= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Steve_Rayhawk comments on Swords and Armor: A Game Theory Thought Experiment - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (68)
Gambit said the only equilibrium was mixed, with 1/5 each of (blue sword, blue armor), (blue sword, green armor), (yellow sword, yellow armor), (green sword, yellow armor), and (green sword, green armor).
With a stylin' bonus of ε points per duel (if a win is 1 point and a loss is −1 points), Gambit says for ε≤1/4 the equilibrium is:
(blue sword, blue armor): 1/5−(4/5)ε
(blue sword, green armor): 1/5−(3/5)ε
(yellow sword, yellow armor): 1/5+(4/5)ε
(green sword, yellow armor): 1/5+(3/5)ε
(green sword, green armor): 1/5
>>2vc//
>Note: this image does not belong to me; I found it on 4chan.
>>2vc//2sbt
>Yellow yellow, because it looks the most awesome and seems like a generally decent combo,
>>2vc//2scc
>Gambit says
>(yellow sword, yellow armor): 1/5+(4/5)ε
File : Gambit_sez_small.jpg
Uh-oh, LessWrong is turning into 4chan! :)
EDIT: The deleted comment this responds to claimed that you should never use the blue armor, because against any weapon, either the green or the yellow armor is better.
It can make sense to choose the armor that is not optimal in any case if it is good enough in more cases. There are no bonus points for winning by a larger margin.
FWIW, my calculations confirm this - you beat me to posting. One nitpick - this is not the only equilibrium, you can transfer weight from (blue, green) to (red, green) up to 10%.