Riddler - Solutions to Castles Puzzle: castle-solutions-2.csv
Data license: CC Attribution 4.0 License · Data source: fivethirtyeight/data on GitHub · About: simonw/fivethirtyeight-datasette
902 rows sorted by Castle 9
This data as json, copyable, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: Castle 1, Castle 2, Castle 3, Castle 4
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? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
21 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 23 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 27 | This setup beat 1071 of the 1387 past strategies (found by integer programming) |
44 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 24 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 30 | Focus on smallest number of castles that can win. Also people seem to understaffed castle 10 so include this in lineup |
85 | 85 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 15 | 18 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 34 | You only need 28 points to win, so we will focus on winning 10, 6, 5, 4, and 3 (total 28), sending troops proportional to the point totals (rounding down for #10 since people doing complicated things are more likely to concede #10). Going all-in on a linear strategy is often good in a situation where a large part of the field is trying to out-metagame each other. This may be the situation this time since the data from the last challenge was posted! |
328 | 328 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 22 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 38 | Try to hit 28 by winning on 4 numbers. |
333 | 333 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 21 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 36 | Sounds good |
336 | 336 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 30 | 0 | 30 | picked the easiest looking quartet worth a majority |
396 | 396 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 13 | 15 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | Third variation. Try to guarantee castle 10, get 18 more with 4 lower cost castles, ignore everywhere else |
397 | 397 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 19 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 38 | Win castle 10, and what appeared to me (after looking at last round stats) to be the least contested way to get 18 more points. Know that I lose to outliers who beat me at castle 10 (and realize an overcorrection from players who realize 10 was undercontested last round may be coming) and won't win many matches if I tie or lose in the middle, but think its okay to concede those rather than dilute strength with token opposition in castles I don't care about |
431 | 431 | 7 | 13 | 0 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | To win, you only need to get 28 points, so I focused on hitting that number exactly and put no additional troops on excess castles. I selected 9, 8, 7 and 3 as the castles I would intentionally forfeit, and sent troops to secure every other castle. After making that decision, every castle is equally important in order to win a battle, so I distributed my points with a number hopefully conservative enough to beat out a large number of opponents. |
547 | 547 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 15 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 17 | eh |
625 | 625 | 6 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 16 | 20 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | I need 28 points. I'm going to take a high risk strategy of only trying win the 7 least valuable castles. And I'm going to make sure I have more troops at everyone of those than our last genius military strategist. |
655 | 655 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 13 | 0 | 23 | 25 | 27 | 0 | 0 | maximizing points |
758 | 758 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Take all the low value castles and gain 28 VPs |
779 | 779 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | initially i had all bets placed on the top 4 to win 34-21 but then i realized more people will bet on the higher castles to rack up points but if i bet my points on the bottom i can win 28-27 which will gain me a victory. so thats exactly what i did, its a little riskier but it will gain the most points from the smallest castles |
796 | 796 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 21 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | I realized that I only needed to have my troops collect 28 points in order to win. I then just gave up on the high worth castles, and spread my points among the lower 7 weighted by the points each castle was worth. This is a rather simple strategy, but I wanted to see how well it works. |
803 | 803 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 15 | 25 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | The way to win is to get 28 victory points. Generally, the data from the last round suggest that higher point castles are more competitive. This strategy involves investing all my troops into the lowest summing castles that get 28, which end up being everything but 10, 9, and 8. I placed them in increasing order with castle value. |
806 | 806 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 23 | 28 | 0 | 0 | Trying to win only castles 8-3. |
