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
1,321 rows sorted by Castle 1
This data as json, copyable, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: Castle 2, Castle 3, Castle 4, Castle 5
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? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
326 | 326 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 23 | 26 | 0 | 0 | Ignored 9&10 and chose the fewest castles past that to give me more than 28 points and weighed troops by value |
329 | 329 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 15 | 18 | 26 | 28 | 0 | 0 | Distributed my troops evenly through 4-8 which will give me 30 points each time banking on that I have more troop in those stations giving the other opponent 10-9-3-2-. |
334 | 334 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 22 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 31 | Before looking at the historical data, I settled on a 10-9-5-4 distribution, with individual soldiers heading to remaining castles so as not to completely cede any points. Once I looked at the last match, I saw that this had been a popular choice for the leaders, confirming its soundness. My draft distribution lost against those leaders, though, due to weakness in the 8-7-6 range. I also noticed that the bulk of forces were being sent against castle 9, producing uncertainty around the success of even a healthy amount of force there. To adjust, I reduced allocation to castle 9, redistributing those troops across castles 9-8-7-6, but left my highest concentrations at 10, 5, and 4. I ultimately ceded castle 1, because I assessed the value of an additional soldier to win a 4+ castle as higher than avoiding the 1 point loss (and most likely, the Battle for Castle One will be a quiet 0-0 match, yielding a free .5 point anyway). |
339 | 339 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 15 | |
342 | 342 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | This is my second entry. I created it as the counterpoint to my strategy (sort of) in the first. Here, I must win 3 of the 4 largest and then pick up 4 more points. |
343 | 343 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 23 | 0 | 30 | 27 | 0 | There's no way to win without at least four castles, so I focused on winning four and tried to optimize versus earlier distributions. |
344 | 344 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 14 | 15 | 5 | 5 | 35 | 10 | |
347 | 347 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 26 | 4 | 21 | 26 | 4 | This is the same strategy I used to defeat the Persian Army in the 5th Century. |
351 | 351 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 30 | 31 | 0 | 24 | I came up with about a dozen different strategies. Strategy A was an even distribution (10 per castle), B was weighted (2 for Castle 1 up to 18 for Castle 10); C was weighted to beat A-B, D could beat A-C, all the way until strategy O. After Strategy O, I couldn't make another distribution that could beat N plus the other ones I had already made. It's banking on chaos and people not wanting to overpay for Castle 10, thinking they can take Castles 6-9 for a little more points |
352 | 352 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 29 | 30 | 0 | Exact victory points, fewest required wins, avoid 10. |
353 | 353 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 20 | 22 | 3 | 24 | 28 | 0 | Resubmission of my last entry, which required me to put at least one on castle 1. Want to concentrate my efforts on reaching 28, the required score for winning the battle. The others are slight contingencies, in case someone else does the same thing. |
354 | 354 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 28 | 32 | 5 | 5 | Because I'm the Grandmaster. |
356 | 356 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 16 | 21 | 3 | 22 | 32 | 2 | 1 | Savviness and wordsmithographyophillia |
361 | 361 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 12 | 17 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 35 | 0 | I need 28 points to win, castle 1 and 2 have little value, I feel like people will value 10 and or 8 highly. 10 seems like a median number and something someone would throw at 3 or 4 so I went with 11 and 12. It's really a win all or lose scenario for me. Hopefully people spend resources out instead of concentrating. 10,9,8,1 seems like the most common strategy for people to really go after, I think I can overwhelm the 9 slot and forfeit the others while getting what I want |
362 | 362 | 0 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 14 | 14 | 0 | This won't work, but I am attempting to avoid over-optimisation by ignoring all previous data. Accept the loss of 1 and 10, and try to win on average against the rest, with a slight bias to higher value targets |
364 | 364 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | Nash Equilibrium |
367 | 367 | 0 | 11 | 12 | 0 | 16 | 18 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 36 | |
368 | 368 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 22 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 33 | 23 | I slightly modified Vince Vatter's distribution from Round 2. I'm very original. |
369 | 369 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 28 | 31 | Subscribe to the "Barely Win or Lose by a Lot" theory. |
371 | 371 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 2 | 2 | 31 | Try and get the 10 and then the 5-7 which weren't as heavily contested |
373 | 373 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 16 | 1 | 16 | 31 | 31 | To win. |
381 | 381 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 8 | 15 | 0 | 1 | 32 | 32 | 5 | I'm going for 2,4,5,8,&9 = 28 for the win... However... if someone is really going after 8 and 9 too, my 5 soldiers on 10 will hopefully be enough to carry the day. |
