Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[schadd]

i mean, we can always randomize things and then not do them

[Calamitas]

i mean, we can always randomize things and then not do them

Obviously we would have punished those not following through because randomization would be by far the most altruistic option.

[schadd]

optimally altruistic ⇒ ¬fun ∴ ¬most altruistic

[schadd]

although i suppose it is thus proven that a perfectly altruistic condition is impossible

[pacovf]

I will put all my money on 2 gold, 2 points.

I wouldn't do that of I were you. I already did

Man. You should have claimed. Now we both have nothing. For the record, you dont get to retroactively claim, that's way too easy to abuse.

[schadd]

jimmmmm was a huge winner if i didn't do exactly the thing that i said i was gonna do

[UmbrageOfSnow]

I'm going to take the 15 points this time around, unless Dylan wants to stop me, in which case I'll take the 10 points.  But Dylan, we should talk about this.

Dylan, you only need 9 gold to secure the 10 points, then you have 5 to throw around trying to win some of the smaller options.  That's my argument for the higher money player taking the lower of the two options.

[Calamitas]

I'm going to take the 15 points this time around, unless Dylan wants to stop me, in which case I'll take the 10 points.  But Dylan, we should talk about this.

Dylan, you only need 9 gold to secure the 10 points, then you have 5 to throw around trying to win some of the smaller options.  That's my argument for the higher money player taking the lower of the two options.

He wouldn't gain 5 points that way, don't try to trick him.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

I'm going to take the 15 points this time around, unless Dylan wants to stop me, in which case I'll take the 10 points.  But Dylan, we should talk about this.

Dylan, you only need 9 gold to secure the 10 points, then you have 5 to throw around trying to win some of the smaller options.  That's my argument for the higher money player taking the lower of the two options.

He wouldn't gain 5 points that way, don't try to trick him.

I'm not trying to trick him.  But he has a greater chance of gaining more than 10 points than I do.  And I think that's sufficient between the two of us.

Especially because I can try to block him tomorrow if he doesn't cooperate.

I think it makes sense for the two of us with more money to cooperate for the maximum potential points between the two of us on this turn.  Of course I would say that, as the person with the 2nd most money, but I'm not entirely without leverage.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

We're playing for the most points, not the most points in this round.

[Calamitas]

We're playing for the most points, not the most points in this round.

He wouldn't gain one of the gols options as well.

[pacovf]

I intend to put all my money on 3 gold

[Calamitas]

I intend to put all my money on 3 gold

Already did that.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

We're playing for the most points, not the most points in this round.

He wouldn't gain one of the gols options as well.

That's not at all what I'm saying.

I'm saying he and I both want to have more points, which isn't as simple as just winning the +15 this round, which Dylan can unilaterally choose to do if he wants.  But our combined average is better for the game if the player with the higher amount of money spreads it around.

And I'm offering both a carrot and a stick in regards to my actions next turn.  I will help or hurt depending on cooperation with my plan.

I really do think it's in his best interests to take 10, if only because it's in my best interests to be spiteful.

How does this effect you, Calamitas?

[Calamitas]

It doesn't effect me, I'm just a little bored

But if you want to do what's best for the game we obviously should intend to maximize the average of everyone and bot just you twos. And the best way to do that is to ensure

a) there are no ties
b) everyone option is covered

[Calamitas]

It doesn't effect me, I'm just a little bored

But if you want to do what's best for the game we obviously should intend to maximize the average of everyone and not just you two's. And the best way to do that is to ensure

a) there are no ties
b) everyone option is covered

My spelling today is horrible

[UmbrageOfSnow]

It doesn't effect me, I'm just a little bored

But if you want to do what's best for the game we obviously should intend to maximize the average of everyone and bot just you twos. And the best way to do that is to ensure

a) there are no ties
b) everyone option is covered

But the group as a whole doesn't care about maximizing the average of everyone, as evidenced by the first come first serve way Round 1 went down.  So I'm better off trying to maximize the value of a small group, in this case the group with 2 people in it who have more leverage than the others.  I'd have also been including the $2 person in this if it didn't tie.

