I have seen a video (                              ) of a guy who is at the same mission as me but of a much higher level as me (He is 25, I am 19) and has a TON more shields and HP than me.  I am pretty much always dying when I try to solo missions. When I am with a team, I have to let them do the mission while I sit in a corner.  Are there any tips to level up fast? Like.... kill tons of enemies, do side quests, etc.? Also, are there any ways to get more shields and HP?
What is the sweet spot for experience gain? Is it more effective to fight the highest level enemies I can find, or am I penalized for being out of my depth? Are certain areas of the game better/best for experience gain/leveling? Are bosses better than areas with infinite minions? Would I get exp faster in a higher-level co-op game? What are the most time-effective techniques for rushing/boosting a character (either solo or co-op)?
Prove that $\sqrt[n]{n!}$ is increasing and diverges I have to prove that $a_n$ is (strictly) increasing and diverges  $a_n = \sqrt[n]{n!}$ ;  n $\in$  $\ \mathbb{N}$  From sequence I see that $a_n$ increasing to infinitive.  $\sqrt[1]{1!}=1 ,\  \sqrt[2]{2!} \approx 1.41, \  \sqrt[3]{3!}  \approx 1.81 ,...,  \sqrt[n]{n!} $ Using the Fitch system, how do I prove $((p \implies q) \implies p)\implies p$? Using the Fitch system, how do I prove $((p \implies q) \implies p)\implies p$? I started with the hypotheses $(p \implies q) \implies p$ and $\sim p$. However, from these hypotheses I did not get the desired contradiction to solve the question.  Thanks sb45 Is there a word for someone with the same name? If a person shares my name, in Dutch there is the word &quot;naamgenoot&quot;, meaning roughly 'member of the same name'.  John A: Hi, my name is &quot;John&quot;  John B: O, then we're insert solution word here!  Similarly,  'classmate' is 'klasgenoot' in Dutch 'roommate' is 'kamergenoot' in Dutch  I'm pretty sure I cannot call someone with the same name as mine a 'namemate' :)  Edit Because sceptics appear to be frustrated mightily by an apparent lack of research, there was  in chat, with no satisfactory conclusion. /Merriam Webster namesake appears to be linked to intentional name correspondance (being named after someone). There may be a US/UK English divide there.  &quot;I was named after my grandfather. I am his namesake.&quot; -   Also, the introduction seems to hint at much broader meaning:  &quot;Namesake is a term used to characterize a person, place, thing, quality, action, state, or idea that has the same, or a similar, name to another&quot;   Do you know of a better word/phrase to describe this succinctly? Multiple TikZ keys with foreach Triggered send status queued, need to get an alert Avoiding confusion over the term "Research Assistant" top command in cygwin? I am starting to use Cygwin(64) on my Windows 8 laptop, however, the top command is not recognized. I have read online that I need to get the procps package, but it is not available on the 'Cygwin Setup' package selections. How should I go about installing the procps package so that I can use top?  ps. for whatever reason ps and kill both work so I would think top would be included in whatever package allowed those guys to work, but there is no top command. How can I change the field names (not the alias) in ArcGIS 10.2? I already found this page on ArcGIS support: &quot;&quot; but there is is not &quot;Defense Mapping&quot; on Customized Mode Categories In my ArcCatalog! Without access to Defense Mapping, how can I change the field names? Is the intersection of a closed set and a compact set always compact? I am going through Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis in preparation for the masters exam, and I am seeking clarification on a corollary.  Theorem 2.34 states that compact sets in metric spaces are closed. Theorem 2.35 states that closed subsets of compact spaces are compact. As a corollary, Rudin then states that if $L$ is closed and $K$ is compact, then their intersection $L \cap K$ is compact, citing 2.34 and 2.24(b) (intersections of closed sets are closed) to argue that $L \cap K$ is closed, and then using 2.35 to show that $L \cap K$ is compact as a closed subset of a compact set.  Am I correct in believing that this corollary holds for metric spaces, and not in general topological spaces? How to understand the combination formula? I'm reading an algorithm book. In which it mentioned:     Imagine (once again) you have n people lined up to see a movie, but   there are only k places left in  the theater. How many possible   subsets of size k could possibly get in? That’s exactly $C(n,k)$, of   course,  and the metaphor may do some work for us here. We already   know that we have $n!$ possible orderings of  the entire line. What if   we just count all these possibilities and let in the first $k$? The only   problem then is  that we’ve counted the subsets too many times. A   certain group of k friends could stand at the head of  the line in a   lot of the permutations; in fact, we could allow these friends to   stand in any of their $k!$  possible permutations, and the remainder of   the line could stand in any of their $(n–k)!$ possible  permutations   without affecting who’s getting in. Aaaand this gives us the answer!       $$C(n,k)= \frac{n!