Data license: CC Attribution 4.0 License · Data source: fivethirtyeight/data on GitHub
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: Castle 1, Castle 2, Castle 3
| 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? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29 | 29 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 21.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 35.0 | Castles 1-3 and 6-8 were the most ignored by the top 5 warlords in the last round. 4-5 and 9-10 were most popular. I figured if I can almost guarantee getting 10 by placing 35 soldiers, ignore 9 where most others will send a significant amount, capture 7-8 which look to be ignored by most, and capture 1-3 which will be ignored for low point value, I could total 31 points which is more than enough to win a majority of the battles. Maybe a simpleminded strategy but this is based purely off the results of the last round and it could be an obvious one. |
| 60 | 60 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 14 | 18 | 22.0 | 28.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Ignore the top ones, focus on minimum needed for majority of points |
| 76 | 76 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 22 | 10.0 | 12.0 | 13.0 | 0.0 | 35.0 | Because this is what my future self told me to pick. |
| 91 | 91 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | overcome 6 |
| 110 | 110 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 14 | 18 | 24.0 | 33.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Assuming more valuable castles will be more contested, negating their points advantage. 28 points wins, so it only makes sense to contest castles worth that many total. I took 1-7 (28 total pts), with troop allocations focused on the hotly contested 5,6,7 castles. I'm hoping to 'pay' for those by taking 1,2,3 cheaply. |
| 141 | 141 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 99.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | You need to get points, and probably the only way to do that is to win a house outright. I am guessing that someone will do 100 for 10 and 9, so guessing 8 will be the one where people don't apply 100. |
| 147 | 147 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 15 | 0 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 173 | 173 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 15.0 | 18.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 28.0 | The Name of this game should be 55. Why? Well for a similar reason why your website is called 538. 55 is the number of total points a player could win in this game, but 28 is the number of points a player needs to win, like 270 in an election. If a player can get to 28 points then he automatically wins. (Said player can win with less if there are ties). Instead of viewing the board as 55 points I can win, I view it as 28 points I need to win. That being said, each point is worth 3.57 of my soldiers (100/28). I am making an assumption, that most people will undervalue lower point tiers. Putting 3, 5, and 7 soldiers on tiers 1, 2, and 3 respectively, 15% of my soldiers, but gains 21% of the points needed. A major victory for my army. 4 and 5 are tricky. They are needed to win if you go the 10,9,5,4 strategy (last season's winners did). But they were overcommitted to those areas. Being wary of losing them due to people overcommitting on them, I left them at 2. Every soldier needs someone to guard his back. Pick up the easy win vs those who bid 0 or 1, but don't lose out on those playing the 10,9,5,4 strategy. Probably a minor loss for my army. 6,7,8 are much easier. They deserve 21, 25, and 28 soldiers respectively (using 3.57x *point value). But they are also VERY underappreciated by both past winners, and the average submission. Capitalizing on this, I can gain these points by using a decent amount of soldiers, but near the amount they deserve. Another major victory for my army. I can count on wins by using only 15, 18, and 20. This leaves me with 9 and 10. And 28 troops. If history tells us anything, its that people like castle 9 more than they like castle 10. This is an either or situation, you won't win both unless you overcommit. I place all 28 in castle 10. |
| 205 | 205 | 21 | 18 | 15 | 12 | 12 | 10.0 | 9.0 | 6.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I made three simplifying assumptions about my opponents' strategies: first, they want to hold as few castles as possible to get over the victory threshold; second, they understand that it is a waste to have more than the threshold of victory points needed; third, they ascribe the same strategic value to each of those castles, as their strategy fails without any one of them. This means that my average opponent will aim to hold four castles, worth 28 victory points and will deploy 25 troops to each. There are (by my very quick, admittedly) count, 9 unique strategic combinations of four castles that get to the victory threshold. I assume that my opponents are indifferent about which one they choose and arrive at whichever one they wish to play randomly. I use the frequency with which a castle worth a given number of victory points appears in one of the 9 unique four-castle strategies to generate the probability that my average opponent, within my simplifying assumptions, would place troops at that castle, and subsequently, how many soldiers (on average) I expect to be stationed at that castle. I would then simply distribute my 100 soldiers so I had marginally more at each castle than my opponent. Noting the inherent risk of this strategy (every battle should be a draw if my opponents play as I do, or as I expect them to give or take a trembling hand or two), I (rather randomly) decide that the castles worth 1 or 2 victory points are of low strategic value, given how infrequently they are included in 4-castle strategy and redistribute the six troops I would have placed there in the purer form of my strategy to the castles worth 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 and 5 VPs. Hooah! |
