Riddler - Solutions to Castles Puzzle: castle-solutions-3.csv
Data license: CC Attribution 4.0 License · Data source: fivethirtyeight/data on GitHub · About: simonw/fivethirtyeight-datasette
213 rows where Castle 2 = 2
This data as json, copyable, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: Castle 1, Castle 3, Castle 4, Castle 5, Castle 6
Link | rowid ▼ | Castle 1 | Castle 2 | Castle 3 | Castle 4 | Castle 5 | Castle 6 | Castle 7 | Castle 8 | Castle 9 | Castle 10 | Why did you choose your troop deployment? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 18 | 2 | 28 | 36 | 2 | DONT KNOW |
4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 28 | Fairly evenly spread out, with an emphasis on the point-heavy castles. |
6 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 16 | 16 | 17 | 6 | 6 | I focused on getting the extreme castles (1,2,3,4,9,10) while hoping to steal one of the middle castles (5,6,7,8) |
12 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 20 | 21 | 33 | 7 | 7 | |
22 | 22 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 10 | 15 | 17 | 19 | 23 | 3 | I tried to look for a mix between the successful armies in 1 and 2. I targeted 4-9 because they total more than half the points, and dropping 1-2 of these castles wouldn't stop my victory. |
23 | 23 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 14 | 2 | 16 | 2 | 4 | 32 | 23 | Intuition. |
42 | 42 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 14 | 9 | 8 | 21 | 26 | Send the troops where the most points are. |
44 | 44 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 2 | Becuase I'm smart, in my head. |
48 | 48 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 17 | 16 | 16 | 4 | 16 | I foresee a lot of fighting over Castle 9. Thus, I focused on 7,8, and 10 to hopefully get a fair number of victories there. |
55 | 55 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 32 | 32 | 33 | The top 3 castles score 27 points in total, almost 50% of the point total. Assuming I can win all 3 and pick up a single unguarded low point castle, i will prevail. |
60 | 60 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 11 | 16 | 10 | 30 | 5 | 8 | 7 | Based on last year's deployments I observed that very few soldiers were deployed to the 9 and 10 castles so I send a force to that could take both of those. I sent a token force to the 1 and 2 castle as they are not worth that much. For the remainder I tried to get above last year's average except for castle 8 which I can afford to lose if I take either 9 or 10. However I may just be fighting the last war and be destroyed. |
67 | 67 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 22 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 0 | 35 | Because this is what my future self told me to pick. |
70 | 70 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 11 | 15 | 3 | 3 | 27 | 31 | 2 | First round won by 7/8 strategy. Second round won by 9/10 strategy. Went with 8/9 strategy. |
76 | 76 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 16 | 20 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 31 | 18 | Random! |
78 | 78 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 2 | 2 | I felt that it would be useless to deploy them evenly. Putting at least 2 in every spot meant that if some else puts 1 or 0, i'll win. I figured others are most likely to go after 9 and 10, so i didn't really bother with them. The remainder were split evenly. |
80 | 80 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 14 | 16 | 17 | 16 | 16 | It slightly beat something that slightly beat May's average. |
91 | 91 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 15 | 30 | 33 | 2 | 2 | Get to as close to 28 without wasting troops |
92 | 92 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 5 | 5 | the plan is to win castles 5,6,7,8 and then hopefully pick up one more somewhere else. |
96 | 96 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 13 | 14 | 16 | 21 | 2 | Ignore castle 10 as large amount of pepople will try to send huge numbers of troops to take it, send at least 2 troops to every castle. |
100 | 100 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 14 | 2 | 16 | 19 | 4 | 31 | The winners of last round went after the castles that were under-targeted the first time around (9 and 10) while ignoring the castles that were over-targeted (7 and 8) and slightly bidding up on the castles that were 2nd most important (4 and 5). That leaves castle 6 as being the most likely attacked castle, so I'm ignoring it. From there, I expect 4 and 5 to start getting ignored with 1 through 3, so there's an opportunity to get those for cheap. If I get those, win 10 and win either 8 or 7 that puts me above the 28-point win level. |
