cmhardw
Premium Member
Hi everyone,
I noticed something fishy going on with Code Cracker on Rubik's Revolution and wanted to post some findings I made.
I systematized the way I approach finding the codes to always checking the colors in the following order: yellow-green-orange-blue-red-white. In doing this I noticed some common patterns. There are 720 possible codes, and each one has an equal opportunity of appearing given a fair code-writer, which the revolution is not.
I played 50 games and wrote down the final code for each one, and I found that in 50 games I only saw 15 different codes. Below I list the code, and the number of times I saw it.
YOBGWR: 7
YROWBG: 5
YROGBW: 3
GBYORW: 5
GBWROY: 1
GWYROB: 2
OGRWBY: 2
OBRGWY: 3
BGRYSO: 5
BRYGWO: 2
RYGOWB: 3
ROWBYG: 3
RWYBGO: 3
WYBROG: 2
WOYRGB: 4
The probability of getting only 15 codes in 50 tries assuming a fair game is (15/720)^50 = (1/48)^50 = 8.7 x 10^(-85)
So clearly the game is a cheap shortcut of the fair game that could be made with the same rules. Also notice that codes starting with yellow are far more common than codes starting with orange. Another interesting thing I saw was that at one point I got the code YOBGWR 4 times in a row. Not counting that group of 4 I got the same code twice in a row 3 times. I just thought it was interesting that the Rubik's Revolution people didn't put a random number generator in place for this game. Is it that much harder to do than to just program in a small number of codes and set those codes on a random loop?
One last thing, I took an average of how many moves it took me to figure out the code when I stuck to my system and I got 21.76 moves on average sticking to my system, below the expected 23.5 average if you look at the fair game. Then just for fun I used my observed probabilities for each code and tried again. I did 25 attempts and averaged 9.4 moves to figure out the code. Not only that but since I always start by guessing the most probable code, one of my 25 tries was that code, so I guessed it in 6 moves ;-) Using these cases the worst case scenario requires 13 guesses to find the correct code. I just thought it was funny, that is well below the predicted average based on the fair game ;-) Now if only at the WC 2009 they have a code cracker competition for 1,000 Euro ;-)
Chris
I noticed something fishy going on with Code Cracker on Rubik's Revolution and wanted to post some findings I made.
I systematized the way I approach finding the codes to always checking the colors in the following order: yellow-green-orange-blue-red-white. In doing this I noticed some common patterns. There are 720 possible codes, and each one has an equal opportunity of appearing given a fair code-writer, which the revolution is not.
I played 50 games and wrote down the final code for each one, and I found that in 50 games I only saw 15 different codes. Below I list the code, and the number of times I saw it.
YOBGWR: 7
YROWBG: 5
YROGBW: 3
GBYORW: 5
GBWROY: 1
GWYROB: 2
OGRWBY: 2
OBRGWY: 3
BGRYSO: 5
BRYGWO: 2
RYGOWB: 3
ROWBYG: 3
RWYBGO: 3
WYBROG: 2
WOYRGB: 4
The probability of getting only 15 codes in 50 tries assuming a fair game is (15/720)^50 = (1/48)^50 = 8.7 x 10^(-85)
So clearly the game is a cheap shortcut of the fair game that could be made with the same rules. Also notice that codes starting with yellow are far more common than codes starting with orange. Another interesting thing I saw was that at one point I got the code YOBGWR 4 times in a row. Not counting that group of 4 I got the same code twice in a row 3 times. I just thought it was interesting that the Rubik's Revolution people didn't put a random number generator in place for this game. Is it that much harder to do than to just program in a small number of codes and set those codes on a random loop?
One last thing, I took an average of how many moves it took me to figure out the code when I stuck to my system and I got 21.76 moves on average sticking to my system, below the expected 23.5 average if you look at the fair game. Then just for fun I used my observed probabilities for each code and tried again. I did 25 attempts and averaged 9.4 moves to figure out the code. Not only that but since I always start by guessing the most probable code, one of my 25 tries was that code, so I guessed it in 6 moves ;-) Using these cases the worst case scenario requires 13 guesses to find the correct code. I just thought it was funny, that is well below the predicted average based on the fair game ;-) Now if only at the WC 2009 they have a code cracker competition for 1,000 Euro ;-)
Chris
Last edited: