Kibitz for Diplomatic Go: The First Game

[Vsotvep]

@yebellz

There was a private kibitz thread for a werewolf game, where I think we established that even @ mentioning someone does not reveal the private message thread to them.

Let me test. @Vsotvep, can you see this thread? If he can, we can abandon this thread and start a new one.

To confirm: indeed, mods can’t see private chats until a message is flagged for moderation.

---

@Aumpa

Oh man. That was really sloppy of

@李建澔2 to collide like that. Everybody else announced their moves to avoid collisions, so they only had to read the discussion to keep up. I really doubt they’ll have any good chance at forming an alliance with any other players.

I attempted, but it seems that the disinterest in alliances was coming from the yellow side. I still feel the first move was a matter of not reading the discussion, and not a deliberate attack on HHG.
But as said, this gave le_4TC a very strong position, and made HHG and Haze quite weak right off the bat.

@Aumpa

It looks like

is very close to making solid, permanent life.

and

also have good chances. So perhaps my fear of a 5-way stalemate is unnecessary.

What a cute thought this early in the game

@yebellz

I feel like Haze is focused on seeking vengeance against Vsotvep. I don’t know what’s been said in private discussions, but maybe HHG has been more tactful and Haze feels like Vsotvep committed greater wrongs against them.

I had the same feeling, but I felt my moves were perfect to resist this. Disconnecting G7 couldn’t have been better.

@yebellz

I think

Vsotvep has to be careful and not gloat too much over

Haze, especially since

Vsotvep does not necessarily have a super strong position.

I was deliberately trying to provoke Haze, since I thought it would both unnerve them, and urge them to try and play in my corner. I figured I could capture Haze later and get a nice large eyespace in return.

It didn’t exactly work like that, but at least it partially succeeded on the right side.

@shinuito

I actually do feel bad for

李建澔2, losing three stones, a very cramped position, even making an eye at f2 by playing f1 still leaves the three stones in 2-atari.

Don’t forget that I offered to help them attack le_4TC, but was rejected.

@shinuito

I feel like this would be a very funny result for the next round

I mean it wouldn’t make sense in the context of HHG being so strong, but funny nonetheless

I wish I had noticed the 4-atari! I would’ve totally gone for that plan

@Samraku

Maybe he doesn’t want a draw, but also respects the wrath of Martin/White?

This, and my main objection in the public thread was against a draw of 5 players, I wanted a draw with 3 players at that point in the game.

@yebellz

Vsotvep and

le_4TC have not voted to draw, and I don’t think

Vsotvep forgot by accident (despite what he might soon publicly claim).

To be honest, I think I did really forget by accident.

@shinuito

I still don’t understand if Vsotvep gets a better position if Martin was eliminated rather than le_4tc.

My problem was that I would be going against a team of Martin and Haze, not just Martin alone. I didn’t see a way to stop Martin from getting at least half of the board, while I did see a way to get more with killing Martin.

@shinuito

I think Vsotvep misjudged le_4tc’s priorities and is thinking maybe too diplomatically for the endgame rather than tactically short term.

In the end, I misjudged Martin’s priorities. If I had known he would not try to take A1, I would have put more effort into getting J3 as well, so that I could get at least as many points as le_4TC. But with Martin refusing to take A1, I had no way of convincing le_4TC to capture.

@yebellz

in order to sway a seemingly risk-averse

Vsotvep to get on board with stopping

le_4TC from winning.

I wouldn’t say I was risk-averse, but rather had the idea that capturing Haze had no urgency. Nothing had urgency at this point in the game.

@shinuito

This seems a bit harsh. Has anyone any examples of games where there’s any rules to motivate play when in a losing position? I don’t think standard risk for instance offers much motivation to play when you’re in a losing position. You could in theory hold out to capture a territory each turn and try get a massive reinforcement card, but supposing you were in such a losing position with one unit left per territory there would be no point in waiting to be beaten.

My main reason for saying this, is that it removes a large part of the strategy from the game if you can’t know what your opponent’s motivations are. Because of the move collisions, it’s difficult enough with clear motivations (such as in SAS go), but if there are players who play without a goal, it becomes very difficult to make much sense of the moves.

