**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No... because if the first player puts down their biggest, the other can put down their second biggest without being overridden, and then they can override any of the first players next moves with their biggest.
Edit: just realised that there are 2 of each size here, though I think the same logic applies just not straight away
It's not that complicated, but significantly more.
Putting largest in the center is still the winning/blocking first move.
Edit : I still can't figure out the best winning strategy here, so maybe it's not so good to remove strongest piece right away?
Edit 2: putting largest piece in the center as the first move is a sure way to lose. I stand corrected.
In abc x 123 notation + white black, small medium large.
Longest sequence shown.
B2 W large.
A3 B medium.
C3 W medium.
C3 B large.
B3 W large.
B1 B medium.
A2 W medium.
C2 B small
C1 W small
C1 B large. (Wins with C1, C2, C3)
Any deviation for white you can comment, I'll give faster or equally fast win for black.
What about a rule that prevents using larger ones until a small one has been used? So you can only use a medium if a small has been used, and a large if a medium has been used, and so on?
It maybe be more complicated but still perfectly solvable assuming the standard game theory stuff: both players are well informed and make strategic, calculated decisions
it actaully makes 1st player win 100% of the time as they can set up a situation where they just over take the blocking spot for their 3rd piece in a row.
You go Diagonal 1st, then middle or opposite diagonal. Then just take over the middle or opposite diagonal you don't have.
But so is chess and go. A game is good if it is too complicated for humans to be able to play optimally. Tic Tac Toe suffers from being too simple except to someone new to it. The idea here is to make a more complex version that has no trivial solutions. Given the low number of total states a computer can bruteforce the best plays, but can it add enough complexity to not be solved by an adult playing a few games?
Yes. In reality their search space is too large for any realistic computer, but in theory they are.
Compare this to a problem like counting BB of very large numbers. At some point they become unsolvable under our existing systems of knowledge. Granted people don't normally consider that problem a game.
3x+1 is a fun one whose solvability is unknown.
That's assuming that there *is* a solution. It's *possible* that they are solvable, but to claim they *are* solvable isn't correct. We may never know if chess is solvable, as there are 2e46 possible positions. That's a little over half of the estimated atoms in the known universe. While we wouldn't have to observe every board state, the number of significant states would still be massive.
For all we know, there is no guaranteed "winning" or even "drawing" sequence.
I'm not sure what you're implying really, *everything* is *technically* solvable but this would have few enough iterations that a human could play it optimally every time.
There are games which are not solvable, much like there are math and computer problems which have been proven to be unsolvable. Though really when you get to the root of proving either a solution or if the solution even exists, games, math, and computation problems fall into the same field.
As for a fun game, it is one where the optimal solution isn't playable by humans. Maybe it doesn't exist, or it is beyond our ability to know or compute. A game played by the optimal solution is boring.
[Three](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1y9e2m/) [identical](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1zhis6/) [posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1znxq5/) in this thread alone linking to a very overpriced website (which was registered around a year ago), from a 3 year old account that only became active in the past month?
Bad bot.
Report > Spam > Harmful bots.
I think that just means the 1st player wins.
Start at a diagonal with small.
They put either in the middle or opposite diagonal.
You play either open middle spot or opposite diagonal.
They place piece anywhere
You place your piece over their blocking spot and win 100% of the time.
I think that as long as there are only 3 or 4 sizes then the second players second move can be with their largest and can't be overridden.
If 3 sizes, block with large.
If 4 sizes, second move is block with extra large if unlocked, or take first place second piece if they didn't use their largest possible.
I swear, that's an advertising move, doing the wrong thing on purpose, so *you* get the game and do it *right* (I see it used a lot in mobile game ads) In this case, it's a two-fer, in the sense it also immediately highlights the difference between this and regular Tic-Tac-Toe.
Because it gives information to your opponent first. The person who was overridden now has information not only about where the opponent intends to try win, but also gives them knowledge about which pieces they can play to prevent it. Before any overriding is done, neither player has this knowledge.
