|
On August 24 2012 20:10 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:09 lothar10 wrote:
Anyone know any game theory? If not interested I would skip the rest. If you are, feel free to point out any errors.
This seems like a repeated game of the classic Prisoner's Dilemma
Kespa/OGN on one side and ESF/GOM on the other
Both cooperate with tournament participation and get payoffs of say 3,3
One cooperates and the other doesn't 5,1 - In this case it would be Kespa/OGN getting 5 by having the ESF players still but not giving them to GOM tournaments
Both don't cooperate 1,1
The dominant strategy is to not cooperate/defect which is what both sides have choosen to do at first chance it seems
Although there is an idea of the first game Kespa/OGN defected and ESF/GOM cooperated (when GOM asked for the players and ESF still was giving the players to the OSL)
Seeing that defection, ESF responded with what is known as the "Grim Trigger" strategy which is where cooperation is intially offered until there is defection. If that happens the other side defects and it stays like that forever, both getting a payoff of 1,1. If we had cooperated it would be 3,3 but you defected first and our nice feelings are done.
Game theory ways to get out of this situation?
Unless payoffs change, which could if sponsors react by pulling out money from one side forcing them to change their strategy, the main way is 3rd party involvement. Namely in this case would be Blizzard doing something like saying to both sides 'players must be available to all tournaments if they choose to be or else you will not be allowed to use the servers and therefore not have the tournament'
The third party forces the players into the cooperate & cooperate choice, payoff 3 each, because if they continue to both defect then any defect payoff becomes 0, and cooperate cooperate becomes the dominant strategy .
Just some random thoughts Game series is fun as exercises... in real life there are too many complex factors for it to make really apply.
For sure, for sure. It is pretty cool to see a real life example of this sort of thing. But as you say perfectly correctly, there are a ton of factors involved here that muddy the waters. Such is the limit of applying models to real life I guess 
|
On August 24 2012 20:12 massivez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:07 Sp00ly wrote:On August 24 2012 20:01 .vid wrote:
well, seeing how far behind kespa players are, this makes sense. they'd just get embarassed in the gsl.. and like fxoboss said, gom really is shit at scheduling.
go kespa, fortunately you can bury sc2 and everyone goes back to brood war :D They wont go back to BW. The best thing that can come from this is Kespa wakes up and smells the coffee and works towards a better eSports scene - where the players (or at least their teams) get to decide what tournaments they play in. At worst we end up with OSL and GSL as two totally distinct tournaments with separate groups of players. I think this will fuck over OGN way more as everyone knows it will be a lower calibre of play and GSL will remain the pinnacle. At the end of the day I just feel really really bad for all the players. I doubt it GSL will remain the pinnacle with players like Effort, Rain, Jaedong, Roro.. already taking games from Top GOM players (Seed, Gumiho, Drg,...). I give it 1 more season of GSL before GOM players will start to lag behind. Mainly because of the ridiculously strict practice regime the Kespa players have.
They are getting there but it's really hard to tell because sample size. I mean, even if 2 players are 60:40 in win probability, which is a giant gap, take off some series is far from rare.
|
On August 24 2012 20:09 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:05 HoriZoNXI wrote:
MC & Oz aren't on the list of GSL players boycotting because they aren't part of Esports-Federation (SK, Fnatic) MC already stated he is with eSF, and his name is in the announcement. Oz haven't declared because he was not in Korea and couldn't be reached.
Oh I was just reading through the announcement and didn't see it, I was just confused and I didn't read the comments.
Thanks
|
On August 24 2012 20:03 seenster wrote:
I would be really happy if someone took some fanreactions of korean sites, translate them and post it / update the thread.
+1 to this
|
On August 24 2012 20:12 massivez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:07 Sp00ly wrote:On August 24 2012 20:01 .vid wrote:
well, seeing how far behind kespa players are, this makes sense. they'd just get embarassed in the gsl.. and like fxoboss said, gom really is shit at scheduling.
go kespa, fortunately you can bury sc2 and everyone goes back to brood war :D They wont go back to BW. The best thing that can come from this is Kespa wakes up and smells the coffee and works towards a better eSports scene - where the players (or at least their teams) get to decide what tournaments they play in. At worst we end up with OSL and GSL as two totally distinct tournaments with separate groups of players. I think this will fuck over OGN way more as everyone knows it will be a lower calibre of play and GSL will remain the pinnacle. At the end of the day I just feel really really bad for all the players. I doubt it GSL will remain the pinnacle with players like Effort, Rain, Jaedong, Roro.. already taking games from Top GOM players (Seed, Gumiho, Drg,...). I give it 1 more season of GSL before GOM players will start to lag behind. Mainly because of the ridiculously strict practice regime the Kespa players have.