[antonTobi]

Yes, the players could always choose whether to care more about maximizing their absolute score or their relative score (whatever the rules say). But I see it as a good thing for the rules to tell us what to do. Personally, I like knowing what the goal of the game is, and trying to follow the “requested” utility function as well as I can. For instance, in the just finished game, I could have decided to maximize my score (and risk losing) instead of settling for a win with just a third of the board. But since the rules say that winning is winning and score doesn’t matter, I played like I did. The other players also referred to the stated rules at multiple points in the games. So while we could in theory have just ignored the (partially) given utility function, we didn’t, because we’re trying to play this game together and have fun. Thus it does matter a lot what the rules say, and it is very much possible in practice to dictate a utility function, even though it doesn’t work in theory

I don’t think we actually disagree on anything, but this point seems to come up multiple times, so I feel like there’s maybe something lost in communication. Maybe the above makes my perspective clearer, but in any case I’m looking forward to the continued discussion on good incentives for the next game!

On that note, since I feel like 90% of what I write looks like I’m trying to “fix” the game, I want to emphasize that I think that almost every part of the game rules was beautifully designed. Specifically, the innovations (new to me at least) of “new chains” and allowing precisely 3 choices per move (I think this is the perfect amount) are very nice and worked well in practice. The only part that I want to improve on is clarifying the incentives, other than that I think it is close to perfect! (I mean as close as regular go is… there’s always room for discussing the fine details of course )

[Vsotvep]

@le_4TC

On that note, since I feel like 90% of what I write looks like I’m trying to “fix” the game, I want to emphasize that I think that almost every part of the game rules was beautifully designed. Specifically, the innovations (new to me at least) of “new chains” and allowing precisely 3 choices per move (I think this is the perfect amount) are very nice and worked well in practice. The only part that I want to improve on is clarifying the incentives, other than that I think it is close to perfect! (I mean as close as regular go is… there’s always room for discussing the fine details of course )

I 100% agree with this sentiment.

[Haze_with_a_Z]

I am not reading this after reading for a bunch and then skimming some of the longer posts.

I also 100% acknowledge that I didn’t know what I was doing and yes I wanted to kill vep more.

[Haze_with_a_Z]

@Vsotvep

I was deliberately trying to provoke Haze, since I thought it would both unnerve them, and urge them to try and play in my corner

hahaha
it like somewhat worked

I decided I would die or yall would make it so I couldnt play if I was predictable so I went for the unpredictable. also sometimes I had no clue where to go.

And my thoughts for most of the game were “if I am not captured, I dont lose”. Maybe bad thouhgts but like if I dont offer a losing draw, I can have a chance at winning if I don’t die.

[Vsotvep]

Also, I was wondering if you used discobot at any point in the game, since you mentioned you deliberately used a strategy of being unpredictable and random.

[Haze_with_a_Z]

@Vsotvep

Also, I was wondering if you used discobot at any point in the game, since you mentioned you deliberately used a strategy of being unpredictable and random

I used it once. I tried to create a private chat with myself that would show up in my inbox. So I had the bright idea of using discobot. It was a terrible idea and I don’t recommend it. It will respond with it’s help post after every message you send and so I wouldn’t do that. Well I needed a post from someone other than me. So I did “@ discobot”

And then I complained about how discobot was annoying and wouldn’t shut up and I didn’t wanna hear from them. Deleted those posts though so I can’t share them.

@Haze_with_a_Z

Well I deleted the unnecessary posts of me complaining about discobot

I only used the chats for like a few days after they were announced and they are half of me getting side tracked.

@Haze_with_a_Z

My strat in this game is basically to be unpredictable. If I am, I can’t lose

@Haze_with_a_Z

Well I can lose but I can’t be elimmed

Also vep, regarding you,

@Haze_with_a_Z

But I have absolutely no clue who is teamed with vep so idk if it would be wise to try to get 2 or le to help me

@Haze_with_a_Z

I already know HHG and vep are teamed

[Haze_with_a_Z]

I guess I got distracted less than I thought but whatever.

[shinuito]

Congrats to all the players on a great first game! Entertaining to watch and comment on and congrats to @le_4TC

[shinuito]

@Vsotvep

My problem was that I would be going against a team of Martin and Haze, not just Martin alone. I didn’t see a way to stop Martin from getting at least half of the board, while I did see a way to get more with killing Martin.

I think this makes sense as well. I was having trouble imagining the diplomacy at points as well and how that factors into decisions. I was thinking a bit too much on the board at times

[martin3141]

@Vsotvep

My problem was that I would be going against a team of Martin and Haze, not just Martin alone. I didn’t see a way to stop Martin from getting at least half of the board, while I did see a way to get more with killing Martin.

