十六夜司的个人资料

有没有人记得抓住努拉的时候雷吉尔吐槽她的一句话？大致是说：暂且不论这些人的罪行，仅仅是因为他们不愿对自己所做的事情负责这点就该上绞架。想要一张截图……越来越觉得好多地方可以用这句。

游侠灵使德丝娜信徒，第三章爱露莎蕾的队友任务如何触发？目前二周目第三章只剩象牙迷堂了，其他队友的任务早已结束，但爱酱迟迟不来找我去酒馆…… 一周目的时候我记得第三章中前期，某次回到眷泽堡垒的时候爱酱会很兴奋地叫我去酒馆，说她做了一个梦，然后展开第三章他的队友任务……可这周目第三章已经要结束了，连兰恩娘都来了她却迟迟不来，搞得我只能怀疑又是哪里出问题导致bug了orz 这周目因为用爱酱做主力了，所以多了段冬阳村结束后的对话，不知是否有这个的原因。倒是也想用百宝袋直接改trigger，但完全找不到，直接改出任务又太容易造出来更多的bug……十分烦恼

pf有没有不开游戏就可以车卡的网站或者app？最近摸鱼的时候想自己研究一套build，但是找不到能作为单机开卡模拟器或者桌游开卡模板的网站。如果有这东西的话麻烦推荐一下

进活畜市场就把奴隶贩子们杀了几个，会不会影响主剧情或者结局实在看不惯这些，用钱赎身相当于鼓励他继续下去，于是干脆就杀了放奴隶们走…… 除了卖武器的两位和中间卖缝线的那位都杀了，相当于在她家市场里边抢边杀……会影响诺提库拉的态度，甚至结局的好坏么？

许久不玩，想氪一下各角色或者各校的人权卡，以及请教一下有些s 3t奥义的角色应该都不差吧……祭祀可和雷神姬和还有勇者mai还是一线么？折神家的话只知道真希是nier联动那张…… 两张晓的4星好像也都不错，新娘播和突属播还有奶惠的祭祀礼装也不错吧？说起来祭祀系列算什么，一个独特的限定池么？这期西游记的三张又如何……感觉结芽很暴力的样子看演习对手sub常有浴衣老师和迷你政委，这几张卡最近有机会入手么？联动的华恋和圆子之类的应该就不用指望了吧……

afk很久了，关于现版本的卡请教一下 18年底afk了，为了刀使小姐投票暂时回归。请问我现在box里的卡还有资格打高难么？以及要多拿投票券需要怎么刷活动比较好？还有就是各角色4星刀怎样获得？如果需要长期周回的话那么用凶祸刀代替，要做哪几把？多谢了

总算出早苗了…… 接下来动画组的角色该孝子和聪美她们了吧……

mobage端，出十天极+全神将+5属老王（除风）的毕业号。 6ffj，7黑钢，9jgj，1玉髓，140金月。贤者方向自拟，水风暗2.0毕业。目前号内还有1井以及2张小美卡自选券可用。

11月宝冢也要上歌剧魅影，上一次是11年。难道有什么联动之类的……

早苗这么现成的前排角色为何游戏中没加入？看了一下据说播つぐみ要上前排了。虽然也喜欢这个角色，但是一直很奇怪费劲捏了这么多新卡，有些明明能直接扔进来的第一期动画角色却一点消息没有…… 早苗也算是平城亚军，孝子和聪美也是长船比较强力的人选……可是别说前排，sup卡都没一张。

有谁用蓝叠的么……更新后一直闪退要怎么解决？国际版和国内版都试过，最好的成绩是点开了抽卡页面……

关于掠夺者解锁，散兵的弱点狙击打了620然而并没有解锁…… 已经蹦了个人成就一击600，然并卵没法解锁…… 至少也见过有人提出这个问题……那么到底是为什么？难道散兵不算在解锁职业中么？

请问下关于新版本各职业的build，以及steam云存档。 wiki上的build版本太久远……而且很少，有没有其他地方可以找到一些好用的build？还有steam云存档的功能是否有问题，我勾选启用云存档后有时会自动取消，而且即使是有云存档的情况下，去网吧玩的时候都无法读取已有角色，新建人物也是种族职业都未解锁的状态，游戏内的登录steam账号也不能登上。还有国内tome4的讨论区只有这里么？感觉人好少……讨论也不多……

关于eslyric……突然无法搜索到歌词了。之前一直在用，没有任何问题。今天突然无论如何都无法获得线上歌词，本地文件的关联暂时没什么问题。标签栏显示这个： Error: ESLyric (35B21A4D-B71F-46CF-8723-19E90482DF25): Microsoft JScript 运行时错误: 'null' 为 null 或不是对象 File: <main> Ln: 67, Col: 9 <source text only available at compile time> 请问是歌词服务器变更了么？或者是我的foobar出了什么差错。

【画师】请问一下有谁知道p站画师吉井うどん为何突然消失了…… id=5278770，爱高本命，也画过一些妙高级的短漫和双鹤的futa作品…… 一段时间之前，大约在这部作品发布出来不久的时候他突然把自己的绝大多数p站投稿删除了。之后又画了大约两三组恶迷和Grandblue fantasy的まとめ之后，几天前浏览的时候他的p站作品还好好的，今天突然发现他的pixiv账户已经停止服务了……希望能知道是怎么回事。我是看了他的作品才喜欢上了爱高这对cp，进而开始关注kc，最后了解到各个角色和cp的故事，对他的作品已经十分有感情了……可以说他是我的启蒙老师，所以十分想弄明白他突然消失的原因。

