100% agree. My family always played strict rules, and the game was always a painful slog. Constant mortgaging properties to afford rent somewhere else, a whole game hanging on $11 here and there. The game I played in a mobile home during power outages was about living paycheck to paycheck.
The first time I saw people do the free parking tax money thing, I thought they were joking. The fuck kind of soft baby game is this? Two times around the board first? Why? Just give $600 more to start, idiots. Why not let the car roll 3 dice or some shit because a car goes faster than an iron?
I’ve heard one time around the board, but not two. The idea though was so the first player to go doesn’t have an advantage (which is kind of irrelevant after the first couple rolls unless they keep rolling high, but it FEELS like it matters I’m sure).
The idea though was so the first player to go doesn’t have an advantage
I… the player that goes first has the EXACT SAME statistical advantage, regardless how many round trips you do before allowing purchases. No matter how many times you roll the dice, each player will, on average, be ≈7 places in front of the person that rolls after them (not exactly 7, because there are rules for rolling again on matching dice etc.). This is true for the first roll of the dice, and it is true for the millionth roll. The distance between two consecutive players is on average equal to the mean number of places you move on a turn.
But who took the first roll was already chosen randomly. My argument is that who gets to the first square where they can buy something doesn’t become any more random by going more laps. The probability of any given player getting to the first purchasable square is 100% determined by the random process that decides who gets to go first in the “warmup round”.
That’s not how standard deviations work though. The point is that if you are n players, the probability of any given player starting is 1/n. After an arbitrary number of dice throws, the probability that a given player is ahead remains 1/n, when you account for the throw that decided who would go first.
Let’s put it this way: Would it be “more random” who goes first if you throw ten dice to decide instead of one? Of course not. But that’s essentially what you’re doing when you go “warm up” rounds. You’re just throwing the dice more times, and letting whoever has the highest total go first. Clearly, the probability that any given player gets the highest total remains 1/n, regardless how many dice are thrown.
I didn’t mean dice rolls for who starts, but moving around the board.
If you go around the board 0 times, there’s a 100% chance the player who started will be ahead.
If you go around the board 1 times, there’s a less-than-100% chance the player who started will be ahead.
Every added round around the board increases the.standard deviation of spaces moved. While the expected amount of spaces moved will still be higher for the first mover after their turn, the significance of this difference goes down as the standard deviation goes up.
Therefore, running 100 rounds around the board before starting the game will change the first-mover advantage from being ahead 100% of the time to, likely slightly more than 25% of the time but very close to 25%.
What you say is true. What you’re neglecting is that you need a random process to choose who will go first. Let’s use your own example: If four players go around the board 100 times, there’s a near 25% chance that a given player gets around first. As you correctly say (indirectly), you will asymptotically approach a 25% chance as you increase the number of rounds towards infinity.
What you seem to be forgetting is that there’s a very easy way to skip the infinite number of rounds, and get directly to the 25% chance: By choosing randomly who goes first. Of course, you need to do that anyway in order to start the warm-up rounds at all, so what you are effectively doing is
First: Give every player a 25 % chance to start. Then: Spend an arbitrary amount of “warm-up” rounds to randomly choose a different player that gets to start the real game.
Of course, these are not independent random processes, so the player that wins the first selection has an advantage in the second selection. The overall probability that a given player starts the “real” game first then becomes identical to the probability that they start the “warm-up” first. An infinite number of warmup rounds is literally identical to a single dice roll in terms of the probability that a given player goes first. So what you’re doing is one quick random selection, which you immediately throw out in favour of an infinitely time consuming random selection with the same distribution.
100% agree. My family always played strict rules, and the game was always a painful slog. Constant mortgaging properties to afford rent somewhere else, a whole game hanging on $11 here and there. The game I played in a mobile home during power outages was about living paycheck to paycheck.
The first time I saw people do the free parking tax money thing, I thought they were joking. The fuck kind of soft baby game is this? Two times around the board first? Why? Just give $600 more to start, idiots. Why not let the car roll 3 dice or some shit because a car goes faster than an iron?
I’ve heard one time around the board, but not two. The idea though was so the first player to go doesn’t have an advantage (which is kind of irrelevant after the first couple rolls unless they keep rolling high, but it FEELS like it matters I’m sure).
I… the player that goes first has the EXACT SAME statistical advantage, regardless how many round trips you do before allowing purchases. No matter how many times you roll the dice, each player will, on average, be ≈7 places in front of the person that rolls after them (not exactly 7, because there are rules for rolling again on matching dice etc.). This is true for the first roll of the dice, and it is true for the millionth roll. The distance between two consecutive players is on average equal to the mean number of places you move on a turn.
It’s definitely possible to fail further than 7 places behind, very quickly. It only takes two turns.
But the problem is that the first roll gets to buy the first property of the game, in most instances. A lap randomizes that advantage.
But who took the first roll was already chosen randomly. My argument is that who gets to the first square where they can buy something doesn’t become any more random by going more laps. The probability of any given player getting to the first purchasable square is 100% determined by the random process that decides who gets to go first in the “warmup round”.
Well, if you do infinite die rolls, your standard deviation becomes so high the “7” spaces bias will be relatively less significant
However, replacing first-mover advantage by RNGesus advantage is not significantly better
That’s not how standard deviations work though. The point is that if you are n players, the probability of any given player starting is 1/n. After an arbitrary number of dice throws, the probability that a given player is ahead remains 1/n, when you account for the throw that decided who would go first.
Let’s put it this way: Would it be “more random” who goes first if you throw ten dice to decide instead of one? Of course not. But that’s essentially what you’re doing when you go “warm up” rounds. You’re just throwing the dice more times, and letting whoever has the highest total go first. Clearly, the probability that any given player gets the highest total remains 1/n, regardless how many dice are thrown.
I didn’t mean dice rolls for who starts, but moving around the board.
If you go around the board 0 times, there’s a 100% chance the player who started will be ahead.
If you go around the board 1 times, there’s a less-than-100% chance the player who started will be ahead.
Every added round around the board increases the.standard deviation of spaces moved. While the expected amount of spaces moved will still be higher for the first mover after their turn, the significance of this difference goes down as the standard deviation goes up.
Therefore, running 100 rounds around the board before starting the game will change the first-mover advantage from being ahead 100% of the time to, likely slightly more than 25% of the time but very close to 25%.
What you say is true. What you’re neglecting is that you need a random process to choose who will go first. Let’s use your own example: If four players go around the board 100 times, there’s a near 25% chance that a given player gets around first. As you correctly say (indirectly), you will asymptotically approach a 25% chance as you increase the number of rounds towards infinity.
What you seem to be forgetting is that there’s a very easy way to skip the infinite number of rounds, and get directly to the 25% chance: By choosing randomly who goes first. Of course, you need to do that anyway in order to start the warm-up rounds at all, so what you are effectively doing is
First: Give every player a 25 % chance to start. Then: Spend an arbitrary amount of “warm-up” rounds to randomly choose a different player that gets to start the real game.
Of course, these are not independent random processes, so the player that wins the first selection has an advantage in the second selection. The overall probability that a given player starts the “real” game first then becomes identical to the probability that they start the “warm-up” first. An infinite number of warmup rounds is literally identical to a single dice roll in terms of the probability that a given player goes first. So what you’re doing is one quick random selection, which you immediately throw out in favour of an infinitely time consuming random selection with the same distribution.
Life ain’t fair. Neither is Monopoly. That’s the point!
Which is basically just a die cast, but extended for no reason 😅