2.26.2014

Out with the old, in with the new!

Have you heard the one about the college kid who has no time on his hands?

Yeah, its been busy, a happy busy, but quite a bit more so for me to work on beating board games and doing unnecessary stats.  I hope to get back on top of things soon, but until then, I'll do some different things.

Like cleaning out your family game cabinet.

I've been watching a lot of Shut Up and Sit Down lately, and I got an idea to there intro to board gaming video (show your friends here!).  Most families / folks have a game cabinet that has a couple of standards in it:
  • RISK
  • Monopoly
  • Cards Against Humanity / Apples to Apples
  • Pokemon/ Yu-Gi-Oh / Magic
  • Chess/ Checkers 
  • Scrabble
While these are games we most commonly associate with board game night, they are often not the best (if you don't have a painful RISK or Monopoly story, you've never truly played either).  In this post, I plan on replacing these games with other games that are more fun, more modern, and more likely to get your friends and family interested in games.

Buckle up for fun, this is a long one!
Bonus: If you don't care how I got the results, just scroll to the bottom of the page for a table!


Game: RISK
Style: Area control, combat

Problems: I'll freely admit RISK was my favorite board game up until a few years ago (when I fully got into games), but RISK has more than its fair share of issues.  First, in large games you have a 20-30 minute break between your turns, which leads to most of game night being waiting around.  Second, the dice, as I have covered before, the game is completely at the mercy of the dice, while this does add interesting outcomes, more often and not they prove to be a little too interesting.

Alternatives: Game of Thrones: A Board Game does a fantastic job of removing the randomness of combat, you often have a good chance of knowing the outcome before the battle.  The game also includes numerous parts that require input from all players, meaning you are almost always involved (though it is quite a bit more complicated than RISK).  Mémoire '44 is a great game that plays out various battle of WW2, it is fast to teach and lets you and your friends kill each other in logical ways (as oppose to the 1 army in Egypt killing 40 blue armies).  Probably the best replacement for RISK is Small World, where players take control of mythological creatures fighting for fantasy lands.  Small World is often described as "Risk without bullshit dice".  It also includes a high degree of random starts and army abilities, which prevents your friends from always clamoring for Australia.



 Game: Monopoly
 Style: Economic Control

Problems: While this example of flawed capitalism is often cited as the most popular game of all time, it certainly isn't for its mechanics.  The primary complaint against monopoly is it is loooong.  Now, long games aren't always a problem (Twilight Imperium and A&A are prime long and awesome games), but Monopoly's long games often don't result from varying phases of development or drawn out, detailed engagements.  Monopoly often goes on for long periods of time because of its victory condition: the last player with money.  Often, one player will run away with a lead, but not be able to fully finish everyone off due to dice rolls and everyone mortaging their properties (I've always felt the final third of the game resembled this video.

Alternatives: Basically, any euro-game where players battle for resources without battling each other.  Ticket to Ride is the game I've had the most success with when converting people into board gamers, since its fast to teach and ends in a reasonable amount of time.  Alhambra and Catan are also great for making sure everyone can finish the game and still be friends before I post again.

 Game: Apples to Apples / Cards against Humanity
Style: Party Games

Problems: For me, parties and board games are like peas and carrots, however, all to often, everyone resorts to Apples to Apples or Cards against Humanity.  While there is nothing really wrong with either game, they are always the ones people want to play, and lets face it, there are only so many times that abortion-holocaust-masturbation jokes are funny.

 Alternatives: If you couldn't tell from my Resistance post, it is probably the best game in the party genre, its fast to learn and fast to get invested in, TEARS ARE SHED FOR THIS GAME!  It is an excellent gateway game.  Other games that go great are Bang! and Coup, these are both fun, but don't seat as many people and take longer to teach, so I tend to shy away from them.  Recently, I picked up Let's Rob a Bank!, a light card game that plays out a bust experiment (HEY! THAT'S WHAT MY NEXT ARTICLE WILL BE!) it seems to be right up their with Resistance.  The other game that I am hopefully going to play soon is Scalawag, which seems to play a lot like Coup.