【AB】捡到了一个皇冠，查了一下好像没人提到过它的用途…… 想问下它的作用……如果有谁知道的话。好像有时会让眼泪变成像素块，掉在地上后有碎开的特效。

【火纹if】应该有不少人在玩吧……交换下城堡地址如何？目前暗夜26章，白夜透魔暂未开始……

请问谁能上传一份ver1.06原始的Assembly CSharp.dll文件？刚刚试试重新覆盖了一遍字体文件发现存档读取不了了orz读取之后进不了loading界面而是一直黑屏然后停止响应，过一会恢复响应竟然变成了最开始大篷车那里的loading界面而且无限读取中orz 然后将备份的原始dll再复制覆盖回去发现仍旧如此，可能是因为那是1.05版本的dll文件？刚刚更新的时候还可以读取但文本全是…，结果自作聪明了一下就搞砸了orz

你们来感受一下…… angel beats

东山老师发糖了……《ストレッチ》29话注意剧透。

【简介】缩水龙腾世纪：Loren the Amazon Princess，良心甜点一楼喂熊……

冬宫g，虽然这里大约也没人玩这系列太冷了…… 昨晚工作的时候拿出来刷了一会，想了想已经刷了300h的我没有什么刷下去的意义了。72个事件除了出现bug的人喰らい蜘蛛，以及麻烦的オエッ以外都已完成；敌人图鉴和物品图鉴的完美有心无力；真·隐藏boss和隐藏FM的难度大约需要我再刷100小时…… 我还是封盘等4g吧(._.) 比起冬宫原和冬宫2，这一作难度提升了一些，毕竟gothic……3代加入的副技能系统在这一作中得到了部分平衡，虽然つばめ杀し和坚阵等技能仍旧无法在组队时舍去，而其实并没有那么万能的sacrifice居然被删掉了很让人费解，只留下一位默认人物拥有这个技能…… 职业上神女的buff把她拔高了一个层次，本来还差一点才能够上输出手而且还被君主几乎全方位比下去的神女这一作HM技能拥有了圣枪术：双手枪可以主手持。加上非L射程的双手武器最高hit数从10增加到14这个改动，再乘上全期都有出类拔萃的枪这股东风简直……队伍里没有神女我都不会玩这游戏了orz 巫虽则被限制了乐器的使用，但是无关痛痒，拥有古式和4～6张大神札的巫仍旧是后期最强dps。即使前中期只能装备打击面狭窄的退魔札邪札等，你还是可以靠盗贼偷来肌襦袢剑圣之铠以及任务奖励的仕挂け眼镜等来弥补这个弱点。只是在没有高级炼金和高炼度矿石的情况下巫的输出并不是很乐观……到了后期在敌方高魔源的干扰下结界略容易被破坏，另外没有选择つばめ杀し作为副职的话多次攻击的巫对高燕返率的敌人仍旧苦手。以及，由于古式需要放弃防具甚至饰品，被敌人搅乱阵型后的巫甚至比法系还要脆弱。侍仍旧是食之无味弃之可惜，也许等级超过500后燕返率过50%才会显露出她光辉的一面吧……可是这个等级对我来说太丧刷。不过我仍旧捏了一位侍做主力orz 三大咒文对应职业自然重要，为了快速得到复活传送修理等（这作可使用非消耗品使用时有几率损坏……）。其中炼金不但前期需要合天使小窗空气之实骨拖鞋等，而且到后期越来越需要高等级炼金的锻冶。在隐藏迷宫探险时炼金咒文必要性甚至高过僧侣咒文…… 盗贼嘛，和炼金一样，很多好装备都是偷来的…… 忍者和猎人有一个共通的问题：低等级没有好装备很难用。但是由于后期没他俩还挺难玩所以请斟酌要不要/何时要将他们带入队伍。由于火山FM可以偷到几乎是游戏第二弓的装备，远超那个时期应有的强度，所以建议那时加入一位猎人。第四咒文召唤也是前期不太好用，后期99抗怪对我这种脸来说几乎相当于浮云……亏我还专门为你建了斗士！提到召唤说一下魂之盟约这个召唤独有副技能，它的效果是将当前召唤物解放，然后其加入你的队伍中，成为一位完完全全的新人物，非纯洁者，保留立绘名字阵营种族性别职业，所有抗性异常属性以及生命/状态回复，保留咒文，武器/防具破坏，不保留怪物特有技能以及非本职业技能。高级怪物可以说除了立绘以外各方面都强于建立人物。其他的嘛，没什么特别的……由于强迫症复发了一下全地图100%了，所以如果有人在玩或者打算玩的话可以找我讨论一下，有什么不清楚的地方我可以试着帮帮忙。

千刃龙套的新技能或者千刃龙棍子的属性可能已经被透露出来了？看了下之前几个4G试玩影像，发现千刃龙新技能或者武器属性可能透露出来了…… 千刃龙套装千刃龙操虫棍的试玩角色拔刀的时候武器时不时闪一次亮光然后出现磨刀完成“锵”那样的声音。比较明显的就是先行体验会里面那个了…… 作为主题怪的武器，看起来击打效果没有任何属性，感觉有点不正常……

【转载】魔兽世界中游戏性和剧情性的区分。之前在看一些吧友讨论时，有时会混淆游戏性于剧情中，进而产生一些不必要的疑惑与分歧。由此，通过借用这篇文章，希望可以让更多人对此有所了解。虽则整篇文章仅仅描写了艾泽拉斯的情况，但我想，对于泰瑞亚的冒险家们并无多少理解不通之处。转自178，原文作者：@略准Neet

【前瞻】世界动态s2ep3 Dragon’s Reach第一集转自nga 伊万ivanito 油库：http://tieba.baidu.com/mo/q/checkurl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fv.youku.com%2Fv_show%2Fid_XNzQ0NTkwOTQ0.html%3Ffirsttime%3D0&urlrefer=f789b42aedbfa10a1ea98067c28d2475

