Splitting Boards

Martin01

When I do games, does not matter which type, I prefer to make as any boards as possible because this decreases the probability that I will get answers wrong. However, on some games, there are many probabilities and it takes more time than I want to spend on creating new boards. But, when I attempt not to make as many boards, it seems that I get more answers wrong.

Any advice on how I can come to a happy medium?????

Pacifico

Stop making more boards when switches will get the point across just fine.

If all the questions are scenario based, try one and see if you can do it easily without splitting all the boards.

If there are more boards than questions, better to err on less splitting.

No time spent splitting is wasted. You either learn by laying out a new world or eliminating one. The wasted time comes from debating and spinning your wheels. Give it a whirl, put pencil to paper and move on with your life.

nicole.hopkins

@Martin01 said:
I prefer to make as any boards as possible because this decreases the probability that I will get answers wrong.

Sure—you gotta weigh accuracy (or theoretical accuracy) versus efficiency. Pac's point about switches is +100.

@Pacifico said:
Give it a whirl, out pencil to paper and move on with your life.

Thank you ... hero ...

Martin01

Pacifico and Nicole, can the both of you explain what you mean by "switches?" I want to make sure that I fully understand, so I can implement it effectively.

Pacifico

Imagine a simple five slot sequencing games with five pieces: A, B, C, D, and E. If you know that in a given world A, B, and C must respectively be in slots 1, 2, and 3, then you know that D and E can switch off between slots 4 and 5. Rather than write these out as two separate worlds it is much more efficient to just put a little switch on them, however you notate that is up to you, but a little arc on top going from D to E is what most people do.