Party Game Bonus: Wit's and Wagers is a great alternative to trivial pursuit, since it takes out waiting for other players to come up with an answer.  Say Anything! is like apples to apples mixed with trivial pursuit, and almost always lead to interesting stories. 


Game: Magic the Gathering / Yu-Gi-Oh
Style: Trading Card Games

Problems: Ignoring the "those are for kids and nerds!" stigma on trading card games, these games have a very serious problem in that players need to keep collecting in order to have effective and competitive decks.  These games turn into such an investment of money (and time), that its almost "go big or go home".  I know most people don't care about this, but it still bothers me to know my Yu-Gi-Oh deck from 5th grade would be the laughing stock of any game night I bring it to.

Alternatives: Instead of trading card games, Fantasy Flight introduced the concept of the living card game, with Android: Netrunner and the LCGs of Star Wars, Game of Thrones, and Lord of the Rings.  These games have box core sets that come with several prebuilt decks that don't need to be updated.  The updates come in sets that are specifically directed to certain decks, making it much less of a chore to put together a good deck, and when you buy expansions, you know exactly what you are getting, so you don't need to buy 400 packs in order to get 5 good cards.  Deck building games like Dominion and Arctic Scavengers keep the deck building solely within the session, so that there is no need for any booster packs.  Summer Wars is another deck game, but you don't need boosters, you can just buy an entire new faction.  My personal pick here is Netrunner, hard for people to call you a nerd while you're hacking the blade runner universe and it has a lot of math (which I always advocate).

Game: Scrabble, Boggle, etc.
Style: Word Games

Problems: Scrabble really favored people with more vocabulary, and while I get that's kind of the point, it doesn't help the one sidedness that tends to crop up around tables.  These games also rely on your opponent a lot (either finding different words than them, or building off of their plays).  On top of that, these games tend to be relatively dry and boring to look at.

Alternatives: Unspeakable Words gets rid of all of these issues by reducing the size of words you play, changing scoring drastically, and adding in a private had of cards and figures straight out of the H.P. Lovecraft universe.  If this word game still leaves your head spinning, Qwirkle is a domino/ scrabble style game that is easy to learn and has pretty pictures instead of words.


Game: Chess / Checkers
Style: Abstract Games

Problems:  The thing about abstract games is that most of them (particularly Chess), are solved.  While good games, they rarely hold interest long unless you are playing against a grand master (in which case, you'll want to leave fast). 

Alternative: I'm not big on abstract games, I like a healthy dose of probability and more than 2 players usually.  However, one abstract game is truly one of my favorites to play right now.  Hive is like a combination of Chess and Chinese Checkers, but without a board, while it runs on the expensive side (in my opinion), it it sure to give joy to any chess master you give it to.



Double Triple Quadruple Bonus: I really like the idea of table-top war games like Warhammer, but I can't afford models and I suck at painting, whatever shall I do?

The answer to that, my friends, it X-Wing Miniatures.  X-Wing models come out of the box looking fantastic with no painting required, they are also cheaper ($100 will give you a full imperial and rebel squad so you can play with a friend with a little bit of variance).  Also, the game is faster to learn and more realistic.  I plan on doing some full break downs of X-Wing in the future, as I can't recommend the game enough for people who enjoy those games.

****STOP SCROLLING!****

Those of you who scrolled down for the table, thanks for joining us, here you go!
Replace With Or
RISK Small World Memoir '44
Monopoly Ticket to Ride Settlers of Catan
Card's Against Humanity Resistance Coup
Magic Cards Android: Netrunner Dominion
Scrabble Unspeakable Words Qwirkle
Chess Hive Hive


I hope to get back to doing more statistical work coming up (right now, it's either going to be Coup or Let's Rob a Bank!).  Hopefully it will come out next week

Fun with resistance! (Moved for your ease of viewing)

I posted this a while ago, but cause blogger is weird, it was in the wrong spot, so here it is again!

Well, I’ve had a busy week and I'm writing this in class, so I’m just going to cut right to the chase.

Resistance is a fascinating game, its not so much a board game or card game as a more organized version of the mafia campfire game.

