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
264 rows where Castle 2 = 0
This data as json, copyable, CSV (advanced)
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? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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. |
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. |
610 | 610 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33 | 33 | 33 | Try to ensure victory at the top 3 values, which are greater than the sum of the rest |
615 | 615 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 21 | 16 | 22 | 4 | 21 | Rd2 winners saw 2 trends v. 1: Entrants mimicked 1 and therefore 2 winners were differented from 1 winners in placement and throw-away towers were defended with 3-4 v. 1-2 solders to win. I picked a strategy that is different from 1-2 and increases throw-away defense slightly. |
621 | 621 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 32 | Fight for the top two, plus the center |
629 | 629 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 21 | 29 | 22 | 11 | 4 | Created a slightly skewed normal distribution centered on 7 then mapped 100 soldiers across that distribution! |
632 | 632 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 8 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 25 | 26 | |
634 | 634 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 30 | 35 | 28 points is a win, so that's all I'm going for. The Castle 1 victory is essential! |
641 | 641 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 15 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 20 | 25 | 0 | I abandoned the first and last castles as not worth fighting over and focused on castles a little before and after the center that other teams might neglect. |
648 | 648 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | All of the troops at the first castle higher than 5 |
662 | 662 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 32 | 42 | 0 | I only need to win 3 castles, assuming people focus on 10, I decided to ignore it an focus on the next three and then power creep 9 and 8 in case people had the same idea as I did. |
665 | 665 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 18 | 21 | 18 | 9 | Zeroed out castle 1 and 2 since 3 points is small potatoes. Created a constraint that castle 3-10 had to be at least (Round One Median +1). Created 12 opponents, 5 winners from round 1, 5 winners from round 2, 2 opponents of my making. Used excel solver to maximize number of wins out of 12. Essentially creating an optimal solution to beat all 10 named winners with the additional requirement that each castle above castle 2 should be above the median and therefore more than 50% likely to be captured by me in any given game |
667 | 667 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 0 | 22 | 28 | 31 | 0 | 0 | Strongly attacked with the most likely castles to reach 28. |
668 | 668 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 0 | 28 | 0 | |
669 | 669 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 11 | 21 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 23 | Just kinda throwing some troops like the US Govt throws money at the army |
672 | 672 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 23 | 2 | 29 | All-in on 3,7,8,10 |
673 | 673 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 11 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 27 | 31 | I tried to place heavier in the 9 and 10 spot to guarantee more points and let the 1 and 2 spots go, as they provide minimal points. I also sacrificed a chicken to Jobu. |
680 | 680 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 23 | 3 | 3 | 33 | 23 | I used k-medoid clustering to find median strategies that represent the most common strategies, then found an allocation of soldiers that beat the 8 most common strategies. I then used that as an initial input to Robbie Ostrow's simulated annealing code from Part 2, which spat out the above. |
681 | 681 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 33 | Choose just a few castles and maximize the chances of winning those. |
686 | 686 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 21 | 3 | 24 | 2 | 24 | This strategy wins at least 24 points against an average opponent, and has the opportunity to take at least 4 points from castles that must be left largely unguarded. If an opponent takes 6, 8, or 10, then they likely used too many troops to adequately cover the mid-tier castles. |
687 | 687 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 21 | 3 | 24 | 2 | 24 | This strategy wins at least 24 points against an average opponent, and has the opportunity to take at least 4 points from castles that must be left largely unguarded. If an opponent takes 6, 8, or 10, then they likely used too many troops to adequately cover the mid-tier castles. |
689 | 689 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 22 | |
691 | 691 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 24 | 20 | 18 | Assume strategies converge to a Poisson distribution around the lastest averages, and optimise. |
713 | 713 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 25 | 40 | |
714 | 714 | 4 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 40 | Focus on getting required 28 points to win by targeting top tiers to make up bulk of points, and a few lower tier castles to add in just enough points. |
728 | 728 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 22 | 25 | 27 | |
729 | 729 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 17 | 19 | 20 | 0 | I guessed that an distribution proportionate to point values will rarely win the 10 and will waste trips on the low-value castles, so I dropped the 10 and the bottom too and then loosely distributed them proportionally from there fight estimating as I wrote on some construction paper with a crayon. |
737 | 737 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 15 | 18 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 23 | Random ass guessing |
