Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

LG Allowing Questions to Drive Inferences

IntlArbitrationLawIntlArbitrationLaw Core Member

Hi! I've finished the LG curriculum and am currently redoing the problem sets I got wrong. One of the things I struggle with is figuring out when to let the questions drive the inferences. I only do this once I've spent 5-10 minutes trying to figure things out and moving to the questions in defeat. Is there a way to build this intuition?

Thanks!

Comments

  • SheboyganBoiSheboyganBoi Member
    edited January 2021 195 karma

    One of the biggest things that helped me with this early on was trying to figure out/being hyper vigilant of what rules tend to be good nodes to split gameboards on-- usually the more restrictive rules. Sometimes it can even be a few rules paired together too. A super simple example of this would be something like a big block rule (X is exactly 3 spaces after Y) on a sequencing game. Depending on how many spaces there are in that particular game, rules like this are amazing for splitting off a few gameboards and then trying to apply the other rules.

    Try to keep this in mind every time you're reading the rules of games you do, and as you continue to foolproof, you'll be able to naturally starting picking up on these rules easier and quicker, and if you don't see rules like these, you'll know it's a game to let the question drive you. Just takes time and repetition to get a feel for this. Hope that made sense and helped a little!

  • Auntie2020Auntie2020 Member
    552 karma

    Something that I realized is when there's few rules and many possibilities, probably shouldn't make many subgameboards.

    However, when there is a ton of rules and less possibilities, you could create subgameboards. This is my rule of thumb, but I am flexible about it based on the game!

Sign In or Register to comment.