/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6441414
i beat this game on the third try...
and have since made it to 4096

That's because /v/ is a gigantic clusterfuck of autism with average IQ of 50. Much like this board, except with more vidya.

I got this on the first try after being confused about what the controls were.
Then I stopped because I could care less about this game.

>>6441469
So you cared about it at least a little bit so you stopped?

Fucking dropped m8

One of the few games I'e played were if you are playing properly it ceases to be fun.

About midway to 4096 I realised I was just following the same three repeating rules, lost interest after that.

Interesting variants though:
http://jmhummel.github.io/1597/

>>6441414

>>6441476
That is fucking shake. Thank you, anon.

>>6441469
>I stopped because I could care less
elaborate please that doesn't make any sense

you started to care, which made you not want to play?

Why does this version never work for me?

The Doctor Who version is better

>>6441583
you misspelt shitter

>>6441586

>Just numbers
>An abstracted variant

No, I'm fairly certain I meant better

Thanks for this, OP

>>6441469
>could care less
Great. I know exactly where you are in the care spectrum.

>>6441414

>>6441414
Anyone can beat this game. To some it'll take a long time and some luck. To some it'll be within the first few tries. But anyone will end up beating the game at some point. It'll be faster if you're clever, it'll be slightly faster if you're lucky, and unless you're smart enough to figure out strategies by yourself it'll also be faster if you read some basic guidelines on how to win the game. But everyone will win unless they're a gigantic retarded faggot, and the way OP seems to think the game is hard kinda confirms that he is indeed a major retard (beside obviously being a fag).

>>6441621
There is a strategy to it.

>>6441622
Yes. That's why I'm saying that unless you're smart enough to figure it by yourself, it's gonna help you to read it somewhere. What's your point?

>>6441627
No point, I just thought you were wondering if there is one.
Also, what's yours?

>>6441622
>>6441629
This reading comprehension

>>6441631
>unless you're smart enough to figure out strategies by yourself
>unless

Ever heard of the conditional, faggot?

>>6441629
After I reach ~128, I try to stack larger numbers on either top/bot/left/right. If let's say I chose bottom, then I put my largest number on the bottom left corner, and try to build up a chain that leads to that number, for instance the bottom row of the grid is gonna look like:

1024 512 128 32

I then add whatever I can to my 32 until I can merge things left. I never press "up", even though sometimes bad luck in things spawning force me to do it. I never press "right" if it means my 1024 will move right and a 2 might spawn on its left, also unless I am forced to. That's basically it. There's a few simple technical tricks or patterns you end up recognizing and solving easily but they don't matter much.

>>6441636

>>6441631 isn't me (>>6441621), but he's right. "Unless you're smart enough to figure out strategies by yourself" means that some people are smart enough to figure out strategies, which means there are strategies. Furthermore, the next part of the sentence is "if you read some basic guidelines", which further shows that those strategies exist.

>>6441639
Nice. Mine is similar, though I'll give yours a try.

All I do is never press left at all - If you move them all from side-to-side, it creates small numbers in areas where you can't get rid of them if you mostly have high numbers, which basically boxes you in.

I guess the trick is to keep most of your numbers in one place, judging by our tactics

>>6441640
Right, there are, but it seemed like you meant "there could be some clever guys who could figure out strategies" rather than "there 100% are". Eh, my bad.
There are guidelines to this game...?

>>6441636
see my face
>>6441631

>This reading comprehension

Since you can't read let me summarize
>Strategy helps and you can just look it up if your stupid to figure it out yourself
You respond
>There is strategy to it
>Just thought you didn't know

Holy shit niiga get your shit together

>>6441644
Nice dubs, but I think I can read, thanks very much
Read my other post

I can't do this.

>tfw low IQ

;_;

>>6441414
I been playing this game since the last thread.
Still cant get the 8192.

>>6441414
This game is killin me. I love it. I'm yet to get a 1024 piece and my top score is only 7056

>>6441655
There is an easier version that lets you save at anytime. It also allows you to go back one move.
http://www.crazygames.com/game/2048-save-progress

Or the one that only spawns 2's, and always in the top left corner.
http://www.crazygames.com/game/deterministic-2048

Would someone want to have some fun and consider some game theory problems related to the game? Like, assuming the RNG is another player and plays against you by choosing where the 2s spawn, do you still have a winning strategy until 2048? Or only until a smaller number? Or can you still go even higher?

Obviously if the RNG is collaborating, you can go to 65536, but obviously if he's playing against you, you can't go that high. I'm sure it'd be easy to figure out a few rules. The arena isn't too big either thanks to symmetries and some states being irrelevant enough to be pruned, so maybe an almost brute-force algorithm could work there too.

Also, same questions when trying to minimize the score (or the highest tile) instead of maximizing it.

My second try, feels bad man

Stop advertising your game here every single day.