Forum
High Diplomacy at the High Tables
![]() |
skrumgaer wrote
at 6:35 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT
“I see too many flags.� --skrumgaer
After observing play at the 1900+ tables, I got the impression that the top players are very cautious—they don’t want to take risks that jeopardize their Elo scores. Hence, lots of flags. Or, as I have commented several times while watching, too many flags. Also, there is evidence of high diplomacy: players using each others’ names instead of their colors, players reminding each other of favors given in previous games, open identification of pga’s, and a new one on me: open identification of pge’s, or “pre-game enemies�. I decided that some statistical analysis was in order. Are diplomatic skills more important at the higher-ranking tables? Do players get killed off faster at the lower ranking tables? I collected data for 131 games in progress. Of these, 8 were at the 1900+ tables, 19 at the 1700+ tables, 30 at the 1500+ tables, and 74 at the no-limit tables. Obviously, the number of observations is skewed in favor of the lower ranking tables, so the stats for them are more reliable. My findings: 1. The game gets less deadly as players advance to higher tables, except for the highest rank of tables. The linear regressions suggest that if all games were played out to a single player finish, zero limit games would last 43 rounds on average, 1500+ games would last 62 rounds, 1700+ games would last about 80 rounds, but 1900+ games would be over in about 35 rounds. But keep in mind that the data are less reliable for the higher-level tables. 2. The average number of players for a game in progress is between 5 and 6 players for all levels of tables, but the average age of a game in progress is between 10 and 12 rounds for the lower level of tables, but only 8 rounds for the 1900+ tables. My hypothesis: The highest-Elo players are so sensitive about big losses that they suicide quickly if they have bad starting positions to minimize their dom point losses. So the 1900+ tables have an unusually large kill rate in the first three rounds. After that, there is some maneuvering for rank, minor transfers of territory, players reminding each other of their pre-game obligations, flags, and the game is over. Remedy: A remedy suggests that there is a problem, and I don’t know if there is a problem here that has to be remedied. Something else I observed, thought, is that lesser-ranked players are discouraged from sitting at the table. But I will offer a remedy for that in a different thread. |
![]() |
Grunvagr wrote
at 8:10 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT lol, kdice research!
I gotta clarify a few things, though, skrumgaer. Only idiots suicide early. Why? Dominance points only start being calculated in round 3. Players who have poor starts (lose 5v4s, etc) and say 'kill me please' are just fools who do not understand how the scoring works. In asking to be killed prior to round 3 out of 'mercy' to preserve their dom, they are actually going out with the worst possible scores for them. PGA's dont last long at the top tables. Usually they get identified and word spreads even faster among people who care to defend their high ratings. What tends to occur though, is a lot of pgdtbsmitncks's. these are pre-game-dispositions-to-be-slightly-more-inclined-to-not-completely-kill-someone. In other words... after playing hundreds and thousands of games at the top tables over many months... people see the same faces over and over and over and over and over and over again. I know a ton of players who say hi to me soon as I sit, and likewise, I know a lot of players by name. Anytime someone 'new' comes to the top tables it is sometimes difficult for them. This is not because people are pga's, but after you get to know who has cats, dogs, states people live in, what cars they drive, their favorite movies, etc... you have a disposition to not kill them as much as someone else. Now, this is just human nature. It doesnt horribly impact things, but it can be a problem. Thing is, there cant be any rule or kdice change that changes how humans choose to play the game. The best thing to do if someone wants to be a great player (make the top players list, etc) is to go watch the top players. Chat, get your name out there, and watch how they play - what moves they do and don't do. It makes you not only a better player by stealing strategies from the best, but you also get your name out there so when you get to the table through skill, you stick around for a while. The top tables are a vastly different community, it is true. You hardly ever see people go away a whole game early - you see this often at the unrated / 1500 tables. Obviously, people have more desire to guard their 2100, 2050+ ratings than someone who has 1509 and could care less. I'm rambling, let me get to some sort of point. As for the lesser ranked players - that is just people being assholes, simply put. There are plenty of tables and usually one is open. If players want to get into a 2100 only or 2050+ only game they can talk to each other, choose a table and go there. I find there is nothing wrong with that. I do think it is very rude to be sitting at a table, have someone sit with 1940 in brown or teals place and get called names or whatever.. that is uncalled for and some people are just highly rude. I play vs 1900s when I have a 2100 elo. Hell, i'm dumb enough to play vs 1500s once in a while with a top 10 rating for shits and giggles. But when I try to gain score, yes, I do tend to seek out other high rated players for a game. 4th places tend to lose only -3 or so instead of -14 or more, and firsts gain +30s instead of +20. Human nature is the name of the game. You HAVE to read intentions of others, and whenever possible, nudge them to either not be inclined to attack you, have mercy on your when you are down, etc. aww hell, there is absolutely no main point to this at all is there? damn, im gonna go get a beer |
![]() |
skrumgaer wrote
at 8:53 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT Perhaps I am a little confused about the dom scores. I know that dom scores are not computed until the fourth round. For 7th placers, dom is negative. In the first three rounds, would not absence of a negative dom be positive? Is there something I am missing?
|
![]() |
Wicked! wrote
at 10:34 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT skrumgaer, if you get knocked out of a game beofre the fourth round you just get the lowest dom available. So your A.S. would be at 0.
|
![]() |
reevadiva wrote
at 10:59 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT kinda sounds like how many wars were fought in ages past... especially in the times when peasants were not allowed to kill or attack knights and could be killed just for even trying. Peasants would kill peasants in the fore front and knights would hang back til' the middle or end. anyone else know what i'm talking about? someone could probably put it more eloquently.
|
![]() |
RaccoonTail wrote
at 11:58 PM, Saturday April 14, 2007 EDT i totally get you reedeva, not sure if it applies though
|
![]() |
Grunvagr wrote
at 1:29 AM, Sunday April 15, 2007 EDT basically, if you get knocked out in the early 3 rounds you will have the worst possible dom - therefore suiciding makes no sense, sticking around for a slightly better place does
nice analogy... but who are the knights and who make up this peasantry? hehe I want many vassals! and court jesters! Let there be a grand club-house feast! Bring me the finest meats and cheeses in alllll the land!!! |
![]() |
StunnedFazer wrote
at 2:25 AM, Sunday April 15, 2007 EDT "and a new one on me: open identification of pge’s, or “pre-game enemies�."
You mean you don't keep a list of people you really hate? Do you just memorize them all? |
![]() |
kwizatz wrote
at 2:40 AM, Sunday April 15, 2007 EDT O M F G.
Dom doesn't count before round 4? WHY THE HELL DIDN'T ANYONE TELL ME THIS DURING THE HUNDREDS OF GAMES I'VE SUICIDED MYSELF IN ROUND 2? Seriously, I hate all of you. Except Grun, Grun is cool. |
![]() |
skrumgaer wrote
at 7:25 AM, Sunday April 15, 2007 EDT Grunvagr:
I went hunting for Round 1, Round 2, or Round 3 kills and found this Round Three example: Highend's turn calisu defeated 5v3: 15 to 8 (2,2,3,3,5 to 1,2,5) calisu surrenders and finishes 7th. Rank: 2164th Rating: -20 1529. (-10 for 7th and -10 for dominance) calisu stands up Part of the score is dominance. Perhaps it is a "generic" dominance score not based on number of countries. Is this dominance score adjusted for quality of opponents as is the place of finish score? |
![]() |
Kehoe wrote
at 9:31 AM, Sunday April 15, 2007 EDT Kwiz - PGE for life!
|