| 216 | 216 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12.0 | 12.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | Maximising castle wins |
| 232 | 232 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 20 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 238 | 238 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 14 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Just give up on the biggest ones, probably a waste |
| 259 | 259 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 15 | 8.0 | 18.0 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 25.0 | Mean of previous winners, then equalization of ROI on all but Castle 9 because I don't like the location of that property . |
| 266 | 266 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 15.0 | 23.0 | 35.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Idk, could work |
| 283 | 283 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 30.0 | You must win at least 28 points. Since the given strategy seems to be to avoid large commitments on 10, and attack 4,5, and 9, I chose to deploy my troops to 10, 8, 7, and 6 in large numbers, concentrating the rest on 3 to offset losing 1 and two. Its a high risk strategy, because losing just one of the higher values will result in a loss. |
| 341 | 341 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 10 | 20 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I targeted 6 castles that would get me 28 points. If I go 6/6 on those ones that I bet big on then I win (doesn’t really feel like a good strategy, but I wanted to see how it would play out) |
| 351 | 351 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 10.0 | 1.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 60.0 | Must win 28 points |
| 364 | 364 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 15 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Willing to concede three castles with most points in hopes of winning all others (28 of 55 possible points). Assigning most soldiers to those with most points among the group that I was aiming to win. |
| 366 | 366 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 17 | 20.0 | 23.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Ignored 9&10 and chose the fewest castles past that to give me more than 28 points and weighed troops by value |
| 369 | 369 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 15 | 18.0 | 26.0 | 28.0 | 0.0 | 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-. |
| 375 | 375 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 14.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I figure the bulk will put their points in to the top 4 if i can win everything else i should be good to go |
| 387 | 387 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 12 | 21 | 26.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I did the math and discovered that 28 points is the magic number. 8, 9, 10 get you 27, and 1-7 get you 28. So, I punted on 8,9,10, expecting most people to stock up on those and give them a free victory there while they use the majority of their troops. Meanwhile, I'll be happy to take all the smaller castles because 28>27. I debated going for 8,9,10 and 1 to take 28 points, or even 2,3,4,6,7,8 to make 28, but figured my first thought would win more often than the other two, which would be harder to distribute troops since 8 would take so many to guarantee the victory. |
| 393 | 393 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 11 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 31.0 | 0.0 | 24.0 | 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 |
| 432 | 432 | 1 | 0 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 23.0 | 0.0 | 34.0 | |
| 436 | 436 | 1 | 0 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 23.0 | 0.0 | 34.0 | |
| 438 | 438 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 19.0 | 22.0 | 31.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 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. |
| 442 | 442 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 15 | 20 | 20.0 | 28.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Seed the top scoring castles and focus heavy on winning the middle ones. The castles worth few pointe I assumed few people would go for |
| 444 | 444 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 21.0 | 21.0 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 11.0 | Gut feeling, picking the less selected castles by either of the previous two rounds. |
| 448 | 448 | 8 | 12 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 14.0 | 0.0 | 27.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I hope to allow my opponent to take the top two and the 7th castle while preserving those forces to have enough to counter what I expect to be a smaller amount dedicated to castles 1-6 and 8, thereby getting a majority of points and castles. |
| 498 | 498 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 60.0 | Many players won't choose lower point castles, so it could be potentially easy to get several low-point castles and gain as many points as the largest castle. |
| 511 | 511 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 50.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 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. |
| 545 | 545 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I assume most opponents would direct the greatest resources to the biggest castles, possibly also directing more substantial ones towards those in the middle of the bracket (5 and 6). While I will lose 9 and 10, opponent investments there should enable me to hold 6 ,7 and 8, which would give me a 2-point advantage at the top range. By dedicating some resources lower I think I'm more likely to gain and hold 1-4 even if I lose 5. (I think 7 soldiers are more likely to win 4 than 5, and if I take some of the lower castles I don't care anyway.) |
