Nfs High Stakes Ost

[Cheryll Witting]

Everyround you will be dealt 9 cards face-down. The goal of the game is to flip as many cards face-up as possible. There is one Vampire card and 8 value cards ranging from 2 to 9. There is always only one copy in each card on the board. If you flip the Vampire card you lose the round.

Flipping a card will raise the stakes. If you flip over all value cards or stab the Vampire the stakes will be added to your winnings. If you flip the Vampire the stakes will be substracted from your winnings.

Use the blood you win to unlock opponents with higher payouts. You win the game if your reach 5000ml. Your progress will be saved between matches. But if you lose all your blood your savegame will be wiped and you need to start over.

This game was created as part of the A Game By Its Cover Jam 2020. The goal was to create a game based on of the cartridge covers from the Famicase Exhibition 2020. The cover to High Stakes was created by Tyler Q Anderson and Jamie C Lee.

Adored this game. Captivating, fun, quick, easy to learn, and you really feel like you can master it somehow. I do wonder if the cards are truly random or if the Vamps have preferences. Wonder that about the "+X" specials too - got caught in some of them. Great design, as in "cool looking" and that the vampires are actually horryfing. Also really like the pun in the title.

The key to realize is that PASSING A GAME gives you YOUR CURRENT STAKES - 2. SO PASSING A GAME AFTER FLIPPING THE SECOND CARD IS NET ZERO. You do not play hands until you stake the vampire or flip it--you play until the outcome is sufficiently certain or uncertain, then act accordingly.

The arrow hint token is confusing me. I had a 3, > on the left and If you had a group of cards 1-9, or 2-9 plus a special/Vampire card, it's possible! But then there would be no hint cards, just luck :) You could play that version with multiple people and everyone takes a turn flipping a card, possibly giving each other hints, etc. Could be a fun party game!

I've once again stumbled onto this game. Three years ago, I left a bitter, vaguely passive-aggressive comment, and I feel like this game deserves a slightly better review, one less clogged with salt.

Aesthetically, this game is stellar. Clearly, a lot of care and effort has been put into the way that its elements look and feel, from the butter-smooth tweens and slides in all its GUI to the smaller details, like the way that hint tiles are thrown into the air from the stake's impact. One touch I particularly appreciated was the grayscale, bit-crushed vampire portraits; they exude uncanny, inhuman menace in a way that works perfectly for the tone.

I deeply admire the visual style on display here, which makes the gameplay they serve so much more disappointing. The core issue, I think, is that the elements of risk create boredom, rather than excitement. The omnipresent threat of completely wiping your save file severely discourages risky play, especially in the last few levels. For all the prompting the game does to "double down," the temptation of taking a 50/50 on the stake after seven draws, or on a risky hint card, or on the direct verbal invitation of your undead dealer, my response was always some variation of the sentiment "no, that's a stupid and self-destructive idea, why would I risk all of my progress for a few extra millilitres?"

Without that high-roller's thrill, what risk is left only serves to create frustration. I find it especially aggrevating that rounds can be lost before even using a single hint card, especially against Orlok, who I swear ends more than half of all rounds like this before they've even begun.

So, those are my thoughts. Full disclosure, I have not finished this game: I very quickly grew bored of the cycle of "duel Zver 5 times for a blood safety buffer, duel Orlok to lose it all on three one-turn rounds, repeat." It's a game I really want to enjoy for its sheer visual style alone, but the gameplay just lets it down for me. I dunno, maybe I'm just too risk-averse to really enjoy gambling, whether the fake PICO-8 game kind or otherwise.

I've been playing this game on and off for over a week now and I seriously can't get above 400ml for these reasons. For some reason, it feels like 1/3 of the rounds I play, even the "easy" ones, the first or second card I flip turns out to be the Vampire card. I would love to finish the game but it feels like at this rate it'll take me at least a month and I think I may get bored before then.

The trick, I find, is to always gun straight for the square. Use the square and arrows to carve out safe space and don't be afraid to pass. Pass literally every game if you need to. You can only lose up to 5 stakes by passing, and that's by literally passing before even flipping any cards yourself. You start with 1 flipped and lose 2 effective flipped by passing, so you lose 1 stake.

