Print

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

[popsofctown]

Depending on how you define depth, chess is not as deep as Dominion.

I know several people who believe Go to be a deeper game because chess is so much more easily conquered by AI

[Kirian]

Depending on how you define depth, chess is not as deep as Dominion.

I know several people who believe Go to be a deeper game because chess is so much more easily conquered by AI

Relevant:



That said, I agree that Dominion is a deeper game than Innovation, partially because of the available cards, and partially because of the (usually) smaller decision tree in Innovation.

[popsofctown]

Well, the trick in the comic that make it funny is, the last category should be "games where humans will NEVER beat computers", and those are the games with the least depth.

[Kuildeous]

I love how the games seemingly become more complex but then ramps up to Snakes and Ladders. I guess they could have also listed War or Candyland, but Snakes and Ladders is probably more universally recognized (though I've not heard of Ghost).

And just you wait. There will be a computer that can win at Seven Minutes of Heaven. That will mark the end of our civilization as the need for human contact becomes obsolete.

Edit: Though, apparently, Ghost is far more global of a phenomenon than I realize. I'm not really sure how I never learned of the game.

And according to Wikipedia, the game was even in "The Long Walk," which I've read twice. I apparently have a blind spot for Ghost.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Ghosts are traditionally hard to see.

[Ozle]

I love how the games seemingly become more complex but then ramps up to Snakes and Ladders. I guess they could have also listed War or Candyland, but Snakes and Ladders is probably more universally recognized (though I've not heard of Ghost).

And just you wait. There will be a computer that can win at Seven Minutes of Heaven. That will mark the end of our civilization as the need for human contact becomes obsolete.

Edit: Though, apparently, Ghost is far more global of a phenomenon than I realize. I'm not really sure how I never learned of the game.

And according to Wikipedia, the game was even in "The Long Walk," which I've read twice. I apparently have a blind spot for Ghost.

I've never heard of it either

[shraeye]

Ghosts are traditionally hard to see.

ZING!!

[eHalcyon]

Mao is a great game.

[Drab Emordnilap]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

[Kirian]

Well, the trick in the comic that make it funny is, the last category should be "games where humans will NEVER beat computers", and those are the games with the least depth.

You think Mao and Calvinball don't have great depth?  (OK, Chutes and Ladders not so much.)

[popsofctown]

Well, the trick in the comic that make it funny is, the last category should be "games where humans will NEVER beat computers", and those are the games with the least depth.

You think Mao and Calvinball don't have great depth?  (OK, Chutes and Ladders not so much.)

I didn't know what Mao was, I assumed it was like Chutes and Ladders.  Computers should crack Mao rather easily, actually.  The computer could make a rule with encryption complexity.  It'd be a stalemate for a human at best.

Calvinball, is of course, an exception Kirian.  On a forum with posters with the general level of intelligence as we have here, it should go without saying as an understood idea that Calvinball is the deepest game in the history of man, and the deepest game we will see for a minimum of a hundred thousand more years.

As follows our expectations, even a five year old human can crush the world's best supercomputer at Calvinball without effort.

[werothegreat]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

[Kirian]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

Certainly.  Zendo fills its inductive reasoning design space quite well and is better designed.  If you want random stuff, go play Fluxx.  Mao, along with Alien Letters, Crossed/Uncrossed, etc, are really just hazing rituals.

[Ozle]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

If you want random stuff, go play Fluxx.

Please, never suggest anyone ever goes to play Fluxx, for whatever reason!
*shudders*

[Tables]

There's nothing wrong with Flux.

It's a light, quick game, easy to play with new players, and there's some strategy involved (testing shows that playing cards at random only wins about 30% of the time against someone that's actually trying!)

[Kirian]

There's nothing wrong with Flux.

It's a light, quick game, easy to play...

Except no.  I've seen games of Fluxx last five minutes; I've seen games of Fluxx last an hour.  The randomness of the cards makes it possible for the game to become nearly interminable, assuming people are playing to win.  Sure, it's simple, but simple doesn't equate with good.  At least "We Didn't Playtest This At All" tells you right on the cover that it's ridiculously unbalanced and random.

