Computers win again

[Marvin the Martian]

There is a game called Diplomacy, it is an abstract WW1. Each player takes a country and tries to take more territory than anyone else.

The key to the game is the diplomatic round. Before each turn, players pair off and negotiate. England might have a deal to help France attack Germany, Germany to attack France, and with Austria and Turkey to attack Russia. After the diplomatic round, players write their orders, then they are executed on the board and it is discovered England was helping Italy.

The old 1970s version I own has a quote from Kissinger that this was his favorite game. It is notorious as the game that will end friendships.

Now a computer has gotten better than humans. This is a game of manipulation of other players, sometimes outright lying, and picking up when one is being manipulated or lied to. I knew one day a computer would get there, but I thought we were a ways off.

Meta researchers create AI that masters Diplomacy, tricking human players

Meta's Cicero can negotiate or persuade with natural language—just like a human.

arstechnica.com

 

[Baller23Boogie]

There is a game called Diplomacy, it is an abstract WW1. Each player takes a country and tries to take more territory than anyone else.

The key to the game is the diplomatic round. Before each turn, players pair off and negotiate. England might have a deal to help France attack Germany, Germany to attack France, and with Austria and Turkey to attack Russia. After the diplomatic round, players write their orders, then they are executed on the board and it is discovered England was helping Italy.

The old 1970s version I own has a quote from Kissinger that this was his favorite game. It is notorious as the game that will end friendships.

Now a computer has gotten better than humans. This is a game of manipulation of other players, sometimes outright lying, and picking up when one is being manipulated or lied to. I knew one day a computer would get there, but I thought we were a ways off.

Meta researchers create AI that masters Diplomacy, tricking human players

Meta's Cicero can negotiate or persuade with natural language—just like a human.

arstechnica.com

It's basically a way more in-depth game of risk?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

It's basically a way more in-depth game of risk?

The big difference is dice, in Diplomacy if Germany attacks Alsace with 2 armies and France has 1, French retreat automatically.

Plus there isn't near the Diplomacy in Risk. And since the orders are written, you cannot wait to see if I kept my word. You have to trust, or not

But conquest is similar. And feedback loops are similar, once one starts to lose everything snowballs.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

France has 1, French retreat automatically

Aren't the french well known to retreat even if they had 30 army's? I mean, the word french in English translates to "Retreat".

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Aren't the french well known to retreat even if they had 30 army's? I mean, the word french in English translates to "Retreat".

There was an old Onion about a German officer complementing French bravery in a battle. He said something like, "They displayed so much courage, we almost had to open fire to get them to surrender"

The jokes aside, the French army fought tenaciously in the Battle for
France. Their generals failed them miserable allowing the Germans to get between them and Paris

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

There is a game called Diplomacy, it is an abstract WW1. Each player takes a country and tries to take more territory than anyone else.

The key to the game is the diplomatic round. Before each turn, players pair off and negotiate. England might have a deal to help France attack Germany, Germany to attack France, and with Austria and Turkey to attack Russia. After the diplomatic round, players write their orders, then they are executed on the board and it is discovered England was helping Italy.

The old 1970s version I own has a quote from Kissinger that this was his favorite game. It is notorious as the game that will end friendships.

Now a computer has gotten better than humans. This is a game of manipulation of other players, sometimes outright lying, and picking up when one is being manipulated or lied to. I knew one day a computer would get there, but I thought we were a ways off.

Meta researchers create AI that masters Diplomacy, tricking human players

Meta's Cicero can negotiate or persuade with natural language—just like a human.

arstechnica.com

I still think Diplomacy is the most perfect casual war game created. Did you ever play by email with folks from the old Usenet group? I was in a few of those games, but it was never quite as fun as it was to get together with a few friends and play in person.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I still think Diplomacy is the most perfect casual war game created. Did you ever play by email with folks from the old Usenet group? I was in a few of those games, but it was never quite as fun as it was to get together with a few friends and play in person.

Nope, I have played via email with people I meet at cons, but not Usenet. Being in person is far better.

 

[SqueakyClean]

There was a game that I played at the Origins Game Fair back in July called "Nuclear War! The Board Game". Strangely, the game was something like 50 years old.
The related concept here is that the first half of the game was "diplomacy" where you try to convince populations of neighboring countries to move to your country because you had more nukes that they did, so therefore, you were the "safer" country.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

There was an old Onion about a German officer complementing French bravery in a battle. He said something like, "They displayed so much courage, we almost had to open fire to get them to surrender"

The jokes aside, the French army fought tenaciously in the Battle for
France. Their generals failed them miserable allowing the Germans to get between them and Paris

They fought hard in WWI. But they haven't been feared since Napoleon

 

[TomEric4756]

There was an old Onion about a German officer complementing French bravery in a battle. He said something like, "They displayed so much courage, we almost had to open fire to get them to surrender"

The jokes aside, the French army fought tenaciously in the Battle for
France. Their generals failed them miserable allowing the Germans to get between them and Paris

History channel practically said one such failure was the refusal to counter massed armor attacks with a massed armor defense. The French tanks in 1939 were capable of winning such a defense.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

History channel practically said one such failure was the refusal to counter massed armor attacks with a massed armor defense was one of these mistakes. The French tanks in 1939 were capable of winning such a defense.

They ordered a massed assault on the German bridgehead at Sedan that was capable of defeating the Germans across the river.

There were two problems. The overall French general in command did not trust any new technology. So all orders were done by runner, the order was slow getting to the armor.

The armored commander got the order and ordered an immediate attack. Well, immediate after he finished his sleep then after a leisurely breakfast. The war would have to wait.

In those hours many more Germans got across and dug onto the high ground. When the French arrived they no longer had superiority and were easily repelled.