关于三体堡垒。到了70级去做个人史诗，发现这里宏伟得出乎意料……契约团建成到进攻欧尔不到半年的时间是如何建起这么一座科技魔法炼金术混合堡垒的？另外吐槽一下68级之后卡级卡得真厉害……

真是这辈子没玩过这么虐心的…… 激战2那个跳跳哭，溺爱海湾。没有中转点不说，落脚点也只有一条线，而且每格之间间距微妙到家。当然这不算什么，跳一晚上也就熟了，关键是掉下来摔死鲲艮就乐了：“coooool”……我可是刚刚在外面又帮你们抵抗了一波蛇妖入侵啊小伙子！还有蟹肉蛋糕是什么鬼东西啊你是夜色镇出来的么！说什么最梦幻跳跳乐果然如梦如幻让人若痴若狂orz 没跳之前我一直以为以太之刃是设计最成功的跳跳乐，既考验底力又要求背板，还有各种机关。现在看来溺爱海湾才是，真真正正的跳跳乐

果然全是PQ…… 朋友问我世界树新作入么我大吃一斤世界树出新作了wtf？ pq啊……那部算p系列新作吧…… 世界树小组做的，而且你不是也喜欢女神系列么？劳资刚入了冬宫3d还没封盘又开始坑GW2要我命啊orz

赤（bai）焰松。可惜找不到白岩松低头看稿子的图片。

单马尾解锁。罪孽深重的女人范。话说仔细玩了之后才发现这代PM简直革命一般……到处都是很赞的进步，譬如说可以斜着走。

求后花园伊布/奇诺栗鼠FC交换……本人冰系后花园虽然入了首发但一直沉迷MH4，刚刚入坑却发现FC交换热潮已过…… 我的后花园是雪人冰桌白海师，如果有需要欢迎交换。