110 | 110 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 16 | 16 | 26 | 16 | 5 | 4 | It seemed to me that the chance of winning castles 9-10 is relatively low, since many warlords will send more troops there. I focused more strength on the mid-range, castles 5-8. chose mostly uneven numbers (rather than rounding at 5, etc) in hopes of beating warlords who divided by 5s or 10s. And I sent at least some troops to every castle, since this guarantees a win against a warlord who sends 0 to any of them-- making that number greater than 1 for each castle, since many players will send a minimal force to those castles. |
124 | 124 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 25 | 30 | 2 | Maximize the troops that could take 28 points, and the others are 2 to cleanup places where my opponent sent only 1. |
126 | 126 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 11 | 2 | 22 | 44 | 2 | I was looking for four castles that would add up to 28 points, the minimum required to win. I found I could not do this without castle 9. I chose to leave out castle 7 because 5 and 6 should be easier to get. I sent token forces to 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 10 to force my opponent to keep those covered. That left me 88 troops. I sent half of those to castle 9, which I assumed would be contested heavily. Half of what was left was sent to castle 8. The remaining troops were split between 5 and 6. |
127 | 127 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 14 | 15 | 17 | 19 | Added up all the VPs to be had (55) took 100 and divided it by 55 (1.8). This is how many soldiers each VP is worth. I then multiplied the castle number by 1.8, rounded and skewed it towards the high end a bit for people who employed the same strategy. |
132 | 132 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 12 | 2 | 5 | 28 | 32 | 10 | |
143 | 143 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 11 | 12 | 18 | 18 | 18 | |
147 | 147 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 39 | to score 28 points 90% of the time |
148 | 148 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 7 | 27 | 27 | 2 | 10 | 14 | Paired scouts to 1/2/3 - not worth more troops, but good to snipe or deny a 1-troop snipe. Common practice in last games has been to focus on 4 castles, with a small number spread to others. This strategy is designed to narrowly defeat any small force at any castle, while focusing on castles 6 & 7 (usually ignored, but form a good base to combine with other towers) and increasing numbers of troops to castles 9 & 10. Castle 8 is almost ignored, anticipating others will focus efforts there. |
153 | 153 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 13 | 16 | 1 | 7 | 16 | 33 | 5 | I looked at the distributions of the two previous wars and picked out some forts that have a potential to be left unguarded and put a couple more troops in there, while approximately splitting the difference between the two sets of winners, hoping that others might have the same approach, allowing myself to have a couple more in those key forts mentioned above. |
156 | 156 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 17 | 15 | 13 | Designed a strategy that would beat both the average strategies from the last 2 battle royales, without winning any castle with a high excess of troops. |
180 | 180 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 9 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 36 | trying to win the higher castles without leaving any empty and pick off the 10 on each strategy |
186 | 186 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 18 | 18 | 24 | 18 | We know nothing. |
188 | 188 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 10 | 28 | 12 | 30 | 2 | Somewhat randomly. Generally speaking, either try to win or don't. Not a lot of in between. |
189 | 189 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 55 | Tried to guarantee 10 and get what I could with the rest |
196 | 196 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 14 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 10 | 2 | devalued the highest due to probability someone would pick those, and the lowest due to lower value. Centralized in the middle, hoping to win the majority of 4-8. Put at least 2 in all categories so if any are using a similar strategy but "giving up" certain castles I will win those, and used 2 instead of one to try and outsmart any with the same strategy using 1 soldier. |
197 | 197 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 13 | 3 | 32 | 31 | 3 | Assume many will either go for 7/8 or 9/10, and those that do will weight heavier on the higher of the 2, so trying to split the difference and win one of each pair. 3s to try to pick up a few where people put 1 or 2, then using the majority of the rest to try for 5/6, which outweigh 1-4 combined. |
221 | 221 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 30 | 30 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 13 | |
225 | 225 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 16 | 9 | 4 | 17 | 36 | 4 | Chose a deployment that defeats all previous top 5 deployments. |