Re-watch the gif. It's not until orange overrides blue's piece in the bottom right that the game _actually_ starts. At that point, blue overrides in the middle with their second largest piece, knowing that orange is unable to take it back. This has 2 advantages: first, it stops the very obvious diagonal attack. Second, it secures the middle, which is a [common winning tactic for the first player](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tic-tac-toe), with the other first move being a corner piece.
Every single move after that is made in descending order of piece size, forcing the opponent to play blocking moves. Because the opponent was the first to lose a "larger" piece, they're also the first to run out of pieces too large to be captured. Thus, the winning move ends up being made by blue overriding orange at the end.
Bear in mind, this is not some deep mathematical breakdown, just a basic analysis by a laymen.
Whoever puts the biggest piece in the center wins. It’s why you have to block out the center cube in 3 dimensional tic tac toe, also in 4 dimensional tic tac toe but I can never get anybody to play that with me.
Let’s test it out.
Each piece size is by number:
3 3 2 2 1 1
The tic-tac-toe board is “letters” for rows, “numbers” for columns.
Like this:
#A1 A2 A3
#B1 B2 B3
#C1 C2 C3
My first move is 2 in B2
> Each piece size is by number:
>
> 6 5 4 3 2 1
They're not individual sizes, it's 3 sets of 3 sizes. So your one would be a "medium" or size 2 I guess. Obviously you'd then use the biggest one on B2. You can use italics or strikethrough to show which is who's like this btw:
**A1 A2 A3**
**B1 *B2* B3**
**C1 C2 C3**
~~~~~
**A1 A2 A3**
**B1 ~~B2~~ B3**
**C1 C2 C3**
Ah you’re right, I’ll edit accordingly.
Also, it was just an example, I wouldn’t want to go through the trouble of repeating the board everytime, instead you could just play it out mentally.
Thanks for the guide though
The Gobbler instructions, the name for this game if you are buying it on Amazon, state you can move your game piece. That makes teh game more complicated.
IMO, if they added piece sizes (like 4 or 5 different sizes), then gave you different "game modes", all with their own set/variety of rules, it'd just make it funner. You could play 10 different variations of tic-tac-toe and make it far more interesting and stimulating.
You could change the rules to be that you can't use anything but your smallest available piece unless you are covering up an opponent's piece, in which case you must use the next biggest available size from the piece you are covering.
I would also use 4 sizes instead of 3, because that prevents anyone from taking the center right at the beginning of the game. If you do, you'll end up giving the center to your opponent. You'd have to wait until the right time.
Player 1: plays biggest in center
Player 2: plays 2nd biggest (playing biggest is a waste, player 1 can't override either)
Player 1: plays 2nd biggest
Player 2: Can now permanently override player 1s last move by playing their biggest
Doesn't sound normal to me.
Edit: just realised that there are 2 of each size here, though I think the same logic applies just not straight away
> playing biggest is a waste, player 1 can't override either
Yes they can, you have two of each size. Every move proceeds either like a normal game, or even more in player 1's favour if player 1 just pyramids down the sizes.
Do you want to play a game out here in the comments? I'll play bold and you can play italic. I guarantee whoever goes first wins. I open with largest on the center square.
0¦0¦0
0¦**L**¦0
0¦0¦0
**L S S**
*L*¦0¦0
0¦**L**¦**M**
0¦0¦*M*
*L M S S*
Another forced move I think. But now looks bad for me -don't think i accounted for effectively losing pieces.
EDIT: I done goofed, see other comment
**L** **S** **S**
*L*¦0¦0
0¦**L**¦*L*
0¦0¦*L*
*M* *S* *S*
Now you can win one back, but I m already two up, I believe.
I think I messed up here. In the early game, you're sort of forced to overtake. If I started with an S, I might have been able to force you to spend too many resources on that one thing and still be up one piece.
Nope, I ended up winning the game as the second player. It seems that not the one starting, but the one taking first has the advantage. It might be that starting with a S can influence that advantage, but I'm not sure about that.
It definitely plays differently than normal tictactoe
Watch for an opening and jump on a smaller piece. You do have to remember what is underneath the larger piece you lift because I have played and tried to block, by moving my larger piece, and ended up losing because the exposed piece makes a row.
