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 6
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? |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1179 | 1179 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 30 | 40 | 0 | 28 is the minimum number of points to win. I sent the least number to castle 4 because I anticipated that it would not need to be taken with higher numbers in most scenarios. |
1192 | 1192 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 30 | 33 | 0 | |
1196 | 1196 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 37 | 28 | To win just over 50% of the points with the least number of castles by deploying enough troops to four castles to win 28/55 points and abandoning the other six |
1205 | 1205 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | Higher value=more soldiers, keep it simple |
1218 | 1218 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 25 | 35 | The focus is on on reducing the battlefield down to enough castles to get 28 victory points, and then identifying the set of castles that make up 28 points that past players have shown the least interest in competing for. |
1223 | 1223 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 33 | 33 | all or nothing |
1248 | 1248 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 40 | The middle castles seem to be the most hotly contested and the lower ones were completely ignored. Secure the most valuable pieces with overwhelming force and pick up cheap points at the bottom. |
1253 | 1253 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 12 | 0 | 19 | 21 | 21 | 1 | |
1257 | 1257 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 28 | 0 | 36 | I chose 4 castles that I had to win and devoted most of my resources to them. In looking at the last winners, I didn't want to waste any resources on pricey castles I wasn't all in to win. On the other hand, if someone outbid my 3, I wanted to take the chance that they might have said nothing on 1 and 2. |
1259 | 1259 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 64 | focused highly on the highest valued castles |
1272 | 1272 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 33 | I want to get to 28 points in the most efficient manner possible. Castles 9 and 10 have been undervalued, but I think their true value is around 35. Castles 6-8 are highly sought after and are best to avoid. Castles 4 and 5 may come more easily. I will take a large risk by essentially giving up the remaining Castles, but it may be worth it for the THRONE. |
1276 | 1276 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 30 | 30 | 30 | Go big or go home |
1288 | 1288 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 40 | 45 | Go nearly all in on the most valuable castles. Plus cheap wins on the least. |
1291 | 1291 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 24 | 35 | 0 | Trying to focus on getting 28 victory points while sacrificing the "10" assuming most people will want the big win. |
1321 | 1321 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 27 | 29 | 33 | My focus was on getting 28 total victory points out of a possible 55, so I concentrated on 8, 9, 10, and winning 1 extra point on the "1" castle. |
7 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 24 | 28 | 31 | 1 | Need 28 to win. Don’t focus on 10 as others will. Hedge with a maybe getting 5 |
16 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 21 | 31 | 1 | In order to win a war I need to get 28 points, anything more doesn't matter and anything less may as well be zero. So I chose to strongly contest 4 spots which would allow me to get that score if I only one those (9, 8, 7, and 4). For each of the remaining spots I chose to place a single troop in case someone also heavily contests one of these numbers but leaves another spot entirely uncontested. Finally I chose numbers ending in 1 because I assumed that many people would choose round numbers and therefore I would have some chance of barely beating them. |
30 | 30 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 91 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Banking on winning ALL the battles at Castle 7 |
37 | 37 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 1 | 28 is the number needed to win so targeted to scrape a win. Did not contend the highest scoring castle as some will likely go very heavy there |
51 | 51 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 12 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 2 | 2 | I copied the first winner one minor arbitrary change. |
61 | 61 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 35 | 44 | 1 | focus on castle 8 and 9 with the assumption that castle 10 is likely going to be taken and castle 1 and 2 will have 1 soldier brought to them |
83 | 83 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 11 | 11 | 1 | 27 | 30 | 2 | 3 | cluster forces around valuable castles most likely to be fought over (7 and 8), choose one middle but less valuable castle (6) to offer almost no defense of, give 11% of forces to next level valuable castles (4 and 5) assuming most will give 10% to those castles. Also assumes most will attempt to cluster forces proportionately to win larger castles in some ratio of all forces in the 10, 9, 8, 7 castles, keeping more than 25% in castles 8 and 7. |
119 | 119 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 10 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 4 | 6 | I took the winning strategy from the first battle royale but then redeployed a few troops from castles 1 & 2 to castles 9 and 10. My thinking is that most players will be trying to beat the winning strategies from game 2, and won't be considering the game 1 strategies as much. Essentially, my hope is that I'll be "zigging" while others are "zagging". |
124 | 124 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 25 | 30 | 2 | Maximize the troops that could take 28 points, and the others are 2 to cleanup places where my opponent sent only 1. |