228 | 228 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 11 | 12 | 28 | 29 | 1 | Have at least 1 at every castle, aim for capturing castles 6 - 9, much higher value than the lower value counts, and hopefully less contested than castle 10 |
231 | 231 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 12 | 18 | 16 | 30 | 8 | 5 | 4 | I need 28 points of castles to win. I started by thinking I would sacrifice 8, 9, and 10 because IF I could win the rest, I'd hit my 28. Recognizing that putting more troops in the remaining high value castles left the low valued castles relatively weak I decided to further reduce the troop deployment at the low end to slightly increase deployment in the 8pt castle. This is an interesting game because I need to decide which bucket of castles I want to commit to while leaving a token force at the rest. There's a subtle rock paper scissors element to this this game but with an extra depth of how sharp are your scissors, how heavy the rock, and how thick the paper. I'd like to know how viewing past battle strategies of winners affects this outcome. If the previous results weren't published, would this third round have a distribution of troops similar to the first round? |
234 | 234 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 20 | True percentages, rounded down and subtracted 1 for less valuable castles 2-5, and rounded up and added 1 for more valuable castles 6-10 |
242 | 242 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 31 | 36 | 6 | 4 | Trying to capture the sweet spot of being 1 more than multiples of 5, or just 1 or 2. I bet this game play very differently with prime numbers of troops and castles, that are not easy to divide. |
248 | 248 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | balanced chance for the higher scoring castles, and can still get points for those who neglect the lower scoring castles |
250 | 250 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 28 | 28 | 28 | I'm punting 7 towers. Looking over past results, I'm choosing towers that were punted most often - I put enough into lower towers in case someone went on a one tower strategy. |
251 | 251 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 12 | 22 | 31 | 2 | Wag |
261 | 261 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 18 | 18 | 26 | 26 | 2 | Avoid 10 as the most likely to be contested. Put 2 as a mininum to beat anyone just throwing 1's in. Focusing on 6, 7, 8 & 9 as together they defeat 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 10. |
268 | 268 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 17 | 19 | I want this to be fun, not work, so I avoided any serious algorithm and went with my gut. Seems like you should send at least 1 to every castle, and given the linearly-increasing value of each castle, it makes sense to send numbers that follow that pattern. THEN YOU GET TRICKY and spice it up with a few extras taken from the lower valued castles and given to the mid-range castles, because I figure there's other lazy nerds like me who'll do the same thing as I did in paragraph 1, and I WANT TO BEAT THEM AND HEAR THE LAMENTATIONS OF THEIR ADVISORS. Thus, castles 6-8 got one extra soldier, who will provide The Edge To VICTORYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!! |
278 | 278 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 12 | 16 | 7 | 14 | 14 | 17 | 13 | For each castle, I took the average from the top 5 winners from the past two versions of this and rounded to the nearest integer. That total came to 102, so I used my judgement to bring 2 numbers down by 1. Because those two rounds differ greatly in winning strategy, this strategy is probably just bad against everything. |
281 | 281 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 23 | 8 | 2 | 21 | 28 | 2 | Ensure I will win against all 0 deployments and try to dominate 9, 8 and 5. |
288 | 288 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 14 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 33 | I picked a strategy similar to the previous champion, but modified to be able to beat the previous champion. |
290 | 290 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 0 | Sacrificed Castle 10 in hopes of winning slightly-lesser castles |
291 | 291 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 20 | 21 | 5 | I will probably lose 5 & 10 (15 points) and win 6, 7, 8, & 9 (30 points) against most value-based opponents. I left castle 10 with enough resources to hopefully win that castle against similar counter-value-based strategies. |
292 | 292 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 10 | Essentially, splitting the difference between the first two rounds by having even numbers across castles 6-9, a fair number on 10, and token troops on 1-5. |
295 | 295 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 22 | 5 | 5 | Looked at the two previous, split the difference, was too lazy to tweak deployments. |
