Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GreatWyrmGold]

How this works is simple.

A bunch of people sign up. I'd like a number equally divisible by a bunch of numbers, like 6 or 12. We have that and have started, so likely no one new will be admitted.

Everyone gets 100 points.
Each turn, everyone can put any or all of their points into a communal pool. This pool is then doubled and divided evenly among everyone, regardless of how much they contributed.

The goal is to get as many points as possible.

-----

Player List:
Criptfiend (144 points)
Iamanelfcollaborator (44 points)
Jbg97 (143 points)
killerhellhound (94 points)
miauw62 (44 points)
Nerjin (44 points)
rancor (134 points)
Remuthra (129 points)
Rolepgeek (44 points)
scapheap (94 points)
shadeknight123 (144 points)
Scelly9 (144 points)

[Criptfeind]

Tots in. Automatic action on every round is to put in zero points.

[Scelly9]

In. I put in 0

[racnor]

I put 10.

[Remuthra]

I put in 15.

[Jbg97]

i put in 1

[Criptfeind]

In. I put in 0

High five. We win.

[killerhellhound]

I put in 50 points and attempt to loot the people who put 0 points in points

[mainiac]

This game design needs a little more thinking through...

[GreatWyrmGold]

This game design needs a little more thinking through...

Why do you say that?

[Criptfeind]

Because it appears that you are trying to recreate the prisoners dilemma without all the parts that make it a actual dilemma. The winning strategy is to simply put in zero points. Every single round. The worst that can happen is you tie for first place.

[Scelly9]

Because, the only way you would gain by putting in points is if the total number of point-givers was less than the multiplier of points. Otherwise, asshats like me will always win since they contribute no points, but still recieve points.

[Rolepgeek]

I'll join. I put in 100 points.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Because it appears that you are trying to recreate the prisoners dilemma without all the parts that make it a actual dilemma. The winning strategy is to simply put in zero points. Every single round. The worst that can happen is you tie for first place.

As it so happens, I'm borrowing an idea from an experiment I read about in...something.

Because, the only way you would gain by putting in points is if the total number of point-givers was less than the multiplier of points. Otherwise, asshats like me will always win since they contribute no points, but still recieve points.

Well, yes, that is a problem. Not entirely true, however.

Two things to consider:
1. If several people put in lots of points, everyone benefits.
2. "The goal is to get as many points as possible." Not "the most."

[Criptfeind]

With no metric to measure them, the most is as good as one needs to be really. I mean, how it is set up here, the person who put in the most, Rolepgeek is actually going to come out with less then he put in. Thus the safest strategy is to put in nothing and profit off the risks of others.

Surely the experiment was not this simple? Perhaps if it was reproduced in full the outcome would be more interesting.