| 558 | 558 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 13 | 20.0 | 24.0 | 28.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I figured most people would choose increasing sequences, which means a lower numbers on 1-8 and more on 9 and 10. So if I put all my solders on 1-8 and beat them, maybe I'd have a better chance! :) |
| 573 | 573 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Only deploy to certain castles to win, hope to get lucky. |
| 580 | 580 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 | 15.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Play for the middle and push for the top but don’t over commit |
| 581 | 581 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 6.0 | 19.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 32.0 | 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. |
| 590 | 590 | 4 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 18 | 22.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Get 28pts by focusing on the less valuable castles |
| 602 | 602 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 22.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 34.0 | Stakeout the middle and get the top one. Didn’t waste on other castles. |
| 614 | 614 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 25 | 0.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 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! |
| 617 | 617 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 34.0 | Try to win 1,2,3,4,8,10 to get to 28 |
| 619 | 619 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 14 | 15.0 | 17.0 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 21.0 | 28 is the magic number. My positioning at the top is designed to get value from a variety of opponents. Main winning method: 8,7,6,5,2 |
| 621 | 621 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 22.0 | 22.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 622 | 622 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 20 | 3 | 0.0 | 21.0 | 24.0 | 0.0 | 28.0 | 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. |
| 630 | 630 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 0.0 | 23.0 | 36.0 | 0.0 | 31.0 | I think people are going for 9. Trynna lock down 8 and 10 and hope 7&3 are strong enough. |
| 647 | 647 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 14.0 | 17.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 13.0 | surrender castle 9 completely -- exceed the average of BOTH original and May average per castle strategies for every other battle. |
| 668 | 668 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Focus more troops on enough points to get more than half of points. |
| 669 | 669 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 14 | 1 | 0.0 | 16.0 | 16.0 | 0.0 | 35.0 | |
| 679 | 679 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 22.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I figured you need 28 points to win and winning 1-7 will get you there exactly. That means you can reallocate all your points from 8-10 to 1-7 and stand a good chance of winning. Other people might do that too though, so I did some other stuff on a whim to mix it up. |
| 699 | 699 | 4 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 17 | 22.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Distributed proportionally-ish on the buckets (hopefully) most likely to get to 28 |
| 716 | 716 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | All of the troops at the first castle higher than 5 |
| 717 | 717 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 20 | 23 | 13.0 | 4.0 | 7.0 | 0.0 | 24.0 | Counter Strategy |
| 739 | 739 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 11 | 0 | 22.0 | 28.0 | 31.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Strongly attacked with the most likely castles to reach 28. |
| 743 | 743 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 11 | 21 | 18.0 | 18.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 23.0 | Just kinda throwing some troops like the US Govt throws money at the army |
| 753 | 753 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 10.0 | As I expect many to choose low troop numbers for the top castles, I deploy many soldiers there in order to hopefully take those three. After that, only one point is needed to win, so I chose to attack castle 10 in hopes that it is the least guarded. This appears to be a reasonable strategy based on the previous distribution. |
| 754 | 754 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 15 | 18 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 31.0 | I dunno, I tried to win all the battles I picked. My strategy does well against last time's winners and beats the average distribution, I guess. |
| 763 | 763 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 15 | 17.0 | 26.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | |
| 795 | 795 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 12 | 17 | 22.0 | 31.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Focus on the front 7, which adds up to 28, which gives you one more than your opponent, who takes 7,8,9 (total 27) |
| 801 | 801 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | There are 55 points up for grabs. To win, I would need 28 or more. I disregard castles 8, 9, and 10. That loses me 27 points. However, I deploy the remaining soldiers in the following manner - 1. Castles 6 and 7 get 25 soldiers each. Assuming that the opponent has committed most soldiers to castles 8, 9, and 10, I should be able to gain these two castles. 2. For the remaining castles, I will assign 10 soldiers each. The hope is that the opponent over-commits on the higher value castles while undervaluing the remaining castles. By flipping that thinking on its head, I hope to undermine the opponent's strategy. |