You saw through my scheme One of my secret plans was to form an alliance to threaten to capture le_4TC’s main group. If all players attacking le_4TC vote for draw, then eventually le_4TC might feel enough pressure to vote for a draw themselves. However at the right time I might have stopped voting for a draw, hoping we would still capture le_4TC despite my deviation from the “draw plan”. With only Vsotvep and Haze_with_a_Z left, I thought I might be able to cooperate with Haze and ultimately win.

@Vsotvep

In the end, I misjudged Martin’s priorities. If I had known he would not try to take A1, I would have put more effort into getting J3 as well, so that I could get at least as many points as le_4TC. But with Martin refusing to take A1, I had no way of convincing le_4TC to capture.

After Round 27 I was convinced that my plan to cooperate and (threaten to) capture le_4TC was bound to fail. Since I had only 2 eyes I was convinced Vsotvep and le_4TC would cooperate to capture me if my area score was high enough to change the outcome of the game. With the two options being to go for a draw that had low chances to succeed (according to my judgment) or gifting le_4TC the win in order to not not have my group captured, I decided for the latter. I feel bad for Vsotvep who counted on me priortizing the objectives as defined in the rules though.

Regardless this game was so exciting it kept me awake until 2 AM a lot of the time (which was the time of the deadline in my timezone)

[Haze_with_a_Z]

@martin3141

it kept me awake until 2 AM a lot of the time (which was the time of the deadline in my timezone)

hahaha.

The deadline for me was 8pm, but my forum checking habits have changed with my schedule and I kept managing to forget to check before the game. And I liked subbing day of and not at like 9 or 10 pm when I checked what actually happened in the game.

[martin3141]

A question to the people who know more about coding than me: How could we collect the diagrams of this first game into a bundle of sorts, such that people can click through the game? I’m thinking a backward-arrow and a forward-arrow, and every diagram shows the position after the corresponding round (including the collisions would be tricky though).

[Vsotvep]

I can work on this to use on my webpage. Probably later today or tomorrow, I’ve been a bit busy today and yesterday

[yebellz]

Well, if you just want something to flip through a sequence of images (showing only the resulting board state at the beginning of each round), then any sort of photo/image album software/websites would be sufficient. I was even thinking about making a GIF showing the evolution of the board state at the beginning of each round.

However, figuring out how to display all of the intermediate collisions, placements, and captures in a concise visual manner is trickier. When producing the game thread, I had to make some decisions about which things to expand out into multiple figures and when to condense things. Even still, there are some collisions, specifically collisions with existing stones, that I didn’t bother to attempt to display in the diagrams, and left to the text instead.

[yebellz]

I’m curious what exactly @Vsotvep, @martin3141, and @le_4TC think about this hypothetical endgame position, and whether it would have been feasible to establish a 3-way draw by setting this up and having @Vsotvep play kingmaker in order to force both of the others to vote for the draw.

@yebellz

[Vsotvep]

I suggested something like this to Martin, I believe. The problem was that Martin did not want to expand their group past the number of points that le_4TC had, since it would become more likely that Martin would get captured (even though there was a chance to get a draw in this position).

That is, Martin placed the goal of staying on the board until the game end above the small possibility of a draw.

[martin3141]

From my perspective, I thought that Vsotvep and le_4TC would likely cooperate to capture my group in a scenario like this, rather than going for a draw. Both had told me that they are aiming for a win.

I don’t recall that Vsotvep told me he was willing to play the Kingmaker in a situation like this. But even if he had said so, I would have been afraight that it was part of his scheme to make me expand enough to give le_4TC the incentive to capture my group.

[yebellz]

Had the game hypothetically reached that position, would you have actually taken the 3-way draw? Or would you work with le_4TC to eliminate martin?

[antonTobi]

I’m guessing the idea is that blue forces white to vote for a draw under the threat of capture, and forces red to vote for a draw under the threat of just going to scoring, where white wins.

But red can equally well “force” blue to capture under the threat of going to scoring, since blue also loses in that scenario (while by capturing, blue might have winning chances).

I would most likely have made the above ultimatum in the game, given how I value a win compared to an agreed draw, and how I perceived how @Vsotvep valued a win compared to a draw.