“Theoretically perfect game” challenge

[ChioneWinterfury]

I spent way too much time on this but it was actually quite fun:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

As mentioned in the sheet, my key self-imposed restriction is to build EVERY turn if we can (have any energy). Repeatedly picking to build only lvl 3s is not interesting.

Check my math, see if you can do better

EDIT: the grand total I arrived at was a whopping 148 points. This surprised me, but I guess that's what happens when you assume perfect luck.

Step 8 seems wrong. The tier 3 score 2 VP cards are 5B > trg _bRU_2vp and 5R > trg_bYB_2vp, card id 317 and 318.

there's no 5Y > trg_bBR_2vp in the game. the 3 5Y are discount tier 2, file when building BR & 2 VP when filing.

And you seem to have added additional rules to ignore maximum of 4 tier 3s. There are 7 in your computations

[Fletcheese]

I spent way too much time on this but it was actually quite fun:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... edit#gid=0

As mentioned in the sheet, my key self-imposed restriction is to build EVERY turn if we can (have any energy). Repeatedly picking to build only lvl 3s is not interesting.

Check my math, see if you can do better

EDIT: the grand total I arrived at was a whopping 148 points. This surprised me, but I guess that's what happens when you assume perfect luck.

Step 8 seems wrong. The tier 3 score 2 VP cards are 5B > trg _bRU_2vp and 5R > trg_bYB_2vp, card id 317 and 318.

there's no 5Y > trg_bBR_2vp in the game. the 3 5Y are discount tier 2, file when building BR & 2 VP when filing.

And you seem to have added additional rules to ignore maximum of 4 tier 3s. There are 7 in your computations

You are absolutely right on all accounts - I did not consider conveniently ignoring the 4 level 3 limit. Guess it's back to the drawing board...

[ChioneWinterfury]

In the theoratical perfect RNG game, the pick Gizmos have better economy than Build Gizmos, since they return 1 extra gizmo, and you don't need to care about availability and randomness of the pick, since perfect RNG.

The 2 VP omnis is a must for high score, and the last 2 tier 3 cards will definitely include 1X 5 pt VP2. The question for the last tier 3 is then which is better 8 X 2 or 6 X 3. By math 6 X 3 is better hence the last tier 3 card would be the omni capacity instead of the other 5 pt VP2.

Hence my ideal opener is 2 same color picks, going into move 6 to build 2 pt build, then 2 pt pick in move 7 to get back 4 energy to start setting up the 4X 3 pt VPs and the 1X 5 pt VP2.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

I had an initial setup lining up the 4X 3 pt VPs first then going into the VP2 last with 2 doublers for the 3 omni cards at the end. Score 132. But I do also realise we can optimise the sequencing to fit the VP2 earlier so as to set up 4 VP per move as early as possible.

Hence the 2nd worksheet for "Setup 4 VP". My theoratical high score is 144.

[Kodiak-Spirit]

I just got 84 points, it's closer to a perfect game than I've so far. https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=554991122

[Le Penseur]

Theoretically, the maximum number of points mathematically achievable in a game of gizmos, given perfect luck and no opponent to hinder or end the game prematurely, is 347. Of course deducing 3 points per turn would drop this number by a lot: just picking one Energy at a time and then building as soon as you have enough, it takes 64 turns *(-3)=-192 points.
Still, we get 155: an impressive amount, and definitely we could do better giving up some points during the game to reduce the number of turns.

As an example, mindlessly tweaking 2 cards saved 15 turns dropping 0 points, effectively raising the total score to 200. I'm positive that with the correct adjustments somebody could get a lot higher.

Edit: My latest calculations resulted in 332 VPs obtained in 42 turns, for a grand total of 206 VPs.