استریم

دسته: تغییرات و بهینه‌سازی‌ها

  • Thinking Beyond Mechanisms Ep 19

    Thinking Beyond Mechanisms Ep 19


    Welcome!

    Welcome to Ludology, an analytical discussion of the hows and whys of the world of board games. Rather than news and reviews, Ludology explores a variety of topics about games from a wider lens, as well as discuss game history, game design and game players.

    We post a new Ludology episode every other week. In these episodes, hosts Erica Bouyouris and Sen-Foong Lim deep-dive into a single topic within game design, often with a well-regarded guest from the game industry. We generally focus on tabletop game design (mainly board games and RPGs), but we often pull in experts from all forms of games, from video games to escape rooms to slot machines.

    On weeks where there is no flagship Ludology episode, we will alternate between two smaller mini-sodes. Erica and Sen are happy to announce that Sarah Shipp of Shippboard Games and Stephanie Campbell of TTRPGKids will be joining us for the next year, providing additional content between our longer episodes.

    Sarah’s segment, Thinking Beyond Mechanisms, is a monthly feature that dives deeper into the other aspects of games beyond the dice and cards we’re all familiar with.

    Stephanie’s segment, TTRPGKids, explores how parents and teachers can use role playing games with children in the home and in the classroom.

    We hope you enjoy the additional content!

    Our History

    We aim for most Ludology episodes to be timeless, so you are welcome to explore our entire catalog. Most of it should age quite well. The podcast was started in 2011 by Geoff Engelstein and Ryan Sturm, with Mike Fitzgerald taking over for Ryan in 2015. Gil and Scott joined the show in 2017 when Mike stepped aside, and Emma joined in 2019 when Geoff ended his tenure as host. Emma left in 2021, and Erica and Sen joined us. Since then, Scott stepped down in 2022 and Gil will be hanging up his mic in 2023, leaving Erica and Sen to carry on this amazing legacy.

    Erica and Sen are working to bring new voices to Ludology and have some great things to announce as gaming expands to include even more people!

    Contact Us 

    Have your own thoughts about our topics? We encourage you to visit us at our guild on Boardgamegeek to get involved in a continuing discussion.

    You can also email us at hello@ludology.net.

    Ludology is part of The Dice Tower Network, the premier board game media network.

    If you have questions that you’d like answered on Ludology, let us know by filling out this Google Form; you can also leave an audio question that we can use on the show, if you wish! 

    Burning Questions for Ludology

    Burning Question

    Support the Show

    Ludology is made possible through the support and donations of listeners like you.

    We currently have 3 “First Listen” series that will go out to Patrons well in advance of the audio being released to the wider audience.

    • The Memories that Made Us (monthly) – memories about gaming experiences that helped shape the people that bring modern games to life
    • Tales from the Designer Toolbox (monthly) – tips and tricks from industry pros learned from both success and failure
    • Ludology Live – recordings from conventions around the world

    Patrons will also get extra consideration for any giveaways that we might have!

    Become a Ludology Patron

    Become a patron

    You can also make a one-time or monthly donation here. The link will take you to Erica’s account. People who donate in this way will not have access to the Patreon page – sorry!





    Source link

  • Which property group colour gives the best ROI , undeveloped or fully developed, in Monopoly?


    Everybody always goes for the dark blues in Monopoly (Mayfair and Park Lane in the UK edition), but I’m convinced that the cheaper colour groups offer a better return on investment, partly because you can fully develop them quicker, and partly because you can own more squares, thereby giving you more "hits" and a steadier income. But is there any analysis to support (or refute) this view?



    Source link

  • How likely are you to lose because Fool’s Landing sinks into the abyss?


    Since I like probability questions, and tttpp brought it up, I figured it might be interesting to calculate how likely you are to lose on the first turn in Forbidden Island, because Fool’s Landing sinks into the abyss. This question is only interested in figuring the odds of losing the game during the first players turn. It would be slightly more difficult to figure the odds of losing during the first round, where each player has taken one turn at most. If this question gets enough attention, I might decide to ask that question and figure out the odds. To figure out the odds of losing, you will need to calculate the following:

    • What are the odds that the first player cannot shore up Fool’s Landing? (depends upon the first player’s character, their starting location, and Fool’s Landing location)
    • What are the odds that no player has received a Sandbag/Helicopter (depends upon number of players)
    • What are the odds that a Waters Rise card is drawn?
    • What are the odds that Fool’s Landing is redrawn after Waters Rise? (difficultly level effects this)

    What are the odds range of losing on the first turn for a 2-4 Player game? Calculate each individual component separately, and then provide a range of maximum/minimum odds of losing on the first turn based upon the individual components above. Assume the following:

    • The all players will attempt to shore up Fool’s Landing. (use Sandbags/Helicopter)
    • The default island map is used.
    • The first player and their character are randomly determined, per the rules.
    • Ignore the odds of losing because a player sinks into the abyss. (optional:)
    • Ignore the odds of losing because both tiles for a particular treasure sink into the abyss. (optional)

    Note: Calculate this if you want, but I am not uninterested in the minimal effect on the result of losing first turn.