}{k!(n −k)!}$$      This formula just counts all possible permutations of the line (n!),   and divides by the number of  times we count each “winning subset,” as   explained.   I'm not quite understand why the reminder can in any $(n-k)!$ permutation, if he stands at the end of the queue, won't he let all these people in?  And why I should use $n!$ to divide by $k!(n-k)!$ ? Didn't see that consequence from the metaphor.  If you have better ideas to explain this formula, you can use them of course. In Rey's vision, whose voice says "These are your first steps"? The units of $\mathbb Z[\sqrt{2}]$ How can I show that the units $u$ of $R=\mathbb Z[\sqrt{2}]$ with $u&gt;1$ are $(1+ \sqrt{2})^{n}$ ?   I have proved that the right ones are units because their module is one, and it is said to me to do it by induction on $b$ and multiplication by $-1+\sqrt{2}$. I have already shown that the units of this ring has norm $1$ and all the numbers with norm $1$ are units, this may help. How does A* pathfinding work? Explaining to laypeople why bootstrapping works Display error message if same record exist with combination of some fields? I have taken three fields from case object called AccountName, IntegrationTo__c and SfType__c (checkbox).  I have created one case record with a specific combination of three fields.  For the second time I create a record with that combination, then  display error message only if SfType__c is true in first record otherwise allow  for record creation.  trigger AvoidDuplicate on Case(before insert)  {          set&lt;string&gt; newNameSet = new set&lt;string&gt;();     newNameSet = new set&lt;string&gt;();      set&lt;string&gt; newEmailSet = new set&lt;string&gt;();      set&lt;string&gt; dbNameSet = new set&lt;string&gt;();      set&lt;string&gt; dbEmailSet = new set&lt;string&gt;();      for(Case newLead : trigger.new){          newNameSet.add(newLead.Account.Name);          newEmailSet.add(newLead.IntegrationTo__c);      }      for(Case dbLead : [select id, Case.Account.Name, IntegrationTo__c from Case where IntegrationTo__c IN: newEmailSet OR Case.Account.Name IN: newNameSet]){          dbNameSet.add(dbLead.Account.Name);          dbEmailSet.add(dbLead.IntegrationTo__c);      }      for(Case newLead : trigger.new){          if(dbNameSet.contains(newLead.Account.Name) &amp;&amp; dbEmailSet.Contains(newLead.IntegrationTo__c))              newLead.addError('You are inserting Duplicate Case');      }  }   i wrote this this not checking the account field name and integration__c values only with combination of account and integration__c shows error Thailand visa exemption: any rule limiting number of entries per year? Negative energy levels in the diagram for a hydrogen atom Is there a way to make the following return true?  string title = "ASTRINGTOTEST"; title.Contains("string");   There doesn't seem to be an overload that allows me to set the case sensitivity.. Currently I UPPERCASE them both, but that's just silly (by which I am referring to the  issues that come with up- and down casing).  UPDATE This question is ancient and since then I have realized I asked for a simple answer for a really vast and difficult topic if you care to investigate it fully. For most cases, in mono-lingual, English code bases  answer will suffice. I'm suspecting because most people coming here fall in this category this is the most popular answer.  answer however brings up the inherent problem that we can't compare text case insensitive until we know both texts are the same culture and we know  what that culture is. This is maybe a less popular answer, but I think it is more correct and that's why I marked it as such. Prove $[\sin x]' = \cos x$ without using $\lim\limits_{x\to 0}\frac{\sin x}{x} = 1$ I came across this question:   From the comments, Joren said:     L'Hopital Rule is easiest: $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to 0}\sin x = 0$ and $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to 0} = 0$, so $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{\sin x}{x} = \lim_{x\to 0}\frac{\cos x}{1} = 1$.   Which Ilya readly answered:     I'm extremely curious how will you prove then that $[\sin x]' = \cos x$   My question:  is there a way of proving that $[\sin x]' = \cos x$ without using the limit $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{\sin x}{x} = 1$. Also, without using anything else $E$ such that, the proof of $E$ uses the limit or $[\sin x]' = \cos x$.    All I want is to be able to use L'Hopital in $\displaystyle\lim_{x\to 0}\frac{\sin x}{x}$. And for this, $[\sin x]'$ has to be evaluated first.    Alright... the definition that some requested.   Def of sine and cosine: Have a unit circumference in the center of cartesian coordinates. Take a dot that belongs to the circumference. Your dot is $(x, y)$. It relates to the angle this way: $(\cos\theta, \sin\theta)$, such that if $\theta = 0$ then your dot is $(1, 0)$.  Basically, its a geometrical one. Feel free to use trigonometric identities as you want. They are all provable from geometry. My understanding is that GPUs are more efficient for running neural nets, but someone recently suggested to me that GPUs are only needed for the training phase. Once trained, it's actually more efficient to run them on CPUs.  Is this true?