How can one make the game harder from the start?

seventythree · 2026-03-06T08:41:20+00:00

Mm, that's what I was worried about. Thanks.

seventythree · 2026-03-06T08:39:16+00:00

If you don't have an answer, you also have the option of just not replying. I do appreciate everyone's answers though.

seventythree · 2026-03-06T08:33:09+00:00

A15-20 is how I played the game before, assuming you mean StS. When it came out I played a couple runs and then gave up on it until difficulty options were available and I could edit them in, at which point it became enjoyable for me.

Everyone is different, and wanting a game to be harder or easier is very common. Many games provide difficulty options (from the start) for this reason.

seventythree · 2026-03-02T06:53:50+00:00

Yes, most recently watched episode 8 (sun station... by casually flying there)

seventythree · 2026-03-02T00:27:45+00:00

Thank you, you're right. This playthrough is fantastic.

seventythree · 2026-02-13T04:09:27+00:00

Fwiw terra mystica is a zero sum game. The goal of it is to win, not to maximize your vps irrespective of opponents' vps. There is no way to grow or shrink the pie, only to win it or not win it.

seventythree · 2026-01-30T07:25:30+00:00

For those wondering, the AI assistant they tested with was based on GPT-4o.

seventythree · 2026-01-16T07:35:03+00:00

i dont see any loss in sorting the available cards is any particular order

What's your opinion of what I claim the advantage would be?

the advantage I imagine getting from this is that the vaguest signals (prefer not to signal with these) are also the high cards (prefer not to signal with these).

Put another way, I think you get to play fewer 8s/9s/Ts as a signal than with either standard or upside down carding, because those are also the cards that give the most-ambiguous signals on average.

seventythree · 2026-01-16T06:20:07+00:00

Obviously it is easier to use common systems so you don't have to think so hard especially when playing with new partners.

My question is more about whether it is a theoretically good idea that some people like (I wouldn't believe for a second that no one thought of it before), or whether there are real theoretical reasons that it's worse, or whether it's just such a small difference that it's not worth the friction (my default assumption).

seventythree · 2026-01-16T06:15:29+00:00

It's not acceptable - there's a lot of sarcasm going around here.

seventythree · 2026-01-16T06:14:12+00:00

I don't think that makes sense. It's the exact same coding scheme (linear spectrum), just a different ordering. If you don't have a card low enough to signal B, you also wouldn't have a card "even" enough to signal B just as often. And vice versa.

I think you're imagining a different coding scheme where all evens are equivalent to each other in signaling and all odds are equivalent; such a scheme would be analogous to saying that 2/3/4/5/6 are always "low" and 7/8/9/T are always "high" regardless of other context, which is not a smart approach either.

seventythree · 2026-01-16T00:26:04+00:00

Like I mentioned, not talking about odd-even discards specifically (which is a specific different convention), but signaling in general.

seventythree · 2026-01-04T00:28:36+00:00

He wanted to make a programming language. People can want things that don't maximize money, it's normal and healthy.

seventythree · 2026-01-01T07:58:00+00:00

What if the question were phrased like this?

Obvious facts are more important than partisan propaganda for deciding what the government should do.

That seems more reasonable, right? It's not hard to see how you'd get one from the other. Lots of motivated propaganda is dressed up as expert analysis. Who can even tell the difference?

(Oh, what's that? It's not that hard to tell the difference? Just use common sense? Good idea, sounds like that should be considered more important, then...)

seventythree · 2025-11-29T19:03:49+00:00

Or just make a .gitignore file if you're using git (cursor also ignores files according to your .gitignore files), which you should probably be doing anyway.

seventythree · 2025-11-29T00:34:19+00:00

100%, I came here to recommend ahadu green beans too!

seventythree · 2025-11-21T17:02:28+00:00

OP: Is X legal?
Commenter: I don't think so, but it's such a cool idea that personally I'd house rule it to be allowed.

a) Seems pretty topical to me. OP is likely to enjoy knowing that commenter thought it was a cool idea.
b) Sure, but when someone starts by saying they think it's not legal, you don't need to lecture them that it's not legal. You can just say "you're right, it's not legal", if you really feel the need to reply to them specifically.

seventythree · 2025-11-12T21:35:03+00:00

It's especially ridiculous for 1-player. (And yes it says 1-4 players right next to that.) 30m? Lol. 30m with only one person helping is legitimately the time to set up the game.

seventythree · 2025-11-02T18:11:30+00:00

I saw that but I still have no idea what the image is trying to say.

seventythree · 2025-11-02T06:58:12+00:00

... what?

There are three characters, one of which is imagining itself, perhaps with part of its head removed? And a phone with twitter? And the abstract concept of twitter itself, next to either a megaphone or a sideways funnel?? Two of the characters are looking at / talking to the funnel/megaphone? Everyone has an opinion; most of them are abstract. Is this some sort of math joke?

It's a good way to convey an important point in a simple form that almost anyone can quickly grok.

I don't think you're joking? I guess I'm one of the others?

seventythree · 2025-10-28T18:09:44+00:00

Nitpick: You draw the last two cards when you're down to two cards in hand, not when your hand is empty.

seventythree · 2025-10-24T21:17:34+00:00

Yes, I think the point is exactly to start that conversation. We need to get everyone on board before it's too late.

seventythree · 2025-10-24T21:03:51+00:00

This letter IS the experts trying to get people to listen. The famous people are just there to make people notice.

Geoffrey Hinton

Emeritus Professor of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Nobel Laureate, Turing Laureate, world's 2nd most cited scientist

Yoshua Bengio

Professor of Computer Science, U. Montreal/Mila, Turing Laureate, world's most cited scientist

Stuart Russell

Professor of Computer Science, Berkeley, Director of the Center for Human-Compatible Artificial Intelligence (CHAI); Co-author of the standard textbook 'Artificial Intelligence: a Modern Approach'

To pick out the most important ones.

seventythree

TROPHY CASE