[Calamitas]

It doesn't effect me, I'm just a little bored

But if you want to do what's best for the game we obviously should intend to maximize the average of everyone and bot just you twos. And the best way to do that is to ensure

a) there are no ties
b) everyone option is covered

But the group as a whole doesn't care about maximizing the average of everyone, as evidenced by the first come first serve way Round 1 went down.  So I'm better off trying to maximize the value of a small group, in this case the group with 2 people in it who have more leverage than the others.  I'd have also been including the $2 person in this if it didn't tie.

First come first serve is the best way to hand out the prizes if one doesn't know about the randomization process.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

Dylan, this is what I'm proposing

You can choose to win whatever category you like today.  But if you're going against me it will take $12, if you're going against everyone else it will take $9.  If you take the 10 points, you know you can win that with $9 and I have no incentive to try to mess with you, because I'm getting more points another way.  So you can put the rest to trying to win a lower category.  You don't really have much chance of getting 5 points, but I think you can get more than 0 points that way.  I cannot.  If you go for the 15 points, I have incentive to try to mess with you, so you really need to commit enough money there to block me.  Which means you probably can't win a lower bid.  15 is still more than 12 or whatever, but not my as much as it's worth to me to try.

So here's the deal:
A) You cooperate with my plan, which works out better for the 2 of us as a 2-person group.  I owe you one, and in the next couple of games, I try to find some little thing or things I can do to help you out, like I was talking about earlier.

B) You announce in thread that you are taking 15 points and I can go to hell.  You probably win the 15 points, unless you try to get cute and underbid.  Next turn, I do my best to block you out of any points, but after I've done one thing that hurts you, I consider us even and move on.

C) You claim you're going to go to do one thing and do the other to cost me more points.  In devote at least the next 3 rounds to trying to mess with you.

This accomplishes my other goal no matter what, which is to establish a precedent of following through on promises.  No matter what you do, I'm making a promise, and I'll follow through on that, which has value in itself in the long run.

Anyway, let's be friends, not enemies.

[pacovf]

I intend to put all my money on 3 gold

Already did that.

Sorry, didn't see it. Ok, I put all my gold on +5 points.

Dylan, this is what I'm proposing

You can choose to win whatever category you like today.  But if you're going against me it will take $12, if you're going against everyone else it will take $9.  If you take the 10 points, you know you can win that with $9 and I have no incentive to try to mess with you, because I'm getting more points another way.  So you can put the rest to trying to win a lower category.  You don't really have much chance of getting 5 points, but I think you can get more than 0 points that way.  I cannot.  If you go for the 15 points, I have incentive to try to mess with you, so you really need to commit enough money there to block me.  Which means you probably can't win a lower bid.  15 is still more than 12 or whatever, but not my as much as it's worth to me to try.

So here's the deal:
A) You cooperate with my plan, which works out better for the 2 of us as a 2-person group.  I owe you one, and in the next couple of games, I try to find some little thing or things I can do to help you out, like I was talking about earlier.

B) You announce in thread that you are taking 15 points and I can go to hell.  You probably win the 15 points, unless you try to get cute and underbid.  Next turn, I do my best to block you out of any points, but after I've done one thing that hurts you, I consider us even and move on.

C) You claim you're going to go to do one thing and do the other to cost me more points.  In devote at least the next 3 rounds to trying to mess with you.

This accomplishes my other goal no matter what, which is to establish a precedent of following through on promises.  No matter what you do, I'm making a promise, and I'll follow through on that, which has value in itself in the long run.

Anyway, let's be friends, not enemies.

There's only one round left after this one, and he has no incentive to claim his bid next round. Blackmail is hard.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

Yeah, but there are games after this one.  And he may have some incentive to claim, because everyone else has an incentive to claim.

[pacovf]

I will bet 1 gold on 8 random options.

The problem is that with too many players that won't work.

That's true of all strategies.

No.

Explain.

Putting everything on one spot and annoncing this is way more stable with more players. Like, with two players, it's probably better to distribute; with more players, it's better to accumulate.