Well right now it really depends on Koreans.
As shown in BW, RTS games on TV are declining in popularity (sponsors losing interest, viewers declining).
With this drama (which even most Koreans are against KeSPA too apparently), KeSPA has a good chance of being boycott by many (and instead, everyone will start watching more kpop).
As for LoL? Is KeSPA the only one exclusively holding LoL tournaments in Korea?
|
On August 24 2012 20:14 lothar10 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:10 ragz_gt wrote:On August 24 2012 20:09 lothar10 wrote:
Anyone know any game theory? If not interested I would skip the rest. If you are, feel free to point out any errors.
This seems like a repeated game of the classic Prisoner's Dilemma
Kespa/OGN on one side and ESF/GOM on the other
Both cooperate with tournament participation and get payoffs of say 3,3
One cooperates and the other doesn't 5,1 - In this case it would be Kespa/OGN getting 5 by having the ESF players still but not giving them to GOM tournaments
Both don't cooperate 1,1
The dominant strategy is to not cooperate/defect which is what both sides have choosen to do at first chance it seems
Although there is an idea of the first game Kespa/OGN defected and ESF/GOM cooperated (when GOM asked for the players and ESF still was giving the players to the OSL)
Seeing that defection, ESF responded with what is known as the "Grim Trigger" strategy which is where cooperation is intially offered until there is defection. If that happens the other side defects and it stays like that forever, both getting a payoff of 1,1. If we had cooperated it would be 3,3 but you defected first and our nice feelings are done.
Game theory ways to get out of this situation?
Unless payoffs change, which could if sponsors react by pulling out money from one side forcing them to change their strategy, the main way is 3rd party involvement. Namely in this case would be Blizzard doing something like saying to both sides 'players must be available to all tournaments if they choose to be or else you will not be allowed to use the servers and therefore not have the tournament'
The third party forces the players into the cooperate & cooperate choice, payoff 3 each, because if they continue to both defect then any defect payoff becomes 0, and cooperate cooperate becomes the dominant strategy .
Just some random thoughts Game series is fun as exercises... in real life there are too many complex factors for it to make really apply. For sure, for sure. It is pretty cool to see a real life example of this sort of thing. But as you say perfectly correctly, there are a ton of factors involved here that muddy the waters. Such is the limit of applying models to real life I guess
I don't think there is a limit of applying models to real life as soon as models are good enough and this one isn't .
|
They rolled out the big guns way too early on this one.
Sure Kespa might cave this time but you cannot keep threatening boycotts whenever something you don't like gets decided.
Sooner or later the threat will need to be realized and it will be only a matter a time before only one Korean organization will survive in sc2.
And it might not be gom.
Still if it was inevitable they may get it over with sooner rather than later.
Hopefully nobody is going to regret the results.
|
On August 24 2012 20:09 lothar10 wrote:
Anyone know any game theory? If not interested I would skip the rest. If you are, feel free to point out any errors.
This seems like a repeated game of the classic Prisoner's Dilemma
Kespa/OGN on one side and ESF/GOM on the other
Both cooperate with tournament participation and get payoffs of say 3,3
One cooperates and the other doesn't 5,1 - In this case it would be Kespa/OGN getting 5 by having the ESF players still but not giving them to GOM tournaments
Both don't cooperate 1,1
The dominant strategy is to not cooperate/defect which is what both sides have choosen to do at first chance it seems
Although there is an idea of the first game Kespa/OGN defected and ESF/GOM cooperated (when GOM asked for the players and ESF still was giving the players to the OSL)
Seeing that defection, ESF responded with what is known as the "Grim Trigger" strategy which is where cooperation is intially offered until there is defection. If that happens the other side defects and it stays like that forever, both getting a payoff of 1,1. If we had cooperated it would be 3,3 but you defected first and our nice feelings are done.
