Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Alchemists: The King's Golem» Forums » Strategy

Subject: Golem Deduction Tips rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Philip Morton
msg tools
Avatar
Moved from an earlier post because enough people seem to have trouble with the golem deduction to make it worth having this separately available.

If you have (or obtain later) full knowledge of the ingredients you're feeding to the golem, you need three different results to solve the golem.

There are four possible results, one for each water pair. Each teardrop has three of the six possible golem-triggers on it. If a teardrop didn't activate a golem-part (ears or chest), you can cross off for that part the three triggers that the teardrop has; if it DID activate a part, you can cross off the three triggers the teardrop DOESN'T have.

Any two pairs of...water-pairs share one size (one trigger). If you do two golem-tests, get different results, and know the ingredients you used, given the following possible pair of results, you should know...

(Both,Single): only one trigger is shared between the two you tested; the part that activated both times is triggered by that. The other part is triggered by one of the other two colors on the teardrop that activated both.

(None,Single): There's only one trigger you haven't tested (the size opposite the one that's shared between your two ingredients). That trigger must be the part that didn't activate. The part that did activate is one of the other two colors on the teardrop that activated it.

(Both,None): Cross off the trigger shared by the two teardrops; the remaining two colors on the Both side are the ears and chest, but you don't know which one is which. This would be a little awkward to submit progress reports with (you'd have to submit a hedged one, then unhedge it when you got it narrowed down and submit the report for the other one?) On the bright side, you know enough to activate the golem (if you know the other ingredients).

(Ears,Chest): The shared trigger can't activate either part, and neither can its opposite. This gives you two possibilities for each part (the non-shared colors on the teardrop that activated it).

In any of those cases, a third distinct result (with full knowledge of the ingredient) should give you enough to narrow everything down fully. On review of the possibilities, I think each case (except both/none) also gives you a 50/50 chance of activating the golem (if you know the identity of the necessary teardrops); if you take the risk activating the golem it will solve the golem for you whether you win or lose (at no ingredient cost, but at a risk of points).

Note that in the early-mid game (e.g. before the first conference), you frequently won't have full information on all the ingredients you tested. Going into the second conference you might have to make a choice about whether to trust the theory board (frequently I find I know the things I've tested the golem with, but don't have certain information on the ingredients needed to activate the golem because they're off in the collection of ingredients I haven't tested).

I had a thought that if you have two results with one ingredient fully identified and one narrowed down to two possibilities, you should have enough to publish a hedged report, but I'm not sure about it. I was thinking that was wrong after I had a game where a two-possibility ingredient with a unique golem-result didn't give me any information, but I think that was my third result, not my second, and the trigger shared by the two possibilities was one I had already eliminated with the other two tests.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcus
Italy
Torino
Piemonte
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chrondeath wrote:
If a teardrop didn't activate a golem-part (ears or chest), you can cross off for that part the three triggers that the teardrop has;

Yes
Chrondeath wrote:

if it DID activate a part, you can cross off the three triggers the teardrop DOESN'T have.

No!
if it DID activate all the parts: boh ears and chest, you can cross off the three triggers the teardrop DOESN'T have.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Morton
msg tools
Avatar
UtterMarcus wrote:
Chrondeath wrote:

if it DID activate a part, you can cross off the three triggers the teardrop DOESN'T have.

No!
if it DID activate all the parts: boh ears and chest, you can cross off the three triggers the teardrop DOESN'T have.

You're saying if you feed the golem triple-positive (just to make things easy), and it activates the Ears but not the Chest, you can't cross off all three small symbols for the Ears?

If the issue is that I didn't specify in the "did activate" branch that you're crossing off the triggers for that part and not for both parts, I felt that was implied--the second clause in the sentence is contrasting with the first and is the same behavior except for the emphasized words (did activate, doesn't have; that the ruling-out is happening per part is the same).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marcus
Italy
Torino
Piemonte
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chrondeath wrote:

You're saying if you feed the golem triple-positive (just to make things easy), and it activates the Ears but not the Chest, you can't cross off all three small symbols for the Ears?

yes in this case is correct, I read wrong.

Chrondeath wrote:

I had a thought that if you have two results with one ingredient fully identified and one narrowed down to two possibilities, you should have enough to publish a hedged report, but I'm not sure about it. I was thinking that was wrong after I had a game where a two-possibility ingredient with a unique golem-result didn't give me any information, but I think that was my third result, not my second, and the trigger shared by the two possibilities was one I had already eliminated with the other two tests.


Let's think about some exercises that include golem deduction to integrate with the standard deduction.
For example we know that 2 ingredient that the same effect on golem create neutral soup.

In our games we manage to wake up golem always at the end of the 5th round before the conference. We never play aggressive and left approval tokens when not needed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Corey Ellis
Canada
Timberlea
Nova Scotia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I only played once but I still can't figure this deduction system out
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Morton
msg tools
Avatar
Kibosh123 wrote:
I only played once but I still can't figure this deduction system out

I can try to clarify if there's any specific questions....?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.