Prisoner's Dilemma --- Congratulations to Sudo_Nym and Tamuz

[blahgo]

Well as far as I'm concerned We should all Defect.

[Xdaamno]

For the record, I'd like to point out you can only defect against one particular person, and, for that reason, if you don't think anyone's going to defect against you individually, co-operation is the best option.

[/modtalking]

Edit: Yes, I'm aware the game theory for this is different than the game theory for the actual prisoner's gambit, and the game could be done in a majority-loses kind of defect/co-operate style, but that's not what I'm doing. If I hosted this again, I'd probably try that out, though, with a few extra twists.

[YagamiLight]

I say we all just discuss tigers this first one, then next discussion phase we discuss strategies and tactics, because tigers are often orange with black stripes.

[YagamiLight]

EBWODP
and I agree with the mod right there.

[Mokina]

I'm setting my policy beforehand.

I will cooperate without fail until someone defects against me (see Tit-for-Tat) whereupon I will defect against them for one turn. If necessary I will use my Top Dog ability to screw you over (assuming multiple defections).

This is a

nice

strategy (you won't be defected against by default), but it is also

retaliatory

(not blindly optomistic) and

forgiving

(tries to avoid a "death spiral" of endless defection). Also, because I've just told you how it works, it is

predictable

. These are the four elements of a utilitarian (good for everyone) Prisoner's Dilemna strategy.

[JordanA24]

I think, for now, we should all co-operate, since the later levels will probably have much harsher penalties for being defected against.

[Sudo_Nym]

The game theory for this is obviously much different than the two player version. What I always found so interesting about that was that each player would be individually better off by defecting, and yet both players defecting would be worse than both cooperating.

In this version, I'm not sure that that holds true. Let's see if I can build a square

Not Defected Defected
Cooperate- 3 -3
Defect- 0 -1

See, the major change I see here is that in the two player version, a person is better off defecting no matter what his opponent does- here one's better off defecting if they believe they'll be defected against, and cooperating otherwise.

Like I said when I first signed up, it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes loose.

[somestrangeflea]

Fact of the matter is, there's a much better payout for co-operation than defection, and so there is no real benefit from it, at this stage of the game! Co-operation will gain 2HP, provided that you aren't defected against.

Now, chances are, someone's gonna be nasty, and defect against the person who come's across most "Co-op"y.

I guarantee you all now, I will co-operate this time.

[Mokina]

I think things are going to be fairly similar to 2-player iterated. Percentages refer to the chance of a particular outcome, assuming everyone acts randomly:

[col]

Mokina Cooperates

[col]

...Defects vs. #1

[col]

...Defects vs. #2

[col]

...Defects vs. #3

[col]

...Defects vs. #4

All Cooperate w/Me (50%)

[col]+2[col]+0[col]+0[col]+0[col]+0

#1 Defects vs. Me (5%)

[col]-3[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1

#2 Defects...(5%)

[col]-3[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1

#3 Defects...(5%)

[col]-3[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1

#4 Defects...(5%)

[col]-3[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1[col]-1

And so on up until #10.

The fact that anyone can target you would convince some players to defect all the time, but the reality is that

they

have 10 other players to choose from. As such, the pure-luck chances that you'll be defected against are exactly the same as in normal 2-player Dilemna.

Xdaamno, correct me if the chart is wrong.


(EDITED, adding percentages to the chart)

[Xdaamno]

The chart's numbers are correct.

[YagamiLight]

Mokina, You missed the fact that 2+ people might defect vs. you.

[Xdaamno]

Yagami, I added the rule that only 1 defect counts against a single person.

Otherwise the game would be over sooner than I wanted it to, I wanted a slight time for players to retaliate, and it's a little more realistic.

[YagamiLight]

Oh, guessed I missed it.

[somestrangeflea]

Oh here's a question.

Will you be told

who

defected against you?

[Xdaamno]

All the results will be 100% public in the reveal phase, including who defected who.

Remember, ideally, you're playing to win alone. If you like, I'll devise a scoring system to give players a rank of 'how much they won', at endgames, so it's not singularily last-man-standing.

[Mokina]

Much simpler chart:

[col]

Mokina Cooperates

[col]

Mokina Defects v. Someone

All Cooperate w/Me (50%)

[col]+2[col]+0

Someone Defects v. Me (50%)

[col]-3[col]-1

Average loss when cooperating: -1.0
Average loss when defecting: -1.0

EDIT: Okay, so the av-losses are equal. But my policy stands... it makes two rounds of defection against me (-1 for you) a worse option than two rounds of cooperation (+4 for you). If the numbers change, so will my strategy.

[Xdaamno]

I'm talking too much.

For rule clarification, I'd like to point out

If you defect, the damage done to you if you are defected against is -1, regardless of who you defected against. You can defect against player A, an if B defects against you, you'll still only take -1 damage

[somestrangeflea]

Eventually though, for the game to go anywhere, it'll become so that the reward for defecting is greater than the reward for co-operating.

Co-operation will be the death of us later on.

[Mokina]

I'm talking too much.

For rule clarification, I'd like to point out

If you defect, the damage done to you if you are defected against is -1, regardless of who you defected against. You can defect against player A, an if B defects against you, you'll still only take -1 damage

Oh. I'm going to edit the chart to reflect that; hope it's okay...

[Xdaamno]

Oh. I'm going to edit the chart to reflect that; hope it's okay...

I'm not the one playing here, so it's fine with me. I was just doing that so you don't all blame me if you start having more HP than you're supposed to.

[Mokina]

I was mostly just concerned about your policy on edits.

[Xdaamno]

Oh, right, I have no policy on edits. Edits are fine, since you're PMing your actions (And even then you can Re-PM me them and change them).

[Mokina]

Now, chances are, someone's gonna be nasty, and defect against the person who come's across most "Co-op"y.

Yeah, but their own score is going to be worse off after two rounds compared to if they'd cooperated (by -5, actually, assuming eye-for-an-eye retaliation). In other words, that nasty person is also a short-sighted one.

[Korran]

Mod: what if two people use top dog ability at once??

[Tamuz]

SSF is defecting