129 | 129 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 22 | 24 | 26 | 2 | I figured a lot of people would go 10 on each, and this would consistently beat those ones. I also guessed a lot of people would put two on each of the lower ones to beat out the one you are forced to put there, so I made sure to take that into account. The second question for me was the people who went a bunch in top half and left one each to the lower ones so I knew I would need to adjust the numbers to favor something would also win against someone who went 1-1-1-1-1-19-19-19-19-19 because that seemed like it would be like the second most common formidable strategy. The last thing I considered was that because you need 28 points to win and the easiest way to there seems to be 9+8+7+6 the easiest way to get there. I ignore the ten because other people will dump a bunch of points there and either way I will need to get four numbers total as 10+9+8 only gets you to 27. This strategy pretty cleanly beats both those strategies. To beat this you would need to foresee it probably and get 9 at least. I think if you went for a 10-9-8 strategy and just low balled a bunch of other numbers hoping to get one you might beat me but you will lose to everyone playing 10 on everything so I think this is the most stable that I can come up with. |
139 | 139 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 33 | 36 | Just win 10,9,8 and get lucky somewhere else. |
141 | 141 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 20 | 2 | 20 | 24 | Focusing on the odd numbers offers fewer points than focusing on the even numbers, but if I can capture one even as well, I can pull ahead. |
150 | 150 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 26 | 27 | 37 | Get 28 points with the fewest number of castles possible (10, 9, 8 & 1). Try to defend those with as many soldiers as possible and leave 1 at the other castles in case any are left undefended. |
153 | 153 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 13 | 16 | 1 | 7 | 16 | 33 | 5 | I looked at the distributions of the two previous wars and picked out some forts that have a potential to be left unguarded and put a couple more troops in there, while approximately splitting the difference between the two sets of winners, hoping that others might have the same approach, allowing myself to have a couple more in those key forts mentioned above. |
172 | 172 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 22 | 25 | 28 | Proportionally allocated to the top four based on point values |
193 | 193 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 27 | 27 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 20 | Achieving the required points while committing to the fewest possible castles to ensure that those who committed troops elsewhere would not be able to achieve the required amount of points. |
194 | 194 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 23 | 32 | 3 | saw the best ones from the last 1 and combinated. |
202 | 202 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 20 | 20 | 50 | |
204 | 204 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 20 | 30 | 35 | I want castle 10 baby!!!!!!!!! |
222 | 222 | 31 | 31 | 31 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Trying to get the top three castles and then hopefully catch one other castle my opponent didn't put any troops at |
235 | 235 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 18 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 21 | 22 | |
238 | 238 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 35 | 34 | Copy the same strategy as last time, but more extreme (thinking people are going to go back to strategy 1) |
239 | 239 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 30 | 32 | 28 | going for the top 3 and hoping to get lucky and get one other |
240 | 240 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 31 | 31 | 31 | |
243 | 243 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 32 | 30 | I want to beat troop allocation based on castle % worth. And also equal split. The base naive case. While at the same time I want to have an edge against some of the winners in Feb and June meta. I win against 40% of Feb winners and 20% of June winners. The meta unlikely to repeat. My max overpay is +16. Median overpay is -2. It’s a more concentrated strategy. June had a more displaced strategy. Feb is more concentrated. Meta will swing back towards concentration. |
245 | 245 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 19 | 1 | 27 | 1 | 36 | 1 | I needed to contest every castle in the event someone did not place any troops there and I could get it for "free". Then I figured out there are 55 total points available, so I needed to get 28 to win. If you divide the points available of each castle by the 55 total, you can get a % of points for each. If you then multiply by 100 you get what each castle is "worth" in manpower. I figured if I roughly double the "expected worth" in manpower, I will win the castle more often than not. I then picked a combination of castles to focus on that if I won them, would give me 28 pts. I wanted to avoid #10 because I expect there will be a lot of fighting for that one, so I concentrated on 9, 7 and 5, to give me a good base of 21 pts. I then focused on the bottom 3 castles because I expect them to be lightly guarded. If I happen to "steal" a castle from someone since they put no one there, even better. |
267 | 267 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 29 | 32 | |
276 | 276 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 22 | 1 | 26 | 34 | 3 | 5 | Trying to avoid over-spending on castles the opponent will deploy to. |
289 | 289 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 39 | 20 | 25 | |
293 | 293 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 30 | 48 | 1 | 1 | I wanted to assure myself of winning 20 points and invested heavily in those castles unlikely to be the principle investments of others. |
297 | 297 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 26 | 32 | 1 | Getting to 28 points |
309 | 309 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 1 | 32 | 32 | I'm trying to get to 28 points as often as possible. |
323 | 323 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 23 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 35 | 2 | My goal was to win 8 and 9. With that I only need 11 more points to secure victory. I sacked 6 and 7 given that they were low in the last one and more people are likely to focus on those. That leaves me with needing to win 5 and 3 and then either 1 and 2 or 4. I sacked 4 given that it was high in both prior events. |
