Was interested to find that the Claudes did the most betraying, and were betrayed very little; somewhat surprising given its boy-scout exterior.
(Then again, apparently the president of the local Diplomacy Society attends my church; I discovered this when another friend whom I'd invited saw him, and quipped that he was surprised he hadn't been struck by lightning at the door.)
DeepSeek and Gemini 2.5 had both a low betrayer and betrayed rate.
o3-mini and DeepSeek had the highest number of first-place finishes, but were only in the upper quartile in the TrueSkill leaderboard; presumably because they played more risky strategies, that would either lead ot complete winning or early drop-out?
Also interesting that o1 was only way to sway the final jury a bit more than 50% of the time, while o3-mini managed 63% of the time.
Diplomacy is a game with the following properties:
1. It's not possible to eliminate someone else without another player's help, particularly early in the game
2. There can be only one winner
So "temporary alliances" which are eventually broken are built into the structure of the game; and unlike the "Surviror"-style game here, there's no "payback" round at the end, where the people you've betrayed get to vote against you. I'm not up on the culture of the game, but I'd be surprised if explicit in-game lying isn't considered fair play (e.g., you're not supposed to hold a grudge in real life against someone who lied to you in the game).
I played it once and really didn't enjoy it. With practice I might be able to bifurcate my sense of morals -- I do actually enjoy playing games like Mafia, Resistance, Avalon, etc. But I didn't feel like it would be worth my effort.
(Then again, apparently the president of the local Diplomacy Society attends my church; I discovered this when another friend whom I'd invited saw him, and quipped that he was surprised he hadn't been struck by lightning at the door.)
DeepSeek and Gemini 2.5 had both a low betrayer and betrayed rate.
o3-mini and DeepSeek had the highest number of first-place finishes, but were only in the upper quartile in the TrueSkill leaderboard; presumably because they played more risky strategies, that would either lead ot complete winning or early drop-out?
Also interesting that o1 was only way to sway the final jury a bit more than 50% of the time, while o3-mini managed 63% of the time.
Anyway, really cool stuff!