809 | 809 | 2 | 5 | 8 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 20 | 23 | 0 | 0 | You need 28 points to win each engagement. I'm expecting most people will deploy their greatest number of soldiers to the highest-point castles. My intent is to concede those and instead deploy my soldiers to the lower-point castles, where each soldier should have greater incremental value. If one could consistently win castles 1 through 7, that would be just enough points to win the battle. I've decided to contest castles 1 through 8. |
821 | 821 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 21 | 24 | 0 | 0 | It's necessary to win 28 castle points. I'm aiming for that with about an %18 cushion. 33 points. Only losing castles 6, 7, or 8,loses outright. And losing 6 is survivable if I get lucky and pick up castle 3. I divided the troops up evenly with 3 per castle point for the castles I attacked. And had 1 left over so I took a flyer on castle 3. |
827 | 827 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 5 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 25 | 0 | 0 | to win |
830 | 830 | 0 | 2 | 14 | 14 | 2 | 14 | 25 | 29 | 0 | 0 | Majority of strategies opted for 1-7, or 1,8-10 then some variant of uniform distribution. High amounts on 7 and 8 defeat first two, 14 each on 3, 4 and 6 brings total to 28 and counters even distribution. Castle 1 is not worth the troop for any strategy. 9 and 10 are more expensive than they are worth vs most opponents. 2 troops on 2 and 5 to beat 1 troop distribution. Wouldn't beat a computer, but I want to beat Riddler Nation. |
835 | 835 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 11 | 14 | 16 | 17 | 19 | 0 | 0 | sacrifice the top 2 and try to win the rest |
839 | 839 | 10 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | To win you don't need an optimal strategy just one that allows your opponent to waste men. This may not be a good strategy but it scores well against a 'normal' attempt to win the big battles. |
840 | 840 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 0 | 0 | I figure people will for the 10's and 9's. Also, the max number of points is 55, so all I need is 28 points to win. Therefore, I want to maximize my chances of winning every small skirmish that I need to get exactly 28. |
844 | 844 | 11 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | It could beat many of the lower troop submissions |
847 | 847 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 14 | 12 | 15 | 0 | 44 | I spent a while playing around with genetic algorithms, this one ended up as the winner in a big run. |
862 | 862 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 8 + castle score for first 8. It only takes 28 points to win. The bottom 7 castles add up to 28. Add in the 8th castle for a buffer and go all in, with a slight weighting towards higher castles. |
863 | 863 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 | Last time I tried to minimize the number of castles needed to get 28 while getting as close to 28 as possible with some soldiers in other castles to pick up stragglers. This time I went for more castles than the minimum needed and didn't go for any stragglers to try and maximize my chance at my win condition. If I only go for what I need and someone else goes for stragglers, then I have more soldiers to work with where they count. Maybe. |
869 | 869 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 19 | 21 | 36 | 0 | 0 | Victory |
883 | 883 | 19 | 17 | 15 | 13 | 11 | 11 | 8 | 6 | 0 | 0 | I took the amount of points available and divided that by the number of troops so you'd get even troops per point available, and I rounded up and took some points from the bottom to reinforce the higher point value castles |
896 | 896 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | Because I am hoping nobody else would send 100 troops to castle ten, because they want to have stake in everything, or something else. They also wouldn't be stpid enough to take this calculated risk, like me. It is also hard to amass 10 victory points by a combination. |
897 | 897 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | Just to see what happens |
898 | 898 | 34 | 30 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | The top 3 castles and any other castle will win it. This strategy allows me to big bid on the high value castle. |
899 | 899 | 32 | 26 | 23 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | The deployment aims to get 3 out of four of castles 10,9,8,6, which always gives you over 23 points. I believe most people will spread their troops more evenly. |
900 | 900 | 35 | 30 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | You only need to win the top 3 castles and the last castle to claim victory (~51% of total points) and since these castles were way underdeployed last time, a big shot in the arm should be enough to take each of them. Since I am completely abandoning the rest, I should be able to over deploy the rest and win the castles that matter. |
902 | 902 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | i am guaranteed one point |
77 | 77 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 22 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 33 | variant of first strat. Looking for 5 wins instead of 4 by focusing on 3 and 6 instead of the pricier 9. Gave a couple more to 10 as well. avoided 8. |