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. |
406 | 406 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 28 | 28 | 1 | |
436 | 436 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 31 | 27 | Win the big castles, grab a couple other points somewhere. |
464 | 464 | 2 | 2 | 26 | 13 | 30 | 1 | 3 | 10 | 5 | 8 | I rearranged a previous winner's deployment and prayed. |
527 | 527 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 30 | 35 | The goal is 28pts, split them between the fewest number of castles weighted by worth of each castle. with a chance to win empty castles |
663 | 663 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 23 | 1 | 28 | 39 | This is my second submisssion, I wanted to try a completely different strategy. Here I aim to win 10, 9, 7 and 2 against many opponents, when that fails, I hope to win enough from the rest as I expect many entries to have several 0's and 1's. |
709 | 709 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 30 | 30 | 55 points possible, so 28 wins. I wanted to defend the fewest amount of castles. Also, I made sure to at least attempt a defense of each castle. |
770 | 770 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 40 | 26 | 15 | 13 | inverse of the 7 down strat |
815 | 815 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 30 | 30 | I’m guaranteed at least one if not two high value castles while still having a chance at all of them |
842 | 842 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 1 | 1 | 22 | 27 | 32 | 1 | 28 points are needed to win so I decided to invest all of my soldiers in taking castles 4,7,8, and 9 for a total of 28 points. I decided this combination was less obvious than ones including 10, which I think will receive heavy investment from opponents, but still uses to smallest number of castles. A point is worth about 1.8 soldiers so I expect investing 3.2 soldiers per point in my castles to take them will win. I also put one point in each castle to have a win condition if I lose one of my castles to a player also play a concentrated strategy. |
889 | 889 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 15 | 22 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 33 | 21 | |
895 | 895 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 46 | 46 | I'm predicting that most of your audience is pretty smart, and will have worked out that you only need 1, 8, 9 and 10 to win, and will have placed 25 soldiers on each of those castles. This strategy is designed specifically to beat that. |
913 | 913 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 28 | 1 | 33 | 29 | I took one of the better performing solutions from last simulation that seemed to work well against the other top solutions and tweaked it slightly. |
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. |
932 | 932 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 91 | |
950 | 950 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 31 | 24 | |
954 | 954 | 1 | 5 | 7 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 34 | 34 | Designed to defeat the average player; effectively giving away castles 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 (27 points) while focusing soldiers on castles 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10 (28 points) |
955 | 955 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 27 | 36 | Need 28 points so I focused on that but didn’t give any away |
969 | 969 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 28 | 29 | 1 | Need 28 points to the win, focused on fewest points castles necessary to achieve that goal |
989 | 989 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 25 | 25 | 30 | Concentrated on high value targets |
999 | 999 | 1 | 2 | 10 | 6 | 21 | 1 | 16 | 11 | 11 | 21 | trying to beat common breakpoints/ round numbers |
1000 | 1000 | 1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 28 | 35 | Focus+surprise. |
1030 | 1030 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 26 | 30 | 0 | I just tried to ensure I had 28 points and didn't want to invest in 10 or 1/2 |
1040 | 1040 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 29 | 1 | 31 | 27 | Used a genetic algorithm which slowly replaced the original entries with the newly generated ones, hopefully optimising against everyone optimising for the previous round. |
1048 | 1048 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 18 | 20 | 1 | 25 | 26 | 3 | 2 | focus mainly on the the middle castes, sacraficing castles to increase distribution to castles 8,9 |
1068 | 1068 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 18 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 32 | 32 | better than Derek |
1082 | 1082 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 19 | 19 | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 11 | I think people will go big on only two of the top four. I should win 2 of them, then get 3,4 & 5. |
1084 | 1084 | 11 | 15 | 6 | 20 | 9 | 1 | 9 | 16 | 12 | 1 | Wrote a Python program to randomize troop deployment; as I'm submitting this I realize that the program was built upon failed assumptions, but that will be even more hilarious if it places in the top-5. |
1137 | 1137 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 21 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 33 | 30 | This combo won 100 simulation rounds in a row using randomized, previous champs, and tweaks of previous round winners. |
