CronoDAS comments on Rationality Quotes November 2009 - Less Wrong

8 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 November 2009 11:36PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (275)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: CronoDAS 01 December 2009 05:12:13AM 4 points [-]

I've played some Settlers of Catan myself, and it took me a while to realize what you were talking about. (If I understand correctly, you chose not to build a settlement next to a tile that produces resources when a 6 is rolled, and by chance, the settlement wouldn't have produced any resources this turn because a 6 wasn't rolled. Therefore, waiting a turn to build the settlement didn't actually hurt you, but it could have.) I see similar situations all the time when playing Magic.

Similarly, even if you do win the lottery, buying a negative expected value ticket was still a mistake.

Comment author: Blueberry 04 December 2009 08:35:06PM 1 point [-]

This also happens all the time in poker, especially when you see the flop and instinctively feel good (or bad) that you folded.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 December 2009 07:50:23AM *  0 points [-]

I've played some Settlers of Catan myself, and it took me a while to realize what you were talking about.

Well spotted!

If I understand correctly, you chose not to build a settlement next to a tile that produces resources when a 6 is rolled, and by chance, the settlement wouldn't have produced any resources this turn because a 6 wasn't rolled. Therefore, waiting a turn to build the settlement didn't actually hurt you, but it could have.

Yes, By forgetting I had a wood port I could have lost possible resources from a 6 or even more if a 7 came while the cards were still in my hand.

I see similar situations all the time when playing Magic.

I see them rather less. I've played sufficiently few games that I mostly notice the mistakes when the cards drop and my Feral Hydra gets fried. RIP.

Comment author: CronoDAS 01 December 2009 08:36:18AM *  4 points [-]

I was mostly thinking about mulligans. If you kept a one land hand and go on to win because you drew three lands in a row, that doesn't mean keeping it was the right decision. Conversely, if you do mulligan your 7 card hand and then end up with completely unplayable 6 card and 5 card hands, that doesn't mean that you should have kept your original hand.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 December 2009 09:09:19AM 1 point [-]

Perfect example.

Comment author: CronoDAS 01 December 2009 10:05:15AM 2 points [-]

And now we've managed to completely confuse all the non-gamers here. ;)

Comment author: Matt_Simpson 04 December 2009 05:44:21PM *  0 points [-]

I think the same things in both mtg and catan. Up until recently, the online version of catan ("xplorers") ensured a balanced distribution, so you could make decisions based on what was "due." Good for developing sloppy habits.

Comment author: Blueberry 04 December 2009 08:38:59PM 1 point [-]

That's actually a variation. It's marketed as the "deck of dice" or something like that. Essentially, you're making random draws from the set of all 36 outcomes when rolling two dice without replacement, instead of with replacement. I'm not sure that leads to sloppy habits as much as it encourages card-counting, which isn't that strategically interesting. But since Settlers is a game of exponential growth, it does avoid the problem where 11 comes up five times in a row near the beginning of the game, giving one player a huge advantage.