[JakeBlues]

It does not make sense that a helm be heavier than an axe.

[Guest]

fiber glass axe?!?

[Accipender]

(2009.Jul.03 10:51 PM)Gornikel Wrote:  It does not make sense that a helm be heavier than an axe.

If I recall correctly, axes used for battle in real life are quite small, as they had to be used for hours on end, and helms could be a little heavier.

That being said, I agree with you, as this is NOT real life lol.

[alinutza]

(2009.Jul.03 10:51 PM)Gornikel Wrote:  It does not make sense that a helm be heavier than an axe.

why not? there are people in this game with an intelligence of over 20. imagine how big their heads are...

[Moriarty]

is stephen hawkins head out of proportion to the rest of him?

[JakeBlues]

Possibly

[Accipender]

(2009.Jul.04 03:32 PM)alinutza Wrote:  

(2009.Jul.03 10:51 PM)Gornikel Wrote:  It does not make sense that a helm be heavier than an axe.

why not? there are people in this game with an intelligence of over 20. imagine how big their heads are...

If I recall correctly, intelligence has more to do with the surface area than the size. I.E. the more wrinkles, the higher the intelligence.

[Guest]

(2009.Jul.04 04:08 PM)Moriarty Wrote:  is stephen hawkins head out of proportion to the rest of him?

Size of your head has an 11% correlation with inteligence or so claimed a psych class i took at one point or another.

[Accipender]

(2009.Jul.11 01:41 PM)xSleekx Wrote:  

(2009.Jul.04 04:08 PM)Moriarty Wrote:  is stephen hawkins head out of proportion to the rest of him?

Size of your head has an 11% correlation with inteligence or so claimed a psych class i took at one point or another.

That means it doesnt 89% of the time. Sounds more like coincidence to me.

[Guest]

(2009.Jul.11 01:46 PM)Accipender Wrote:  That means it doesnt 89% of the time. Sounds more like coincidence to me.

You miss understand what a correlation is ...

A correlation doesn't mean that 89% of the time it means absolutely nothing and 11% of the time its absolutely true.... its more like uhm...hard to explain

Example: Being obese has a (lets say) 30% correlation with eating too much. That just means that 30% of the problem as to why they are obese is that they eat too much on the average. Now is every obese person big because they eat too much? No, and are the ones that eat too much eat exactly 30% more then they should? No, but the correlation means that eating too much is 30% of the problem on the avg. (and no i have no idea what % eating too much has to do with being obese was just a number i guessed)