    Source link

  • Origin of scores for letters in Scrabble (in relation to their frequency in a language)


    In Scrabble, each letter is worth a number of points. Typically, the rarer the letter, the more score it has, see Scrabble letter distribution and score.

    Does anyone know how these scores are being assigned? (Or modified, if needed.) Is it based on some gut-feeling, or a formula/algorithm?

    As I see, the score is proportional to surprisal (from information theory), i.e. \log(1/p), where p is the frequency of a given letter in a given language. Just I am not sure, if such scoring is planned mathematically, or appeared as some emergent behavior (e.g. other scoring seems unfair, unnatural, etc…).



    Source link

  • If I double (takeout) after the opponents have bid two different suits, does the takeeout apply to "both" bids or only the most recent one?


    My left hand opponent dealt and bid one diamond. Partner passed. My right hand opponent bid one spade. I wanted to double one diamond, but not one spade, with the following hand: ♠KQT5 ♡K92 ♢2 ♣ KT653.

    So I passed. Left hand opponent rebid two diamonds. Partner and right hand opponent passed. Now I doubled, because the last opposing bid was diamonds.

    Partner’s distribution was 4-3-4-2, with xxx in hearts and Qx in clubs. She passed because she had four cards each and her remaining seven honor points in suits bid by the opponents, and she thought she was "playing defense." She didn’t want to bid one of her short "round" suits (clubs or hearts)to take out my double.

    I told her, "I had four spades to support a spade bid, and a only a singleton diamond opposite your four diamonds. We were not strong enough to defend, but we were strong enough to play two spades" (RHO opponent had five little ones for his bid).

    Partner thought that my double showed shortness in both the opponents suits. I say that my bidding pattern showed shortness only in diamonds and suggested strength in spades. Are either of these interpretations more nearly correct than the other? Or do some world class partnerships use one, and some the other?



    Source link

  • Does a card have a keyword if it has the same effect as said keyword?


    I was looking at Contingency Plan and found the effect surprisingly similar to the keyword Surveil. To compare, first the wording of Contingency Plan and then the wording of the Surveil keyword:

    Look at the top five cards of your library. Put any number of them into your graveyard and the rest back on top of your library in any order.

    And

    701.41a To “surveil N” means to look at the top N cards of your library, then put any number of them into your graveyard and the rest on top of your library in any order.

    They quite clearly are the same, so can I assume the card states “Surveil 5” instead? And if so, does it trigger abilities which state “Whenever you surveil …”?



    Source link

  • Exactly how does casting another players spells work? (Aeon’s End)


    There are a couple of ways in which Player 1 can end up with the option to cast spells prepped by Player 2.

    At the start of the game this is very simple – P1 casts a spark that P2 prepped, and deals 1 dmg. Great.

    But as the game progresses this gets more and more complex, and it doesn’t really specify exactly how this works?

    Things like:

    • Which Breach is being used? Do you get Breach 3/4 bonuses?
    • If the spell text refers to "you" then who does it refer to P1 or P2?
    • If the spell lets the player discard/destroy, then is it the owner or the active player?
    • If another spell/card cared whether "you had cast a spell" … then who cast that spell?
    • Where does the spell go after casting?



    Source link

  • Is reading the back of the main villain cheating?


    I was learning Star Wars The Clone Wars Board Game | A Pandemic System, and while setting up, I ended up reading the back side of the villain card just to understand the mechanics of the game. Is the back side supposed to be hidden information or just another phase of the game?



    Source link

  • Who, if anyone, opens 1NT strong (15-17) in first and second positions and weak (12-14) in late position?


    As dealer, I would be afraid to open 1NT with 12-14 for fear that one of my two opponents might clobber me with a strong (15-17) 1NT hand.

    If all pass to me in later positions, at least one of my opponents does not have an opening hand, and in fourth position neither has such. With a balanced 13 in last position, I figure that the other three hands each have 7-11 points, and even if partner has the weakest of the three remaining hands, we’re no worse off than even (13+7=20).

    If I had a good five card major, I’d open one of the major. But suppose by distribution is 2-3-4-4, that is skewed to the minors. A bid of a minor would invite opposing overcalls in the majors, while 1NT forces the next bid to come at the 2 level.

    Does anyone (of note in the bridge world) bid a weak 1Nt in late position and a strong 1NT in early position?



    Source link

  • In Seven Wonders, can I build multiple Halicarnassus B stages in the same age, and thus play multiple discarded cards in the end of the same age?


    This came up last game I played. I purposely built Halicarnassus stages 2 and 3 both in age 3 with the expectation that I would be able to then play two cards from the discard at the end of age 3. Is that allowed?

    Here’s the rulebook entry for Halicarnassus side b – doesn’t seem to restrict using two stage powers the same age?

    The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus

    • the first stage is worth 2 victory points and the player can look at
      all of the cards discarded since the beginning of the game and build
      one for free.
    • the second stage is worth 1 victory point and the player can look at
      all of the cards discarded since the beginning of the game and build
      one for free.
    • when they build the third stage, the player can look at all of the cards
      discarded since the beginning of the game and build one for free.
      Clarification : this special action is taken at the end of the turn in which the
      stage is built. If players discard cards on that turn (for example, during the
      6th turn of an age), the player can also choose from among those cards.



    Source link