To be fair, based on the (lack of) spelling and grammar in his e-mails, that might actually be how he writes letters.

Eh, vintage has had control and hatebear-style decks as its most prominent decks for years, with combo often being around 1/3 or less of the metagame. Legacy often has a tempo or control deck as the de facto best deck. Combo being this dominant is really only a modern thing. And while some of these decks aren’t A+B combo decks, I wouldn’t immediately consider them interactive in the way tempo or control would be.

Most of these decks are racing for their win-con, which makes them strategically similar in a way a metagame with strategies like death&taxes, hard control, tempo, and midrange wouldn’t be. I wouldn’t consider a hypothetical metagame with 50 different T3 combo decks more diverse than, say, current vintage.

None of these look very interactive, so I’m not sure “healthy” is the right word. Diverse, sure, but a format where almost every deck is essentially a combo deck is probably not especially interesting to play (and I say this as an absolute combo degenerate).

I myself only ever visit chewbac.ca!

This feels like they gave Sakurai carte blache and I’m here for it! Kirby Air Ride was an absolute gem and probably the best showcase of Sakurai’s design sensibilities. Definitely my most anticipated game of the year!

It wouldn’t. A tetrahedron has four sides, hence the name, while an Egyptian-style pyramid has five (if you include the base, otherwise it isn’t even a polyhedron).

No, I agree that independence is necessary, not just because of “always”, but because if, as a crude example, your odds of hitting B halve each time you hit A, an infinite number of tries isn’t guaranteed to give you Shakespeare, even if the odds aren’t technically 0. My problem was that what you originally described wasn’t independence, it’s uniformity, which isn’t a prerequisite. And it’s up to 9 upvotes now so I don’t know what’s going on.

What? That’s not what independence means. They need to be independent, yes, because otherwise you might get into weird corner cases where the probably doesn’t converge to 1, but they don’t have to be equally likely. In fact, weighing the odds based on how often letters are used by Shakespeare should lower the expected timeframe. Heck, Shakespeare doesn’t use “J”, why would that key even be relevant? Where in the world do normal distributions even come into this? How does this comment have 4 upvotes? What am I missing here?

Oh no, I’m so sorry, the microplastics got you too: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Language_and_the_euro&diffonly=true#Written_conventions_for_the_euro_in_the_languages_of_EU_member_states

And Last Chance to See! It’s somehow almost as absurd as his fictional works.

… it’s not really an opinion piece? It’s mostly a breakdown of the church’s dubious history and leadership. I’m sure they also do video game stuff, but that feels like it has no bearing on the actual facts presented.

In case anyone genuinely has this misconception: birds branched off from the other dinosaurs during the Jurassic, probably over 100 million years before the astroid hit. Dinos didn’t suddenly grow feathers and a beak because a big rock hit them.