I keep coming back to this game, ever since I first saw it on the Game Jam 3 years ago. Honestly hooked on it. The execution is simple yet captivating enough to keep you going. Easily one of the best games on this website. Major kudos to the dev.

Clever how you (I'm guessing) predicted that people would lean hard on the 2x2 token strategy, so you punished it hard. That said, figuring that out made the final opponent much more predictable, so I think it might've helped at the end.

It was interesting to see how some of the tradeoffs you had to make to boost the difficulty, like the vampire placement on the entire board, or how you place the 2x2 token over the most unrevealed cards, ended up making it easier in other ways.

Incarceration has long dominated the national conversation on criminal justice, because the U.S. prison population skyrocketed between the 1980s and late 2000s. Starting in 2007, policymakers seeking to protect public safety, improve accountability, and save taxpayer dollars initiated a wave of bipartisan reforms that has reduced the number of people behind bars in many states. Yet this movement has largely overlooked the largest part of the correctional system: community supervision.

Community corrections is marked by considerable growth and scale, disproportionate representation of men and people of color, and a majority of people who committed nonviolent offenses.

These findings demonstrate the need for greater scrutiny of the community corrections system by policymakers and the public. They also reinforce an emerging consensus among leading practitioners for a fundamental change in the vision and mission of supervision: from punishing failure to promoting success.

Administrative response: A sanction for noncompliance with supervision rules that is less punitive than long-term incarceration, such as a verbal or written warning, curfew restrictions, more frequent drug testing, and short-term incarceration.

Administrative supervision: A form of probation that typically requires little to no contact with a supervision officer but also permits a return to prison or jail if the person being supervised is not compliant.

Conditions of supervision: Rules that those under supervision must follow, such as abstaining from alcohol and illicit drugs, reporting to supervisory officers, abiding by a curfew, participating in treatment programs, and avoiding contact with people with felony records.

Graduated sanctions: A range of community-based penalties, such as increased reporting, community service, and short-term incarceration, administered in a manner that is swift, certain, and proportional to the violation.

At the end of 2016, more than4.5 million people were on probationor parole, accounting for two-thirdsof the total correctional population.More than 3.6 million of thoseindividuals were on probation, andthe remaining 875,000 were onparole.1

The community correctionspopulation peaked in 2007, andalthough it had declined 11 percentby 2016, it remained near its all-timehigh and was 239 percent largerthan it was in 1980.2 Althoughthe significant growth of theU.S. prison and jail populationsover the past half-century hasgarnered substantial public andpolicymaker attention, this similarrise in the number of people oncommunity supervision has beenlargely overlooked.

As probation and parole populationsgrew, so did the per capita rate ofcommunity supervision. Today, 1 in55 adults in the U.S., or 4.5 millionpeople, is subject to postconvictionsurveillance and court-ordered rules.That share is down 581,900 peoplefrom the 2007 peak of 1 in 45, but itstill represents nearly 2 percent ofAmerican adults.

In addition, the national ratemasks wide variation in howprobation and parole are usedacross states. The share of peopleon community supervision rangesfrom 1 in 18 in Georgia to 1 in 168in New Hampshire,5 and evenamong neighboring states withsimilar populations and politicaldemographics, rates can differsignificantly. For example, 1 in 33adults in Idaho is on supervisioncompared with just 1 in 134 in Utah.

The racial gap resembles that inincarceration: Black adults are about3.5 times as likely as whites to besupervised, and although African-Americans make up 13 percentof the U.S. adult population, theyaccount for 30 percent of thoseon probation or parole. In addition,although federal data do not indicatedisproportionate representation ofHispanics in community corrections,many states do not report ethnicitydata, so Hispanics under supervisionare undercounted.7

Imbalances also exist among femalesand males under supervision.Men are supervised at a rate about3.5 times that of women. However,the share of women under supervisionhas nearly doubled from 520,000 in1990 to more than 1 million at theend of 2016. As a result, womenaccounted for one-quarter of theprobation population and 1 in 8parolees by 2016.

At the end of 2016, 8 in 10probationers and two-thirds ofparolees had been sentencedfor nonviolent crimes. Drug andproperty crimes each accounted formore than a million of the people onparole or probation that year.8 For asense of scale, if individuals undersupervision for drug crimes andthose for property crimes each madeup a city, they would rank among the10 largest cities in the U.S.9

3a8082e126