hanabi-live icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
hanabi-live copied to clipboard

[Variant] Decimal

Open Romain672 opened this issue 2 years ago • 4 comments

A suit which got 8 cards: (1-), (1+), (2-), (2+), (3-), (3+), 4, 5

You must play 5 cards of that suit in order. So per example (1-), (2-), (2+), 4, 5 or (1-), (1+), (3-), (3+), 4.

Playing (1-) on a stack with (1+) would bomb. If playing a card would reduce the max score (ie usually make a total of 4+ cards skipped), or if the card isn't after the card on the stack, the card would bomb.

Romain672 avatar Jun 10 '22 15:06 Romain672

About the strategy of that suit and it's balance. It look like you only want to play one of the two next card of the suit. So initially you want to play only (1-) or (1+) at 50%/50% to be simple. Which mean after four coin flip in average the (3+) will be played as the forth card. Which leave 4 or 5 for the last card. So it work nicely (and i didn't take into account playing that suit has low priority, so you got some extra % for it).

So I think the difficulty is nice. It's still a drawback (2 less clues compared to a normal suit, and 'two cards playable' initially instead of three, but it's fine).

Romain672 avatar Jun 10 '22 15:06 Romain672

You can also explain this as a suit with 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 5 Where you have to play a greater number on top of the current number and you must play exactly 5 cards to complete the suit.

timotree3 avatar Jun 10 '22 15:06 timotree3

You can also explain this as a suit with 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 5 Where you have to play a greater number on top of the current number and you must play exactly 5 cards to complete the suit.

Hum, and so 1.5 would get touched by 1 clue. Make sense, I like it. Got the name 'decimal' at the very end.

Romain672 avatar Jun 10 '22 15:06 Romain672

The only problem with '.5', is that you expect a 4.5. While with +/- you expect (at least more) a different behaviours, which is less precise, so better since there is artificially no 4.5.

Romain672 avatar Jun 10 '22 17:06 Romain672