739 | 739 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 18 | 2 | 24 | 3 | 22 | 3 | 27 | go for 4 castles that add up to just over half of points: 10, 8, 6 & 4. put some troops for most other castles in case i get wiped out on my targets by someone who sends few or no troops elsewhere. go all in on castles 6 & 4 (4 & 4.5 troops per point) with less investment in castles 10 & 8 (2.7 & 2.5 troops per point). send 0.33-0.43 troops per point to castles 3, 5, 7 & 9. this troop alignment happens to beat the top 10 previous finishers (5 from first round & 5 from second round). the main weakness of this strategy is if someone sends a ton of troops to castles 10, 9, 8 & 7 however not many players seem to take that strategy. the other weakness is an odd-numbered-focused strategy where the opponent sends a ton of troops to castle 10 or 8, plus a moderate number of troops to castles 9, 7, 5, 3, 2 and/or 1. |
745 | 745 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 32 | 34 | My plan hinges on capturing the most valuable castles, 8, 9 and 10, as well as capitalizing - hopefully - on a perceived deficiency in the lowest value castle, 1. The total value of 55 divided by 2 gets 27.5, so the magic number is 28. 10, 9, and 8 would get me to 27 already, so capturing 1 alone would put me over the top. If I lose any battle I've committed to, I lose. If I tie any battle I've committed to, I lose (other than 1, in which I'd tie). Hopefully all works out. |
748 | 748 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 12 | 24 | 24 | 0 | 24 | |
759 | 759 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 31 | 24 | Magic |
760 | 760 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 13 | 27 | 32 | 18 | 4 | I am modifying a model of a weighted bell curve, giving least priority to castles that have the least effective in point value, but also avoiding major battles for the top castles, which are relatively equivalent in value. Also trying to beat people who tend to round off or beat people who round, though that might be overthinking it. |
768 | 768 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 12 | 16 | 0 | 33 | 34 | 3 | Trying to win 9, 8, 6, and 5, and hoping I can steal some of the others. |
769 | 769 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 21 | 2 | 25 | 3 | 29 | 3 | |
772 | 772 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 23 | 16 | 13 | 17 | 23 | Inverted bell curve for the top castles, leaving ineffective castles empty. |
773 | 773 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 9 | 14 | 21 | 21 | 30 | 0 | Ill sacrifice the extremes and try to take the bulk of the points in the middle |
776 | 776 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 17 | 1 | 21 | 10 | 33 | |
777 | 777 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 30 | 30 | 28 is a win, so concentrate where you need to win, and win! |
780 | 780 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 18 | 35 | 5 | |
783 | 783 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 2 | 14 | 5 | 16 | 3 | 36 | -Try to lock up 10 -While everyone else is going for 28, go for 29. It guarantees you a couple towers you want, and hopefully if they went all in on 8, 6, or 4, hopefully you can pick up the number beneath it and you still hit 28 |
787 | 787 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 20 | 0 | 40 | 25 | 0 | Choose four castles whose total point value is 28. Go all out for them. |
791 | 791 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 35 | 35 | A gross misunderstanding of all logic |
798 | 798 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 30 | 30 | A deliberate overkill strategy, designed to get exactly 28 points. If my guess is right then people will back down a bit on the bids on the higher, and still ignore the lower values. In this strategy you have to take the top 3, so the 1 value castle is the best hope to steal a final strategy. It just seemed like an interesting idea. |
801 | 801 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 21 | 24 | 33 | 0 | Avoided overcommit on 10. Attempted to stack 9 and upper middle. |
804 | 804 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 0 | 20 | just felt intuitively good |
806 | 806 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 33 | 33 | 34 | Go big or go home |
811 | 811 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 33 | 33 | 30 | Just need 28 points to win. Figure I can almost always win 1 point with a small number on 1. Then maximize my focus on 8, 9, and 10. |
818 | 818 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 34 | 34 | I don't want to lose any large castle by a narrow margin, as this would be a significant waste of troops. If I win a large castle narrowly, this is the best scenario, but an overwhelming loss is also acceptable (since it will cost my opponent many troops to achieve this, and therefore give me numerical superiority elsewhere). It's like the electoral college! In the previous rounds, players deployed troop amounts on the large castles that were either very small or very large. My strategy depends on my expectation that this pattern will repeat itself. I chose all of my troop placements with this in mind, determined not to lose any large castle narrowly against either of those strategies. I invested heavily into castles 9 and 10, expecting to win their points almost every time. If I win one or both of them narrowly, then this is a significant boon to my efficiency. If I win them overwhelmingly, this is not as good, but for 19 points I'm willing to take the risk. I expect to defeat most players who conduct a predictable attack on one or both of these castles. If I lose either of these castles after such a large investment then I probably lose the match. I expect to do well in castles 3, 6, 7, and 8. I'm vulnerable to opponents who attack three or more of these simultaneously with medium-sized forces while conceding castles 9 and 10, as some top finishers did in the first round, but it's a risk I'm willing to take. Any two of these mid-range castles, plus the 19 points above will give me the 28 points necessary for the win. Castles 4 and 5 seem to have been highly overvalued in the earlier rounds, so I did not contest them at all. I am hoping to take an overwhelming loss here against opponents who try this again. If I lose them narrowly, that's unfortunate, but it won't matter too much. My path to 28 points is fairly difficult to block even without them. |