388 | 388 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 19 | 17 | 12 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 32 | Trying to win 10, 6, 5, 4, 3. Probably not a strategy to win the whole thing but should be good enough to be in top 50%. |
390 | 390 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 34 | |
391 | 391 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 19 | 22 | 31 | 0 | 1 | There are 55 points on offer. But you only need to win half plus 1 (.5 actually) My strategy was to secure the minimum points for victory by winning the 5 Castles. 8,7,6,5 and 2. Hopefully avoiding the high value castes will allow me to put more troops on lower values and win the war. Throwing 1 soldier to castle 10 in the event my opponent is thinking the same way. |
396 | 396 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 11 | Gut feeling, picking the less selected castles by either of the previous two rounds. |
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 |
406 | 406 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 28 | 28 | 1 | |
407 | 407 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 33 | 33 | 28 | I wanted to win 28 point by attacking as few castles as possible. By focusing as many troops as possible on castles 8, 9 and 10 and choosing a low value castle that people typically don’t commit many resources to, I hoped to win the majority of bouts. |
408 | 408 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 17 | 21 | 17 | 14 | 16 | 5 | 6 | I devised a strategy to beat all ten presented in previous iterations, then I added that strategy and devised the way to beat all ten plus that solution. I repeated several times adding improved solutions to my list to beat. |
411 | 411 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 1 | 0 | Dominant the middle/paint like in basketball |
417 | 417 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 20 | 21 | 35 | |
418 | 418 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 18 | 15 | |
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. |
424 | 424 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 17 | 20 | 17 | 14 | 16 | 6 | 7 | Beat previous submitted solution (plus all others considered...but with smaller margins on many others). |
429 | 429 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 17 | 10 | 6 | The lower numbers are obviously less valuable. 10 and 9 I armed moderately, so that they could take a small force, but I didn't want to waste forces that could be used on the medium-high numbers. Those are the meat, and if past trends prevail, 10 and 6 may very well be good enough to beat many people anyway (for 9 and 10) |
430 | 430 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 17 | 16 | 17 | 16 | 16 | |
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. |
438 | 438 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 23 | 25 | 2 | 29 | This strategy should beat proportional strategies and rotations of proportional strategies, and I think that these will be the most common type. This will probably lose to some similar strategies (very concentrated on a few highest numbers and some low numbers), but by betting 2 on some of the middle numbers we'll hopefully beat more similar strategies than we lose to. We'll get crushed by strategies that beat us on 10 and 9 and also win a lot of low numbers, but I think these strategies will be least common. |
444 | 444 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 10 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 32 | I assumed everyone would group-think back to the round before the last one (focusing on 7 and 8). Given that, I mostly copied the strategies of the last round , assuming that everyone else is "too smart" to try it. |
447 | 447 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 31 | 32 | 0 | I went for the less "psychologically significant" castles which would still give me a significant advantage. I sent 11 troops to 4 as an additional bonus in case someone is close to me in the upper ranges, or sweeps all the castles I didn't send any troops to - and since 11 just barely beats the simple strategy of sending 10 troops to each castle. I sent 26 to 7 because 26 is one more than 25 (another round number I expect people to use a lot), and similarly I sent 31 (rather than 30) to #8. Hope this works! |
448 | 448 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 18 | 3 | 26 | 26 | Focus on castles 5-6 and 9-10 |
457 | 457 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 13 | 16 | 8 | 14 | 14 | 17 | 14 | Took the average of the previous two winners and made a team that could beat that. |
458 | 458 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 50 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 seems like a good number. And I didn't want to send any lone soldiers off to die. I expect to win Castle 6 around 1/3 of the time, so hey, that's like 2 points. I'm feeling positive about it. |
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. |
461 | 461 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 18 | 21 | 0 | 22 | 36 | 2 | |
463 | 463 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 15 | 25 | 40 | More troops at higher point total castles. Abandon the smallest castles as they aren't worth winning. |
466 | 466 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 15 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 30 | Focused on towers where 2nd game average was 2 soldiers or less per point |
467 | 467 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 39 | I started with the averages and the winners from the last 2 rounds. Then I tried to craft a few strategies: a few random ones, some crafted to specifically beat the winners, some crafted to take advantage of historically undervalued spaces between winners and averages, - with some variations on how little/much to put on some of the lighter weighted castles. Then I sat down and went for a hyper aggressive strategy that had a single path to 28 points and would defeat all of the above hahaha. And so we end up here, with a warlord who styles him/herself also as an edgelord, and possibly did not do enough to account for beating strategies that were previously losing. |
