Talk:Go First Dice: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 08:34, 9 July 2024

Role-playing games Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Board and table games Low‑importance

	Games portal This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Two players

Conversation relocated from User talk:Rainwarrior:

Die 1	0	3
Die 2	1	2

Isn't the solution for two players even more trivial than this? If the first dice rolls a 0 they lose, if they roll a 3 they win; The second dice result is irrelevant. It may as well be a single coin flip - heads I win, tails you win. (Hohum ^@) 23:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the goals of the problem are that each player should have their own die, otherwise it's not the go first dice problem anymore. For instance, the 3 player random order could be determined with only 1D6 looking up an order from a table, but that's not the problem we wanted to solve. Harshbarger included the 2 player case in their table, and to me it seemed symmetrical enough with the 3 and 4 cases to be worth explaining in the article. - Rainwarrior (talk) 23:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a second note, that's why Harshbarger's table lists 3 as the fewest total sides (1D2+1D1) rather than 2. Both players must have a die, even if it's 1-sided. - Rainwarrior (talk) 23:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The second dice serves no purpose, it's redundant; the person using it isn't taking part in anything meaningful. It seems like a terrible example. (Hohum ^@) 21:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Optimal"

The article uses the word "optimal" repeatedly, but the term is not defined, and it's not used in the reference. If it means "permutation-fair", it is redundant where it's used. I'm not sure what else it could mean. 144.82.114.249 (talk) 08:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 ::The second dice serves no purpose, it's redundant; the person using it isn't taking part in anything meaningful. It seems like a terrible example. ([[User:Hohum|<b style="color: Green;">Hohum</b>]] [[User talk:Hohum|<sup style="color: Red;">@</sup>]]) 21:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
+== "Optimal" ==
+The article uses the word "optimal" repeatedly, but the term is not defined, and it's not used in the reference. If it means "permutation-fair", it is redundant where it's used. I'm not sure what else it could mean. [[Special:Contributions/144.82.114.249|144.82.114.249]] ([[User talk:144.82.114.249|talk]]) 08:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)