Also (to my annoyance) people tend to play the game with their heart, and not their brain.


Built for 5 to 10 players, you have a group of resistance members trying to run missions against a generic distopian government, and spys from within the government trying to tank those missions.

You know what, I'll let Wil Weaton explain it:

I’m planning on eventually doing a full break down of the games use of deduction, until then, here are some nifty things.

For the purpose of math, we are going to use a game of 7 people (4 resistance, 3 spies).

Some quick numbers:
  1. The Random Chance that Someone is a Spy: ~43%
  2. On the missions, you will send 2,3,3,4*,4 agents.
  3. On the fourth mission, you need 2 fails to for the mission to fail
  4. Chance of sending the 4 resistance members on the last mission: 10.5%
Resistance is an interesting game, since you have such a small margin for error, the resistance doesn't really have a lot of time to try test cases and route out the spies.

Winning in 3 turns (using the leader rotation)
I found this one on Boardgame Geek...
If you are a lucky resistance member who starts as a leader, it is possible to win the game with 3 turns.  For the first mission, you send yourself and the person to your immediate left.  Chances are, there will be a resistance victory.  For the next mission, the leadership moves to the left, he takes you and one more person at random.  If this person is also a resistance member, you win, since you just need just need to vote the leadership over to them (hopefully the 4th resistance member will help you guys out here).
If you're astute, you will know the odds of this working are based on just cubing the chance of someone being a resistance members:
5 Players: 21.6%
7 Players: 18.6%

6,8,9 and 10 player games have 3 and 4 player missions, changing the formula.  Long story short, I wouldn't rely on this as a resistance member.

The "real timeframe"
Unless you are playing a 9 player game, the last mission will require you to choose all the resistance members, and only one spy is needed to tank the mission. Basically, the resistance needs to have the system totally solved in order to have a successful last mission and win the game.  This is important info for the spys.  The resistance essentially gets a free first mission, where the spys are often forced to keep quiet, unless they change it up...

Aggressive Start*
There is 86% you will end up with a spy on the first mission (in a 7 player game, its 66% in a six player game and 80% with 5 players).  Usually, the resistance is just trying to get feelers out and will pick a spy unwittingly.  Usually, with such small numbers, players will choose to pass the mission to throw off suspicion, but I propose a different tactic.  Since the resistance has limit margin for error anyway, failing the first mission will cause all sorts of chaos and can even lead to an early victory.  This works even better in larger games, where you are sending 3 players on a mission instead of 2.  Just remember not to force your way onto the first mission, since that will immediately cause suspicion.

*also, this has limited field testing, there could be flaws that are unaccounted for

The Votes Matter
There is an awful lot of information on who votes for a mission to go... generally, you should see votes fall along the number of spy's/ resistance members (in a 7 person game, you should either see 4 pass and 3 fail or vice versa).  There is a project on boardgame geek to figure out the math (I'll send a link later).

Sorry for how sparse this is, I don't even know what I'm going to write about next, but until then, play smart!


2.03.2014

Resistance breakdown delayed, but something new!

First off, sorry that the Resistance review isn't ready yet, I've been busy with school and playing other games, though I had a 3 hour long session of Resistance that provided a lot of fun new data for the review. I think it will be up by this weekend, but I'm going to be busy again.

Now, lets talk the NFL championship game...

I'm not a big football fan (hockey is the only sport, everything else is just a game), but when it comes to statistical analysis, football and baseball are wonderful in the way they break everything up, they are both truly numbers games, and this games numbers were.......weird.

So, football betting is done in two ways.... the traditional "Seattle will win with a spread of 14 points" (common for most sport betting), and by "hits".

Hits are the last digit of the score at , which, since scoring in football is more difficult than scoring in Carcasonne, is essentially guessing how many and what type of scoring a team will do in a quarter.


Touchdown Hit
1 7
2

4
3
1
4
8
5
5
6
2
7
9


It gets a lot more complicated when you add in 2 point conversions, field goals, and safeties, I actually find it a lot more enjoyable and challenging.