With enough players, there is no incentive for players to respect the first-come-first-served system.

[Dylan32]

We're playing for the most points, not the most points in this round.

He wouldn't gain one of the gols options as well.

That's not at all what I'm saying.

I'm saying he and I both want to have more points, which isn't as simple as just winning the +15 this round, which Dylan can unilaterally choose to do if he wants.  But our combined average is better for the game if the player with the higher amount of money spreads it around.

And I'm offering both a carrot and a stick in regards to my actions next turn.  I will help or hurt depending on cooperation with my plan.

I really do think it's in his best interests to take 10, if only because it's in my best interests to be spiteful.

How does this effect you, Calamitas?

This is fascinating.  Each person's goal is to maximize their own points without regard to the status of other people's points, yes?  So in a vacuum, my best play this round would be to bid 12 gold on the 15 pts and place my remaining 2 somewhere else on a lower point in hopes of a empty prize like last round.  If I go through with this, you could then win 10 pts and also have 2 gold remaining to try to get a lower prize also, since no one claimed the 2 gold prize to be able to force you all in.

"Carrot": Since people have seen that the people who claimed their bid followed through, it is at least somewhat more likely that people will place more bids on the lower prizes this round since I assume no one will bid under you and I for the two top prizes and fewer will bid under other all-in claims. Therefore, my hypothetical 5 gold extra probably wouldn't actually be enough to get me any additional prizes due to the increased density of bids on the lower prizes.

"Stick": If I do not disclose my bid for the final round, how would you know what to do to stop me from getting points? Since winning gold will be useless in the third round, everyone will be bidding on the point prizes.  Since runners-up do not get the prize if there is a tie, there will probably be very few points actually awarded in the 3rd round anyway due to a large number of ties.  So the chances either of us are actually able to win additional points in the 3rd round are minimal in any case, regardless of whether or not you try to spite me.

The only realistic circumstances in which people will actually gain points in the third round would be the case in which we cooperate fully.  That situation would rely on people being altruistic, however.  Since at least a couple people would have to be shut out, the group would likely expect those of us who have received the most points already to be altruistic and allow other people to get the prizes.  If that is the case, you would have no opportunity to spite me since I won't be getting a prize anyway.

PPE 4. Will read after hitting post.

[Dylan32]

Dylan, this is what I'm proposing

You can choose to win whatever category you like today.  But if you're going against me it will take $12, if you're going against everyone else it will take $9.  If you take the 10 points, you know you can win that with $9 and I have no incentive to try to mess with you, because I'm getting more points another way.  So you can put the rest to trying to win a lower category.  You don't really have much chance of getting 5 points, but I think you can get more than 0 points that way.  I cannot.  If you go for the 15 points, I have incentive to try to mess with you, so you really need to commit enough money there to block me.  Which means you probably can't win a lower bid.  15 is still more than 12 or whatever, but not my as much as it's worth to me to try.

So here's the deal:
A) You cooperate with my plan, which works out better for the 2 of us as a 2-person group.  I owe you one, and in the next couple of games, I try to find some little thing or things I can do to help you out, like I was talking about earlier.

B) You announce in thread that you are taking 15 points and I can go to hell.  You probably win the 15 points, unless you try to get cute and underbid.  Next turn, I do my best to block you out of any points, but after I've done one thing that hurts you, I consider us even and move on.

C) You claim you're going to go to do one thing and do the other to cost me more points.  In devote at least the next 3 rounds to trying to mess with you.

This accomplishes my other goal no matter what, which is to establish a precedent of following through on promises.  No matter what you do, I'm making a promise, and I'll follow through on that, which has value in itself in the long run.

Anyway, let's be friends, not enemies.

I have no interest in option C, and am still deciding between A and B. What do you think about my reasoning in my previous post?

[UmbrageOfSnow]

That is really interesting, Dylan.

I honestly don't think we'll collectively have our act together enough to try to cooperate like that in the last round.

So yeah, I'm somewhat banking on the 2nd game I guess.