1138 | 1138 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 30 | 30 | I ran some quick analysis and was aiming for 28 points, the minimum for victory with the existing point structure. Given those constraints there are 40 solution combinations. I further narrowed it down based on which involved the fewest castles. Of the 40 solutions, 9 required focusing on 4 castles. From here on it becomes judgment calls. The last warlords competition saw 4 of the top 5 winners with the combination 10,9,5,4 (also employing the 28 point strategy). I’m unsure of whether this means we will see more or less of this particular combination, however 7 of the 9 found before use castle 10 and 6 use castle 9. I decided to go with 3 heavy hitters in 8,9,10 so that I could spend less on my 4th castle in castle 1. On choosing the amounts, the first warlords page provided some very useful information on the underlying statistics of the distribution. I noticed this was missing from the next time, so I made some inferences. We see the skewed distribution for just about all 10 castles, so the median should nearly always be lower than the mean – and in this case significantly so. So choosing the amounts for castles 8,9, and 10 I based off the mean (and previous winners for an approximate upper range) to establish a point where my guess would be safely in the 90%ile or higher for each. For the remainder of castles, I feel leaving them empty is unwise – as most of the time my selections for 1,8,9, and 10 should all win against normal opponent selections – for castles 2 through 7 I was debating leaving anywhere from 1 to 3 to defend. I landed on 1 in the interest of increasing defense for my primary 4, but so that in the fringe case that somebody defeats one of my castles I have a chance to gain points back if they leave something undefended. |
1155 | 1155 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 13 | 1 | 24 | 12 | 21 | 22 | The King left none living, none able to tell. The King took their heads and he sent them to hell. (Also, FYI I noticed that one non-integer submission snuck through last time.) |
1188 | 1188 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 50 | 25 | 12 | 7 | Inverse of 7 down strategy |
1215 | 1215 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 28 | 28 | 28 | |
1220 | 1220 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 20 | 29 | 6 | 31 | try to win 10 8 7 3, then some random backups |
1229 | 1229 | 0 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 13 | 1 | 19 | 11 | 2 | 32 | Ran a genetic algorithm simulation and this was the winning strategy. The best strategy depends on the other strategies entered, so it is within the space of possible, winners, but probably won't win. |
1233 | 1233 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 21 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 35 | 24 | Optimised against top fives from both runs and median from the first. Depends on snatching the top two bolstered by four and five, these four wins would total a bare minimum of 28 of 55 points. Sometimes snatches the 6–8. If most strengthened the top prizes a bit, yeah, I'm screwed. Didn't want to do a deep dive into the complete data. |
1246 | 1246 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 31 | 31 | 31 | Just winning the top three castles is enough to win, so I'm only focused on winning those; I sent one soldier to the rest just in case the castle is undefended. |
1258 | 1258 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 40 | 40 | 1 | 1 to every castle to ensure I capture any uncontested castle. Most people will likely focus on the highest value castles and you need 28 total points to win so castles 8/9/10 would do it and splitting troops 3 ways to grab those I would still take 8 and 9. |
1264 | 1264 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 27 | 30 | 34 | Proportional alignment based off points needed to win + at least 1 troop at every castle |
1295 | 1295 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 1 | 1 | 26 | 26 | 17 | 2 | The simplest win is on 10/9/8/1. Two problems: it's already popular, and weak players over-defend Castle 10. I'll try to win on 9, 8, 7, and 4 instead. |
9 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 14 | 13 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 15 | 10 | 10 | I mostly trusted my gut, but did a back over the envelop best response iteration. |
19 | 19 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 2 | 16 | 18 | 15 | 14 | I have optimised this strategy to beat the average deployment from the last iteration of the game, by sacrificing castle 6,which was not well contested last time, so I expect it to be hotly contested this time round. |
27 | 27 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 9 | 12 | 2 | 28 | 27 | 2 | 3 | Just did a pretty similar strategy to Cyrus. |
35 | 35 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 12 | 12 | 2 | 21 | 3 | 30 | 8 | |
44 | 44 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 2 | Becuase I'm smart, in my head. |
88 | 88 | 15 | 15 | 7 | 2 | 26 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 10 | 18 | Last time winners focused on the middle. I'm focusing on the edges |
100 | 100 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 14 | 2 | 16 | 19 | 4 | 31 | The winners of last round went after the castles that were under-targeted the first time around (9 and 10) while ignoring the castles that were over-targeted (7 and 8) and slightly bidding up on the castles that were 2nd most important (4 and 5). That leaves castle 6 as being the most likely attacked castle, so I'm ignoring it. From there, I expect 4 and 5 to start getting ignored with 1 through 3, so there's an opportunity to get those for cheap. If I get those, win 10 and win either 8 or 7 that puts me above the 28-point win level. |
116 | 116 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 20 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 29 | 30 | I'm dumb |
132 | 132 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 12 | 2 | 5 | 28 | 32 | 10 | |
137 | 137 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 23 | 22 | 2 | 25 | Going all-in on Castles 7, 8, and 10 gives 25 points of the 28 needed to win. After that, I just split my troops between 3 and 4 with the hope of winning one of the two battles and pushing myself over. Castles 5, 6, and 9 each got 2 troops so that I could win those if the opposition left them undefended. |
159 | 159 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 | People seem to try to get clever by guessing which castles others will give up on or go all-in for. Maybe being not-clever and just going for the high-value ones counters that? |
183 | 183 | 4 | 8 | 9 | 11 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 27 | 29 | Trying to get undervalued castles for cheap while leaving highly contested ones on the board |
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 );