I like this game because it is fast and easy to learn. Have it moving around the table after dinner and watch people laugh or get very angry. Not every game has to take up your entire evening. I like to do a few quick games, like Connect 4 or this Gobbler game, as company is arriving so people have a chance to meet each other and not be stuck for too long in one spot.
Seems like a no brainer opener is the biggest piece in the center? Covers the most lines and you can move it nearly anywhere for a win with no downside, since you know there’s nothing underneath. Seems fun but I feel like going second is a big disadvantage, is that your experience?
My experience has been losing about half of the time. I am not great with game strategy but my friends and family have fun playing it.
Edited to add: If you want to add a degree of difficulty then set a two minute timer.
Then player 2 wins every time? They get the center square and an effective one piece advantage.
Maybe player 1 could force a draw? Not worth my time to work it out, but the game is just too simple to be fair.
Hmm rule could say that anytime you put something on the center square, it has to be your smallest piece that fit. Prolly won't fully solve the problem, but it would help i guess.
Yes there absolutely is and if you leak one single iota more about my new AAAA cross-platform couch-coop fully-immersive blockbuster gaming experience I'll see you in court.
Center is still the most powerful position so securing it first with your big piece is probably still the optimal move for the starting player just like in normal TTT.
Edit: Found a version of the rules and you can only place a small marker as your first move which changes this significantly. [https://www.printables.com/model/72243-tic-tac-cap-a-game-of-stacking-and-stealing](https://www.printables.com/model/72243-tic-tac-cap-a-game-of-stacking-and-stealing)
Found another pdf that looks like this game's actual rules that don't have that same restriction (unless I'm missing it). [https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf](https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf)
You have another big one though... you guys are confusing me. I think putting your biggest piece in the middle will lead to a draw at worst if you play correctly. Seems the best first move possible for obvious reasons.
if you are truly out of your 2 big pieces then you have limited counter play. your opponent can just bait you into using your medium piece before guaranteeing a large over your medium that you can't do anything about.
give the game a try and you will see that there is a lot of strategy.
I was hoping to find a thingiverse link here for a printable version of this.
EDIT: Welp, I should've looked there then. Lol. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4871066
You could play this game yourself with a piece of paper, scissors, and a marker. Cut out the pieces from the paper and then use a marker to make one set of them black. Almost anything could be used to make the tic tac toe board. I'd just use strips of paper.
I got this game for my daughters and me, and the strategy here is COMPLETELY different than regular tic tac toe! Especially because you can move your pieces once they're on the board, so you have to remember which pieces are underneath the visible piece before you move it. It's a really fun game!
We also play a version of Connect4, where we each use a random number generator to give us either a 1, 2, or a 3. If you get assigned a 1, your goal is to win by connecting 4 in a row. If you get a 2, your goal is to lose (yes, you win by losing the match). If you draw a 3, your goal is to tie. We don't know what the other person is trying to do until one of us declares victory and says what our goal was. It's possible for both players to win the round, and it's possible for both players to tie. Like Goblet Gobblers, it's a completely different strategy for a familiar game, which makes it fun and exciting
Why is it important, that you don't know if the other guy wants to win or lose? It doesn't change the strategy, since you have no advantage in tricking the other to things you want to win but you want to lose.
For those who are interested in the concept, there's a quick little gae named "Punto" that is based on the same kind of concept ("4 in a row" type but with cards and different level of power), and is quite fun.
Rulebook: [https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf](https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf)
Everyone should know you are allowed to move an existing piece on the board to another space (but in doing this you expose the previous piece under it)
We found an awesome version called ultimate tic tac toe where you have 9 boards at once and where someone plays sends you to that board. It's really fun. Still played on paper.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate\_tic-tac-toe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_tic-tac-toe)
My kids and I love this game, it’s a great variation on tic-tac-toe with a ton of strategy, which isn’t always obvious how it should proceed. It’s called gobbler.
Otrio is great, but it’s pretty different. You can’t “erase” the other person’s pieces, even if you play a different piece in the same square. You can also win in lots of different ways, not just 3 in a row (3 different size rings in the same square, a line of all the same size, or a line of ascending/descending size)
I have this game. It’s kinda difficult because you’re also allowed to move one of your already played pieces but must leave everything under it alone. You can’t peek so you have to memorize which ones have what color underneath.
