Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

26

Other Games / Re: Terminology

« on: May 01, 2013, 10:19:22 am »

"sneak".

As in, sneakily move two spaces delta force/navy seal style.

Oh, how about "stealth"? "Commando"? "Scout"? "Reconnaissance"? something in that direction?

Or does the setting allow you to use "teleport"? or a variation thereof? "fly" maybe?

27

General Discussion / Re: Probability paradoxes

« on: January 14, 2013, 03:39:12 am »

You are flipping a coin. Previously, you have established that the coin has equal odds of showing heads or tails; so no funny business there. You get heads ten times in a row.

I just realized the bolded parts of my original post make the whole discussion, ehrmmm..., interesting? Considering that you, yourself mess up your own thought experiment by purposely biasing your own imaginary flips and also assuming your own incompetence in your own imaginary investigation of equal odds?

And now I also realize that my answer to any question about the methodology of establishing the fairness of the coin should have been boomeranged: "well, you tell me, how did you do it?"

Oh and after rrenaud's post, I realize that I knew that, but forgot about it. Sorry about that...

28

General Discussion / Re: Movie Night Suggestions

« on: January 11, 2013, 06:05:05 am »

Well, neither do I usually, but its a social gathering with movies included really.

In that case, none of my suggestions fit.
I'd suggest any movie containing at least one of the following: Hugh Grant, Sandra Bullock, Martin Lawrence, Eddie Murphy or Mike Myers. You're pretty much guaranteed then that people who actually pay attention ~30% of the time, will still be able to follow the story, and nobody will really dislike it.

29

Dominion General Discussion / Re: 3+ player games with junking attacks: worth playing?

« on: January 11, 2013, 02:01:21 am »

Contrary to 2 player games, for 4 player games moat rules. Never played 3 with moat in the kingdom.

I had a game where I had built a beautiful torturer chain, 1 other player didn't see it, 1 other player didn't open with silver or terminal silver so had to watch how I won that split, last player just bought a bunch of moats. And a thief or two. Which is a really bad strategy in 2 player games. It turns out, in 4 player games, this means winning easily: the thief hurts my economy, eventually gets the few silvers the other two players have, boosts the moat-thief players economy and I spend waaaaayyyy too much time building up that torturer chain, while the moat-thief player just buys provinces.

I'd wager any other defense like it (e.g. watchtower, lighthouse) will do pretty much the same. Also, cellar becomes much more important in games like these. I have won while ignoring a curser but getting a bunch of cellars to get past all those curses. Granted, my opposition is not of top level quality.

30

General Discussion / Re: Movie Night Suggestions

« on: January 10, 2013, 09:27:15 am »

not appropriate for a group of people drinking beer and sitting around, probably with half not paying attention and talking (grrr)

I never go watch movies with people who are not paying attention and talking. I get annoyed and start yelling at people - not fun for anybody.

31

General Discussion / Re: Probability paradoxes

« on: January 10, 2013, 09:23:23 am »

And then I just spent quite some time flipping this coin and recording the results, until I happened to run across a streak while having gathered enough data to do a statistical meaningful test and be able to state with > 99.999% certainty that the odds are 50/50.

Sounds like simple hypothesis against simple alternative, in which case I would like to see your alternative. Probably not anywhere within the interval [.499; .501].

Depends on the kingdom. (f.DS, find an edge case for anything.)

If I had to do the actual work, it'd probably be as low as .49<x<.51, because I'm lazy. If I can use lab staff, but have to pay for it out of the project budget, probably, .4975<x<.5025.
But in my thought experiment, where I don't actually have to do any work, I selected .4999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999<x<.5000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

Selection was determined by how long I pressed and held the 9. I might have taken a bit longer if I got into it.

Now let this go. The point stands: even if there is a bias either way, let's say something as ridiculous as 70% heads - 30% tails. Given that I had ten consecutive heads, the next throw will have the same probability either way as any other random throw; for this particular coin from RidiculousCoins inc. that would be 70% chance of heads.
Or we get one from That'llBeGoodEnoughCoins inc., which give 49.9 heads-50.1 tails. In that case, the odds after ten consecutive heads are 49.9%, just like any random flip.

The actual numbers are irrelevant. I'll let go now, will you?

32

General Discussion / Re: Probability paradoxes

« on: January 10, 2013, 09:00:24 am »

Oh, and about being short sighted, and the premise, I failed to mention something that was obvious:
Of course I ordered a special calibrated coin from UnBiasedModelCoinCorp inc.

