Best defcon player

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

Torp
level1
level1
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 10:48 pm

Postby Torp » Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:37 pm

I played against the Emperor once. Or, well, I played with him. And I'm glad I did, because I would not have scored so well had I played against him.

But I don't think it's possible to pick one "best player of DefCon". I believe we'll end up in a loop of A is better than B is better than C is better than A. The best we can hope for is a "group ranking", especially in multiplayer games. These players are good, these are better, and these are considered the best.

I think a part of the problem here lies in the fact that, at least in multiplayer games where you have an idea of the strength of your enemies, it's easy to "cheat" and ally against those perceived as the greatest threaths. If 6-player game of Diplomacy was played, and five competent players allied against the sixth, I don't think even Ace or Caligula could get themselves out of that mess.

So the only way to really decide would be multiple rounds of anonymous multiplayer. And even then, the top players should be able to recognice each others play styles with some accuracy.
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:42 pm

Torp wrote:I played against the Emperor once. Or, well, I played with him. And I'm glad I did, because I would not have scored so well had I played against him.

But I don't think it's possible to pick one "best player of DefCon". I believe we'll end up in a loop of A is better than B is better than C is better than A. The best we can hope for is a "group ranking", especially in multiplayer games. These players are good, these are better, and these are considered the best.

I think a part of the problem here lies in the fact that, at least in multiplayer games where you have an idea of the strength of your enemies, it's easy to "cheat" and ally against those perceived as the greatest threats. If 6-player game of Diplomacy was played, and five competent players allied against the sixth, I don't think even Ace or Caligula could get themselves out of that mess.

So the only way to really decide would be multiple rounds of anonymous multiplayer. And even then, the top players should be able to recognize each others play styles with some accuracy.

I agree about the "loop", which is why in the 1v1 ladder I said its a case of a layered net more than a ladder when considering skill level.

However, in a 6-player diplomacy with 5 competent players against you, all you have to do is start lowering the score of just one of the other players enough to a point where he/she begins to be separated enough from the other five to cause some "score envy". Then they will begin see the need for bringing somebody else down with them, and so on.... If you're quick enough, you might even be left with a decent enough score to place well. :wink:
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
MikeTheWookiee
level4
level4
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Kashyyyk / Cambridge (commuting)

Postby MikeTheWookiee » Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:56 pm

Ace Rimmer wrote:However, in a 6-player diplomacy with 5 competent players against you, all you have to do is start lowering the score of just one of the other players enough to a point where he/she begins to be separated enough from the other five to cause some "score envy". Then they will begin see the need for bringing somebody else down with them, and so on.... If you're quick enough, you might even be left with a decent enough score to place well. :wink:


You mean a quick bit of Hanky Panky? :wink: With the rest following each other soon after?

In all those artificial scenarios, you always have to remember that you're not only playing the players at the game but you're playing the players themselves, too. One of my card-sharp friends claims that the best poker players don't play to the cards, more to the opponent (or he may just have been trying to psyche me out with his 'advanced knowledge'). This would be something similar - it's not about the megadeaths initially, more about playing the egos off against one another to make the others not see you as a threat.

Unless of course you really meant to say a 5v1 no defection game with survivor scoring. Now that would be brutal. I sense a new high-score challenge coming on.
User avatar
caranthir.pkk
level3
level3
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Postby caranthir.pkk » Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:59 pm

MikeTheWookiee wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:However, in a 6-player diplomacy with 5 competent players against you, all you have to do is start lowering the score of just one of the other players enough to a point where he/she begins to be separated enough from the other five to cause some "score envy". Then they will begin see the need for bringing somebody else down with them, and so on.... If you're quick enough, you might even be left with a decent enough score to place well. :wink:


You mean a quick bit of Hanky Panky? :wink: With the rest following each other soon after?

In all those artificial scenarios, you always have to remember that you're not only playing the players at the game but you're playing the players themselves, too. One of my card-sharp friends claims that the best poker players don't play to the cards, more to the opponent (or he may just have been trying to psyche me out with his 'advanced knowledge'). This would be something similar - it's not about the megadeaths initially, more about playing the egos off against one another to make the others not see you as a threat.

Unless of course you really meant to say a 5v1 no defection game with survivor scoring. Now that would be brutal. I sense a new high-score challenge coming on.


There's only one problem with that. The second you have a bunch of gullible beginners, you can manipulate them so easily that it becomes boring. I had a game the other day (diplo) where I did not lose a single person, I actually went and cooked dinner leaving it at speed 4, I was that sure of my alliance. It was boring as hell. :o
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:59 pm

MikeTheWookiee wrote:You mean a quick bit of Hanky Panky? :wink: With the rest following each other soon after?

Something along those lines, yes. heh :wink:

caranthir.pkk wrote:There's only one problem with that. The second you have a bunch of gullible beginners, you can manipulate them so easily that it becomes boring. I had a game the other day (diplo) where I did not lose a single person, I actually went and cooked dinner leaving it at speed 4, I was that sure of my alliance. It was boring as hell. :o

But we're not talking beginners, we're talking competent "experienced" players.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
caranthir.pkk
level3
level3
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Postby caranthir.pkk » Wed Jun 20, 2007 10:04 pm

Ace Rimmer wrote:
MikeTheWookiee wrote:You mean a quick bit of Hanky Panky? :wink: With the rest following each other soon after?

Something along those lines, yes. heh :wink:

caranthir.pkk wrote:There's only one problem with that. The second you have a bunch of gullible beginners, you can manipulate them so easily that it becomes boring. I had a game the other day (diplo) where I did not lose a single person, I actually went and cooked dinner leaving it at speed 4, I was that sure of my alliance. It was boring as hell. :o

But we're not talking beginners, we're talking competent "experienced" players.


Anyone that I can freak out and (ab)use via PM chat can't be that experienced ;)
Torp
level1
level1
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 10:48 pm

Postby Torp » Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:22 am

No, but then they're not the players I suggested for my sceneario. That one was basically stolen from the board game of Diplomacy (an excellent game, which I'd consider a better analogy for Defcon than chess), where it's supposedly quite common that the best players are knocked out of tournaments early because other players fear them and decide to gang up on them. This is a good level of metagaming, and quite a good strategy, really. Well, as long as you can make the other players do most of the work, or you can reap most of the reward.

The poker anecdote about playing the players, not the cards is quite true, by the way. And it holds for Defcon as well. Which is one of the things I really love about the game, and why I consider non-defection games to be less fun, even if I'm not the big backstabber, and will usually give at least several seconds of warning. :lol:
User avatar
skynet77812
level2
level2
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 12:28 am
Location: south carolina
Contact:

Postby skynet77812 » Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:27 pm



well said fued!
User avatar
Hank Scorpio
level2
level2
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:34 am

Postby Hank Scorpio » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:20 pm

(:

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests