Vsotvep, ok sure, I already said that I can’t do anything to prevent you from capturing me if you cooperate with le_4TC anyway.
Note that this will make the situation impossible anyway: Haze will not vote for a 3-way draw, I will now vote for a 4-way draw. That means even if I were to vote for a draw, we wouldn’t be able to agree on it.
You know Vsotvep, you could just vote for a 4-way draw … insert appropriate emoji here
I’m not going to. Neither is @le_4TC:
But a 4-player draw is prefered to losing, right?
Anyway, it’s your decision. Since I have said what I wanted to say, I will shut up now. :X
Since the discussion has directly brought up what I’ve said, let me publicly clarify:
It’s up to the players to personally decide whether how large or who’s included in a draw matters to them.
It’s up to the players to decide upon exact preferences between outcomes, which would also include their personal considerations of risk tolerance/aversion, and even distinguishing what are the distinct outcomes.
All of these preferences might also be influenced by various psychological factors and the minutiae of what transpired in a game. It is impossible for the game designer to know or dictate utility functions to the players. Utility functions are (implicitly) determined by the players’ preferences, not the other way around.
I only request that the players remain generally consistent with Win > Draw > Loss, but there is no strict enforcement of that, since the intent behind one’s actions is a subjective matter.
There is a lot of interesting game theory discussion to be had regarding all of this and potential tweaks to the game objectives. I would love to discuss those at length when the game is over, but I’m deliberately not diving into it for now, since I don’t want to influence the game any further.
2 Likes
Round 22 has been extended by 24 hours
The new deadline is now 2020-09-13T00:00:00Z
@Vsotvep has been deducted an “extra day” and now has one extra day left.
@李建澔2 has also not submitted moves, but already does not have any extra days left. @李建澔2 has asked for a replacement, but I have not been able to arrange for one yet.
All players may continue discussion and change their moves if they wish.
There will be no second extension. Failing to submit by the extended deadline will result in the move being counted as a pass.
1 Like
Replacement player is joining the game
@Maharani is replacing @李建澔2 and thus taking control of the 
position.
@Vsotvep, @le_4TC, @martin3141, @Haze_with_a_Z, please establish communications with the new player, and share previous communications (from interactions with @李建澔2) with @Maharani.
@Maharani will be given 3 extra days to work with.
@李建澔2 is no longer participating in this game.
4 Likes
I assume this means that @martin3141 will suggest a 5-player draw.
I wish to warn @Haze_with_a_Z and @Maharani about collaborating with Martin to enforce such a draw. If you help Martin take revenge after le_4TC or I (or both of us) refuse to draw, by killing either le_4TC or me, you will help with bringing the game to a position where the other four remaining players will divide the spoils. With most likely only two players remaining with a strong position, there will be practically no possibility of another draw.
Hence, by helping Martin, you’re doing nothing else than that: helping Martin get a larger chance to win the game. You’re not helping yourself get a better position: the game will still end with one winner.
Please keep that in mind: a draw is most likely your best bet, but if there will be no draw, then you basically have no reason to help either of the three of us kill another.
On the other hand, by not helping Martin, he’ll be a shark without teeth, and the game is more likely to converge to a position where a draw is really the only possible outcome of the game.
1 Like
well we don’t have a reason not to help yall either so idk what the big deal is if I wanna help someone or mutliple someones do something. like i am dead right now but if I work together, I might live.
1 Like
That’s what I’m trying to say, you’re not going to live by helping to kill one of the players. You’re lowering the chances of a draw, since two strong players would just have the strongest of the two win. Three strong players can perhaps manage to achieve a draw, like Martin is currently trying.
Of course, when you believe you can get enough eyes to make a living shape (which still would need three eyes), you can do this, but I doubt that’s going to be happening.
1 Like
I can tell that if we have a draw now, i’ll be excluded from it which I don’t like. I’d rather try to kill someone than sit idly thouhgh
2 Likes
I have realized that there are a couple of things that I need to add to the proposal from yesterday.
1.) The draw I propose is indeed a 5-way draw.