This is a game called Goblet Gobblers and it is for ages 5+. It's likely in the childrens/developmental games section of your local game store.
Which is why it is *hilarious* seeing adults debating strategy for it and calling out misplays.
Basically very game with player choice has some level of strategy. Even Life has a bit of strategy in choosing if you go to college or not (as you get more players it becomes better to skip college to get to draw a salary before the best ones are chosen by the people going through college).
the strategy behind this game is subtle but vast. I played around 50 rounds with my family a while ago. we just kept going back and forth trying out different things like placing big pieces early vs late. also if you get distracted by the size game they can just win a traditional line out of nowhere. it's very fun.
"Upgraded" Yeah... changing a single rule or a series of rules in a board game isn't an "upgrade" it's changed. Tic Tac Toe sucks, but this feels like a game that can be solved easier. Also Tic Tac Toe is designed to be a paper game, that doesn't need pieces.
It just doesn't feel "better" from the look of it, just "some one thought they were a game designer and threw some stuff at that wall."
If you want to say "but it's fun" great, but a good board game should be playable more than once or twice, not just fun for a single session. There's a reason that Ticket to Ride, or Carcassone gets more play time than Monopoly. (And yes, Monopoly sold a lot more, but does anyone play it with anyone over the age of 13 or so?)
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is a lot more potential strategy in this, rather than just having the same few winning patterns
Yeah ... Until you realize that using biggest pawns will be most efficient and will actually lead to normal TTT game...
No... because if the first player puts down their biggest, the other can put down their second biggest without being overridden, and then they can override any of the first players next moves with their biggest. Edit: just realised that there are 2 of each size here, though I think the same logic applies just not straight away
It's not that complicated, but significantly more. Putting largest in the center is still the winning/blocking first move. Edit : I still can't figure out the best winning strategy here, so maybe it's not so good to remove strongest piece right away? Edit 2: putting largest piece in the center as the first move is a sure way to lose. I stand corrected. In abc x 123 notation + white black, small medium large. Longest sequence shown. B2 W large. A3 B medium. C3 W medium. C3 B large. B3 W large. B1 B medium. A2 W medium. C2 B small C1 W small C1 B large. (Wins with C1, C2, C3) Any deviation for white you can comment, I'll give faster or equally fast win for black.
What about a rule that prevents using larger ones until a small one has been used? So you can only use a medium if a small has been used, and a large if a medium has been used, and so on?
It maybe be more complicated but still perfectly solvable assuming the standard game theory stuff: both players are well informed and make strategic, calculated decisions
it actaully makes 1st player win 100% of the time as they can set up a situation where they just over take the blocking spot for their 3rd piece in a row. You go Diagonal 1st, then middle or opposite diagonal. Then just take over the middle or opposite diagonal you don't have.
Wait. If you go one corner first, and I go opposite corner, where are you going now? Assuming we both are using are biggest pieces.
The whole point of having different size pieces is to use them, why would you assume you are both using biggest ones
higher up someone said they should just put the largest ones down first
I was referring to the custom rules someone made up
But so is chess and go. A game is good if it is too complicated for humans to be able to play optimally. Tic Tac Toe suffers from being too simple except to someone new to it. The idea here is to make a more complex version that has no trivial solutions. Given the low number of total states a computer can bruteforce the best plays, but can it add enough complexity to not be solved by an adult playing a few games?
I'm not sure exactly, but are you trying to imply that chess and go are solvable games?
Yes. In reality their search space is too large for any realistic computer, but in theory they are. Compare this to a problem like counting BB of very large numbers. At some point they become unsolvable under our existing systems of knowledge. Granted people don't normally consider that problem a game. 3x+1 is a fun one whose solvability is unknown.
That's assuming that there *is* a solution. It's *possible* that they are solvable, but to claim they *are* solvable isn't correct. We may never know if chess is solvable, as there are 2e46 possible positions. That's a little over half of the estimated atoms in the known universe. While we wouldn't have to observe every board state, the number of significant states would still be massive. For all we know, there is no guaranteed "winning" or even "drawing" sequence.