299 | 299 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 21 | 26 | 32 | 1 | My strategy is to invest heavily in castles 7-9 to get to 24 and then try to secure the other 4 points by divesting my remaining points and hope to capture enough. |
322 | 322 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 21 | 21 | 2 | 21 | 21 | I couldn't put a 0 in some of the columns (the webpage rules wouldn't allow me). So knowing that, I put heavy focus on winning 4/5 top levels and put slightly more than minimum on the lower ones (hoping to pickup a couple scraps). |
336 | 336 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 15 | 16 | 4 | 26 | 18 | 4 | I punted on Castle 10 assuming that a large number of people would simply deploy troops largely in direct proportion to the number of points, but still put more that 0-2 in the hopes of catching some that decided to punt entirely. I grouped the bulk of my troops around the 5-9 castles as I assume most would do, but hope to have just a few more quite often. To do this, I picked another one to punt on (Castle 7) guessing that that is a sweet spot in terms of points I can lose and where I think others will load up. My strategy is going to require me to win almost all the castles to which I committed significant troops (which is somewhat risky—but I think really the only way to go) or to steal a lot from the castles I committed few (but not zero) troops to. That seems like an unlikely path to victory but a decent hedge against someone that stacks all of their troops on Castles 7-10. I am quite worried about a 25-25-25-25 or a 27–26-24-23 deployment, so I decided to put 26 in Castle 8 which should give me a victory over all of those. Also a little worried about those deployments along with 1 troop at other castles, so decided to go with 2s mostly on the punts. |
344 | 344 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 14 | 15 | 5 | 5 | 35 | 10 | |
348 | 348 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 32 | 32 | Win 10, 9, 6, 3 = 28 pts = win. few troops to others just in case. |
365 | 365 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 30 | Felt like it. |
370 | 370 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 12 | 0 | 30 | 32 | 14 | I wasn't really going for castle 10, but thought I would beat some people. I really wanted to pick up castle 8 and 9, so I put a lot of troops there. I thought I would pick up some easy points by not putting "0" in the early castles. I though people would waste a lot of troops on castle 5, based on last time, so I didn't put a lot there. |
374 | 374 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 2 | Giving up the highest value castle to counter people putting a lot of chips on it. Instead securing the next 3 (9, 8, 7). Trying to put enough soldiers on the other ones to counter the strategy of one guy per castle if they spent too much on higher castles. Arggh gonna lose. |
375 | 375 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 27 | 6 | 1 | I tried to adapt to the changes from the previous wars. I believe castle 10 will be the most hotly contested, so I only want to gather the table scraps there. I think castles 5-8 will be the most important to win this time. |
379 | 379 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 13 | 20 | 7 | 27 | 13 | i liked the numbers |
383 | 383 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 12 | 31 | 35 | 5 | I earn enough victory points from castles 6, 7, 8 and 9 so I focused on them. I put at least an army in each castle to prevent free wins. I only sent a few armies to castle 10 because I felt others would devout a lot of troops there. I didn't want to waste mine in a large battle there but I put some in case others have my same strategy of avoiding a large battle at castle 10. I also put a great deal in castles 8 and 9. I wanted to nearly guarantee victories at those castles. |
397 | 397 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 18 | 21 | 22 | 1 | 1 | I focused on winning the midtier castles while still sending a few troops to others in case they completely abandon them. |
399 | 399 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 8 | 8 | 28 | 33 | 1 | 1 | 1. In order to win one only needs to get 28 points. 2. Most players will send most of their troops to the top two or three castles, with minor amounts sent to castles at the bottom end of the scale. Most players will probably ignore castles 5 and 6. 3. Occupying castles 4-8 will win the game for a player. 4. Player should make only a minor attempt to capture castles 9 and 10, and should throw the lion's share of their forces against castles 7 and 8. They should also send a small force to each of the low scoring castles, as insurance in case of failure. 5. Player should send at least one soldier to each castle, just in case the enemy ignores them. 6. Player should send two or three soldiers to castles 1-3, to prevent a single enemy spy from capturing them. |
