Skip to content

Comment on Advanced Minesweeper

Comments

This seems totally wrong to me. Of course the probability of surrounding squares being all safe is higher in the corner simply because there are fewer surrounding squares!

To make it more fair, calculate the probability that 3+ adjacent squares would be safe, since that's how many you get in the corner. Then the math shows that center is better because there are more neighboring squares that could be potentially blank.

More useful would be the probability of having a cascade continue on past adjacent squares to squares adjacent to those, with the "winner" being whichever location is most likely to make the largest exposed bubble.

My strategy is generally click a few places in the center quickly. If I die, I don't have much invested and just start over. If I find a large bubble, then I can play.

Absolutely agree!

..and from my experience, three clicks is about optimum for speed and opening the board. All my sub 80s games have opened 'gashes' across the board, the three clicks gives you the best chance of jumping the 'wire' (as the other guy put it)..

If you are going to have to play the odds at some point anyway, may as well do it at the start before you invest 50s of your life in some pointless activity.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.