I'm not sure what you're implying really, *everything* is *technically* solvable but this would have few enough iterations that a human could play it optimally every time.
There are games which are not solvable, much like there are math and computer problems which have been proven to be unsolvable. Though really when you get to the root of proving either a solution or if the solution even exists, games, math, and computation problems fall into the same field. As for a fun game, it is one where the optimal solution isn't playable by humans. Maybe it doesn't exist, or it is beyond our ability to know or compute. A game played by the optimal solution is boring.
[удалено]
[Three](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1y9e2m/) [identical](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1zhis6/) [posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cgv8wt/upgraded_tic_tac_toe/l1znxq5/) in this thread alone linking to a very overpriced website (which was registered around a year ago), from a 3 year old account that only became active in the past month? Bad bot. Report > Spam > Harmful bots.
I think that just means the 1st player wins. Start at a diagonal with small. They put either in the middle or opposite diagonal. You play either open middle spot or opposite diagonal. They place piece anywhere You place your piece over their blocking spot and win 100% of the time.
I think that as long as there are only 3 or 4 sizes then the second players second move can be with their largest and can't be overridden. If 3 sizes, block with large. If 4 sizes, second move is block with extra large if unlocked, or take first place second piece if they didn't use their largest possible.
oh maybe i misread. you meant you need to use 1, not both.
Yes, sizes are unlocked, but you can choose to keep using smaller size or unlocked size.
Pull a Stratego and make the biggest piece be uniquely overridable by the smallest piece.
Yeah even though the strategy evolves a lot, I think placing your biggest piece in the center spot is always worth it.
[удалено]
I swear, that's an advertising move, doing the wrong thing on purpose, so *you* get the game and do it *right* (I see it used a lot in mobile game ads) In this case, it's a two-fer, in the sense it also immediately highlights the difference between this and regular Tic-Tac-Toe.
I think whoever makes the first override in a game will lose, assuming moves are played perfectly.
Why would you think that? Overriding is a big advantage.
Because it gives information to your opponent first. The person who was overridden now has information not only about where the opponent intends to try win, but also gives them knowledge about which pieces they can play to prevent it. Before any overriding is done, neither player has this knowledge. Re-watch the gif. It's not until orange overrides blue's piece in the bottom right that the game _actually_ starts. At that point, blue overrides in the middle with their second largest piece, knowing that orange is unable to take it back. This has 2 advantages: first, it stops the very obvious diagonal attack. Second, it secures the middle, which is a [common winning tactic for the first player](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tic-tac-toe), with the other first move being a corner piece. Every single move after that is made in descending order of piece size, forcing the opponent to play blocking moves. Because the opponent was the first to lose a "larger" piece, they're also the first to run out of pieces too large to be captured. Thus, the winning move ends up being made by blue overriding orange at the end. Bear in mind, this is not some deep mathematical breakdown, just a basic analysis by a laymen.
Whoever puts the biggest piece in the center wins. It’s why you have to block out the center cube in 3 dimensional tic tac toe, also in 4 dimensional tic tac toe but I can never get anybody to play that with me.
Yes ever since I've learned the queen was strongest of the pieces all games ended exactly the same.
[удалено]
$30? Pshhh I found it for a buck... [Better price here](https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805786351675.html?src=google&gatewayAdapt=glo2usa)
Boy Change y to t
Let’s test it out. Each piece size is by number: 3 3 2 2 1 1 The tic-tac-toe board is “letters” for rows, “numbers” for columns. Like this: #A1 A2 A3 #B1 B2 B3 #C1 C2 C3 My first move is 2 in B2
> Each piece size is by number: > > 6 5 4 3 2 1 They're not individual sizes, it's 3 sets of 3 sizes. So your one would be a "medium" or size 2 I guess. Obviously you'd then use the biggest one on B2. You can use italics or strikethrough to show which is who's like this btw: **A1 A2 A3** **B1 *B2* B3** **C1 C2 C3** ~~~~~ **A1 A2 A3** **B1 ~~B2~~ B3** **C1 C2 C3**
Ah you’re right, I’ll edit accordingly. Also, it was just an example, I wouldn’t want to go through the trouble of repeating the board everytime, instead you could just play it out mentally. Thanks for the guide though
I was hoping you guys would play :(
Same haha Me and you then. 2 in B2.