822 | 822 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 30 | 2 | 30 | 2 | 34 | 0 | 0 | Three eyed raven told me |
823 | 823 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 25 | 35 | Just a hunch I had based on previous editions |
825 | 825 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 23 | 27 | 31 | 0 | All focused on the fewest castles needed to win, avoiding the highest and lowest valued. |
830 | 830 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 1 | 21 | 2 | 23 | 3 | 37 | Felt right :) |
834 | 834 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 28 to 27 |
836 | 836 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 35 | 30 | No modelling, just a ten second guess on what others would do on average. (It's a no stakes game.) 28 is needed to win. 10 + 9 + 8 + 1 suffices. Naturally you'd expect them to be hotly contested, but this is well above the average content of those castles so let's let the last two round's data suggest it is worth a go attacking them. So let's sacrifice losing to players that take alternative strategies to see if this wins enough rounds against common submissions. And taking a complete guess that the peak of the contest will move from castle 8 to castle 9. |
838 | 838 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 18 | 30 | 35 | 0 | |
839 | 839 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 17 | 19 | 21 | 0 | 1 and 2 are low-value; 10 will be too heavily contested |
840 | 840 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 40 | 29 | 55 points to win, this is a race to 28. The quickest way to that is winning 9 & 10 and then then figuring how best to win one big-ish castle and win/split a small-ish (but not smallest) one. I focused on 7 because I thought the battle would be bigger for 8, and then 3 to win or split. That takes me to at least 27.5 with the hope that one of the other towers breaks my way (particularly the 1 point as a win or split). |
844 | 844 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 18 | 19 | 21 | 30 | 3 | 1 | Try to have a large enough force where opponents would not expect it. |
848 | 848 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 21 | 21 | 22 | 3 | 4 | 26 | Trying a 4-castle deployment, as it's just easier to rely on. Throwing a few around in the larger unattended castles in order to protect against other 4-castle deployments. This mostly beats the recent winners and isn't the obvious 10-8-7-6 that stomps the last round. I could be in trouble if people really try to jump on 10, though. |
850 | 850 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 30 | 39 | 0 | Highest % troops outside Castle 10 |
852 | 852 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 40 | I wanted to deploy high numbers of troops to the highest value castles to get as close to victory at the beginning as possible. From there, it only takes 6 more points to win the game, so I put all my remaining troops in Castle 6 to have the best chance of taking the points needed to win. |
862 | 862 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 26 | 28 | 0 | Maximizing distribution to minimum number of castles needed to win, while avoiding expense of castle 10. |
872 | 872 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 12 | 25 | 50 | Keep cutting my troops in half starting from top to bottom |
873 | 873 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 31 | 36 | Protect the bag |
875 | 875 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 23 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 34 | 24 | Beat the top player from last time then designed a strategy to beat that then designed a strategy to beat that |
889 | 889 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 22 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33 | 21 | |
890 | 890 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 25 | 50 | Forces concentrated on minimum four castles to win |
893 | 893 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 1 | 1 | 41 | The most direct method of achieving a majority while (hopefully) limiting exposure to defeat by fielding more men along my prescribed victory path than does the opposition. No backup plan, no reserves. When in doubt, attack. |
894 | 894 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 22 | 22 | 33 | 0 | 5 | Give up 5 castles expecting to split points on some of them. Maybe get a cheeky 10 against similar strategies. |
896 | 896 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 23 | 0 | 27 | 31 | 0 | Go all-in on 4 castles that give just enough points to win (28), ceding the other 27 points’ worth. Stack a few more troops on the high value castles just because. |
898 | 898 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 21 | 14 | 3 | 33 | 4 | 22 | I ran a monte carlo with all the previous troop deployments, plus a bunch of variations on the previous successful strategy, and it popped out this trimodal distribution. Basically, I optimized a trimodal distribution to beat optimized bimodal deployments. |
899 | 899 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 11 | 21 | 21 | 22 | 22 | Nothing complicated - just based on past winners and seems like an even mix across the top castles may work. |
910 | 910 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 10 | 17 | 28 | 32 | 5 | The additional deployment scheme was won with emphasis on castles 7 and 8 .. and in the reprise (second) simulation, the winning submission emphasized Castle #9 and #10. By putting 0 soldiers in Castle #1, 2 and 3, I am going to concentrate my forces in Castles #6 - #9 with just putting enough soldiers in Castle #10 to avoid giving it away cheaply. In addition, I am putting 4 soldiers each in Castles #4 and #5 as a way to score a few "cheap" points against people who concentrate almost exclusively in Castles #6 - 10. |