请问吧里有人入手冬宫3d么？假如愿意的话希望能用手头的新世界树迷宫交换一下……一直很喜欢这个系列。

存。第二章：可视结构理论综述 An information visualization, like any artifact used for communication and reasoning, is a representation system. This system includes correspondences between low-level properties of the data and the image, which is the information captured in the variable encoding model. However, it also includes a system for fitting those properties into a larger picture: the visual information structure. This structure provides context for individual data items, suggests patterns and relationships in the overall data, and assists the user in reasoning about visually presented information. Current infovis theory has much more to say about the low-level data encoding side of this representation than about the high-level structural side. Theories in infovis and diagrammatic reasoning that do consider the importance of visual structure tend to be either fairly vague or to focus on spatial layout as another encoding dimension. However, there is work in the related field of human-computer interaction (HCI) that takes a more concrete view of how visual interfaces suggest structural properties of systems, which suggests a possible way forward for infovis theory in this regard. The importance of finding a way to integrate visual structure into infovis theory is shown by work in cognitive science that highlights the strong effects that structure and context can have on the perception of visual information. In this chapter, I will present and discuss this background in visual structure theories in terms of the attempt to make infovis theory more structurally sound. 2.1 Visual Structure in Infovis Theory Infovis theory has most often adopted a model of visualization as information extraction. This model focuses on how data are transformed into visual encodings, and how a user then translates those visual encodings into internal knowledge. As a result, theory of this kind tends to be largely concerned with object-level rather than global properties. When structure is considered, it tends to be restricted to a question of what data attributes influence an object’s position in space. The seminal work in visualization theory is Bertin’s Semiology of Graphics [9]. Although Bertin was at the time writing about static diagrams, his work has been highly influential in modern infovis. Bertin lays out a thorough system of information graphics, defining “marks” as the primitive graphical object whose visual and spatial properties are based on a mapping with underlying data. A mark can be any visual element, such as a shape, line, area, or point, that represents information. He refers to these visual properties as retinal properties, e.g., color, size, shape, and location. Based on psychological knowledge about perception, he then provides guidelines for the mapping of these properties to different types of data, such as categorical, ordinal, and numerical: color is best suited to categorical data, position is the most precise mapping for numerical values, and so forth. Bertin also considers spatial structure in his work, primarily focusing on the image plane and how marks are positioned on it. He calls systems of planar organization “imposition” and sorts them broadly into diagrams, networks, maps, and symbols, which can be further classified by the coordinate system used. This part of his theory has been less broadly influential on infovis practice than the retinal properties, perhaps because it is less thorough and does not provide such clear guidelines. Another reason may be that the retinal properties were founded on scientific knowledge about the capabilities of the human visual system, and no equivalent knowledge existed at the time about how people understand visual structure. However, when visual structure has been considered in infovis theory, it has usually resembled Bertin’s construction. Similarly to Bertin, Cleveland and McGill’s work on graphical perception [17] explains the comprehension of information graphics through elementary perceptual tasks, such as discerning angle, direction, area, and curvature of visual marks. Having identified these tasks, they describe common diagram types like bar charts, pie charts, and scatterplots in terms of which tasks are used to encode and decode data. Like Bertin, they go on to make recommendations on the suitability of certain graphics based on human perceptual abilities. Their theory is based on the idea that reading visual information is a process of extracting information by decoding the visual mapping. These two works have together had a foundational influence on theoretical discussion of information visualization. In many cases, this influence is direct and explicit: for example, Mackinlay [42] employs Bertin’s classifications of visual marks and Cleveland and McGill’s recommendations in his system for automating graph design. Card and Mackinlay [13] also use a Bertin-inspired system to describe and classify visualization methods in a taxonomy. In their model, visualization methods are coded according to mappings between data variables and retinal variables; for example, data variables are first coded by data type (i.e., nominal, ordered, or quantitative) and then by what retinal or other visual property they are mapped to in a visualization. What is striking about this paper is that, when they apply this model to describing a number of actual infovis systems, it is almost always inadequate to the task. Nearly every encoding they present includes asterisks and question marks to indicate special cases, uncertainty about the visual variables being mapped, or what the authors call “non-semantic use of space-time.” While this taxonomy makes a heroic attempt to unify data description and visualization description under a single model, the awkwardness of the fit seems to suggest that there are aspects of this visual mapping that do not easily fall under variable encoding. In other cases, the influence is more subtle, and reflects the emphasis on marks and their visual properties in a broad range of ways. Wilkinson’s grammar of graphics [61] attempts to define a language for combining these basic graphic elements. This grammar takes an object-oriented approach in order to define generalized designs of graphical representations of data. Like Bertin, Wilkinson considers structure only in terms of coordinate systems—that is, how the position of marks is determined. Shneiderman’s task by data type taxonomy [51] classifies data by a similar set of structure types: one-dimensional, two-dimensional, three-dimensional, multidimensional, temporal, tree, and network. Although these classifications refer to inherent data properties, not visual structures, they are nonetheless influenced by assumptions about on-screen positioning, or there would be no reason to separate two- and three-dimensional data from the multidimensional category. This influence is also present in taxonomies that classify visualization methods by how they encode data, such as Chi’s data state reference model [16]. This model expands on the steps involved in translating data into visual form, then defines the behavior of a broad range of visualization methods at each step. This is similar to Card and Mackinlay’s system, but is more process-oriented, emphasizing the encoding as a transformation rather than a simple translation. While it is useful to expand on what is meant by variable encoding, and what this process actually entails, it is still an expansion on a narrow definition of what is going on in the use of infovis. A basic assumption of this area of theory, made explicit in Cleveland and McGill but implicit elsewhere, is that understanding a visualization is a process of information extraction. That is, there is some encoding from data property to visual property, and all a user does to gain knowledge from a visualization is reverse that encoding. This viewpoint sees all the activity of using infovis happening at the level of individual graphical marks; it does not allow for overall structural impressions having a significant impact on understanding. There have been many practical benefits of this line of research, such as its application to automatic view generation in the visual analysis system Tableau [43]. Building on his previous, more theoretical work in automated graph design [42], Mackinlay provides users of Tableau with the option of automatically choosing the best graph for their data, based on the type of data dimensions being visualized. The variable encoding model has also provided a framework for usefully including knowledge of perception in visualization research. However, a body of theory that concerns only object properties is in danger of missing the forest for the trees. It is in some ways surprising that infovis has taken such a narrow view of visual information, since the closely related field of human-computer interaction (HCI) has dealt extensively with the idea that a visual interface represents structure. 