And then I just spent quite some time flipping this coin and recording the results, until I happened to run across a streak while having gathered enough data to do a statistical meaningful test and be able to state with > 99.999% certainty that the odds are 50/50.

That's the beauty of thought experiments and model calculations, you can just skip all the hard work. That's why we employ lab staff

On a more serious note, I do expect that randomly selected, not clearly defective coins (bent, double headed, whatnot) will be properly described by 50-50 heads/tails. Note that I also negliged the slight possibility of "neither" (i.e., it falls on its edge and just stands there).

33

General Discussion / Re: Probability paradoxes

« on: January 10, 2013, 08:49:21 am »

Actually, this is only true if you assume that the coin MUST be a 'fair' coin.

As specified in the premise.

However, ten consecutive heads is some evidence that the coin isn't fair.

Sometimes there is no way to say something without being a condescending jerk, so here it goes (I have no friendlier way to phrase (PREVIEWED IN: from the post you made while I was typing this, seems to suggest you already got this. But, for those who didn't:)):
Ten consecutive heads in any realistic situation is some evidence that the coin MIGHT not be fair. The MIGHT is extremely important. There is a probability of ~0.1% of this happening. Compare this with lottery odds (link is an example that took me a few seconds to find) , they are much lower than this - yet every now and then someone somewhere wins a lottery. That's because A LOT of people partake in these lotteries...

The 0.1% chance of it happening, means a 99.9% chance of it failing, for each try. If I can have 3000 tries, that means odds of failing every single time are .999^3000 = .05 => 5%; i.e. with 3000 tries available, throwing 10 heads in a row doesn't seem so unlikely anymore!

I have been to casinos. I enjoy watching people spending boatloads of money on roulette even if I don't. And I actually did see a streak of >10 consecutive red results with my own eyes. Casinos feel a bias directly in their bottom line - they make sure it is negligible. But given the sheer number of roulette plays in the world, SOMEONE is bound to witness one SOMEWHERE SOMETIME.

34

General Discussion / Re: Movie Night Suggestions

« on: January 10, 2013, 03:59:04 am »

Oh, I forgot an important one:
No Man's Land (IMDB link)
It's by a director from Bosnia, and it deals with some soldiers from the opposing sides in the civil war who are trapped in a trench between the front lines. It really gives a thought-provoking insight in the intricacies of a conflict like the one in former Yugoslavia...

35

General Discussion / Re: Movie Night Suggestions

« on: January 10, 2013, 03:50:02 am »

I always have trouble with categories. I'll just throw out a few ideas of awesome films that I think people should have seen:

- Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> best intertwined-stories-movie that I have ever seen. And it's humorous in its own way as well!
- Any western movie directed by Sergio Leone -> Best Western movies in existence. Period.
- Avalon (directed by Mamoru Oshii) (And no, it's not a typo of Avatar) -> If I explain why it is awesome, it takes away from its awesome.
- The Terminator, The Running Man, Tron, Robocop, (there are more) -> These form a nice "time-document": this is what people were afraid of in the 1980's.
- [rec] - scariest zombie movie I have ever seen. Think Blair Witch Project with zombies.
- Shaun of the Dead - Funniest zombie movie I have ever seen. It's a romantic comedy, with zombies. What more do you want?
- Anything by Quentin Tarantino -> my favorite movie director. If you don't agree, you are wrong :p
- Ben Hur -> No really, this is actually great, especially if you consider its age!
- Romper Stomper -> I like this more than American History X.
- Enter the Dragon -> no explanation needed.
- Ong Bak -> Awesome martial arts movie. It turns out Muay Thai translates to the silver screen even better than Kung-Fu. And it has a great car chase variation, with Tuk-Tuks!
- Bullit -> Speaking of car chases... For a more modern car chase movie, you could get Ronin, but I like Bullit more.
- Amsterdamned -> It'll be tough finding a subtitled version, but this has a better boat chase than the one from James Bond, in my not-so-humble opinion.
- Guesthouse Paradiso -> Rick Mayall is a personal favorite of mine.

This should keep you occupied for months...