In terms of game design, I think it's about the worst thing Andy Looney ever designed.  In terms of pure profit... well, I won't fault him for putting out seventeen different versions if people keep buying them.

[Drab Emordnilap]

and there's some strategy involved (testing shows that playing cards at random only wins about 30% of the time against someone that's actually trying!)

In what other game is it possible to win 30% of the time playing completely randomly against someone who's trying? I'm pretty sure you can't even win Tic-Tac-Toe 30% of the time playing randomly.

[Tables]

Clearly sarcasm doesn't go down well on the internet...

Although it is definitely a good light filler. I've never seen games last more than about 20 minutes, and most games I've seen tend to be about 4-6 player. It's not a game to bring out when you have heavy gamers around, but it's a bit of fun as long as you don't take it too seriously.

[Thisisnotasmile]

and there's some strategy involved (testing shows that playing cards at random only wins about 30% of the time against someone that's actually trying!)

In what other game is it possible to win 30% of the time playing completely randomly against someone who's trying? I'm pretty sure you can't even win Tic-Tac-Toe 30% of the time playing randomly.

It's not possible to win more than 0% of the time against someone trying to win at tic-tac-toe... whether you're playing randomly or trying to win yourself.

[eHalcyon]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

Certainly.  Zendo fills its inductive reasoning design space quite well and is better designed.  If you want random stuff, go play Fluxx.  Mao, along with Alien Letters, Crossed/Uncrossed, etc, are really just hazing rituals.

The point of Mao is not to frustrate new players.  At least not the way my friends and I play it.  Confusing newbies is funny, but the real game begins when everyone knows what's up.

[Drab Emordnilap]

It's not possible to win more than 0% of the time against someone trying to win at tic-tac-toe... whether you're playing randomly or trying to win yourself.

You're correct, of course. The comparison I had in my head was "You can't achieve the best outcome playing randomly 30% of the time", and in Tic-Tac-Toc, the best (achievable against a competent opponent) outcome is a draw. So really I should have said "You couldn't achieve a LOSS rate of better than 70% playing randomly".

[werothegreat]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

Certainly.  Zendo fills its inductive reasoning design space quite well and is better designed.  If you want random stuff, go play Fluxx.  Mao, along with Alien Letters, Crossed/Uncrossed, etc, are really just hazing rituals.

The point of Mao is not to frustrate new players.  At least not the way my friends and I play it.  Confusing newbies is funny, but the real game begins when everyone knows what's up.

Or I'll just play Egyptian Rat Screw. 

[Thisisnotasmile]

Mao is a great game.

This post broke a rule. Try again.

Mao needs to die in a fire.  When the entire point of a game is to frustrate new players, it has no right to exist.

Certainly.  Zendo fills its inductive reasoning design space quite well and is better designed.  If you want random stuff, go play Fluxx.  Mao, along with Alien Letters, Crossed/Uncrossed, etc, are really just hazing rituals.

The point of Mao is not to frustrate new players.  At least not the way my friends and I play it.  Confusing newbies is funny, but the real game begins when everyone knows what's up.

So why not just tell people the rules so you can get to the "real game" quicker?

[eHalcyon]

So why not just tell people the rules so you can get to the "real game" quicker?

It depends on the group of people.  We're almost at that point.  When I was first taught the game, my friends would look at me until I played a card and then penalize me.  I toughed it out until I caught on.  But we've found that most newbies aren't as stubborn as we are and give up too soon without encouragement.  We're much more lenient with them now, and will generally try to be helpful while still keeping silent.

[ftl]

Fluxx scales really badly. I've played a lot of 2p fluxx with my girlfriend to pass the time when we don't feel like playing a serious game, and it's fun, mostly random. But when you get above 4-player, it can really slow to a crawl, with keeper limits, hand limits, steal a keeper, trash a keeper, etc making it so nobody has any winning goals and you cycle through the whole deck with no progress.