Game theory ways to get out of this situation?
Unless payoffs change, which could if sponsors react by pulling out money from one side forcing them to change their strategy, the main way is 3rd party involvement. Namely in this case would be Blizzard doing something like saying to both sides 'players must be available to all tournaments if they choose to be or else you will not be allowed to use the servers and therefore not have the tournament'
The third party forces the players into the cooperate & cooperate choice, payoff 3 each, because if they continue to both defect then any defect payoff becomes 0, and cooperate cooperate becomes the dominant strategy .
Just some random thoughts
Prisoner's dilemma only happens when the two players don't know each other's strategy. If they know each other's strategy then the game is easily fixed through negotiation.
Once Blizzard, GOM and OGN are like "come on man this is BS we all suffer from this so cut the crap" then we should see things get solved.
Assuming you are correct about the payoffs though. KeSPA might not see it that way. Maybe gambling on the korean market is the way to go and grab the world market for free once GOM collapses.
|
Kind of sad but it's a good move, a fair move. Hope they can work this out in such a way that the fans benefit.
On August 24 2012 20:09 insanet wrote:
Blizzard better not do anything. KESPA would prefer to blow their brains out or switch to LoL before bowing to Blizzard, You just dont threaten a bunch of Asian Corporations and expects them to comply, do you? No way that is gonna happen in asian culture.
Only in western movies about Asia.
|
United Kingdom12042 Posts
On August 24 2012 20:12 massivez wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:07 Sp00ly wrote:On August 24 2012 20:01 .vid wrote:
well, seeing how far behind kespa players are, this makes sense. they'd just get embarassed in the gsl.. and like fxoboss said, gom really is shit at scheduling.
go kespa, fortunately you can bury sc2 and everyone goes back to brood war :D They wont go back to BW. The best thing that can come from this is Kespa wakes up and smells the coffee and works towards a better eSports scene - where the players (or at least their teams) get to decide what tournaments they play in. At worst we end up with OSL and GSL as two totally distinct tournaments with separate groups of players. I think this will fuck over OGN way more as everyone knows it will be a lower calibre of play and GSL will remain the pinnacle. At the end of the day I just feel really really bad for all the players. I doubt it GSL will remain the pinnacle with players like Effort, Rain, Jaedong, Roro.. already taking games from Top GOM players (Seed, Gumiho, Drg,...). I give it 1 more season of GSL before GOM players will start to lag behind. Mainly because of the ridiculously strict practice regime the Kespa players have.
You've got to remember (even the Kespa players said this) that there was HUGE amounts of pressure on the GOM players in the WCS to do well and the majority of the time they wasn't playing at their best and you could tell.
|
While I agree with their reasons, I think it's a very disproportionate reaction and one that has much bigger consequences than to simply not have KeSPA players play in Code A qualifiers.
|
On August 24 2012 20:09 lothar10 wrote:Anyone know any game theory? If not interested I would skip the rest. If you are, feel free to point out any errors. This seems like a repeated game of the classic Prisoner's Dilemma Kespa/OGN on one side and ESF/GOM on the other + Show Spoiler +Both cooperate with tournament participation and get payoffs of say 3,3
One cooperates and the other doesn't 5,1 - In this case it would be Kespa/OGN getting 5 by having the ESF players still but not giving them to GOM tournaments
Both don't cooperate 1,1
The dominant strategy is to not cooperate/defect which is what both sides have choosen to do at first chance it seems
Although there is an idea of the first game Kespa/OGN defected and ESF/GOM cooperated (when GOM asked for the players and ESF still was giving the players to the OSL)
Seeing that defection, ESF responded with what is known as the "Grim Trigger" strategy which is where cooperation is intially offered until there is defection. If that happens the other side defects and it stays like that forever, both getting a payoff of 1,1. If we had cooperated it would be 3,3 but you defected first and our nice feelings are done.
Game theory ways to get out of this situation?
Unless payoffs change, which could if sponsors react by pulling out money from one side forcing them to change their strategy, the main way is 3rd party involvement. Namely in this case would be Blizzard doing something like saying to both sides 'players must be available to all tournaments if they choose to be or else you will not be allowed to use the servers and therefore not have the tournament'
The third party forces the players into the cooperate & cooperate choice, payoff 3 each, because if they continue to both defect then any defect payoff becomes 0, and cooperate cooperate becomes the dominant strategy .