155 | 155 | 3 | 4 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 26 | I put just 1 troop each at Castle 7, 8, and 9 so that I'd win against any zeroes, but otherwise ignore the castles that had the most troops deployed last time. Then, I tried to use the data to deploy my resources so as to beat as large of a population as possible (around 80%) from the previous data set. |
524 | 524 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 12 | 15 | 20 | 24 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 10 was underutilized |
528 | 528 | 1 | 2 | 11 | 13 | 16 | 1 | 20 | 20 | 1 | 15 | I designed several strategies that seemed good to me and then designed this one specifically to beat all of them. |
610 | 610 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 12 | 1 | 19 | 1 | 26 | 1 | 31 | I divided the 10 castles into 5 adjacent pairs, allocated troops based on the relative value of each pair, and then placed 1 troop in the odd-numbered (and lower-valued) castle to leave no castle uncontested with the rest of the troops in the even-numbered castle. |
649 | 649 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 15 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 1 | 10 | Focusing in the middle |
744 | 744 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 14 | 1 | 19 | 24 | 29 | 1 | 1 | If I win 3,4,6,7,8, it would be 28 which is over half. I guessed it would be easier (solder deployed vs likelihood of winning) to win lower numbers. I added 1 per castle to ensure they sent troops in order to win points. |
745 | 745 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 10 | 12 | 24 | 29 | 1 | 19 | trying to win .... |
752 | 752 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 16 | 29 | 32 | 1 | 2 | You need 28 points. I expect most people to load up on castles 10 and 9, and then try to make up the rest on the lower value castles. The middle castles are likely to be the softest targets. I sent some troops to 10 and 9 in case someone else uses a similar strategy and does not go after either of those. |
789 | 789 | 1 | 11 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 1 | 27 | 1 | 1 | Distributed to get 28 points |
790 | 790 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 18 | 23 | 22 | 19 | 1 | 3 | Reviewed all previous historical data to produce a model that would win the highest % of times. From there, knowing that many would use the same approach, and likely the same (somewhat simple) tools - the excel solver, I tweaked my final answer to beat the solution I found in the first step. |
792 | 792 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 14 | 18 | 21 | 25 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Tried to win the bottom 7 castles. |
801 | 801 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 1 | 1 | Focus on the middle of the range. Not paying much attention to what people did last time. Too much game theory going on. |
820 | 820 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 17 | 21 | 25 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Fight where your enemy is weakest and take just enough to secure victory. |
851 | 851 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 17 | 1 | 1 | 1 | I chose to go for the lower numbers because I thought most people would focus on the higher numbers |
871 | 871 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 21 | 26 | 30 | 1 | 1 | I figure that too many people will overdeploy to castles 10 and 9, so it's not worth overdeploying to those castles. I also figure that Castles 1-4 just aren't worth enough to overdeploy there. But, I also want to capture any castle that anybody doesn't even try to defend. So, I'll put a single defender on the 6 castles that I don't want to overdeploy to in order to pick up some cheap wins or ties. As far as Castles 5-8, I figure those are the most valuable ones. I also figure that Castle 8 is worth the most. And, given that the winner last time put 30 there, I figure 30 seems to be about correct for that. Then I just divvied up the rest of my troops in a configuration that makes some type of sense. I probably have no shot, but this is an interesting exercise, and I like seeing the data that comes out of this. |
872 | 872 | 3 | 3 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | I estimated where most people would distribute their troops, assumed they would plan what I would plan to combat that. Then I tried to maximise a way of beating my own plan against them. |
874 | 874 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Getting 28 so that I can always have a majority amount of castle points. |
876 | 876 | 12 | 12 | 7 | 7 | 23 | 23 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 1 | I looked at the last winner's strategy (1), found the strategy to beat the last winner by as many points as possible (2), and found the strategy to beat that strategy by as many points as possible (3). The goal is to get to 28 points as many times as possible, so I came up with an ideal strategy to do that, while also making sure that my troop deployment would beat 1, 2, and 3, as those would likely be popular picks. |
884 | 884 | 7 | 8 | 1 | 13 | 32 | 30 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Random solution meant to help my initial submission. |
886 | 886 | 12 | 15 | 20 | 24 | 2 | 2 | 22 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Wild Guessing |