For some perspective, here are the historical odds a number will be hit after last night (thank you to www.printyourbrackets.com):
The number 0 appeared 105 times - 26.78%
The number 7 appeared 78 times - 19.89%
The number 3 appeared 60 times - 15.31%
The number 4 appeared 39 times -9.95%
The number 6 appeared 33 times - 8.41%
The number 1 appeared 23 times - 5.86%
The number 9 appeared 17 times - 4.34%
The number 8 appeared 16 times - 4.08%
The number 5 appeared 10 times - 2.55%
The number 2 appeared 11 times - 2.81%

The numbers that were needed to win included 3 8s, one 2, 6, and 3, and two 0.

Long story short, if your friends had money on the game, they probably lost it... or are a now rich time traveler.

Throughout the game, I kept my Facebook friends happy with fun tidbits each quarter (maybe I should start a twitter account for this?):

*********************************************************************************


S*p*rb*wl Stats - 1st Quarter - There is only a 2.08% historical chance that there will be a saftey OR an 8-0 score after 1 quarter.

S*p*rb*wl Stats - Second Quarter - 22.91% chance that a team is shut out after 1 half.

Double Bonus: 81.25% of super bowls include an Eastern Timezone team.

And for the triple bonus: If you were going of historical scores for your hits, there is a .06% chance you got Seattle right.

S*p*rb*wl Stats - 3rd Quarter - If you choose a Denver play at random, there is a 10% chance it results in a turnover (including the safety), there is a 2% it is the touchdown.

S*p*rb*wl Stats - 4th Quarter - Seattle tied for youngest average winning team and was 10 points from the largest point +/-.

Bonus: There was a 0% chance of the Ducks winning the game.

Only a few more months 'til the Stanley cup!


So yes, Resistance will be on its way, and it will be fantastic.

Until then, play smart!

1.18.2014

The Australian Gambit - RISK

There are a few games set aside that are timeless classics that everyone knows.  RISK is by far the most popular war game in the world, and I know I have poured more of my time and energy into games of that than anything else.  As old and great as the game is, though, it isn't without its problems...

RISK is very highly based on luck, is generally long (especially if you're knocked out early on), and has been known to have unbalanced points, most well known is Australia.

The Australian continent has 1 entrance, 4 territories, and provides 2 extra units per turn.  It is a common strategy to bottle up in Australia, earn 5 units per turn, and just wait until you can conqure the world in one turn.

So how effective is it?

For this discussion, we will be using the TRADITIONAL RULES OF RISK.  Yes they exist, yes they are written in the rule books.  The game is the result of so many different house rules that I won't bother to cover how well the strategy works in these settings.

Dice in RISK
You know the basics, the attacker rolls a max of 3, the defender, a max of 2.  Here is a table of how individual battles work:

Defender Attacker
one die two dice three dice
one
die
Defender loses one 41.67% 57.87% 65.97%
Attacker loses one 58.33% 42.13% 34.03%
two
dice
Defender loses one 25.46% N/A N/A
Attacker loses one 74.54% N/A N/A
Defender loses two N/A 22.76% 37.17%
Attacker loses two N/A 44.83% 29.26%
Each loses one N/A 32.41% 33.58%

I just wanted this to be public knowledge before we continued.  The Wikipedia article on RISK has this and several more charts for the game.

Hypothesis: Australia is the best starting point for RISK and you will almost always win if you can take and hold Australia for a long period of time.


Now, there is nothing wrong with the Math, it works, if you can take and hold Australia and hold out long enough, you will almost always win (if you attack at the right time, also).  However, I wouldn't make that your go to strategy, since....

Everyone else is doing it
The reason the Australian Gambit is so effective is that Australia is out of the way, and inexperienced players will be too busy battling on other continents to pay mind to your small choke point in the corner.  However, sense everyone knows how effective that is, its very unlikely you will be able to take and hold it unopposed.  Anecdotally, I've seen players who rush for Australia be ganged up on and eliminated first.

While you can still easily hold Australia, you are going to have to fight for control of it.

Taking Australia
Assuming a random setup where you have control over 1 of the 4 (5 if you include Siam) territories in Australia, players going for the Australian gambit will need about 16 armies (and probably more), depending on how your opponents react to you stacking all of your units in 1 territory.