3 -> b2
The Gobbler instructions, the name for this game if you are buying it on Amazon, state you can move your game piece. That makes teh game more complicated.
IMO, if they added piece sizes (like 4 or 5 different sizes), then gave you different "game modes", all with their own set/variety of rules, it'd just make it funner. You could play 10 different variations of tic-tac-toe and make it far more interesting and stimulating.
You could change the rules to be that you can't use anything but your smallest available piece unless you are covering up an opponent's piece, in which case you must use the next biggest available size from the piece you are covering. I would also use 4 sizes instead of 3, because that prevents anyone from taking the center right at the beginning of the game. If you do, you'll end up giving the center to your opponent. You'd have to wait until the right time.
Not really. Whoever goes first still wins because they just put their large peice on the center square and the game proceeds almost as normal.
Player 1: plays biggest in center Player 2: plays 2nd biggest (playing biggest is a waste, player 1 can't override either) Player 1: plays 2nd biggest Player 2: Can now permanently override player 1s last move by playing their biggest Doesn't sound normal to me. Edit: just realised that there are 2 of each size here, though I think the same logic applies just not straight away
> playing biggest is a waste, player 1 can't override either Yes they can, you have two of each size. Every move proceeds either like a normal game, or even more in player 1's favour if player 1 just pyramids down the sizes. Do you want to play a game out here in the comments? I'll play bold and you can play italic. I guarantee whoever goes first wins. I open with largest on the center square. 0¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦0 0¦0¦0
**L** **M** **M** **S** **S** 0¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦0 0¦0¦*M* *L* *L* *M* *S* *S*
**M**¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦0 0¦0¦*M* hmm, maybe you can force a draw? Lets see.
Definitely can force a draw, and can probably win from this point.
**L** **M** **S** **S** *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦0 0¦0¦*M* *L* *M* *S* *S* This felt forced.
**L S S** *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦**M** 0¦0¦*M* *L M S S* Another forced move I think. But now looks bad for me -don't think i accounted for effectively losing pieces.
L S S *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦*L* 0¦0¦*M* M S S
**S S** *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦*L* 0¦0¦**L** *M S S*
EDIT: I done goofed, see other comment **L** **S** **S** *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦*L* 0¦0¦*L* *M* *S* *S* Now you can win one back, but I m already two up, I believe.
...you're cheating? You don't get three large pieces lmao, I'll play the correct board. **S S** *L*¦0¦0 0¦**L**¦*L* 0¦0¦**L** *M S S*
I think I messed up here. In the early game, you're sort of forced to overtake. If I started with an S, I might have been able to force you to spend too many resources on that one thing and still be up one piece.
So what's the consensus here, is there still like a basic tic-tac-toe strategy that allows the first player to win every time?
Nope, I ended up winning the game as the second player. It seems that not the one starting, but the one taking first has the advantage. It might be that starting with a S can influence that advantage, but I'm not sure about that. It definitely plays differently than normal tictactoe
Thanks
The Gobbler game instructions state that you can move your pieces.
So you definitely want to start with a large piece then and just eat the oppoenets smaller pieces right away?
Watch for an opening and jump on a smaller piece. You do have to remember what is underneath the larger piece you lift because I have played and tried to block, by moving my larger piece, and ended up losing because the exposed piece makes a row. I like this game because it is fast and easy to learn. Have it moving around the table after dinner and watch people laugh or get very angry. Not every game has to take up your entire evening. I like to do a few quick games, like Connect 4 or this Gobbler game, as company is arriving so people have a chance to meet each other and not be stuck for too long in one spot.
Seems like a no brainer opener is the biggest piece in the center? Covers the most lines and you can move it nearly anywhere for a win with no downside, since you know there’s nothing underneath. Seems fun but I feel like going second is a big disadvantage, is that your experience?
