It is actually fun when you overlook the weaknesses of early access titles. Though it would need changes to remain fresh. The game is supposed to get new maps, which would be integral in it staying enjoyable.

Games would last way too long without the reduction in map size. The maps for these games are huge. Like you can start someplace and not see anyone until a few people remain huge. or never see anyone before dying in the circle of death huge.

No, the percentage in both cases who require interventions would be between 0.0. and 1.0. Additionally, the covered population for Viagra would include retireds. The persons eligible or receiving would be a really big number. When you divide to get cost per, you end up with a very small number.

You don't. The incidence of ED increases with age and former military members are covered by military health plans. According to the study that is referenced here, most of the prescriptions (90%) were retireds and covered family members. I don't think that the 85% ratio would hold for older groups either.

H1Z1: King of the Kill, which is similar, is supposed to be released for PS4.

The comparison does not get us anywhere. It does not address the claim made. It does not lead us to any reasonable conclusions that can be used to make decisions. It is an appeal to emotion disguised as scientific thinking. The line of inquiry ends here. "This number is bigger, so unjustified conclusion."

I am to math what Sam Harris is to atheism.

Comparison based on population. if Viagra costs were 8600% greater than costs of transgender-related health care, then the author might have an argument. but it is actually really cheap. the cost only adds up because a lot of people get it. When you look at the cost per beneficiary, it is very very small.

Which is why I have not addressed the policy. i like knowing things before coming to a conclusion. It is exactly the opposite of what you do.

The number provided don't support the conclusions of the article. They are meaningless. What is the significance of comparisons to Viagra? What is indicated by the given proportion of total spending? Nothing and nothing. They don't tell you anything of value. You can't draw any logical conclusion about the…

Some number between 0.0 and 1.0 would actually be getting interventions for both groups.

So me where I wrote that, please. For someone who supposedly writes for a living, you have issues with reading comprehension. My criticism was clearly about the argument being offered. Then again, expecting logic from you is like expecting a cat to lay an egg.

One of the problems with medicine is that people don't have the understanding to compare costs. You need population data and willingness to pay threshold and all that annoying boring shit that most people don't care about.

It can, but that is not the argument presented here. The point here is to exploit people's inability to deal with numbers. I really don't like that.

No, it is all that matters. The entire crux of the argument is the difference between groups. At some point we would all agree that the level of spending per soldier is excessive for some groups (blind people who need sonar systems or something crazy like that). To make a cost argument you need to know the cost per…

Viagra was originally created to treat cardiovascular disorders. The mechanism of action also resulted in aid to those with erectile dysfunction. Athletes have also used it as a performance enhancing drug in the past. Mountain climbers use it to breathe easier.

The cost of dismissing soldiers for any reason is probably small. The military is huge. The DoD employs like 1.5 million people. It also wastes a lot of money.

Yeah, math is dumb. Especially when making a point that requires it. Feels forever! You didn't spend 6 years on an English degree to know how numbers work.

Does no one who writes for this site understand math?

And they live forever. You can be stuck with one for 20 years.