The CIA uses board games to train officers
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
http://grantland.com/features/diplomacy-the-board-game-of-th...
“I guess I’m just a hard muthafucka like that.”
Damn, that's funny.
“Are you going to be paid for writing this story?” a Scottish player asked me. “Because I am losing three days’ wages to be here so that I can get screwed by you.”
> “Are you going to be paid for writing this story?” a Scottish player asked me. “Because I am losing three days’ wages to be here so that I can get screwed by you."
The leading > and italics make it clear that it's quoted and it avoids making the reader scroll horizontally. Not perfect but it's about the best you can do here, AFAIK.
Try posting small piece of code. You hear me HN?!
Edit: I found the formatting doc for HN https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc
> Text after a blank line that is indented by two or more spaces is reproduced verbatim. (This is intended for code.)
So that might be the answer to putting code on here.
function say(message: string, volume: number): void {
//do text to speech code here
}
```typescript
new line with the code
```
I guess moving HN to markdown could be done. Just say all posts after X date are markdown(or add a boolean to the post in the DB saying so. Then have the editor have like a preview button(but I know HN likes to be lite on JS stuff) but the md could be generated server-side, but do the preview client side.
Also notable: http://www.playdiplomacy.com/
The right way to measure the skill required for a game is how many tiers you can construct where each tier reliably beats the one below it. I.e. ELO or something like it.
That said, who cares? They are both beautiful and deep in their own way.
Human psychology may just seem complex to humans, as we have to look from within the maze, not from outside or above it.
I wonder if the first alien species we encounter would consider us elaborate or simple..
Well, crude but mighty is also an option. We could be the Huns ravaging distant worlds.
I had read lots and lots of strategy articles on the web, planned all my deviant schemes in my head, and finally signed up to a newbie PBEM diplomacy game.
I'm probably the first Englishman in the history of the game who never even got off that damn island.
I've seen people start to get agitated at each other playing Pandemic.
it sounds like the structure of the marine officer training camp avoids the problems some students have with poor "exam technique" - if you are given a fixed block of time to use to attempt all tasks (e.g. the obstacle course, the exercise room) then there is the risk of students spending all their time on the hardest task, and not leaving enough time to succeed at the other easier tasks.
edit: on another hand, you could argue that "a student's poor exam technique" could equally well be called "poorly designed exam / measurement process"
Taught that game a few years ago to my Boston friends (back when I lived in Boston) and it ended up being a big hit and I never won a game again.
I'm too nice, I guess.
Not sure if relevant but the guy who tended to win the most now heads a multimillion-dollar company. So there's that...
There's a very popular board game they're also very good at, and have been for at least a century.
Humans are humans. And game theory is the same for every game, only the medium changes.
In real life, you have to make choices. Some choices preclude certain futures while enabling others. Sometimes you can make a sacrifice now in order to "win" later. Etc.
I am not saying that memorizing complex mating patterns for example can be directly transposed to real life decision making. Rather, realizing these exist, and appropriating the patterns of thought that make such analyses possible is what is beneficial.
You are right that we aren't "built to exhaustively analyze game trees", but this is precisely what makes learning chess a good thing: you get to train your mind to do that. Transposing that skill in real life is, I believe, beneficial.
> In general, a beginner is around 800, a mid-level player is around 1600, and a professional, around 2400.
I think you're at a much more specialized level. You need to see many moves ahead, and predict your opponent effectively. That won't generalize so well, because it's purely focused on the rules of chess.
But I've never had the patience for chess or go.
A lot of modern board games have just as much analysis involved and the themes make them way more fun for me.
It won't. Chess is a game, you can learn chess to play a better game of chess and maybe you'll find other games where you can use the knowledge gained (but less likely), but you will rarely - if ever - be in a position where you apply a lesson learned in chess to a real life situation. And if you did you probably would end up making a mistake.
(Edit: I dont think you got my joke)
I mean, yes, world class Risk players ;-)
But, as this is HN and we aren't allowed the luxury of comedy in this state (I thought we were stateless) -- Ill have to go with the binary position of the fact that we are either funny or un-funny... I beleive myself to be funny, I believe you to be funny... but my funny logic turns to fuzzy logic here so I need you to be solid with me???
If you're looking for a 20min party game on the same vibe, I can't recommend The Resistance: Avalon highly enough. A more recent take on the hidden role and voting genre is Secret Hitler, but I didn't try that yet.
Links:
Twilight Struggle: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/12333/twilight-struggle
Cuba Libre (COIN series): https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/111799/cuba-libre
Other COIN games: https://www.gmtgames.com/c-36-coin-series.aspx
The Resistance - Avalon: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/128882/resistance-avalon
Matchmaking is there as well as async play, so you can get a game going with a stranger. but, it might take awhile.
I've played it (with a friend) about 30 hours so far, it really is a great game. After a few brutal losses I started to get the hang of it. There is depth, sacrifice and tough decision making. I'm definitely a fan of the game, now.
Speaking of which, I ought to go take my turn.
[1] https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamedesigner/772/volko-ruhnke
Is there some kind of training we need that awesome board games could help with?
When you're working in a company sometimes people are in different silos. Opportunities to discuss things across the company are lacking. But these discussions are often useful; a problem in one department might be a simple fix from another department. People hate meetings. People like games. A games afternoon once a fortnight would help people discuss this stuff.
RTS is very useful and you can learn a lot.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarCraft_II:_Wings_of_Liberty
Some of the 10-20 year old RTS games got released as HD-editions recently. But they are just the same old games. What is really needed are new games with new content. Not just lame cheap re-releases named "HD". The world needs new Triple-A RTS games, that are not clones of Star Craft 2. Star Craft 1, Age of Empires and Command and Conquer series were better games in many respect and this is what is missing today - non-causul non-F2P new RTS games with realistic scenarios like in C&C Generals and Age of Empires or Empire Earth series.
Total War is a computer series of strategy games developed by The Creative Assembly. These combine turn-based strategy and resource management, with real-time tactical control of battles.
It's not a Real-Time-Stragey (RTS) game series like Age of Empire, Command and Conquer or War Craft.
The rise of "casual" games was essentially irrelevant, actually, but that's another story.
Also, to put yourself in the shoes of a country (in terms of crisis). Imagine you're a guy with several women:
Some women are chill with being friends and understand that. Some women want you to settle, but you don't or can't. Some women just hate you. Some women share no interest but could be converted depending on time, resource allocation (e.g. time or else), etc.
After a while things seem simple, then you notice time conflicts, argument conflicts. Then you begin to think: "What if they're doing the same thing I'm doing?"
Then comes in the role of intelligence collection and plausible deniability as well of minimizing evidence showing alternative events of the same story.
Then, of course will come a time when alliances are formed. Are you with them, or are you not? Intel sharing? What if they compare the metadata of x and y event and see an outlier?