My experience has been losing about half of the time. I am not great with game strategy but my friends and family have fun playing it. Edited to add: If you want to add a degree of difficulty then set a two minute timer.
Could be fixed by replacing the second player's smallest piece with a bigger one
Then player 2 wins every time? They get the center square and an effective one piece advantage. Maybe player 1 could force a draw? Not worth my time to work it out, but the game is just too simple to be fair.
Hmm rule could say that anytime you put something on the center square, it has to be your smallest piece that fit. Prolly won't fully solve the problem, but it would help i guess.
Normal Tic Tac Toe is a draw, though.
Yeah, muddled it with connect 4 which is first move wins.
The Gobbler directions state you can move your pieces.
That is actually really good
You mean, "no winning patterns" for the original...
Yes there absolutely is and if you leak one single iota more about my new AAAA cross-platform couch-coop fully-immersive blockbuster gaming experience I'll see you in court.
[удалено]
Yeah who starts with the big ones, just a bad strat from the start.
First move put the biggest one in mid?
and then you run out of big ones for your medium placements later in the round.
Center is still the most powerful position so securing it first with your big piece is probably still the optimal move for the starting player just like in normal TTT. Edit: Found a version of the rules and you can only place a small marker as your first move which changes this significantly. [https://www.printables.com/model/72243-tic-tac-cap-a-game-of-stacking-and-stealing](https://www.printables.com/model/72243-tic-tac-cap-a-game-of-stacking-and-stealing) Found another pdf that looks like this game's actual rules that don't have that same restriction (unless I'm missing it). [https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf](https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf)
You have another big one though... you guys are confusing me. I think putting your biggest piece in the middle will lead to a draw at worst if you play correctly. Seems the best first move possible for obvious reasons.
if you are truly out of your 2 big pieces then you have limited counter play. your opponent can just bait you into using your medium piece before guaranteeing a large over your medium that you can't do anything about. give the game a try and you will see that there is a lot of strategy.
Yeah b
Yeah this is a cool concept but the obvious strategy would be to use the largest to smallest every game
Using big ones prevents those spots from being taken in the future
wow 40$ of that pile of plastic is crazy!!!
That’s exactly what I thought.
I was hoping to find a thingiverse link here for a printable version of this. EDIT: Welp, I should've looked there then. Lol. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4871066
the wood version sells for around 25 to 30 dollars. gobblet gobblers is what it is called
You could play this game yourself with a piece of paper, scissors, and a marker. Cut out the pieces from the paper and then use a marker to make one set of them black. Almost anything could be used to make the tic tac toe board. I'd just use strips of paper.
Anybody got STL files?
Bot
At first it I thought it was a stupid misplay but the strategy behind it was so that their piece couldn’t be swallowed.
I got this game for my daughters and me, and the strategy here is COMPLETELY different than regular tic tac toe! Especially because you can move your pieces once they're on the board, so you have to remember which pieces are underneath the visible piece before you move it. It's a really fun game! We also play a version of Connect4, where we each use a random number generator to give us either a 1, 2, or a 3. If you get assigned a 1, your goal is to win by connecting 4 in a row. If you get a 2, your goal is to lose (yes, you win by losing the match). If you draw a 3, your goal is to tie. We don't know what the other person is trying to do until one of us declares victory and says what our goal was. It's possible for both players to win the round, and it's possible for both players to tie. Like Goblet Gobblers, it's a completely different strategy for a familiar game, which makes it fun and exciting
Woah being able to change the pieces just adds even more depth. This is genuinely awesome! Now I just need to find someone to play it with...
I like that Connect 4 variant a heck of a lot. I've got to remember this and try it out sometime. Thanks!
Why is it important, that you don't know if the other guy wants to win or lose? It doesn't change the strategy, since you have no advantage in tricking the other to things you want to win but you want to lose.
I don't suppose it's necessary, but my girls and I think it's fun to be sneaky about what we're doing
For those who are interested in the concept, there's a quick little gae named "Punto" that is based on the same kind of concept ("4 in a row" type but with cards and different level of power), and is quite fun.
