GS的评分不是乱评的,白字属性,绿字附加属性都是评分标准,so,GS就代表了装备的好与坏。GS比你高的人装备肯定比你好(仅就基础属性而言)。
当然也有可能GS低的比GS高的人打出来的DPS更高,这是附加属性的取舍,操作的YD与否决定的。但这是“软件”,是不能做为标准的,人人都知道组人要组意识好的,但什么样的才是意识好呢,没法用一个标准来衡量。
我都想插件显示:此人操作极度YD。
装备本来就是要淘汰的,所以没必要为装备和队友闹矛盾,不值得。只有坐骑和成就才是永恒。
打过以前的SW金团么?那会套装普及了,于是要什么4T6以上啦之类的。不是说你有4T6你就操作有多高端,而是说至少你有这些装备的话,相应的本你就打过,会有经验。
现在要求GS道理也差不多吧,GS高点,一是可以说明你混了很久了有一定的经验,二是GS高了直接带来的就是输出“有可能”会高(你GS不高即使不划水、手法NB,也没可能有很高的输出,这是硬件限制)。不然你让团长怎么喊人呢?喊“物理输出来攻强4000+, 法系输出来法伤3500+ ,T来防御等级 600+”?显然这样很麻烦,于是就简单的以GS评分来做衡量的标准喽。
你不要这么忿世嫉俗的,你应该见过因为小白而灭团,因为dps不够而boss狂暴的情况吧,这都是没办法。人家团长也不容易,得为全团人着想嘛。
GS除了说明装备等级外,的确不能说明个人操作和网速问题。但是现在装备等级不同,效果还是差的比较多,GS的级别高出许多的话,甚至可以弥补操作的不足(当然是一般普通人,不要拿超高手说)。
其实这跟我们现实生活一个道理
公司招聘,一般第一个要求就是XXX学历而不是看你有XX能力(多数如此)
就跟GS一样,如果不是亲友
必然是首先凭装备好坏推测你的大致水平
说实话很偏颇,但是没办法
The climate change "benefits" would be equally underwhelming, resting as they do on the dodgy premise that Australian uranium would replace coal rather than simply replacing uranium from another source or replacing renewable energy sources, he said.
"Few countries support the opening up of nuclear trade with countries that refuse to sign the NPT. The 118 countries of the Non Aligned Movement voiced objections during the NPT Review Conference in New York this year," he wrote in 'The Age'.
"Second, while the non-proliferation regime has certainly been damaged, there is no justification for Australia to damage it further.
He said that uranium sale would do very little to expand Australia's export revenue - which helps explain why the Australian Uranium Association supports the government's policy of prohibiting uranium sales to countries that have not signed the NPT.
"Proponents celebrated the expansion of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards achieved under the US-India deal. However, under India's agreement with the IAEA, safeguards will be tokenistic and apply only to that part of the nuclear programme that India considers surplus to its military "requirements," he said.
"If Australia supplied one-fifth of India's current demand, uranium exports would increase by a measly 1.8 per cent. Even if all reactors under construction or planned in India come on line,gucci bag, Australia's uranium exports would increase by just 10 per cent," he opined.
"Nor would safeguards address another key problem: Australian uranium freeing up India's limited domestic supplies for weapons production," Broinowski added.
He noted that proponents of the deal have resorted to the disingenuous argument that India's "moratorium" on nuclear tests is a victory.
Referring to the US deal to open up civil nuclear trade with India, Broinowski said India made no concessions whatsoever during the deal and it would be naive to imagine Australia could win concessions from India that the US was unable to do.
But the "moratorium" was already in place before the US-India negotiations began,gucci bag, and it is clearly no substitute for ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, he added.
"Even in the unlikely event that a rigorous safeguards regime provided confidence that Australian uranium would not be used in India's weapons programme, that would not undo the damage done to the NPT by opening up civil nuclear trade with non-NPT states.
Selling uranium to India would spell more damage than gains for Australia as it would raise the export revenue only marginally while giving out signals to nations like Japan and South Korea that Canberra was not serious on adhering to the non-proliferation treaty,gucci bag, a former diplomat has argued.
"But that argument has its faults," he said.
According to Richard Broinowski, a professor at Sydney University and a former diplomat to several countries like Vietnam, Korea, Mexico, the uranium sale may encourage other nations to develop nuclear weapons without necessarily fearing a cut-off of Australian supplies rather than follow the NPT.
"If there is an argument for uranium sales to India, it is that the damage has already been done to the NPT and the non-proliferation regime, and Australia might as well get in there and make a few bucks from selling uranium.