2.) Vsotvep, you said you prefer a 3-way draw over a 4-way draw. I rather believe you were trying to avoid the draw, eliminate Haze and then somehow try to win, possibly by cooperating with le_4TC to capture my group and then fight for the rest of the points subsequently. I think in your position, a draw is not a bad outcome, and you should be satisfied with it.
3.) It is absolutely necessary that Haze stays alive, else we can’t threaten to capture le_4TC’s group. Vsotvep, if you shorten Haze’s liberties at any point in the future (regardless of whether you voted for draw or not), I will start playing against you.
I’ve said this in my personal messages to you as well: I’m not interested in the kind of draw where the threat is to kill le_4TC’s group. You have the stronger position, and with le_4TC gone, I expect that you will become the winner, not I.
Your initial draw proposal was based on another idea: that I would be ahead in points, but had my stones inside your territory ready for you to capture:
Both le_4TC and I would need each other’s help to capture you. I would refuse to capture, since I’m ahead in points (30, le_4TC has 29) and thus by passing, I’d be declared the winner. On the other hand, white can capture my three stones, to make le_4TC the winner of the game, forcing me to accept a 3-way draw or lose. le_4TC has the same prospect: a 3-way draw or lose.
The plan you’re currently proposing, is to kill one of us with the help of Haze / Maharani (which I explained should not be given, since it does not help them get into a better position). The prospect after this, is that one of the other two players wins, but it is not certain who it is: if you kill me, you may very well win from le_4TC, and if you kill le_4TC, you may very well win from me.
Not only is the number of players in the draw less preferable in the current plan, neither le_4TC nor I are currently in a position where the only prospects are drawing or losing: by killing you (for which we both have incentive) we may actually reach a position where one of us could win.
The plan is not to kill le_4TC, the plan is to threaten to kill le_4TC and simultaneously vote for draw. I believe that, if we stick to this plan, it is highly likely that le_4TC will agree to a draw.
The rules don’t state that a draw with 3 people is preferable over a draw with 5 people. This is only your desire, I guess.
Furthermore, in case my plan for a draw fails, I do not intend to give le_4TC incentive to cooperate with you to capture my group. As long as I make sure that le_4TC has the most area score, why should they drag out the game by removing my stones and therefore give you a chance to overtake them in terms of points?
Why would they agree to a draw, if you’re planning on doing this?
This is only relevant in case you choose not to go along with my plan to draw. As long as you do cooperate with the plan, I believe they will likely agree to a draw. After all, they prefer a draw over getting eliminated, right?
This is getting a bit too complicated for me to follow, but I believe the problem right now is that your plan is to threaten to capture me together with Vsotvep in the case where I’m leading on the board, but for the threat to work I have to actually believe that both of you want to go through with it (and Vsotvep doesn’t seem happy with going through with it).
Here’s the simple version of my intentions. I am presenting two options to Vsotvep:
1.) Cooperate with the plan and go for a draw.
2.) le_4TC wins.
I am doing this because I’m desperate. Of course I am, I already demonstrated above that I cannot win anymore (I refer to my post from yesterday).
If Vsotvep does not cooperate, I know for a fact that I am going to lose. Thus (in that case) I may as well make sure that le_4TC wins, right? And I have a rather fool-proof strategy to accomplish this.
You know what they say … a dying lion is the most dangerous.
I guess we will have to see which option Vsotvep chooses.
Round 22 has ended
-
@Maharani did not submit moves and I have not been able to reach them (since they have not signed into the forums since agreeing to join) - At this point, I’m not sure if @Maharani is still planning to join. I’m sorry for the inconvenience and misunderstanding.
- Since the round was already extended before, I’ve decided to just proceed
- All of the other players placed at their first choices, with no collisions
- One stone at J3 was captured
Voting (Round 22)
-
@martin3141 voted for a 5-way draw -
@Vsotvep voted for a 5-way draw - No other votes were submitted
- I am counting the position as being absent. Hence, according to the procedures that I outlined here, I will assume that they are voting both for a “Resign” and any “Draw” that excludes themselves.
- Note: if one position is absent and the other players all vote for a 5-way draw, I will count it as a 4-way draw for the non-absent players.
- Since no unanimous consensus was reached from voting, the game continues.
Round 23 has begun and will end on 2020-09-14T00:00:00Z
Here is the current board state:
2 Likes