887 | 887 | 22 | 27 | 27 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | I tried to hit as many high value castles while simultaneously giving myself a decent (>25%) chance of getting the smaller castles. I looked at last time's data and tried to stay out of the "no-man's land" where additional troops wouldn't have made a difference against most opponents |
889 | 889 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 87 | This is based off a a genetic algorithm fighting itself. If I had time I think a Monte Carlo based integer program would be interesting. |
891 | 891 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 90 | I had no strategy I just wanted to participate |
893 | 893 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 91 | Why not. |
894 | 894 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 91 | HOLD THAT L!! |
190 | 190 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 11 | 22 | 2 | 32 | 2 | 7 | This beats 1250 of the previous 1387 matches :) |
244 | 244 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 18 | 20 | 23 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 23 | I tried to dominate in areas that I don't think will be strongly contested. |
287 | 287 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 16 | 18 | 23 | 15 | 3 | 2 | 6 | Combination of best responses to old answers as well as against a first iteration of best responses to the old answers. |
302 | 302 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 27 | 31 | 2 | 23 | Using the numbers from the previous version of this riddle, I calculated the average and then added two standard deviations to that. I focused on Castles 3, 7,8, and 10 as it's a relatively cheap way to get to the necessary 28 points. Giving those castles two standard devs above the average, I attempted to put 2 soldiers in the other 6 castles and then normalized and made some tweaks to account for rounding. |
343 | 343 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 20 | 25 | 10 | 2 | 23 | Looking at the previous dataset (game theory be damned), I picked a 4-castle combination of 10-7-6-5, and allocated enough troops to be in the 80th percentile for each. The remaining 16 troops I distributed to the other castles so that each was in at least the 20th percentile, but also so that they got at least 1 troop each. |
465 | 465 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 17 | 13 | 21 | 2 | 7 | I put several on each castle to beat anyone who chooses to put none. Then, I selected some of the middle ground castles to get a good number of points up on. |
579 | 579 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4 | 13 | 16 | 17 | 22 | 2 | 18 | I randomly generated ~200,000 deployments and picked the one that come out on top. |
601 | 601 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 10 | 12 | 15 | 2 | 25 | 2 | 25 | Gut feeling |
603 | 603 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 11 | 2 | 19 | 2 | 25 | 2 | 32 | I chose to compete at all castles in case my opponent left one unguarded, but I chose to prioritize the even numbered castles based on their point value. Then, anticipating a similiar 1-soldier strategy among my opponents, I rebalanced the higher value odd castles with two soldiers, borrowed from the lower value castles. |
671 | 671 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 16 | 11 | 21 | 2 | 2 | 35 | Beats virtually any strategy? Maybe no. |
673 | 673 | 4 | 6 | 9 | 11 | 14 | 17 | 30 | 5 | 2 | 2 | Focusing on winning the bottom 7, with a few troops on the top 3 to beat people with a similar strategy |
704 | 704 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 15 | 21 | 25 | 2 | 2 | 3 | I analyzed the previous submissions and looked for patterns, then built a tool that let me try different combinations. I noticed that you usually needed to be able to 'pick' one or two castles from other leading submissions. This variant, 'pick'ing castles 6 and 7, had the best win total against the previous generation. While it loses to the "classic" solutions of 10s across the board and maxing 1/8/9/10, because of how obvious those solutions are, nobody actually ever chooses them. |
715 | 715 | 1 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 2 | 4 | I used Excel solver to find the winningest combination over the last battle's data, with last round's winner as the initial guess. Improved the winning percentage by about 4%. Figured it couldn't be too awful in the second round. |
729 | 729 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 11 | 12 | 2 | 26 | 31 | 2 | 4 | Attempted a numeric approximation of a linear optimization based on the historic cumulative frequency distribution. Then performed a Monte Carlo simulation by changing the cumulative frequency distribution to see if there were any improvements. |
776 | 776 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 25 | 25 | 2 | 2 | I have to win 28 points. Token forces at 9 and 10 to defeat anyone leaving them undefended or with 1 troop. Focused on winning 4 through 8, which gives me 30 points if I win them all. |
777 | 777 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 9 | 12 | 2 | 26 | 31 | 2 | 3 | Classic force concentration and penetration of the center as military tactics. |