2.2 Visual Structure in Human-Computer Interaction In human-computer interaction (HCI), the idea that an interface (the system of input methods available when using a computer program) contains information about how its components fit together and how they can be used is a natural one. A common way of talking about this is in terms of a user’s mental model of a system [48]. That is, when faced with a novel piece of software, a user tries to figure out how it works and what interactions are possible based on the appearance of interface components. These perceptions of form and function compose the user’s mental model, which is used to make predictions about how to achieve a goal using the interface. There is evidence that these mental models, far from being a purely abstract design concept, can have a powerful effect on memory and reasoning in interface use. Kieras and Bovair [35], in a series of experiments, presented participants with a novel device consisting of various switches and flashing lights, then taught them how to use the device either by rote (that is, by explaining what steps to take to achieve a specific result) or by giving them a model of the device’s purpose and how it works, describing it in Star Trek-inspired terms as a control panel for a “phaser bank” and assigning purposes to the various interface components. Users given a meaningful model of how and why a device works were not only more able to remember memorized tasks using the device, but were also more likely to spontaneously find a more efficient way to perform the task. This work shows how important structure is for understanding a complex system. While our purpose in infovis is not necessarily to solve problems (although it can be in some cases), the argument can still be made that exploring a dataset is a matter of learning a model for a complex system of information. Mental models are therefore a useful way to think about how a user comes to understand a dataset. While mental models are a good way of thinking about how people conceive of the structure of software systems, the question of how people perceive that structure is perhaps a more pressing one. That is, how do people construct a mental model of a system, given the appearance and function of its interface? One of the most common ways to discuss this process in HCI is in terms of perceived affordances. The concept of affordances is originally derived from Gibson’s ecological perception theory [29]. Gibson framed perception in terms of what actions a given animal sees its environment as affording. For example, a solid, flat surface affords supporting the animal’s movement, while a smooth, sloped surface affords sliding downwards. In all cases, affordances are relative to the viewer; a given environment affords different actions to a mouse and to an elephant. Any animal faced with a given environment will automatically perceive such potentials for movement or action based on apparent physical properties and the animal’s own abilities. In HCI, the concept is used in a slightly different fashion, to refer to aspects of a visual interface that suggest potential actions to a user [47]. For example, an interface element that is styled to look like a physical toggle button suggests to the user that it can be pressed. The general model of visual structure in HCI, then, is that people view an interface in terms of its perceived physical affordances, derive predictions about what actions they can take based on those affordances, and then derive a mental model of the system by taking those actions and seeing how they meet their predictions. Given the amount of research overlap between HCI and infovis, it is surprising that visualization is rarely thought of in terms of what mental models a technique suggests to a user. There are two likely reasons for this. The first is that HCI assumes that the systems it deals with are interactive, so the ability of a user to predict the outcome of her actions is an obvious consideration. Infovis, on the other hand, builds on a history of static depictions of data; interactivity is a more recent development for the field. Consequently, the ability of a user to perceive data accurately is the primary consideration. The other reason is the lack of well-defined tasks in infovis. Having a model of how a system works is obviously necessary if you need to use it in pursuit of a goal. Knowing what you can do and how to do it are prerequisites for solving a problem. But in infovis, we don’t necessarily know what problem we’re trying to solve. The tasks we feel visualization systems are meant to address are vague ones like understanding a dataset, forming hypotheses, pattern recognition, and exploration. These are important tasks, and the possibility of systems that can help perform them is what excites people about visualization. But they are also tasks that lack a clear end state. Perhaps this aspect of visualization makes structural properties of the interface seem less important than in other domains. However, even a task without a clear goal can benefit from structure, even if the contribution of a user’s mental model seems less direct or obvious. Some of the ways that visual structure can affect understanding and general reasoning are illuminated by work in diagrammatic reasoning and visual cognition. 2.3 Visual Cognition of Diagrams While the information processing approach has provided a way to apply perception research to information visualization, it is less well-suited to understanding visualization from the perspective of higher-level cognition; that is, not only how people perceive information, but how they learn, reason with, and remember information. This cognitive perspective forces us to consider the structural properties of visualization and how they affect not only what information is extracted but how that information is understood. Theories that focus on reasoning with visual representations include Stenning and Oberlander’s view of diagrams and language as logically equivalent yet supporting different facilities of inference [54]. That is, by making certain aspects of a problem specific through visual representation, diagrams such as Euler circles can make certain problem constraints explicit and therefore restrict potential inferences to a smaller, valid subset. Similarly, Larkin and Simon [41] consider the differences between graphical and verbal representations as differences in what information is made salient and explicit. In a graphical representation, information is naturally organized by location, while in a sentential representation it is organized sequentially. This makes graphs more useful for, e.g., solving geometry problems, and language more useful for problems that require logical reasoning. The authors consider what effects the structure of a representation has on understanding, although they focus on the very broad differences between words and pictures rather than defining differences among types of graphical structure. The importance of such differences, however, is illuminated by the extensive body of work by Tversky and colleagues on how people interpret information presented in different visual representations. For example, the authors presented the same simple two-point data as either a bar chart or a line graph and asked for users’ interpretations [63]. They find that those viewing a bar chart tended to describe the diagram as depicting two separate groups, while those viewing a line graph described the data as a trend. This effect holds even when the interpretations conflicted with the labels on the data points. For example, a line graph showing the average height of males versus females prompted one participant to describe the chart as saying “The more male a person is, the taller he/she is.” These findings and others are further discussed as examples of how schematic figures such as bars and lines are interpreted in varying contexts [56]. Many of these figures have seemingly natural interpretations; for example, lines between marks imply a relationship between the represented objects, while contours are used for grouping objects. However, in many cases context aids the interpretation of ambiguous primitive features such as blobs and lines by fitting their relevant properties to task demands. Understanding the cognitive basis for these primitive features and how they can be altered in context would go a long way towards explaining how visualization works. This work has a particularly direct application to infovis, but it also recalls a broader area of visual cognition that looks at how people use diagrams as an external representation to aid in reasoning. Gattis and Holyoak [28] argue that the power of graphical representations go beyond Larkin and Simon’s view that they merely allow for more efficient information access in certain cases. Rather, they see diagrams and graphs as having a special role in supporting reasoning by mapping conceptual relationships to spatial ones, so that inferences about spatial properties can be extended to inferences about the represented information. This view is supported by a number of studies on diagrammatic reasoning, such as Bauer and Johnson-Laird’s finding [8] that diagrams improve reasoning if they visually represent meaningful constraints in a problem and Glenberg and Langston’s demonstration [30] that diagrams only improve efficiency when their spatial mapping is conceptually meaningful. This work taken together suggests that graphics can assist in problem solving, but only when their spatial structure is meaningful in some way. The question of what structures are meaningful and which are not, however, is not easily answered by existing work. While this work suggests the importance of structure to the understanding of information visualization, it offers no clear framework for discussing and analyzing that structure. While they intuitively seem to be talking about the same thing, researchers from different fields and perspectives may refer to these structural properties as visual framing, spatial layout, graph types, and so on. A common language and theory for discussing the effects of structure is necessary to integrate it into visualization practice, as Bertin’s conception of retinal properties has provided a common language to deal with object properties. A promising source for this theory is visual metaphor.

