When to Use a Chart Versus Regular Grouping Game Set Up. PLEASE HELP

Comments

• 1 Like

  Cant Get Right Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 🍌 7Sage Tutor

  March 2016 27885 karma

  I’ve really only just started on Games, but for me, it’s a matter of inherent distribution limits before the rules. So in a car game, that’s a standard grouping game because if A goes in car 1, A cannot go in car 2. In the dog show game, a dog cannot be grouped in both the winners and losers columns; not because of any rules, but because of the inherent binary nature of the groups. With the street food game, is there really anything limiting the distribution? Not really. If everyone wants hot dogs, let’s all get hot dogs. Everyone can get everything. Of course, once the rules are applied this changes, but before the rules kick, there is theoretically universal distribution. Much like with the disease symptoms game. Can they each have all three symptoms? Sure. Theoretically universal distribution. Chart.
• 7 Likes

  runiggyrun Alum Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐

  March 2016 edited March 2016 2481 karma

  Hi @linda_matias91, I think your three indicators while not necessarily wrong overcomplicate things a bit, but maybe you are only starting with games and you are looking for "key phrases" to recognize, rather than key concepts.
  The key concepts that you would need to recognize are:
  1. If no element is used more than once, you don't need to use a chart.
  2. If some elements can be used more than once, a chart might be easier, but it's not always necessary or best.
  
  I'll expand a bit on each.
  1. No element used more than once (either in the same group or in different groups) will usually be identified by phrases like "no person can serve in more than one committee" or something similar OR will be implicit through the laws of nature (for example we know that no person can be in two places at the same time so we don't need a rule for that).
  If the game states "every element is used at least once", that means that it's a straight up grouping game, not a grouping game with a supplemental "out" category. It can suggests that you might want to use a chart because it allows for elements being used more than once (otherwise it would say every element is used only once).
  
  2. Some elements can be used more than once
  
  In most games, elements used more than once will in some way be restricted to "elements can be part of different groups"
  The hot dog game is an example - the rules tell us that each person orders a single portion of each item. So all three people could get hot dogs, but nobody can be a pig and get 3 hotdogs for themselves.
  The symptoms game does the same thing using the rules of nature rather than specified rules. And yes, the LSAT does allow for rules of nature and really basic common sense, unless specifically suspended by premises. So, once you have a fever, you have a fever. You can't have 2 fevers at once. (Among other common sense limitations are things like you can't be first and third at the same time, you can't be in Portland and Boston at the same time, it can't be both winter and summer, if you're making three rugs out of colored thread each rug has to have at least one color, otherwise there's no rug to speak of)
  
  In a handful of games elements can be used more than once per group (I believe there's a game where you use certain kinds of flowers and certain numbers of each kind. A tricky one for sure - I did use a chart for that)
  
  If the game allows for elements to be used more than once, you need to look at the rules to see whether a chart would be the best approach.
  a. I'd use a chart if there are several rules that span two or more groups (A and B don't have any options in common. If C has power windows, then D has leather seats; A, B, C and another car have sunroofs and so on.
  b. I'd use a regular grouping board and keep strict track of the number of slots in each group if all the rules are of the sort: A has more ingredients than B. C has the most ingredients of all. D has the fewest ingredients.
  Once the type of rules above start getting combined with "A and B have nothing in common", I'd switch to a chart, because now you can make inferences across the groups.
  c. You can use either type of board if the majority of rules are "within group" rules, but you have a rule that goes across groups. For example: if a park has a museum it has to have a garden (one group rule); If a park has a fountain, it can't have a playground (one group rule); There are two gardens (cross group rule). JY used a chart, I used a grouping board - worked out to about the same time, but I find it easier to copy over a grouping board than a chart, and JY has a magic eraser :-)
  
  Hope this helps a bit - it looks like a lot of stuff to remember, but with practice you will sort of instinctively know, because all these mental decisions will be automatic and second nature.
  
• 2 Likes

  MrSamIam Inactive ⭐

  March 2016 edited March 2016 2086 karma

  Not knowing which set of variables to use as the base v. the game pieces is a strong indicator (the two will seem interchangeable in terms of their role in the game).
  
  I tend to use a chart when the variables are either doing something, or they're not. This is not to be confused with an in-out game - where the variables are either in or out.
  