780 | 780 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 16 | 20 | 33 | 2 | 2 | It seems to me that the point of this exercise is to maximize the number of strategies that you beat. In looking through the data, many people leave a lot of 0s and 1s, so I have at least 2 in each. I would like to reach 28 with a combination of 2, 5, 6, 7, 8. But I am trying to maximize the number of ways that I can win. I hope I submitted this on-time, I dont know when the cut off is. Thanks! P.S. Did the last winner really not say anything about their strategy? |
782 | 782 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 11 | 11 | 16 | 26 | 31 | 2 | 2 | (2nd submission) This is identical to the strategy that got me fourth place last time. If it ain't broke, don't fix it? maybe? |
784 | 784 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 13 | 2 | 25 | 2 | 37 | 2 | 4 | I observed through some Excel trial and error that winning five castles (3, 4, 6, 8, and 10) against last time's top 5 and median and tying castle 9 against the top 5 would have been enough to beat those six strategies. More fundamentally I was trying to beat a proportional allocation on several castles while still beating a lone outpost on the remaining castles. We'll see whether this is enough to beat this round's crop of entries! |
793 | 793 | 2 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 31 | 2 | 2 | Slightly adjusted plagiarism. |
794 | 794 | 2 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 31 | 2 | 2 | previous winner solution++ |
798 | 798 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 6 | 28 | 32 | 2 | 3 | Based on the winners of the last one, trying to beat them. |
805 | 805 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 25 | 26 | 2 | 3 | Averaged the top 5 distributions from Round 1. Strategically made these values integers by rounding deployment to castles 1-5 down and castles 6-10 up. |
807 | 807 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 12 | 14 | 1 | 25 | 31 | 2 | 2 | Modified version of last winner, optimized against all previous entries |
817 | 817 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 2 | 2 | I figured that people would try and come up with new strategy to counter what they imagine will be the counter to last year's winning strategy, or they would go even further and try to counter the counter of the counter (etc). I decided to copy last year's winner and see if lightning would strike twice. |
818 | 818 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 2 | 2 | Last time's winning strategy. Maybe people don't change. |
823 | 823 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 2 | 28 | 33 | 2 | 2 | Can't waste too much time to lose anyway... decided to just beat round 1's winner. |
837 | 837 | 6 | 11 | 13 | 15 | 14 | 15 | 2 | 20 | 2 | 2 | decided 9 and 10 weren't worth it. the last winner really put effort in to winning 8 and 7 and i expect competition to overcompensate but i can't let both go so i'm only trying to win 8. the winner also left 6 alone so im hoping i can sneak a win through. the rest was just eyeballing what i thought would work |
842 | 842 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 34 | 2 | 41 | The most popular strategy will be picking numbers that sum to 28, the minimum to win, which can be most efficiently done by picking four distinct numbers. I noticed that either 10 or 8 was in all of these, so those had to be priority. I calculated the expected troop allocation to each of these ((castle #)*100/28) and added a few troops to ensure my victory at both. I sent 2 to each of the other castles to beat anyone that would only send 1, and the rest we dropped at 3, which could beat the expected troop allocation of 10.71. |
845 | 845 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 12 | 13 | 26 | 30 | 2 | 2 | Focusing on 7 and 8 while not sacrificing any with 0. I'm hoping I can beat the balanced people at 5 and 6 to and stealing where they put 0s or 1s. The ones who go heavy up top I hope to beat them at 8 and win most of the rest. |
846 | 846 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 23 | 27 | 33 | 2 | 2 | Castles 9 and 10 are too high risk, high reward, and not necessarily needed. 6, 7, 8 and any combination of 3 castles (except for Castle 1) would grant you a win. |
859 | 859 | 12 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 15 | 17 | 26 | 2 | 2 | Minor tweaks to the previous winning strategy |
865 | 865 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 28 | 32 | 2 | 2 | to win. rp |
867 | 867 | 6 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 2 | 21 | 2 | 32 | 2 | 2 | Blind Guess |
868 | 868 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 48 | 5 | 19 | 5 | 2 | 9 | I created a random plan generator that kept track of the best point expectation out of a small number of attempts. Then I ran it many times. The one that survived I tested against many random troop deployments. |
878 | 878 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 30 | 30 | 20 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2 | middle castles will be underplayed |
880 | 880 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 33 | 3 | 2 | 21 | Random solution meant to help my initial submission. |
890 | 890 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 30 | 20 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | by gut feeling. |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited
CREATE TABLE "riddler-castles/castle-solutions-2" ( "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 );