Skip to main content

Another quick gripe about Scramble With Friends

One reason why I prefer the word-game Boggle over Scrabble is the fact every player has the same letters to work with, so no player is at an advantage or disadvantage on that front. In Scrabble, while the better player will win more times than not, it's quite common for a player to be at either a significant advantage or disadvantage due to the letters he or she has to play with during the course of a game.

Well, I just found out the exception to this rule is with regard to the Challenge feature on the Zynga game Scramble With Friends (Boggle). About once a week, players can take part in a four-part challenge and whomever racks up the most points by the end of the challenge will be rewarded with some additional tokens in which to play more games.

For part one of this challenge, my grid looked like this:

U X D J
K R K C
F P R R
J O D O

Yeah, try forming 30 words with that grid - I dare you! Due to this grid, I was hardly able to muster any points and was shocked to see the almost overwhelmingly larger scores. I then retried the grid for whatever reason and noticed a few changes, meaning the grid was compiled of entirely different letters. In other words, not all of the players had the same grid to work with. This was disappointing, because it places certain players at an advantage and others at a disadvantage just based on the luck of the draw. How can a winner be determined in the game of Boggle if each player has different letters on their grids? If we're going to play games like that, why not have competitive bowlers face-off at separate bowling alleys? One can bowl at the alley where the league is played every week and the other can bowl inside their own mansion.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"