  For instance (car game example): There are 3 cars, and each car CAN have ANY of 3 features. Which do you use as the base? It's tough to tell. More importantly, notice that the cars can either have, or not have the features - again, not an in-out game since we're not trying to decide which cars are picked and which are not...rather, we're deciding which features are picked for each car, and which are not.
• linmat09 Member

  March 2016 10 karma

  @runiggyrun
  
  I like what you explained in B. So basically, if the rules speak to some sort of distribution (e.g. group 1 has 4 variables, or group 3 has to have more than group 2), it's better to just use the standard grouping game set up.
  
  I have noticed it was difficult with a chart to sometimes keep track of any row or column having more variables.
  
  
  Also, perhaps what I'm about to say is a logical flaw, LOL, but in regards to A, is it safe to then assume that if the rules DONT include two or more groups, you're probably better off just using a STANDARD grouping game set up?
  
  1 Group rule- "City 3 can only have flowers"
  2 Group rule- "City 3 can only have a park, if City 4 and 5 have a museum"
  
  PS "but not both" relationships are AWESOMELY depicted in chart set ups! :-D
  
  Lastly,
  Can you please elaborate further on point C.... I have been watching the core lessons a little out of order (I actually used a different course b4 7sage, so i'm skipping some lessons and targeting others) so I might have missed the whole "one group rule" versus "cross group" rule. I'll go search for that in the syllabus but I would really welcome an explanation of how that applies to figuring out when to use a chart versus a standard grouping game set up.
  
  Okay and really lastly,
  what about my question in regards to a cell being able to contain MORE than one variable?
  In the hot dog, fruit cup game, the first rule specifies that each portion is only ONE hot dog, or ONE fruit cup. Contrast this with the City of millvile, subzones, industrial, residential game where each subzone can have like TWO housing uses.
  
  Is it safe to say that when you CAN have 2 variables in each CELL (a cell of a chart), then you shouldn't use a chart....
  
  
• runiggyrun Alum Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐

  March 2016 2481 karma

  First things first: I can't say much about the subzones game because I haven't done PT 67 yet; maybe someone else is able to comment on that specific game.
  I did encounter an earlier game where you could have more than one element of each type in the same group (game 1 PT9). Three corsages of 3 flowers each, made of 4 kinds of flowers (roses, orchids, violets and gardenias) that allowed for "repeat" flowers within a corsage, like 2 roses and one violet. For that game I think a grouping board is easier (even though I initially used a chart and it was fine but a bit clunky) because the rules tell you that you have exactly three slots in each group and the rules apply to each corsage separately (what I called "one group rules"). Corsage 1 has this, corsage 2 has this, and so on. I think for that game it was the nature of the rules and the fact that we knew exactly how many slots were in each group, rather than the duplicate elements/group that made the grouping board a more logical choice. The zoning game might be an updated incarnation of that, and it would be the rules that determine what sort of board I'd use.
  
  Now in order for the rest of your questions:
  I think games where the rules only speak of numbers in each group (scenario b) are going to be very rare, but there are games where you will know that keeping track of the numbers is going to be THE most important thing, even if you have one odd rule that is not strictly a numbers rule. For those games I'd focus on making all the numbers inferences, and then the extra rule(s) can probably be accommodated by a grouping board with those inferences clearly shown. BTW, there are MANY games where each piece gets used only once (so, grouping games with no chart needed) where the number distribution is absolutely key to solving the game. It's always a great idea to keep track of numbers.
  
  To make it easy to keep track of the numbers for chart boards, I write the total number allowed/needed at the bottom of the column (just under the chart) or at the end of the row (to the right of the chart). Sometimes what you know about the number changes as you go through the rules. I cross/erase the intermediate number and circle the final.
  I'll make up a version of the car/options game, but with made up rules to illustrate the thought process I go through and how I notate it.
  We have cars A, B, C, D, E and options p, r, s, t.
  Each car has at least one option. Each option is used at least once.
  You start out with a grid with 5 columns (ABCDE) and 4 rows (prst), and each car can have 4 options at the start.
  Rule 1: A and B can't have any options in common -->that means that A and B have 3 or less options each (if they had four, they would overlap). I'd write <=3 at the bottom of the A and B columns.
  Rule 2: C has less options than any other car. --> that means A, B, D and E have at least 2 options (C can't have less than one, so all the others have to have at least 2). C has to have 2 or less, because having 3 would cause A or B to have 4, and rule 1 doesn't allow that. Combined with rule 1, we now know A and B can have 2/3 options, C can have 1/2, D and E can have 2, 3 or 4. Erase/cross over what I had before, and write these numbers at the bottom of each column.
  Rule 3. C and D don't have any options in common. Now we know D only has 2/3 options (the 4 is off the table because if D had 4 it would overlap with C). Write 2/3 under the D column
  Rule 4. D has the more options than any other car. Now we know D is 3, and everything else is less: A, B and E are 2 each, and C must be 1. Make sure you write and circle these numbers below the appropriate columns.
  
