dehro

2007-11-18, 06:01 PM

a thought brought up by the reading of the algorithm of evil (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SortingAlgorithmOfEvil) has been buging me for a while now. Since I suck at maths, I propose the matter to you.

In the following situation, what would be the best strategy?

on the battlefield we have 1000 fighters on one side, and 9 stronger fighters on the other side.

let's say that the 9 "heroes" are fighting monks and that the 1000 soldiers must conquer their monastery.

the monastery has 9 levels and is built so that each monk can defend the access to the next level.

the monks are also of different levels of skill, and know this, whereas the enemy soldiers are all of the same level, inferior to even the weakest of the monks. (we can consider them to be different in the "number of enemies that they can take down before kicking the bucket")...they are therefore of ascending "value" from apprentice to abbot (or champion fighter...just a figure of speech..if you prefere you can say from white belt to, say... 3rd dan, or something similar).

now... given that the important thing is not to win the fight, which might be more than can be asked from them, but taking down the largest number of enemies before dying, how could they achieve this?

should they place themselves in ascending order of "strenght" from the first to the last level of the monastery? in opposite order?

or should they place themselves at random?

let's not work on loopholes, let's not come up with alternative strategies like putting all of the monks in the first floor...

I'm asking what would be the most effective placing of the monks, from a statistic/mathematic point of view.. one monk each level.

I have a theory, but as I said I suck at maths, and can not say that it would work out the way I think it would.

have fun.

P.S. If you want to juggle with the numbers and the strength of each fighter so that they can defeat a total of 1000 enemies (and not more than that, or I feel it would fail the experiment) and win the day, feel free to do so, I don't really mind... it's the correct use of strategy and placement that bugs me.

In the following situation, what would be the best strategy?

on the battlefield we have 1000 fighters on one side, and 9 stronger fighters on the other side.

let's say that the 9 "heroes" are fighting monks and that the 1000 soldiers must conquer their monastery.

the monastery has 9 levels and is built so that each monk can defend the access to the next level.

the monks are also of different levels of skill, and know this, whereas the enemy soldiers are all of the same level, inferior to even the weakest of the monks. (we can consider them to be different in the "number of enemies that they can take down before kicking the bucket")...they are therefore of ascending "value" from apprentice to abbot (or champion fighter...just a figure of speech..if you prefere you can say from white belt to, say... 3rd dan, or something similar).

now... given that the important thing is not to win the fight, which might be more than can be asked from them, but taking down the largest number of enemies before dying, how could they achieve this?

should they place themselves in ascending order of "strenght" from the first to the last level of the monastery? in opposite order?

or should they place themselves at random?

let's not work on loopholes, let's not come up with alternative strategies like putting all of the monks in the first floor...

I'm asking what would be the most effective placing of the monks, from a statistic/mathematic point of view.. one monk each level.

I have a theory, but as I said I suck at maths, and can not say that it would work out the way I think it would.

have fun.

P.S. If you want to juggle with the numbers and the strength of each fighter so that they can defeat a total of 1000 enemies (and not more than that, or I feel it would fail the experiment) and win the day, feel free to do so, I don't really mind... it's the correct use of strategy and placement that bugs me.