1. This project did not provide an interaction pattern. How did you approach the design and problem solving process for this project?

   We had a very in-depth meeting to review the requirements, and planned out our vision for how we would approach the design. Once we felt solid with our vision, I (MC) built out some test specs for the LinkedList set-up and BG wrote the classes and methods. From here we were able to print a game board and after that we did real-time testing with the command-line inputs to see if our code was operating correctly.

2. If you had one more day to work on this project, what would you work on?

   BG: Making it into a Gem to be called in Terminal from any location. MC: Would've liked to put the game on a live server and add smart-computer functionality

3. Describe the pairing techniques you used while working on this project.

   Initially we tried Ping-Ponging which worked for the basic code-base setup. After that it became difficult to manage because we wanted to make bilateral decisions regarding design and it was much easier to work Driver-Navigator. This way we accomplished much more since we could work out problems in real time.

4. Describe how feedback was shared over the course of this project.

   Most feedback was shared directly during Driver-Navigator sessions. The dynamic was very open and honest, any concerns or ideas were generally shared in the moment and either resolved or implemented.