36

General Discussion / Re: Probability paradoxes

« on: January 10, 2013, 03:07:54 am »

Another nice one that people tend to refuse to accept:
You are flipping a coin. Previously, you have established that the coin has equal odds of showing heads or tails; so no funny business there. You get heads ten times in a row. What are the odds of getting heads next coinflip?
And is this equal to the odds of getting eleven times heads in a row?

odds of the next coinflip are the same as any random coinflip, 50%. Interestingly, odds of eleven consecutive coinflips with equal result is 100%*((.5)^11) = ~0.05%. The difference lies in the fact that in the first case, the "history" has already taken place; it doesn't matter what result they gave; the information is irrelevant, I might just as well have stated (heads x3-tails x3 - heads) as history. Basically, I just kept flipping the coin, until variance gave me the desired history; if I try long enough it WILL happen eventually.  While in the second example, I have more uncertainty: I don't have the freedom to try, try, try again; I am calculating the odds of getting it right in one try.

Same problem works with throwing a die, or black vs. red in roulette but you have to adjust for the odds of each option (1/6 vs. 1/2 for the die, and for roulette the odds are slightly less than 50% due to the green fields.)

And for those of you who think this stuff is merely done for fun - I'm an engineer, and I have done probability calculations similar to this in that function in the past. Most difficult part is explaining any counterintuitive results to management...

37

Other Games / Re: Game rules and their depth

« on: January 08, 2013, 04:27:32 am »

If beer pong is on there, darts should be too. Students at Delft University built a robot that could throw triple 20 - triple 20 - triple 20 = ONE HUNDRED AND EEEEIIIIGHTYYYYY every single time, and which would hit the double finisher >99% of the time. The robot beat the human world champion easily.

Then again, darts is annoying.

How long will it be before robots beat humans at soccer?

Depends on the restriction on the robots.  If you take a 7,32x2,44mē machine as goalkeeper, it should be quite easy to at least tie...

Or.......(click)

38

Other Games / Re: Game rules and their depth

« on: January 08, 2013, 02:13:39 am »

If beer pong is on there, darts should be too. Students at Delft University built a robot that could throw triple 20 - triple 20 - triple 20 = ONE HUNDRED AND EEEEIIIIGHTYYYYY every single time, and which would hit the double finisher >99% of the time. The robot beat the human world champion easily.

Then again, darts is annoying.

How long will it be before robots beat humans at soccer?

39

General Discussion / Re: Computer and Video Games

« on: December 20, 2012, 04:08:54 am »

I'm ridiculously late to the party in this topic.  First, a quick list of games I've seen mentioned in here that I have on my own list of faves (in the order they were mentioned in-thread).
...
- Civilzation I
...

Even later to the party

Original CIV!!!!! I spent so many hours with that game. In school we had a contest, "finish the game ASAP", on the standard world map, %^ cheat allowed (typing that would reveal the map). Once we managed that easily in BC era, we changed the contest to "Nuke ASAP". We could JUST NOT fire them off BC.
Later Civ games are still awesome, but I never managed to do such ridiculous things. Although I did not spend nearly as much time on those games.

I also LOVED Colonization. I find it a big shame that that has never been re-released in modernized form.

The Advance Wars games have been a huge time-sink for me. Oh, and Death Rally.

40

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: December 18, 2012, 09:57:22 am »

<text>

O right, now I get it. I guess you meant it in the sense of "discovered" instead of "Eureka".

No, I have been playing video games my whole life, and I love TBS games more than any other. I was just wondering what a Donald X. (2 SdJ's says he knows a thing or two about making good/fun games) rejected-IRL-for-bookkeeping-or-specifically-designed-ground-up-for-touch-devices game would be like. Judging from his answer (which I missed earlier): apparantely nothing worth publishing. (yet)


Sorry to have sort of taken offense.

41

Other Games / Re: Ascension

« on: December 18, 2012, 04:45:16 am »

Apart from both being deckbuilding games, Ascension and Dominion are a world of difference. I love both; I think Ascension is more fun with 2p while I prefer Dominion with >2p, although I have yet to try Ascensions 2v2 mode, which supposedly fixes a lot of the gripes I have with >2p Ascension.