| 817 | 817 | 0 | 2p | 0 | 0 | 20 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Try to get to 28 in a way that average person wouldn't do. |
| 821 | 821 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 13 | 14 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I think people will underinvest in low value castles, and invest more on high value castles than the middle range ones. So my hope is to win one through five relatively cheaply, while having a decent chance of winning 6 and 7. |
| 828 | 828 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 32.0 | 0.0 | 35.0 | Goal is to take castles 1, 3, 6, 8, 10 for a winning 28 points. Single points in castles 2, 4, 5 are to tie with other people who put a single point in their castles or win against people who put 0 points in there castles. On a weighted percentage any opponent who puts more into castle 10, 8 or 6 is drastically overvaluing these castles (since you need half the points to tie any castle with more than double its weighted percentage is overvalued) and may beat me but will not be beating the majority of other opponents. I slightly undervalued castle 10 and castle 6, because I anticipate heavy investment in castles 8 and 9. Concerns are a skew to castle 3 in response to round 2 and that naive strategies (say 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 20 20 40) that are more top heavy are prevalent enough in the 538 reader base that I cannot win castles 10, 8, 6, and 3 consistently. Interestingly enough an even distribution of (10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10) beats my distribution and the top 5 distributions from round 2. I assume however that most of the 538 reader base will not submit such a simplistic submission. My distribution beats the top 5 from round 2, but loses to the 3 of the top 5 from round 1. I do not anticipate to win round 3, but am anticipating many readers will play similar strategies. |
| 829 | 829 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 12.0 | 24.0 | 24.0 | 0.0 | 24.0 | |
| 855 | 855 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 19.0 | 26.0 | 41.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Avoid wasted troops at high value targets and low v; win on aggregate over sim. |
| 873 | 873 | 0 | 5 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 19.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 24.0 | My brother worked on this, and I think he was on the right track. But he failed to account for how many will just use variations of the plans that won last time. I used a set of info Thomas made from your last two warlord games and made a strategy that works almost as well, but specifically targets the winners of the previous two games. My goal here is to have just one or two more soldiers than my enemy in the areas I'm fighting, and abandon the places where my enemy puts the most soldiers. |
| 890 | 890 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 20.0 | just felt intuitively good |
| 911 | 911 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 30 | 2 | 30.0 | 2.0 | 34.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Three eyed raven told me |
| 964 | 964 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | trying for a plausible counter-intuitive plan |
| 971 | 971 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 21.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 979 | 979 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 35.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I didn't try for 9 or 10 and went for 5-8. |
| 990 | 990 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 22.0 | 22.0 | 33.0 | 0.0 | 5.0 | Give up 5 castles expecting to split points on some of them. Maybe get a cheeky 10 against similar strategies. |
| 1002 | 1002 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 5 | 4.0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 40.0 | I've done these things before, and I know that people stack the second-highest value. I decided to go a more conservative approach and split a lot of things, stacking on those where less soldiers would be and retreat where others would stack. |
| 1011 | 1011 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 14 | 15.0 | 16.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I went for 28 out of 55 points by selecting the lowest values that add to 28. |
| 1012 | 1012 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 18 | 22.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I aimed to win 28 points (minimum for a simple majority out of 55), and targeted the lowest value castles to reach a 28-point total while avoiding committing troops to the high-value targets. My goal was to pay just over 3 troops per point. |
| 1015 | 1015 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 23.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Trumpian Electoral college: ignore NY and CA, go for TX, PA, FL |
| 1019 | 1019 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 14 | 21.0 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I expect most people to put most of their troops in the higher numbered castles, so my strategy is to win the lowest 7. |
| 1020 | 1020 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 11 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | castle 9 and 10 would be the most valuable so should get the largest number of troops assigned to them by the other overlords so fighting over them would be the most pointless allocation of troops since you're most likely to lose there. castles 1-3 are of limited value so while they could safely be ignored you could steal one of them with minimal troop numbers. combining those 5 castles gives you 25 points which won't be enough to win. castles 6-8 are the most valuable as far as being high enough to want to take but not so high that you would risk sending all your troops to, so 20-30% of your forces should be enough to win those three, especially castle 8 as you've conceded 9 and 10 already so you have to win castle 8 . castles 4 and 5 are the risky ones as losing either one means you lose, but again aren't valuable enough for large troop dispositions. however in the event of the enemy dividing his troops evenly among all 10 castles I need to commit more than 10 troops to ensure victory. doing things this way should give me a 30-25 victory |
