In my experience....
Solo play of Car Wars breaks down into 4 discrete activities:
play of automatic opponent scenarios
playing multiple sides
play of paragraph driven scenarios
Vehicle Design as Solo Play
For me, this was the number one way to waste time with Car Wars. I designed about 50x more vehicles than ...
Use 2 standard decks of 52 cards and deal 10 piles with the following rules:
Dealing the cards
When dealing each row, the first and last card is always face up, while the rest is face down.
In each row, after you have dealt the card to the 5th pile, the next card is dealt face up to the "devil's six" pile. The "devil's six" pile is placed on the upper ...
In Klondike Solitaire there are 7 cards face up on the table, 21 face down on the table, leaving (out of the 52 card pack) 24 cards in the deck. If you're dealing 3 cards at a time, only 24/3 = 8 of these cards are available. So only 15 cards are available at the start of the game.
In order for there not to be any valid moves at the start, you would need:
In FreeCell, you are only allowed to move 1 card at a time, either to or from a free cell or from one stack to another.
That said, it is trivial to move an entire stack of N+1 cards, where N is the number of free cells, by moving N cards to the cells, moving the last card to the new stack, and then pulling down the stored cards onto the ...
This is very similar to a game called "Perpetual Motion" -- the rules from Wikipedia specify gathering same-ranked cards to the left, and only allow for eliminating groups of cards if the four of a rank are dealt out to the four piles as part of a single deal. They seem similarly unclear as to which pile should end up on top of the new stack.
According to one of the biggest player on the solitaire market (SolSuite), the game of Accordion (one card at a time version) has a chance of winning in about 1 of 200 games, i.e. 0,5%
But I would actually say that there is no difference in the winning percentage (if played right) between the two versions you are talking about, since (in the ...
I haven't played this yet, but from a review the rules are as follows.
You need two standard decks of cards, so 104 cards in total.
Deal 6 cards face-up to the top left of the play area (The Devil's Six)
Deal out 10 columns of cards: One face up card in the first column, one facedown followed by one face up card in the second, two facedown ...
I've never heard of any variation that would not allow you to do this. Though the help text you quoted is ambiguous, I believe that "deepest card" refers to the "deepest card that you want to move", not the "deepest card in the entire column". If the computer itself that has such a help file allows you to do the partial-run move anyway, do you have a reason ...
It sounds like a variant of Push-Pin.
You can eliminate a card or a pair of adjacent cards between two cards of the same suit or rank. Select a card or a pair of cards you want to discard by clicking on them. The overall effect of successive plays is that length of the layout gets shorter and shorter. If the length is reduced to two cards the game is won.
The game you are looking for is a mixture between the classic solitaire games Scorpion and Yukon.
I've looked through over 700 games in both SolSuite Solitaire and Pretty Good Solitaire and I came really close to finding your game in a variation called Geoffrey (by Thomas Warfield) in Goodsol's game Pretty Good Solitaire. The only difference is that ...
Yes, it is possible. You can enter the game number into this online solver, and it will show you the full solution.
Here are the first several moves:
Foundations: H-0 C-0 D-0 S-0
: 8D 4D QH KS 2C 9D 8H
: QS AS 2S KD QC 3C 4C
: 7D 7H 9S TH 6D AC 3S
: 5H 8C 8S 5D AD TS 6C
: 3H QD KH 9C 6S 4H
: 6H 2H JS 4S KC 7C
: 2D 5S JC ...
From a human perspective I suppose one's interpretation of difficulty is quite subjective: what one person might find difficult another may find easy. If, for our purposes, we use a rough definition along the lines of, "how much time the average player spends on a layout", then there are a few interesting things we can say about the relationship ...
you deal out the cards up to three. If there are less than three you just deal out those cards. Use what you can. And then put them in the discard pile and start over.
If those are the only cards you have left including the rest of the discard pile then you might be in a lose scenario.
Bicycle cards lists the more restrictive rule.
Any movable card or cards (from tableau, reserve, or stock) may be placed only on a card next-higher in rank and of opposite color in the tableau. Example: The 8♥ may be placed on 9♣ or 9♠. An entire pile of the tableau must be moved as a unit.
Boardgames.about.com also lists the more restrictive ...
This is regarding the game that when played with 1 deck uses 7 build piles.
The earliest recorded rules for this game appear in two different books from 1894 both refer to the game as Triangle. In one version only a single card can be moved and in the other entire sequences may be moved. Partial sequence movement was first recorded in a 2 deck version named ...
I play this sometimes and the person who taught me called it "One-handed Solitaire". I don't know if that's the real name, but that's what I've always called it and people seem to know what I'm talking about if I ever do mention it.
Wikipedia has quite a collection, and the site you mention also has a page with further links. You might find more online if you also search for "patience", the more common name for "solitaire" outside North America.
Probably the best way to make a bot to play against is to not make it have a deck at all, just every other turn make it take a duchy and on the other turns make it randomly take an attack card and do it's effect (only bother with the effect that effects you for the bot doesn't have a deck)
You should check out the game Ascension, it is a deck building game ...
I believe you are talking about Gaps (or some variant of it).
The cards are dealt into four rows of thirteen. The aces are removed and discarded from further play. The gaps that they leave behind are filled by cards that are the same suit and a rank higher than the card on the left of the gap. (For example, 4♣ can be placed beside 3♣.) However, any gap at ...
The closest I’ve found is Batsford.
Batsford uses 2 decks, and has 10 tableau stacks going from 1 to 10. You didn’t mention how many foundation piles; but given 2 deck I would assume 8 foundation piles.
The problem is that Batsford only has the top card facing up in the tableau stacks. Perhaps this is a Batsford variant that alternates the cards face up ...
Copied from https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/428919/dominion-solitaire
I was bored today so I came up with a sort of "Dominion Solitaire".
The way you do it is you set up a standard two player game with you being one player. You simulate the other player's turns in a purely mechanical way, as follows:
Purchase a Province or, if unable to do so, ...
You do not place a card on top of a pile which starts with a King and descends when adding to the columns (you still place one if there are unturned cards beneath a King). Also, there are many permutations of Devil’s six which are impossible. For instance, any sequence of three descending cards in the same suit can’t be solved since you are unable to clear ...
You can only move them when they are in the correct order. You can move all or the bottom part. You cannot pull some from the middle or the beginning and only move those.
Only a king (and its descending cards, if they are in the correct order) can be moved to an empty column.
The random number generator could have been seeded with the same seed, which would cause the same sequence of random number to be generated. The RNG in Microsoft's C library repeats every ~32,000 numbers (which is pretty abysmal), so there's effectively only that many seeds.
>perl -E"say srand; say join ' ', map int(rand(52))+1, 1..10;"