3 ms·
Previous discussion on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1132991 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1132991 At that time, he only had solutions for up t
by lotharbot 16y ago
Previous discussion on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1132991 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1132991
At that time, he only had solutions for up to 5 players. I submitted the first 6-player solution [0], which is also the only constructed solution I have seen (the others were found using brute force algorithms.)
[0] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1134906 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1134906
- benjoffe 16y agoThanks again for passing on that idea for the 6 player deck. The concept that a repeating deck can be easily found was what helped find most of the higher order decks. edit: I'm not sure if brute force is the correct term (though I may be wrong), it's kind of simulated annealing. The difference being I'm not checking all possible decks, only the ones that appear promising.
- lotharbot 16y agoI remember going back to the site a while after submitting my solution. I'd been so happy that I'd given you the solution for the largest number of players yet, feeling like I had made a real contribution, and was somewhat disappointed to see that you'd surpassed it many times over. I am again restored to happiness, knowing that my contribution played a part in those solutions. Thanks for letting me know! --- Also, you are right; "brute force" appears to specifically refer to exhaustive search methods. It was a poor word choice on my part.