The player interaction in Dominion is mainly through attacks, which you can see coming from before the game starts and you can (and should) plan for that. Interaction through the "marketplace" is very limited - the PPR and perhaps leaving a pile at 2 or 3 cards to prevent a 3-pile ending. Other than that, it's pretty much a racing game, find the most efficient route to collecting VP while simultaneously ending the game. Or in other words: design what you want to do, taking into account the possible actions of your opponent(s), then everybody builds his design and we will see who hits the finish line first. I find that if I have chosen the wrong strategy or just have really bad luck, I can only catch up if the opponent has made a (number of) mistake(s) as well. (I can't do anything my opponent couldn't have seen before the game has even started; and he could have done it himself)

The player interaction in Ascension is mainly through the marketplace, which is variable and unplannable; and consists mainly of allowing/denying cards to your opponent. Attacks are as unplannable as everything else and in addition also a bit weak. It plays out much more like a boxing or football match - you do something, the opponent responds, you respond to that response and so on. If I make a bad decision or have bad luck somewhere in the game, I can adapt to try to turn things around. The analog would be that we are both on the same train, we both have a speed control for the train, and stuff swings by as we go along and we each have to make the best of what is thrown at us.

As for the actual cardplay - I find both games have equally meaningful decisions in that area. It's not like you are often not going to buy anything with a $6 hand in Dominion either - it's just the decision between gold and $5 action that can be interesting. That sort of stuff is also in Ascension - buy what's obviously reasonable, buy something cheap just to rotate new stuff into the marketplace, or not buy something from the marketplace to prevent new goods rotating in for your opponent. Also, the always availables in Ascension are about as good or bad as silver is in Dominion - that stuff helps but can also really get in the way. I very often let 2 or 3 runes unspent when I see nothing good/affordable in the marketplace and I also don't feel like I would improve my deck with any of the always availables (and indeed, in Dominion you sometimes dump a $3 hand straight in the discard for the same reason). I also sometimes NOT play the banish-from-the-center-row cards when I don't see anything of value for my opponent.


In summary, if you think you will be getting Dominion, you will have a bad time playing. Then again, the same can be said about Carcassonne, Settlers and, well, anything that's not Dominion.

--------------

As for the actual iOS app - it's awesome. It's as awesome as Isotropic is for Dominion, only prettier and with some (not so smart) AI. Only no in-game proper matchmaking. oh well.

42

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: December 17, 2012, 09:08:11 am »

it's a computer, right! These things are really good at counting stuff!

Have you just invented computer games? 

Not sure if serious. So I will elaborate.

What I mean is inspired by my new addiction: Hero Academy for iOS. This plays like a strategic boardgame - the playing field is even divided up in clearly visible squares. But as fun as the game is on iOS, it would totally suck IRL. You would have to keep track of hit points, upgrades, calculate damage modifiers for each individual unit, a.s.o. For that kind of effort, the game is too light. The iPad naturally does a very good job at keeping track of all this, thus matching lightness and level of bookkeeping, leading to a fun experience.

43

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: December 17, 2012, 08:02:32 am »

One of the reasons that a game might not be fun enough to play, is when it just has too much bookkeeping for how meaningful the choices are. (Imagine something like the numerous resources of Puerto Rico or Agricola with the depth of Monopoly. Or imagine a DifficultDominion, with not only treasure and potion, but also wheat, wood, swords and ships as possible card costs. Or imagine a Dominion card whose effect changes each time you play that individual card (rather than e.g. pirate ship, where the number of successful PS plays are recorded)).

With the recent uprise of touch devices (iPad etc.) this could be alleviated - it's a computer, right! These things are really good at counting stuff!

Have you ever considered developing a game especially for this kind of devices? (either completely new, or adapting an old, rejected one)
Realizing that the above question only allows a boring yes/no answer, but not being successful at properly rephrasing it:
Why do you give that answer?

44

General Discussion / Re: theory really needs to stop with the terrible puns on his gmail.

« on: December 13, 2012, 09:43:55 am »

Here's one from a certain someone called A. Einstein, regarding neat/organized people who tend to annoy the crap out of chaotic people like me with their unrelenting complaints about the state of my desk:

If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, is an empty desk a sign?

----

And another good one, especially for theory, from a certain W. Churchill:

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

45

Dominion Isotropic / Re: Taking a Break

« on: November 28, 2012, 11:41:54 am »

Most striking thing about IKEA: Some of it actually is of decent quality; but that part of what they offer is not cheap! Their really cheap stuff is just that, cheap; you get what you pay for. (the quality/price is still quite favorable, but what do you expect for that small budget...)

