Kingreaper comments on Diplomacy as a Game Theory Laboratory - Less Wrong

44 Post author: Yvain 12 November 2010 10:19PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (93)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: thezeus18 14 November 2010 09:15:33AM *  1 point [-]

Doesn't iteration cause this strategy to be balanced out? After it becomes clear that two players have an unbreakable alliance, it's in the best interest of the rest of the players to destroy those two first in all future games.

This passage from the TV Tropes page on the Scrub is relevant:

The mistake the Scrub often makes is making up rules too soon. The Metagame can often turn an apparent imbalance on its head. A lower tier character can become a higher tier one, or vice versa. Or something that seemed initially very unbalanced can be countered with time and effort at learning the tactic. The Scrub circumvents this by simply banning the practice without making a good faith effort in actually getting around it with the in-game rules.

Comment author: Kingreaper 16 November 2010 04:17:51PM 5 points [-]

In Risk, iteration will cause the player who always rolls 4-6 on all their dice to lose, because everyone will think they're an annoying cheater.

Doesn't make it not cheating to use dice which only have 4-6 written twice.

If you're playing a different game to the one people agreed to play, even if the game you're playing can be considered as metagame balanced, you're cheating.