| 1024 | 1024 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 12 | 16 | 18.0 | 20.0 | 22.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 1025 | 1025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 20 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Why not? |
| 1056 | 1056 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 17 | 16.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 33.0 | |
| 1066 | 1066 | 4 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 15 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 35.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Since I figured most would go for the large numbered castles, I decided not to contest those, instead choosing to go with a more conservative strategy in which I compiled that lower numbers to form a small majority. |
| 1070 | 1070 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 15 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Slightly higher than the average for each castle from the last two games. Ignored castles 9 and 10. Adds up to 36 maximum points, well enough to win. Even if losing castles 7 and 8, can still win. |
| 1082 | 1082 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 17 | 11 | 13.0 | 16.0 | 18.0 | 0.0 | 17.0 | Counter positions of most successful players from last time, while exceeding averages. |
| 1094 | 1094 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 11 | 13 | 16.0 | 0.0 | 51.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Because you need to get to 28 to win so maximum chance of getting to 28 |
| 1096 | 1096 | 10 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Total of 55 points. Need 28 to Win. |
| 1098 | 1098 | 20 | 10 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 15.0 | 22.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | It is a race to 28 points. Chosen locations least likely to be fought for. |
| 1103 | 1103 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 19.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Aim to get just 28 points |
| 1112 | 1112 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40.0 | 60.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 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. |
| 1114 | 1114 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 15 | 18.0 | 21.0 | 22.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 1119 | 1119 | 0 | 8 | 10 | 0 | 4 | 23.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 29.0 | Winning castles 2, 3, 6, 7, and 10 are enough to win a majority of point, so i spent most of my soldiers there, with an extra 4 in castle 5 who could win some points here and there |
| 1125 | 1125 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 33.0 | //Spam troops at only locations that add up to 28. Sacrifice castle 9 because it was too hot in the previous round, take castles 10, 8, 7, and 3. |
| 1146 | 1146 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 16.0 | 17.0 | 17.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| 1162 | 1162 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 21.0 | 0.0 | 26.0 | 2, 3, 4 instead of 9, and then and 3 of 5,6,8, and 10 |
| 1164 | 1164 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 11.0 | 20.0 | 26.0 | 0.0 | 32.0 | Because it'll win? |
| 1204 | 1204 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 15.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 50.0 | Arbitrary |
| 1234 | 1234 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 11 | 18.0 | 28.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 31.0 | I tried to use Ken Nickerson's strategy from the first battle but with a focus on two castles that were differently successful in the first two battles. In the first one, 7&8 were the main targets by the top 5. In the next one, 9 and 10 became the big numbers to target. I need 28 points to win the battle. My goal is to take 5, 7, 6, and 10 in most matches. I get all four of those and I win. If I don't, well, hopefully I can steal the 8 (or the 4) and use dumb luck to conquer smarts. |
| 1241 | 1241 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 20 | 30 | 40.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | I decided it was easier to capture alot of lesser castles |
| 1265 | 1265 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 19 | 20.0 | 21.0 | 23.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Capture the middle |
| 1285 | 1285 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 13.0 | 21.0 | 20.0 | 0.0 | 25.0 | I consulted Mars the God of War and he suggested this. |
| 1286 | 1286 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 11 | 21 | 26.0 | 31.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Assumed people would dump heaps of soliders into 9 and 10, so didn't waste troops there. 55 points total, so I need over half. And then I guessed :-) |
| 1287 | 1287 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 20 | 20.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Figuring the enemy would over commit to the larger value castles. |
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited
CREATE TABLE "riddler-castles/castle-solutions-3" ( "Castle 1" TEXT, "Castle 2" TEXT, "Castle 3" TEXT, "Castle 4" TEXT, "Castle 5" TEXT, "Castle 6" REAL, "Castle 7" REAL, "Castle 8" REAL, "Castle 9" REAL, "Castle 10" REAL, "Why did you choose your troop deployment?" TEXT )