炮击套与抽插套。

这张小松简直不能更赞…… 唱功也一如既往，路人转粉了。

还记得九鼎山伯爵么…… http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2831033185?ADUIN=429727105&ADSESSION=1390554892&ADTAG=CLIENT.QQ.5281_.0&ADPUBNO=26292 虽说做出这个决策的度娘蠢爆了（没智能手机=没吧务资格），不过没办法，只能当心再出现那样的家伙……

天野老师的philosophia超赞…… 虽然只看了2章不过已经迷上了，等到放假想要入一套……不知现在发售了几章？倒是一直听说的私の世界を构成する尘のような何か并不怎么喜欢。

我加的吧从上往下看起来就你这没有头像简介…… 不设置一个么……

请问有人要一起刷斗技场S么…… 和野人刷了杨老师甲虫和奇猿狐的S，其它几个发现没配合太难了……

剩饭快乐诸位。

13-12-17【心得攻略】关于エリアホスト（area host）…… 没图。我想只要是能联机的猎人都遇到过这种情况，明明同一个房间，同一位玩家的任务，但有时自己就会玩得很流畅而就连房主和任务领取人都卡得寻生觅死；而有时即便自己卡得难过，队友们屏幕上的怪物还毫无lag…… 这对控场手，或者锁头锤使弓使大剑使都是个问题。至于操虫棍，更加致命，有多少次100黑轰都是瞬移到眼前打飞空中的我然后压起身一套连死，有多少次明明抓着他出招硬直撑杆跳起来准备上背然而却发现这时它已后撤完成蓄力，还有多少次，跳斩打倒后我并没有上背，然后和队友们一起把其实已经在目标背上的我A了下来OTL 所以这篇文章的主旨是希望定番队中的火力手，以及正常游戏时的一些不那么依赖精确打击输出或者输出很灵活的武器将area host尽量交给需要的队友，以便正常完成一次狩猎。那么不想听废话希望直接看这个问题要点的请拉到 2F 人们都会为这样并非自己努力就能解决的问题总结规避经验，于是我之前听说的大部分说法都是“先进区的家伙就是主服务器”。从4代才开始玩的我对前辈的总结深信不疑。然而昨晚野队定双金狮在一次我因为很卡而导致一麻后落穴放的稍晚于是金狮怒后跳毁了落穴，直接二猫。好容易补救回来没有三猫，然而片刻之后降落此区的另一头金狮也是这样的情况……三猫后回房间我对其他人道歉着，其中一位霓虹少年却说不是我的错，告诉我们要将エリアホスト交给控场。听起来应该是area host吧，联想一下他说的可能是“先进区的家伙就是主服务器”这事，于是我就对其他两位询问什么是エリアホスト的少年大致这样解释了下。由于我日语不太好所以组织句子花了些时间，然而一大段带着语病不地道的日语砸过去那位少年却否定了我的说法，并告诉我们回去google下就退了。于是另外两位也跟着散了，我没有双金狮也就放弃房间了。百度之，只有一个结果符合，http://tieba.baidu.com/mo/q/checkurl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cngba.com%2Fthread-17606311-1-1.html&urlrefer=4406a5fe23b0d78ad0fa82ae80702c26 另外tgbus和网易也有转载这篇。 google之，wiki里有不少关于这个的消息。这里是五年前MHF的情况，虽说看起来和今日的MH4的情况差不多，但会不会有出入呢？（没有？！∑(°Д°υ)） MH系列理应是一款联网为主由大型怪物构成敌人与玩家自由战斗的ACT。这样的怪物boss是会应实时的时间流逝来对于玩家的行动自由作出应对的，然而在MH初期ps2的联网能力并不怎么出色，由于光缆的缺乏比起ADSL泛滥的现在，玩家间的lag更加严重，丢包卡顿时有发生，玩家的操作过段时间才能反馈到服务器上这种悲剧也成了一种家常便饭。再加上TCP延迟啊，确认字符反馈之类的时间，简直how to play……因此，为了在游戏体验上掐掉这种吃苍蝇般的感觉，area host规则加入了游戏。 area host实质上是一种以怪物作为位置基准来判定玩家的规则。怪物的位置并不像一般的网游那样在服务器上，而是在客户端内，这样就可以做到一点：无视其他玩家的客户端只凭主机上进行的行动进行判定。简单地说就是没有击中主机画面上对应的位置的话你再怎么抽自己画面上的怪物也没用(ノ°Д°)ノ（┻━┻ 反过来说，即便是天涯海角，拥有host权的玩家就与lag没关系了了。这样的情况在异常积累，弱点攻击，贯穿长度选择以及部位破坏啊捕捉还有骑乘之类的情况下就不容易出现问题了。观察眼也是根据主机的怪物到达临界血量才会发出信号。不过话说回来，host虽然自己不会有lag，但是网络较差的host会影响全局的网络情况，所以建议网络差的玩家最好不要选择那些容易出问题的武器。

可能火星了些……关于エリアホスト（area host）的一些科普…… 没图。我想只要是能联机的猎人都遇到过这种情况，明明同一个房间，同一位玩家的任务，但有时自己就会玩得很流畅而就连房主和任务领取人都卡得寻生觅死；而有时即便自己卡得难过，队友们屏幕上的怪物还毫无lag…… 这对控场手，或者锁头锤使弓使大剑使都是个问题。至于操虫棍，更加致命，有多少次100黑轰都是瞬移到眼前打飞空中的我然后压起身一套连死，有多少次明明抓着他出招硬直撑杆跳起来准备上背然而却发现这时它已后撤完成蓄力，还有多少次，跳斩打倒后我并没有上背，然后和队友们一起把其实已经在目标背上的我A了下来OTL 所以这篇文章的主旨是希望定番队中的火力手，以及正常游戏时的一些不那么依赖精确打击输出或者输出很灵活的武器将area host尽量交给需要的队友，以便正常完成一次狩猎。那么不想听废话希望直接看这个问题要点的请拉到 2F 人们都会为这样并非自己努力就能解决的问题总结规避经验，于是我之前听说的大部分说法都是“先进区的家伙就是主服务器”。从4代才开始玩的我对前辈的总结深信不疑。然而昨晚野队定双金狮在一次我因为很卡而导致一麻后落穴放的稍晚于是金狮怒后跳毁了落穴，直接二猫。好容易补救回来没有三猫，然而片刻之后降落此区的另一头金狮也是这样的情况……三猫后回房间我对其他人道歉着，其中一位霓虹少年却说不是我的错，告诉我们要将エリアホスト交给控场。听起来应该是area host吧，联想一下他说的可能是“先进区的家伙就是主服务器”这事，于是我就对其他两位询问什么是エリアホスト的少年大致这样解释了下。由于我日语不太好所以组织句子花了些时间，然而一大段带着语病不地道的日语砸过去那位少年却否定了我的说法，并告诉我们回去google下就退了。于是另外两位也跟着散了，我没有双金狮也就放弃房间了。百度之，只有一个结果符合，http://tieba.baidu.com/mo/q/checkurl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cngba.com%2Fthread-17606311-1-1.html&urlrefer=4406a5fe23b0d78ad0fa82ae80702c26 另外tgbus和网易也有转载这篇。 google之，wiki里有不少关于这个的消息。这里是五年前MHF的情况，虽说看起来和今日的MH4的情况差不多，但会不会有出入呢？（没有？！∑(°Д°υ)） MH系列理应是一款联网为主由大型怪物构成敌人与玩家自由战斗的ACT。这样的怪物boss是会应实时的时间流逝来对于玩家的行动自由作出应对的，然而在MH初期ps2的联网能力并不怎么出色，由于光缆的缺乏比起ADSL泛滥的现在，玩家间的lag更加严重，丢包卡顿时有发生，玩家的操作过段时间才能反馈到服务器上这种悲剧也成了一种家常便饭。再加上TCP延迟啊，确认字符反馈之类的时间，简直how to play……因此，为了在游戏体验上掐掉这种吃苍蝇般的感觉，area host规则加入了游戏。 area host实质上是一种以怪物作为位置基准来判定玩家的规则。怪物的位置并不像一般的网游那样在服务器上，而是在客户端内，这样就可以做到一点：无视其他玩家的客户端只凭主机上进行的行动进行判定。简单地说就是没有击中主机画面上对应的位置的话你再怎么抽自己画面上的怪物也没用(ノ°Д°)ノ（┻━┻ 反过来说，即便是天涯海角，拥有host权的玩家就与lag没关系了了。这样的情况在异常积累，弱点攻击，贯穿长度选择以及部位破坏啊捕捉还有骑乘之类的情况下就不容易出现问题了。观察眼也是根据主机的怪物到达临界血量才会发出信号。不过话说回来，host虽然自己不会有lag，但是网络较差的host会影响全局的网络情况，所以建议网络差的玩家不要选择那些容易出问题的武器。