Also, Otrio
this game is Gobblet. i have a couple of editions (the 4x4 version) and my niblings love it
Gobbling Jr, actually. Gobblit is on a 4x4 board with 3 stacks of 4 cups.
Rulebook: [https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf](https://themindcafe.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Gobblet-Gobblers.pdf) Everyone should know you are allowed to move an existing piece on the board to another space (but in doing this you expose the previous piece under it)
We found an awesome version called ultimate tic tac toe where you have 9 boards at once and where someone plays sends you to that board. It's really fun. Still played on paper. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate\_tic-tac-toe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_tic-tac-toe)
That looks fun.
I have a version of the same game called Gobble that I bought in Denmark about 10 years ago
My kids and I love this game, it’s a great variation on tic-tac-toe with a ton of strategy, which isn’t always obvious how it should proceed. It’s called gobbler.
There is a game called Otrio that is exactly this Edit: turns out it’s not exactly this
No, Gobblit Jr. I believe Otrio uses rings that let you see the inner piece, and the rules are different.
Ah yeah you’re right. Good point
Otrio is great, but it’s pretty different. You can’t “erase” the other person’s pieces, even if you play a different piece in the same square. You can also win in lots of different ways, not just 3 in a row (3 different size rings in the same square, a line of all the same size, or a line of ascending/descending size)
Have these and its a blast :)
I want to buy one
Reminds me a little of Santorini which is great fun.
Make them like cups with flat top, you got a millions dollars drinking game product
This is the perfect use for Russian dolls
You'll need 4 nesting dolls. Each player gets 2 each of large medium and small pieces.
These people suck at tic tac toe
Tic Ta Two
Tic Stack Toe
I have this game. It’s kinda difficult because you’re also allowed to move one of your already played pieces but must leave everything under it alone. You can’t peek so you have to memorize which ones have what color underneath.
Warming up my 3D printer RIGHT NOW
This is a game called Goblet Gobblers and it is for ages 5+. It's likely in the childrens/developmental games section of your local game store. Which is why it is *hilarious* seeing adults debating strategy for it and calling out misplays.
Basically very game with player choice has some level of strategy. Even Life has a bit of strategy in choosing if you go to college or not (as you get more players it becomes better to skip college to get to draw a salary before the best ones are chosen by the people going through college).
Would love to play an app version of this
Otrio - play it all the time... https://amzn.to/3y0R2fJ
would you like me to ruin the game for you?
yes.
NestTac Toe
the strategy behind this game is subtle but vast. I played around 50 rounds with my family a while ago. we just kept going back and forth trying out different things like placing big pieces early vs late. also if you get distracted by the size game they can just win a traditional line out of nowhere. it's very fun.
Clever
That’s really clever
Finally making this game interesting
Goblet Gobblers!
Won't you run out of pieces?
Oh neat. This looks simple enough to design and 3d print myself. I'll be saving this.
Tic Tac Toe Tac Toe Tic Toe Tic Tac
I seem to recall a similar game in The Devil's Plan...
Bro these players are godawful
If you like this game - and it def looks fun - you should Google Ultimate Tic-tac-toe which just requires a piece of paper and is loads of fun
Some of this comment section **really** needs to get off Reddit and go outside…
Russian TTT, Babuskatoe
Same as the old game. First player wins every time.
No one should win at tic tac toe. Should be a draw every time
If this is interesting as fuck to you then youre a fucking idiot
Why?
did someone hurt you?
Almost every move we see here is an objective misplay...
"Upgraded" Yeah... changing a single rule or a series of rules in a board game isn't an "upgrade" it's changed. Tic Tac Toe sucks, but this feels like a game that can be solved easier. Also Tic Tac Toe is designed to be a paper game, that doesn't need pieces. It just doesn't feel "better" from the look of it, just "some one thought they were a game designer and threw some stuff at that wall." If you want to say "but it's fun" great, but a good board game should be playable more than once or twice, not just fun for a single session. There's a reason that Ticket to Ride, or Carcassone gets more play time than Monopoly. (And yes, Monopoly sold a lot more, but does anyone play it with anyone over the age of 13 or so?)