching

Equalizer APO - System wide EQ. Extremely configurable. I've since hopped over to SoundID Reference, but prior to that, I was using this. It's great for making all your headphones and speakers sound like any other pair of headphones, and there's a huge library of headphone presets that tell you how to get a neutral signature on just about any pair of them

Honestly I'm shocked and surprised the Risk of Rain soundtrack hasn't come up. Both 1 and 2 are bangers. Chris Christodoulou (the lead composer) has a yt breaking down the soundtrack.

Stellaris' ost is also up there for memorable leitmotifs and just plain understanding the assignment.

I also quite like redout 1 and 2's soundtrack.

Honestly the average user should probably go wireless. The convenience factor is huge, and most of these new headphones come with active noise cancelling.

The average pair of wireless headphones is also good enough for casual listening (depending on codec) and can come pretty close to wired solutions.

That said, I would never go for wireless on ear/over ear headphones again. The more features something has, the harder it is to fix when something breaks.

My wireless solution is a set of mmcx in ear monitors connected via Bluetooth adapter. Even without active noise cancellation, they block out sound well. For desktop my job requires critical listening, and I like neutral signatures, so I'd rather stick to desktop monitors and wired solutions.

My heart lies with Islay Scotches, Belgian Sours and South American Malbecs.