又一起人肉引发的悲剧…… ac953466

养了一个青杨老师+金狮任务，结果根本没法玩啊！养到80级手残想练一下猫猫轻弩控场……要么进来一位十技能猎人直接接受准备让人毫无办法，要么就是一个小时两个小时没人来orz 求队友……

13-11-21【求助】请问这套神岛装足够么？另外求控场手前辈指教箱子里面躺了十把神岛看着心疼，于是配了一套出来…… 倒是大轰可以做到二眠二麻晕闪落麻了，但这控制链加起来也就四分多一点到不了五分钟啊……而且这是我自己一个人去练习才做到的，假如有三位队友的话安了消声器的我仇恨肯定比较低，这样不能保证彻3彻2的连贯性和命中率，可能问题会很大啊…… 用77黑疯子和集会所激昂金狮做小型怪练习感觉一塌糊涂，不是控制重复就是彻甲打不倒，感觉好难……

请问这套神岛装足够么？另外求控场手前辈指导一下…… 箱子里面躺了十把神岛看着心疼，于是配了一套出来…… 倒是大轰可以做到二眠二麻晕闪落麻了，但这控制链加起来也就四分多一点到不了五分钟啊……而且这是我自己一个人去练习才做到的，假如有三位队友的话安了消声器的我仇恨肯定比较低，这样不能保证彻3彻2的连贯性和命中率，可能问题会很大啊…… 用77黑疯子和集会所激昂金狮做小型怪练习感觉一塌糊涂，不是控制重复就是彻甲打不倒，感觉好难……

每当我想要睡觉的时候这死蚊子总能扰得我毫无困意……… 三个晚上了。

13-11-06【水】新人报道，顺带村毕业求贺电…… 鬼畜的激昂金狮和狂化雷狼……天廻比起他俩来讲太乖了点…… 我是从MH4才开始接触这个游戏的。之前被推荐过P2和3G，但是感觉没什么意思而且流程太长就没有跳坑…… 国庆去同学那里玩的时候随手试了一下4，不知为何竟然喜欢上了。于是第二天直接买了一盘回去和他们联机。但是回到学校之后发现自己的网络0612，不得已只好开始solo生涯……第一次三猫交在了毒怪鸟身上（うさ姐那首co限深有感触啊OTL），第一次卡关是在上位影蜘蛛，猫得不亦乐乎。同时刚好预定的X要到货了，几度想等到放假回家面基的时候再拿起来这游戏…… 不过还好在远程求助下终于还是过了。然后卡樱火卡狱狼卡天廻，跌跌撞撞终于到了千之剑……当时我还不清楚飞扑有超长的无敌判定，一看到地图炮就慌了手脚不知怎么应对，咨询了朋友之后才逐渐对蛇王龙有了正确的认识。可惜我自己输出不够，试过虫棍剑斧大剑双刀太刀都无法在时间结束前干掉蛇王龙，而且刚好一位朋友帮我解决了0612问题，于是我在同学的带领下解禁了…… 没能真正地solo解禁真是遗憾= = 怎料没玩多久拉我进坑的几位纷纷弃我而去，玩OL家伙整天只要开服就玩OL，玩闪轨的家伙干脆不碰这游戏了。于是我又踏上了单刷之旅，不过总算可以找野队一起玩了，和霓虹人联机各种有趣，偶尔遇到几位同胞也能算是小小的惊喜……怎么说呢，实在无法想象以前不能网联的情景…… 总之请多关照。

有时候真想拥有这么一种超能力。看到谁在肆无忌惮的喷人的时候我能让他下体一直刀割一般的痛直到他向对方道歉为止…… 否则真是无解，说人话说鬼话完全没用，动用些别的权限末了喷子还满满委屈以为自己又被世界的恶意A到了。

【新人报道】顺便请教两个问题…… 请问一下X版限定除了龙虾和棉花糖以外还有谁？冰岩化石是哪个版本的限定…… 另外再问一下诸位是在哪里预订的XY，我是在淘宝上这家订的，看到吧里讨论的预订特典和价格后开始怀疑是否合适……

