4 ms·
This is also brought up in the comments of the article itself. Yes, the game could be over in fewer turns/dice rolls this way. But then, would someone really pa
by what 16y ago
This is also brought up in the comments of the article itself. Yes, the game could be over in fewer turns/dice rolls this way. But then, would someone really pay that much for the property at auction? Maybe not.
- jerhinesmith 16y agoAgreed, but we are talking about the shortest theoretically possible game anyway, so might as well put all options on the table. One could argue that rolling doubles 5 times in the first 7 roles is just as unlikely. :)
- what 16y agoAh, right. My thinking was that in the scenario proposed in the article, it doesn't matter what player 2 does (apart from the dice rolls, which is beyond their control anyway) they'll still lose. You only have to control the actions of player 1. While in the auction scenario you need to control both players to make it work. So if you were actually playing as player 1 and all the dice rolls lined up, you would only be guaranteed to pull off the scenario in the article. But I guess it doesn't matter since both scenarios are theoretically possible.