Defeating the Gambit
As stated above, the reason taking Australia works is because most people don't see it as a threat.  If your opponent is going for Australia early on, you can apply several countermeasures early on.

  1. Call them out - A little bit of psychological warfare always makes RISK more fun, and it will make them start second guessing their moves, which is an advantage to you
  2. Get aggressive - Chances are they left a lot of open territories elseware, knocking these out really forces a player into shutdown.
  3. Don't let them accumulate soldiers - Most people view RISK battles as an all or nothing, you go until you can't attack any more.  Set this thought process aside.  Chances are they will be building up their forces in Siam, if you can, leave some troops in India to take a couple potshots at this stack to keep it under control.
  4. Get cards and use them - A player going full offensive in Australia will not be able to collect cards, you can really abuse this.  Also, keep an eye on when they are getting ready to trade in (5 cards), as this is usually the sign that they are going to go on the offensive.
Applying the Gambit
So just going for Australia is not an option against experienced players, you will constantly be harassed and won't be able to build up a large force.  You can learn to apply this tactic in other ways.

Beating RISK counts on using 2 of the 3 Ss.

Stay Silent - Keep out of the way of the big fights, don't make yourself a target
Stay Small - Don't Spread Yourself Thin
Stay Intrusive - As oppose to staying silent, focus on taking a territory every turn for a card.

Using Australia keeps you out of the way (Silent), and consolidated (Small).  Other options include playing nomadically, you consolidate in an area of about 4 or 5 territories, and each turn you take 1 territory and lose 1 territory, slowly accumulating cards.  There have been several games I've played where everyone is so hellbent on taking Australia I was able to set up shop in South America (or Sometimes Africa), and play a similar strategy.

Side Note: If you are defending 2 territories, the best statistic advantage is to place 2 armies in 1 territory and all of your armies in the other territory, this way, you have the highest probability of doing damage in both territories, while maintain a force to counter attack.

Conclusion: While Australia is no longer a guaranteed success, the same tactics that allow for a successful Australia run can be applied elsewhere.

Well that took longer than expected.  Maybe in the future I'll look at Objective based RISK, but next week, I plan to tackle the modern classic, Resistance.

Until then, play smart!

 

1.11.2014

Pandemic! Difficulty Levels

Pandemic is one of the most popular co-op games on the market, designed by arguably the genres best game maker, Matt Leacock.  It features some of the best mechanics you can think of when it comes to the theme, and never fails to disappoint.
The most dangerous part of the game, those who have played know, are the Epidemic Cards.  These cards sit in the supposedly helpful player deck waiting to wreck all of your plans with the dangerous three actions: Increase, Infect, and Intensify.  You can set the difficulty of the game by using any where from 4 to 6 cards (7 if you include the On the Brink expansion pack (I didn't)).

While changing the difficulty of the game makes it harder, it does provide a small advantage...

There are 3 ways to lose pandemic, the first is to have 8 outbreaks, the second is to use all 24 cubes of a color (not have any more to place).  The last way is to not be able to draw player cards than needed, also known as "running out of time".

I have played six games of easy (4 cards), with the following results:

3 Wins!
1 Pandemic Loss (Out Breaks)
0 Plague Losses (Run out of cubes)
2 Time Losses (Run out of cards)

We have never had trouble working with the outbreaks or cubes, but running out of time is a big thing (one of the wins was on standard, where we had 0 cards left to draw, 7 outbreaks, 1 yellow, and 2 black cubes left).  However, having more epidemic cards leads to having a larger player deck, which means more time....

Hypothesis: Adding more epidemic cards makes pandemic easier, since you have more time to reach the cure.

Maybe easier is a bit of a streach, but how much difference is there between difficulty levels?

Step One: The Difficulty Levels
In the player deck, there are 48 city cards, 5 event cards and 4 to 6 epidemic cards, depending on the difficulty, just how much does this affect the deck length and chances of epidemics?