Just some random thoughts
I think of this situation as more of the traditional Hawk-Dove (a.k.a. "Game of Chicken") game theory scenario, rather than Prisoner's Dilemma ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_(game) ).
|
On August 24 2012 20:17 Fyodor wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 20:09 lothar10 wrote:
Anyone know any game theory? If not interested I would skip the rest. If you are, feel free to point out any errors.
This seems like a repeated game of the classic Prisoner's Dilemma
Kespa/OGN on one side and ESF/GOM on the other
Both cooperate with tournament participation and get payoffs of say 3,3
One cooperates and the other doesn't 5,1 - In this case it would be Kespa/OGN getting 5 by having the ESF players still but not giving them to GOM tournaments
Both don't cooperate 1,1
The dominant strategy is to not cooperate/defect which is what both sides have choosen to do at first chance it seems
Although there is an idea of the first game Kespa/OGN defected and ESF/GOM cooperated (when GOM asked for the players and ESF still was giving the players to the OSL)
Seeing that defection, ESF responded with what is known as the "Grim Trigger" strategy which is where cooperation is intially offered until there is defection. If that happens the other side defects and it stays like that forever, both getting a payoff of 1,1. If we had cooperated it would be 3,3 but you defected first and our nice feelings are done.
Game theory ways to get out of this situation?
Unless payoffs change, which could if sponsors react by pulling out money from one side forcing them to change their strategy, the main way is 3rd party involvement. Namely in this case would be Blizzard doing something like saying to both sides 'players must be available to all tournaments if they choose to be or else you will not be allowed to use the servers and therefore not have the tournament'
The third party forces the players into the cooperate & cooperate choice, payoff 3 each, because if they continue to both defect then any defect payoff becomes 0, and cooperate cooperate becomes the dominant strategy .
Just some random thoughts Prisoner's dilemma only happens when the two players don't know each other's strategy. If they know each other's strategy then the game is easily fixed through negotiation. Once Blizzard, GOM and OGN are like "come on man this is BS we all suffer from this so cut the crap" then we should see things get solved. Assuming you are correct about the payoffs though. KeSPA might not see it that way. Maybe gambling on the korean market is the way to go and grab the world market for free once GOM collapses.
I doubt they will be able to grab the world market in full, esp if GOM's blood is on their hands.
If that ever happens I'd probably just watch IPL, DH, IEM etc. No more Kespa or even MLG for me.
|
United Kingdom12042 Posts
On August 24 2012 20:18 howLiN wrote:
While I agree with their reasons, I think it's a very disproportionate reaction and one that has much bigger consequences than to simply not have KeSPA players play in Code A qualifiers.
I'm not too sure if it's disproportionate. The players themselves have even stated they want to play in the Code A qualifiers and they've not given any good reason to stop them playing. They're going against their own players for the focus of their monopoly once again. A similar thing happened during Broodwar.
|
On August 24 2012 20:18 howLiN wrote:
While I agree with their reasons, I think it's a very disproportionate reaction and one that has much bigger consequences than to simply not have KeSPA players play in Code A qualifiers.
"ESF players can no longer play in this OSL and future OSLs due to time constraints." That better?
ESF/GOM had to do something or risk KeSPA trying to take complete advantage of them and push them out of the scene permanently.
|
Granted I didn't follow starcraft until after the release of wings of liberty and I've only heard rumors about the kespa monster, but this seems like childlike playground squabble to me.
|
Also what is TL's stance on this (the website, not the community)?
Will they start to not 'feature' OSLs and stuff?
|
On August 24 2012 20:23 phoenixfeather95 wrote:
Also what is TL's stance on this (the website, not the community)?
Will they start to not 'feature' OSLs and stuff?
Don't you thing that's going too far?
Next thing you'll be banning anyone mentioning the word 'Kespa'.
|
On August 24 2012 20:23 phoenixfeather95 wrote:
Also what is TL's stance on this (the website, not the community)?
Will they start to not 'feature' OSLs and stuff?
Don't drag TL into shitfest.
|
Can anyone translate some Korean Netizen reactions please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