I have all kinds of stuff from IKEA, a kitchen table with 4 chairs, a desk, a desk chair, some Expedits on the wall for books, several Pax closets... but all this stuff isn't even so much cheaper than what I could get in different stores. e.g. the Pax seems cheap - and then you add shelves, drawers, clothes hangers, doors, hinges, grips... and you end up at 70-80% of the price of the much more beautiful and sturdy garderobe closet I have in my bedroom. Still, those 20-30% was enough to convince me to buy Pax...

46

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Thought exercise: nerfs and buffs

« on: November 15, 2012, 08:33:19 am »

I think Pirate Ship is fine in 2p games (it's weak, but not completely useless, and if it were really strong we would be complaining that militia would be weak but it is annoying in 3p or 4p. For Ambassador, you are going to need a game plan for what to do once the ambassador(s) gradually start to lose their usefulness. For witch or any other curser as well, you need to figure out how to bank on your winning position, or how to respond to your losing position. But for Pirate Ship the endgameplan is built right into the card. I don't mind that you "have to buy" a card, but I don't think it is nice that the game sort of auto-plays after the purchase of the card.

As for thief, it would be nice if you could put some value in your hand. e.g. "you may put one of the trashed treasures in your hand." Although that might be too strong. Maybe put only the lowest cost stolen treasure in your hand.

Adventurer is so much fun to play, but so weak, that I would like a buff on that. At $5, I think it will be overpowered on a lot of boards, so definitely a buff. Any buff will probably do, +1 action would probably make it very strong (not necessarily a good thing); I'd prefer either +1 buy, or "pick 2 from 3 revealed treasures" which would make it useful much more often, in a support-card role. I like the pick-2-from-3 idea best.

47

General Discussion / Re: iOS / Android games

« on: November 15, 2012, 07:29:10 am »

I cannot recommend Hero Academy highly enough. It is easily my favorite iOS game and probably one of my favorite video games of all time. Rarely has a day gone by since its launch that I haven't played it.

The iOS version is free to download and comes with one team (of five, soon to be six). The Steam version is $5 and comes with two teams (including a team based on Team Fortress 2!) (yes, it's Valve-approved, that's how good this game is).

Hit me up in game (I'm stevezissou) and I'll show you the ropes.

I have downloaded it, and I am loving it! This really is a great game. If you like TBS and boardgames, you are likely to enjoy this a lot. I am playing under the username weni2009 (thanks for being nice in the chat, limpy aka. stevezissou), I am still figuring things out, but if you're looking for an opponent who is less than a complete stranger, invite me to a match! I will say beforehand that my time is quite limited (and I'm playing on a wifi-only ipad, so I have to be at home, not doing laundry, cleaning, cooking, eating, quality time with the wife, etc.), so I'll usually make just a few moves, and then take a day or so to make the next move, but that's the nice thing of asynchronous play!

Now I just have to decide which team purchase in order just to get rid of the mildly annoying ads...

48

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Translations

« on: November 06, 2012, 04:08:23 am »

A real blunder is the Dutch translation to "Remake", which is something like "Version 2.0". It should obviously have been translated with a verb.

Another huge blunder is Forge: translated as Vervalsen which is a verb that translates into forge, but in the sense of "making fake copies of something", like forging paintings, diamonds or ID's. While the art and card mechanic clearly suggest that Forge is meant as "melting furnace", so Smeltoven would have been better. I ran into Forge on Iso before IRL, and it befuddled me completely, I really had to think deeply about which card I was staring at...

49

General Discussion / Re: iOS / Android games

« on: November 06, 2012, 02:06:20 am »

I am really enjoying PunchQuest. It's free, and it is summarised pretty well in the title of the game. Fun enough to download and play, nothing to be too serious about.

In addition, Brainss is a nice variant for an RTS. You get to control zombies!

50

General Discussion / Re: "You think too much"

« on: November 01, 2012, 05:59:34 am »

CR stats on this are meaningless since people tend to play people at a similar level.

I'll bet if Marin or Obi or WW or Rabid or anyb of those in the top 30 played level 15s their win rate would be 80%+. In Colony games it would be 90%.

Ed

Good TTR players will beat you, or me, in these percentages as well. Regardless of initial ticket draws.
Bad initial ticket draws compare to 5/2 vs. 4/3 openings in a Dominion game with Witch: it is a definite disadvantage; and it will likely make you lose against a player of similar level, but nothing you can't overcome if you are clearly a better player.