感觉ATLUS渐行渐远了…… 据日经报道，SEGA正式以140亿日元的价格收购了INDEX HD，这样就意味着老牌游戏厂商ATLUS的各种游戏也转到了SEGA的旗下。个人非常喜欢的女神转生和世界树迷宫系列以后也要挂着SEGA的名号发售了，但愿同样是老牌游戏厂商的SEGA能将这一系列发扬光大吧！但是SEGA亲sony……任系党表示很头疼= =

ds群里快被mh4刷屏了……没人入手冬宫么？是很不错的迷宫游戏啊……难度也不低

请问一下为何我拾取和任务完成所得的托格币都不增加…… 完成了好几遍赛车任务，每次本应奖励20枚的，但是我现在一共才23枚。我是2周目的……

请教一个关于吉大师的问题…… 就是用那块石头卡吉大师，耐心地等了很久后吉大师盾没了，血也掉了2/3，这时突然他停止掉血了，而且右上小地图也没红点了……走到场地中连那些沙虫都不冒头，自然门也不开，看来只能自杀…… 第一次打吉大师，带着任务……51级双牙刺客，用的是沙鹰+bee。

假如你们遇到了别人的质疑与反驳的话…… 有则改之，无则加勉……吧。

有生以来最爽的一局…… 五人开黑，两个新皮肤乌迪尔抢使用权，最后双打野游走乌迪尔和龙女，龙女惩戒虚弱，乌迪尔点燃闪现，开局在蓝方，上单肾下单爱射中单大虫子。一看对面两个最强王者打野蜘蛛和上单乌迪尔，一个钻石女枪，两个白金辅助锤石和中单卡特。一级团肾不慎被抓送了一血换了两个闪现，干掉了对面蜘蛛和女枪，然后对打中慎活了传眼团灭了对面，开局5:3。之后龙女乌迪尔肾爱射蹲对面蓝准备再抓一次，锤石毫无防备地走了过来结果过于心急没等进草丛就开打，导致对面的女枪和支援及时的乌迪尔拿下了两个人头，锤石还跑了，5:5。之后龙女绕了一圈蹲在蓝BUFF外面，爱射给了蓝buff区一个E，龙女惩戒抢掉了蜘蛛的蓝。肾回去对马上就有了弯刀的乌迪尔，中路大虫子略压卡特，下路寒冰没眼，苦苦挣扎在锤石和女枪的压制下。乌迪尔和龙女合作拿了红和F4到了2，和3级龙女一起去下路，在爱射的帮助下龙女成功双杀没有眼没有闪现的下路二人组。然后乌迪尔和龙女游中，大虫子虽然踩中了卡特，但是卡特离塔太近，闪现E仍旧逃掉了。龙女和乌迪尔去把自己的蓝拿掉后顺手去上路gank乌迪尔，怎奈没有沟通好导致肾上得太早，倒在乌迪尔虎爪之下，随后龙女拿到了乌迪尔的人头。此时大虫子看到补中路线的蜘蛛身上没有红，虽然时间可能已过，但是龙女仍旧试着去看了一下对面红BUFF,发现的确没打掉，然后偷上BUFF回城。自此上路大逆风，下路逆风，中路顺风，野区相当于没有蜘蛛这个英雄了…… 然后蜘蛛抓下，寒冰在自己塔下交了鬼步和闪现侥幸逃命，上路肾到6支援中路加双游干掉了卡特。然后锤石突然掉线，寒冰单杀了女枪，又被女枪单杀，之后寒冰远程支援一箭，精准地擦过了野区遭遇乌迪尔和龙女的卡特，上路河道爆发小规模团战，对面卡特又交代了……再一看乌迪尔，腰带弯刀鞋顿感绝望；本方乌迪尔根据对面乌迪尔的皮肤推测出他是满虎形态的，于是准备越塔杀，结果龙女没扑到乌迪尔，被他在塔下换掉了肾和本方乌迪尔。此时锤石成功重连。之后就是上路肾拼命守塔大和传送好就支援；寒冰疯狂减CD全屏擦身箭，并且配合双游打掉了对面下1塔；双游的龙女肥得流油，乌迪尔也做了饮血轻语；中路大虫子压得卡特抬不起头。最后结束的时候人头超了对面近三倍，塔只掉了下一，全场大龙小龙只留给了对面一条……

【新树】story已破，接着该classic了…… 森林细胞这算剧情杀吧……简单得过分啊…… 目前接不到三龙任务，准备直接二周目了。

留美·拉希奥·王过了几年有车有房父母双亡的拉希奥遇到了以联合艾星所有种族为己任的中立秘密组织，这个组织名叫天人。他们在白女士上有一个基地，管理者为Eluen。他们还在德拉诺附近有一艘空艇，里面有秘密研制出的，能自发产生圣光并以光能做驱动力的发动机。由于能力有限只生产出五台……为了保险起见组织首领麦德安还成立了另外一个组织天使，以协助天人并在其危险时对其进行抹消或者救援。他在艾星外空间建立了一个浮空城，取名天都。作为天使的主要基地。为了迎接即将来临的对话，拉希奥向这个组织投去了全部家产…… fin 膝盖在杭州中了一键，好不容易恢复好了回来打网球又扭了╮(╯v╰)╭

一年之前关于小吼的讨论不知道还有谁记得…… 无论大吼小吼阿尔萨斯伊利丹凯尔希尔瓦纳斯这些人还是遗族巨魔莫古BE这些种族…… 为什么总是有那么多洗地的家伙？只要别人一提出他们的缺点与黑暗面，就要出来反击……你可以因为他们的魅力而喜欢他们，也可以用各种宣传让更多的人了解他们的魅力。但是你有什么必要去掩盖他们板上钉钉的缺点与污点？连瑕疵都接受不了的玻璃心么……难道不知道其实这样最招黑？