CORDIAL MINUET ENSEMBLE

I think the rising ante is perfect the way it is, Ive personally had games go up to round 15 on the ante. Every pick is a chance to work out part of your opponents strategy, so by the end of round 3 ( still a very low ante ) you've already seen your opponents strategy 9 times.

I had the same issue when I compiled on my system.

Just install the x32 bit packages and their dependencies. On debian this is easy as adding "i386" after the package name.

sudo apt-get install <package-name>:i386

also make usre ldd is linking to the right libgl.so files. You might have to put in some sym links to get it to reference the right one.

Here is an official page from the debian wiki describing some of this. https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/HOWTO

will we be able to see who is holding each amulet and the amount of points each player has accrued, same as the last contest?

EDIT: Never-mind, I just saw your post on the feedback thread.

It seems everyone has already brought up my thoughts, mostly the problem was the ratio between number of amulets and active players.  Depending on ones time zone (and sleep schedule) it was difficult to find a game when holding and not holding an amulet, forcing me to adopt the drop-and-catch method and limiting the total games I could play.

This essentially put me out of the running for the high value amulets so when I received a low value (the $20 amulet) I held on to it as long as possible, while playing conservatively, and ensuring me the win.

One thing I believe will still be relevant in the official contest is the advantage given by playing a large number of games. The obvious reason is more possible exposure to games involving an amulet, the ability to pick up a high value amulet quickly after its dropped, and a higher points earned / points burned (the holding penalty).

EDIT: This could be solved by raising the minimum wager to be pulled into an amulet game (so $1-3 = amulet game), however this would give the more "financially sound" players an advantage because really what's losing $3 every 5 minutes when you make $40+ an hour?

I did find a certain amount of collusion was possible between two communicating players with the current active players ~5, albeit was time consuming and obvious what was happening if you looked at canto delirium.

All-in-all I had fun and was glad to be able to participate, so as everyone has said, thank you Jason.

Im not sure if this is desired but, I played an amulet game (the $75 one) against cat flask. The wager was 20c and neither of us had the amulet going in. At the end of the game I lost and cat flask gained the amulet, however my balance still shows I lost the 20c.

This may be my confusion but I thought in amulet games the amulet was the prize at stake and not the initial wager.

Even a board with a poor statistical advantage can win if played correctly, because the skill of CM is to accurately predict what your opponent will play for themselves and you.

The only argument for the game to have any aspect of chance is, given two players of significantly high skill levels, does the favour of the board determine the victor?
I believe the answer is no because I believe CM is and ideal skill based game (comparable to chess, go shogi), and there is no cap on the amount of skill one could have.

Post pick-2 forced win scenarios do exist in CM, these aren’t invisible to the opposing player if they can deduce the possible outcomes (of the game) and know the odds of you having one (of the forced wins).

Now Im curious, In boards containing post turn-2 forced win scenarios are the potential games resulting in these (% of 720) equal for both players? (does one player have a higher chance of getting a forced win?)

Sorry, that was me, I was curious to see how people would react to a player who consistently over-bets. I wasn't trying to bully you into folding I was going all in even when I got low numbers ( I remember one turn I got a 1 and still bet the full amount ). I also would only do this on low stakes games (games .10cents or less).

I wont actually use this play style anymore since I dont want to ruin the fun of the game for anyone else.

I would like to discuss the strategies and counter strategies for players who will adopt this play style. Im sure were going to see a lot of this after the release.

+1 for this idea

I see where I went wrong.

Im still not sure the actual number is 720 though because it doesnt filter out duplicate moves, ie you couldnt choose both column 1 for yourself and your opponent.
Am I right in thinking this way?

Ill refine my method to take this into account and post back the results.

Sorry, you are right, the actual possible moves for a player to make is 720. That makes the possible sequence of plays each player could make combined to be 518400.

Also, Ive found what im calling the "Perfect Square" it gives no statistical advantage to either player. Im using it for a baseline to compare other magic squares against.

36	1	36	1	36	1
1	1	1	36	36	36
36	36	36	1	1	1
1	36	36	1	1	36
1	1	1	36	36	36
36	36	1	36	1	1

Now im curious about how many "perfect squares" that exist other than the one above?

Thank you very much!

I should have been more specific.

What I want to do is give myself tools for analyzing the game board before the first pick, and after all susequent picks. I can display simple text data back on the command line but I want to be able to graph my data using CM's existing methods.

I will be attempting to do all of this from scratch tomorrow (Its my day off ) but figured I would ask first so Im not reinventing the wheel.