404 | 404 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 16 | 3 | 19 | 3 | 0 | 33 | 24 | Did not overthink it.. the strategy likely relies too heavily on taking castle #10 with a modest deployment |
409 | 409 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 16 | 23 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 23 | 20 | |
413 | 413 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 12 | 16 | 21 | 24 | 4 | 4 | I added up to 100... i guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
418 | 418 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 18 | 15 | |
419 | 419 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 2 | 2 | 31 | 31 | Bc 2 > 1 and 10+9+6+3=28 |
423 | 423 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 35 | 32 | Try to obtain 9 and 10 over all others, and for those who can beat me in one or both; punish them by taking other castles they hopefully skimp on. |
435 | 435 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 22 | 25 | 28 | 1 | 1 | Stating the obvious first- there are 55 possible points, meaning you need 28 points to guarantee a victory. I feel like Castles 9 and 10 are overrated since Castle 10 is worth the same as Castles 8+2, 7+3, etc. My strategy was to win castles 5, 6, 7 and 8 for a total of 26 points. If accomplished, I only need to win ONE castle out of castles 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10 to guarantee a victory. I dedicated the vast majority of my soldiers (94) to get castles 5-8 while the rest only got 1 or 2 soldiers each. I actually put 2 soldiers on Castle 2 since it has the lowest value, I feel like putting a 2 there gives me the best chance of getting it. Putting 1 soldier each at 9 and 10 may seem silly but I still may get points against some other similar strategies. Even winning half of those castle 9 or 10 points would put me over the top. Anyway I have an English degree so the pressure is on you, math people! I wish you good fortune in the wars to come. |
436 | 436 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 31 | 27 | Win the big castles, grab a couple other points somewhere. |
440 | 440 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 15 | 18 | 2 | 12 | 3 | 35 | Based on the last couple of series I tried to take advantage of what people were conceding without overspending. The most valued castles (9&7) I largely abandoned in favor of 10, 8 and 6. If I win those three and a couple low point castles I can secure a win. |
452 | 452 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | |
453 | 453 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 2 | 2 | 30 | Basic bell-curve distribution, with a good amount on 10 to potentially tie at best with someone who puts a lot at 10. |
459 | 459 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 2 | 2 | 34 | 34 | Never send just 1 so that you win vs any solo scouts, focus on 9 and 10 to try and insure 19 out of 28 required points, aim for over average on 3 and 6 to try and secure the 8 additional points needed for a win while hoping that victories over singles allow for any shortfall, sacrifice the 1 pt castle as winning it fails to make up for a split anywhere else that will determine the game. |
462 | 462 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 25 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 35 | |
464 | 464 | 2 | 2 | 26 | 13 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 5 | 8 | I rearranged a previous winner's deployment and prayed. |
465 | 465 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 11 | 15 | 26 | 27 | 3 | 3 | Looks a bit better based on the data from the last two. |
485 | 485 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 14 | 23 | 36 | I used the Fibonnaci sequence to provide a ratio of importance to each castle, starting with 0,1,1,2,3 etc. But I had 12 soldiers left over so i just added one to each castle except castles 9 and 10 where i added two soldiers. |
492 | 492 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 16 | 25 | 3 | 33 | 3 | I decided to leave Castle #10 essentially undefended, and instead focused on some of the less-worthy castles, especially #9 and #7, to get a "winning coalition" of six castles with around 30 points. |
494 | 494 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 2 | 2 | 31 | 33 | tried to invest in 4 castles that I felt relatively sure of winning and conceded the rest. High risk appetite! |
497 | 497 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 25 | 30 | 26 | Several troops on each in case someone puts down 0, and tried to have more than 1 since I suspect others will put 1 at each (at least). Thought 10 is a place where people would have very low or high, so I went medium to beat the lows but not waste too much. Trying to really capture 8, 9, and the misses to add up to 23 (winning number) |