917 | 917 | 23 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 24 | 24 | I placed at least 1 troop to every castle except for 2. I assume that my enemy sends at least 1 troop to every castle and therefore will give me the best chance to win 3. Next I assume the point of the game is to get 28 as there a total of 55 points. By dividing up all other amounts amongst the quickest way to make 28, (10+9+8+1) I have given myself the best chance to win those numbers. |
925 | 925 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 0 | Why not? |
926 | 926 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 21 | 24 | Started proportionally and then let go of the lesser castles |
927 | 927 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 3 | 3 | 33 | 24 | Used a genetic algorithm (the same as last competition) to explore distributions that would be good against the second round distributions and the first and second round distributions combined. Then used the same algorithm to optimize against *those* and the first and second round distributions simultaneously. |
938 | 938 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 30 | 20 | 10 | Just giving away the low point castles and loading up on the 8 and 9 but hoping to eke some wins out of the 10 and 7 |
945 | 945 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 2 | 2 | 31 | Castles 8 and 9 received a lot of attention in the previous two iterations, respectively, because of various assumptions about the other players. We’ll see if this will work, but 10/7/6/5 are enough to win, and I’m gambling on any deployment that beats one of those splitting other castles with me. |
946 | 946 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 18 | 28 | 32 | Top Heavy |
947 | 947 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 29 | 1 | 1 | 55 | winning #10 cancels out the first 4 if lost. then 567 > 89 so put more there. |
951 | 951 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 17 | 16 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 33 | |
952 | 952 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 30 | 50 | Seemed smart |
964 | 964 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 15 | 18 | 22 | 0 | 26 | 0 | It looked about right. |
966 | 966 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 31 | 31 | 0 | No point putting a small number of soldiers in a castle as you get no points for a loss. 9+8+7+4=28 is just over half the maximum (55). I think a bunch of people will go all in on 10, 9, 8, 1 with a 30,30,30,10 spread and this will beat that. Similarly, this beats a 25-25-25-25 spread on 10,9,8,7 and the 10 on all castles approach. Finally by ignoring castle 10, we also beat the strategies that put alot on castle 10 and spread a little to everything else which I think might be common. |
967 | 967 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 12 | 18 | 26 | 32 | 3 | 3 | |
973 | 973 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 15 | 20 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 30 | God told me. |
978 | 978 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 15 | 17 | 17 | 18 | 18 | Because in the last battle the most successful warlords targeted the middle and top numbered castles with an overwhelming number of troops, I wanted to spread my points more evenly across castles with a value of five or higher (because even if you conquer the lower castles you still lose). This general strategy might be susceptible to players who cluster their soldiers at the top, but I am hoping to split the difference and more evenly spread my troops in the hope that when the smoke clears I can - to paraphrase Varys from Game of Thrones - be king of the ashes. |
981 | 981 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 25 | 0 | |
982 | 982 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 11 | 5 | 34 | 28 to win. Win 10. Win any 3 of 5-8. |
991 | 991 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 34 | I only need 28 points to win and castles 9&10 seemed undervalued by the average player. I’ve gone all in on four castles. |
1002 | 1002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 18 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 35 | 11 | |
1004 | 1004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 0 | sacrificed top and bottom |
1006 | 1006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Want to overwhelm the squishy undervalued middle with enough troops to fend off anyone who doesn't just flood one of the two castles. Pin the rest on luck and the fog of war. |
1010 | 1010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | |
1011 | 1011 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 21 | 25 | 30 | 4 | Figured this setup would get me the 28+ points I need against most other folks' deployments. |
1014 | 1014 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 15 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 34 | 20 | I assumed that most people would choose a strategy from one of the top performers from the last time we ran this competition. I started my “strategy bank” with the top three performers from last time. Then, my process was to move a single soldier from one castle to another for each strategy, store this as a new strategy in the “strategy bank”, play each strategy against the others, and keep the top 2% performing strategies as the seed for the next generation of strategies. I coded this in Matlab. After 5 generations, the top strategy I got was [0 0 2 14 15 5 5 5 34 20]. |
1015 | 1015 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 18 | 27 | 3 | 4 | 27 | Hold strong on 10+7+6+5. If I don't win one of these distribute enough to hopefully get lucky on one or two other castles. This strategy has better than 75% win percentage against previous rounds and beats 8 of the 10 top 5 competitors in the previous two battles. |
1016 | 1016 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 31 | 9 | 9 | 40 | Noticing that in both prior rounds people have hammered the middle numbers or the top numbers, but not both, I wanted an allocation that would win outright at one of those values (31 on 7, 40 on 10) while also winning whichever of 8 or 9 opponents leave under-defended, and winning enough lower-hanging points to get to magic number 28. |
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 );