DifficultyEpidemic CardsPlayer DeckTurnsActionsChance of getting an Epidemic


5324
Beginner45720847.02%
Standard55821888.62%
Heroic659218810.17%

Players always draw 2 cards and have 4 actions per turn, meaning that you can easily calculate how much time a team has to beat the game (this assumes a 4 player game).

We can see plain as day that there is no difference between standard and heroic (for those intrested, you get at least 1 more turn out of a Legendary game which requires the on the brink expansion, but I don't know the exact card count to come up with the other numbers).  But how much does that one extra turn matter?

Step Two: How long to victory (or the more likely defeat?)
So is it actually easier to play on standard than beginner?  For this, we need to look at how long it usually takes to win.

In pandemic, you need to have 5 cards of the same color and use an action at a research station to win discover a cure, 4 cures wins the game.  It takes a lot of numbers to figure out just how many turns it takes for an average pandemic win, given different abilities and assuming that you are moving around, but will look at how often it takes to get all 5 cards of a color on the table.
CardsChances of a Certain Color# Of turns til 5 appearTo Complete a cure4 times

12(1/.13)Assuming it takes 2 extra turns to get the cure(Assuming you work on 2 cures at once)
5721.05%81020
5820.69%81020

Side Note: If you have the researcher and the scientist, you can theoretically win the game in 3 rounds, now, the chance of this happening is so small, it didn't even register when I calculated it in google calc.

The .13 comes from the card drawing probability that you have (x/y)+(x-1/y-1)..... until you reach a certain number of cards, in this case 5.
Now this is actually low, since it doesn't take into account the first 2 draws of a player don't have epidemic cards (meaning about 22% chance for these).
This goes to show how intense pandemic is, it looks to take the entire game and luck to even have a shot at victory.  From this angle, it looks like the extra turn would be benificial, as there is such a small margin for error, however, that extra turn would end with an epidemic, so we need to see...

Step Three: Chances of losing on the last epidemic
An epidemic has 3 steps, increase, infect, multiply...
  1. Increase...keep this in mind for later.
  2. Infect...an infection card you haven't seen yet
  3. Intensify...all discarded infection cards go back on the top of the draw pile
  4. And then the killer: Draw infected cities.
Its the drawing infected cities that causes the loss. so we will focus on that.  If it is the last epidemic on an standard game, you will be drawing 4 cards.  According the the shuffle rules for epidemic cards (shuffled into stacked piles), you will be looking at having about 10 rounds between epidemics, meaning you would have 31 cards in the infection discard pile when you intensify (3 * 10 +1 (infect)).  Now, I'm going to guess at this point you have 5 outbreaks (about 1.25 outbreaks per epidemic), and that you have been very fortunate as to not be in too much trouble with cubes, so based on the number of cities you have ready to outbreak....

Cities Ready to OutbreakExpected Outbreaks

Cities/30+Cities/29+Cities/28+Cities/27
10.140567414705346
20.281134829410691
30.421702244116037
40.562269658821383
50.702837073526729
60.843404488232074
70.98397190293742
81.12453931764277
91.26510673234811
101.40567414705346

So if you've been doing your job, chances are you will be fine, now, these don't take into account chained out breaks, but it actually doesn't look that scary, unless you are down to 7 cities with 3 cubes in them (7*3 is 28, meaning at this point, the cubes are to be an issue as well).

Conclusion
First, lets look at some numbers we learned
20%, the chance of getting a card of a specific color
12, 6, and 5, You have 12 cards of a certain color, meaning if you burn more than 6 of these cards for research stations or travel, you can't win
20 or 21, the number of turns in a game.

After looking at the results (and using anecdotal evidence), I would have to say the standard game is just a little bit easier than a beginner game, overall, you get 4 more actions in a game where actions mean everything, and if you have been playing good prevention, you run a very small risk of outbreaking.  Now, this being said, most of these differences (even in difficulty) are well within the 5% error that makes a result valid.  So, it doesn't even really make the game that much more challenging, or easy.

However, telling new players they are playing on heroic will never stop being fun.

So I plan to try to do one of these every week.  Next week, I will try to find out just how powerful Australia is in a game of risk, but until then, play smart!