469 | 469 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 21 | 38 | predictive to the human adjustment from round #2, I assumed flipped value on #9 and #10, otherwise assumed the meta deployment would be similar to before |
472 | 472 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 21 | 21 | 25 | Guarantee 10 and then assume no one else would expend more than 20 on any particular castle. Guarantee 9 and 8 on this rule and then spread the rest out descending. |
473 | 473 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 32 | 4-castle all-in no scouts. Relative value. My min allocation has to be > 10 to beat naive even split. My overpayment vs avg cost... I must win castle 9. The other castles I will overpay relative to my overpayment on castle 9. Castle 3 +7, castle 6 +11, castle 9 +18, castle 10 +14. You really have to beat my contested castles. Weakness is castle 3, but I’m at +7 and castle 6, +11. Beats all past winners. |
480 | 480 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 22 | 18 | Maximize points from ties |
482 | 482 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 8 | 15 | 18 | 22 | 24 | Looks good to me! |
484 | 484 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 1 | |
486 | 486 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 15 | 35 | 35 | Compared the strategy against a uniform deployment (10 / castle) and against the winner from second round. Tried to get at least 28 points against both strategies. |
487 | 487 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 35 | 15 | |
489 | 489 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 34 | 41 | 0 | The minimum number of castles needed is 3 which have to add up to 23. 6 is app. 25% of 23 so 25 soldiers 8 is app. 33% of 23 so 34 soldiers and the rest go to 9. |
490 | 490 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 5 | 28 | 30 | 2 | 2 | |
493 | 493 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 37 | 38 | 23 points are needed to ensure a win - Overwhelming top two castles can get to 19 and then I just need to pick up one more of the other castles to win. Splitting between two helps cover bases if I lose one of the 9/10 and also increases odds i get the one castle to push me over 23 if I win the top two. |
495 | 495 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 16 | 16 | 27 | 27 | 11 | Sacrifice the low scoring to just barely overload the mid-to-high tier castles |
496 | 496 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 20 | 17 | 15 | 3-4 points higher than previous average on higher point castles, at least 1 point per castle. |
506 | 506 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 22 | 22 | 6 | 27 | 2 | 6 | 6 | I chose to give up 1 and 2 completely, focus on 4,5, 7 while putting enough points into the rest to hopefully stall non advances. |
508 | 508 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 27 | 27 | 4 | 3 | 11% 1st 4, 55% middle 3, 1/3 top 3 |
512 | 512 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 32 | 32 | 27 | |
513 | 513 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 0 | rather take the sum of the middle numbers over the first and last |
517 | 517 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 0 | 0 | Only deploy to certain castles to win, hope to get lucky. |
518 | 518 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 16 | 22 | 0 | 1 | 32 | 24 | I am defending the most important places unlike Game of Thrones |
519 | 519 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 19 | 5 | 26 | 29 | 5 | |
523 | 523 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 25 | 30 | 0 | 0 | Play for the middle and push for the top but don’t over commit |
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. |
525 | 525 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 19 | 0 | 30 | 35 | 0 | I'm going all-in for getting the bare minimum points of 28 or more. The fewest castles I need is 4. 10-9-8-7 is an option but lots of people will go after castle 10, so I'm going after 5-6-8-9. Same number of castles, but I'm playing off the beaten path. Also, 5-6-8-9 are all castles that are in fewer winning combinations, so they're more likely to be won by me. The actual troop placements are based on the relative difficults I computed for winning those particular castles. |
534 | 534 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 18 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 31 | 27 | You need 28/55 points to win. Went big for the big castles since winning those two gets you within 9 points of victory. Then went for castles 4 and 5 since that gets me right to 28. No need to try and blow anyone out. Left token forces at castles 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 to capture them against opponents who did not attempt for them, while not wasting too many soldiers on the assumed large group who will try to rack up the middle-high values of 6-8. I know this is a strategy used before and there is also merit in avoiding the large castles, but I'm going with the all-in strategy on this one! |
539 | 539 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 23 | 23 | 22 | 21 | |
543 | 543 | 0 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 17 | 20 | 3 | 25 | 4 | I'm guessing 8, 10, and 1 will be the least cost effective castles, based on the previous wars, so I focused my troop deployment on the others. |
544 | 544 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 22 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 34 | Stakeout the middle and get the top one. Didn’t waste on other castles. |
546 | 546 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 40 | 23 points to win. Overload the highest rated castles and sacrifice everything else |
547 | 547 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 22 | 23 | 12 | 0 | I'll never tell. |