499 | 499 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 2 | The first 4 are so low value I'm giving them away, and the last one will be so hotly contested it's not worth fighting for. I put two there in case people put 1 - it's basically to take freebies while not costing anything substantial. I wanted to push all my chips in for the upper mid range ones. I went 21 for those as I think people might cap themselves at round numbers (20) for them, so it'd give me a slight edge. |
503 | 503 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 2 | 30 | 36 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 6 | Trying to beat more people so i assumed that people either put a lot of soldiers in the higher castles or none at all(1-5 soldiers "just in case") |
514 | 514 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 14 | 12 | 30 | 25 | Winging it. |
524 | 524 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 6 | 19 | 25 | 0 | 32 | Way I figure it, the goal's to get 28 points. Minimum number of castles you can get that with is four. Best way to go about it is to abandon a couple of them completely so you can withdraw troops to ones that help the overall plan, while still targeting another lightly in the event that you lose an opening. Ergo, this. |
526 | 526 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 22 | 2 | 22 | 22 | 22 | 2 | 2 | go for 28 points exactly, figure everyone is sending at least 1 soldier to each castle, so i sent 2 |
535 | 535 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 22 | 6 | 27 | 31 | 4 | 4 | Looked to see where the past winners had shifted their troops from game 1 to game 2. Identified 5, 7, & 8 as places to pick up points while also noticing that Castle 6 is under attacked by 7/10 past winners. My hope is that those who only send a very token force to 9 & 10 (2 or 3 seem the most common) will lose to my 4 troops, while not costing me very much on the 3 main ones I focused on. |
554 | 554 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 20 | 22 | 26 | 4 | 4 | |
559 | 559 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 34 | Top strategies in round 2 were all-in on 4 specific numbers, particularly 9+10 and a 9-sum pair (4/5, 3/6, 2/7, 1/8). Looking to break that by stealing 10 then getting 3 out of 5-9 range. Loses to top strategies of round 1 (more balanced emphasis on 5-9 range), hopefully the 'meta' doesn't drift back. |
560 | 560 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 8 | 10 | 8 | 23 | Moneyball style. The goal is to buy points, and our goal is 28 points (more than half of 55). I divided 100 soldiers by 28 points and determined that the "right" value of a point is about 3.5 soldiers. I then determined the "right" value of each castle. I made a list of all the possible castle combinations to get to 28, and did some math to determine the inefficiencies between "right" values and "actual" values of the castles in prior exercises (for instance, Castle 10 was worth about 33 soldiers, but averaged 11.5 soldiers). Then I picked one combo that did not emphasize the most emphasized castles in the prior exercises (8,7,9). Then I averaged the "right" value for that combination against the average value placed on each castle in the previous two exercises, and went with that. I checked it against the averages and winners of the last one and felt comfortable to submit. |
567 | 567 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 19 | 11 | 24 | 17 | 3 | 12 | I chose it for the win! |
568 | 568 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 3 | 2 | 33 | 33 | To maximize winnings. |
571 | 571 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 21 | 31 | 11 | 16 | I think a major underlooked part of the strategy is that many people will default to round numbers. Going one over the natural human instinct for round numbers should have a high return all over the board. Additionally, the previous two winning strategies had low numbers on the high-value castles, presumably because competition is fierce up there. But eventually enough people will switch resources away from those castles to make them profitable conquests again. I'm hoping third time's the charm! |
574 | 574 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 2 | 18 | 22 | 33 | 1 | 1 | I expect that there will be even more of a focus on number 10 this time, so I'm going to ignore that one. My plan is to get to 28 without winning either 9 or 10. |
584 | 584 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 9 | 11 | 15 | 22 | 20 | 3 | 10 | Trying to beat the last two averages from the riddles before |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited
CREATE TABLE "riddler-castles/castle-solutions-3" ( "Castle 1" INTEGER, "Castle 2" INTEGER, "Castle 3" INTEGER, "Castle 4" INTEGER, "Castle 5" INTEGER, "Castle 6" INTEGER, "Castle 7" INTEGER, "Castle 8" INTEGER, "Castle 9" INTEGER, "Castle 10" INTEGER, "Why did you choose your troop deployment?" TEXT );