  Rule 5. There are more cars with p than r, and more cars with s than p. Now, because we have A/B and C/D with non overlapping options, the maximum number of each option is 3 (A or B, C or D and E). So S is 3, p is 2 and r is 1. Write these numbers at the end of the s, p and r rows and circle them. You also know that E must have s, as it's the only way to get to 3 s's.
  
  
  This is now a very restrictive chart, where you know how many options you have for each car, and you also have two mutually exclusive groups A/B and C/D. Any extra information will lead to a ton of inference.
  
  This is more information than you're likely to get, but that's the general thought process for some of the more complex chart games. The fever game for instance relies on a similar train of number inferences to reach the fact that disease N has 1 symptom and disease M has 3, but it's a lot simpler with fewer groups and fewer elements.
  
  For my point C - that's just my own notation, I don't think JY uses "one group" or "cross group" rules. I mean if a rule only affects what happens in one group, I call it a "one group rule" (If A has x then it has y; if A has z then it doesn't have w; y and w are always together, no group can have both y and z etc). These rules can be represented with "blocks" (or crossed over blocks). I find that for games where the vast majority of rules are like this, and maybe one rule isn't, a regular grouping setup is faster to copy, and a chart is not typically necessary (you just remember the "extra" rule).
  
  A "cross group" rule is one that gives you information about how one group affects the other (A has x, then B has y; there are 2 w's; A and B have exactly 2 things in common, etc). These sorts of rules would be nearly impossible to keep track of with a simple grouping board, because you can't really make a "block", and conditionals would be tedious to keep track of. So if more than one rule is of this sort, I'd use a chart.
  
  I think your example of "city 3 can have a park only if city 4 and 5 have a museum" would fall under "cross group" rules, because what happens to cities 4 and 5 influence what happens with city 3, but it depends how many of the rules are of this type. If it's only one, than a grouping board might be OK. 2-3 rules of this sort might be easier to deal with in a chart.
  
  I apologize if this is all over the place, it's kind of difficult to do "lectures" about these things in sort of an abstract way and I'm not the most organized person. I hope it's at least somewhat helpful.
• 1 Like

  stepharizona Alum Member

  March 2016 3197 karma

  For me personally I find charts to be useful where they may not seem to be the obvious choice. The amusement park/garden comes to mind. I think the use of charts or grids can be beneficial depending on how you think and picture games. If there is something on an x axis and y axis for me a chart seems useful and often helps me complete a game quickly. The stain class window is another one that a chart immediately came to mind for. I try to visualize a set up and proceed from there.
• 1 Like

  runiggyrun Alum Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐

  March 2016 2481 karma

  @stepharizona said:
  For me personally I find charts to be useful where they may not seem to be the obvious choice. The amusement park/garden comes to mind. I think the use of charts or grids can be beneficial depending on how you think and picture games. If there is something on an x axis and y axis for me a chart seems useful and often helps me complete a game quickly. The stain class window is another one that a chart immediately came to mind for. I try to visualize a set up and proceed from there.
  

  This just goes to show that for a lot of games it's not a very clear cut, and it depends on personal preference. The amusement park/garden game (If we're talking about the same game from PT C) was one I did several times each way, and I found it faster without a chart as the only rule that spans two groups is the "2 gardens" rule. But both you and JY did it with a chart, so it clearly depends on how you picture games.
  I've not tried the stained glass with a chart mostly because the windows are not defined (they are not Window 1, window 2, window 3, just 3 interchangeable windows) so I didn't even think about a chart for the lack of column headers, but I guess it's possible and potentially very intuitive for some people.
  
  @linda_matias91 might be a good idea to try both for some of these games that are not obviously one or the other, until you find where your own intuitive preference lies. That's the beauty of the FoolProof method - if you actually think about the game from scratch every time you do it, rather than mechanically remembering what you did before, you might find different/better/faster ways to solve a game. For these types, I'd definitely suggest trying both methods and seeing how that choice affects your "getting" the game, your accuracy and your speed.