549 | 549 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 0 | 18 | 18 | Previously I had anticipated 10 to be the central battleground and abandoned it, the past two rounds the central battleground has ended up being 8 instead. I've abandoned contesting 8, focusing on the surrounding high number figures, and tapering off from there. 1 is also abandoned as low reward. |
550 | 550 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 17 | 0 | 33 | 35 | |
551 | 551 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 20 | 2 | 2 | 27 | 34 | Focusing resources where they could be useful, deliberately avoiding a couple of high-value targets to win the war |
554 | 554 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 20 | 22 | 26 | 4 | 4 | |
555 | 555 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 25 | 25 | 0 | 0 | Sacrifices must be made! Castles 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 10 are dead to me! Going hyper-aggressive (but not the most aggressive strategy). Best Case: I win! Worst Case: I am a troll! |
556 | 556 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | Win four of the top five castles, and you win. This particular troop distribution fights harder for the bigger prizes; would win against four of the five top strategies devised last time; and should be able to compete against anyone putting significant effort in winning lower tier castles, as people have been doing. |
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. |
561 | 561 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 22 | 22 | 30 | 0 | 0 | |
562 | 562 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 20 | 3 | 0 | 21 | 24 | 0 | 28 | Looked at the past distributions and estimated what it would take to win castles 10, 8, 7, and 4. Saved some leftover men for other random castles. But figured castle 9 wasn't worth it. |
563 | 563 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 21 | 0 | 26 | 36 | 0 | I think a lot of people will be fighting for #10 and #1 because 10 is worth the most points and #1 is the tiebreaker if you went 10,9,8,1 or 7,6,5,4,3,2,1. I considered going for 10,9,8, 2 to avoid fighting over the #1 and because I could win even with a tie on #2, and then realized I could avoid #10 as well. In summary, I'm avoiding fighting over what I expect to be hotly contested #10 and #1 in favor of #6 and #5 while maintaining the concentration of my troops by only needing to capture 4 castles to win. As far as specific troop distribution goes, I made sure I had at least three times the castle number and dumped a bunch extra on #9, which I think will receive a heavy designation from anyone pursuing a variant of the 10,9,8,1 strategy. I did not assign any troop numbers that end in 0 or 5, they are too popular. |
572 | 572 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 11 | 12 | 14 | 17 | 20 | Using a base-10 logarithmic scale to determine base troop deployment for each castle (base troop deployment = log(castle#) * 10). Deduct each base number of troops deployed at each castle from 10, and send those troops to each castle in reverse order. E.g. spare troops from #1 go to #10, spares from #2 to #9, and so on until spares from #10 go to #1. I end up not sending any to #1 because log(1) = 0 and log(10) = 1. |
575 | 575 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 14 | 14 | |
577 | 577 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 16 | 20 | 25 | Based on a fibonacci series with rounding to the nearest integer. |
580 | 580 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | Instead of spreading out my troops, I wanted to backend my troops toward the castles with higher amount of individual points. |
586 | 586 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 29 | 29 | 0 | Let me try this again because I did my math wrong. Sacrifices must be made! Castles 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 10 are dead to me. |
587 | 587 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 23 | 26 | 30 | 1 | Grasp barely enough castles to win, plus one in 10 as a counter strategy against a mirror match. |
588 | 588 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 13 | 15 | 20 | 32 | The smallest 3 castles combine for only 6 points, so they're not worth deploying to, especially since that increases the available troops you can commit to the more valuable targets. |
589 | 589 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 17 | 13 | beat the average for both original Feb. and May soldiers per castle for all of the most valuable castles - punt on the low point battles. |
597 | 597 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 15 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 24 | 26 | Basically a half-baked revision of the winner of the last time (trying not to duplicate exactly or respond too directly) |
599 | 599 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 21 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 32 | 22 | I created a giant spreadsheet that I filled with placements from the previous rounds (with winners on the list twice because they rock). Then I built formulas to calculate my win percentage against them and played with my placements. After lots of testing, I chose a modified Vince Vatter (Round 2 champ who) that performed slightly worse that his Round 2 victory in my experiments. I did this because I figured people would note that leaving 0 or 1 soldier in a castle was a bad move and would start leaving 2 or 3. Basically, I did some math then took a guess as to how the masses would behave. My goal is over 80% victory! |
604 | 604 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 25 | 24 | 27 | 0 | You only have to win by a little. |
606 | 606 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 25 | 0 | 0 | Focus more troops on enough points to get more than half of points. |
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 );