Jump to content


Photo

Piece value contest


  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#41 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 12 November 2018 - 10:07 PM

I see. I guess this is what you meant with "fruitful discussion", or would you label it "entertainment"? :rolleyes:

It might fall under the category of "game theory".

#42 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 November 2018 - 03:33 PM

I see. I guess this is what you meant with "fruitful discussion", or would you label it "entertainment"?  :rolleyes:

 

The above request would fall under " pointless request " since you already know the answer to it. It's getting repetitive and boring. The opposite of entertainment if anything.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#43 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 13 November 2018 - 03:52 PM

The above request would fall under " pointless request " since you already know the answer to it. It's getting repetitive and boring. The opposite of entertainment if anything.


I would not have written my question if I thought it was pointless. Your OP was to have a *positive* contest for a change, raising overall skill level and thought processes etc. Dismissive one liners with rude adjectives to me and others (no public schoolteacher, no spoonfeeding, take a guess, repetitive, boring, pointless) asking legitimate questions (with honest intentions) is not really contributing to a positive atmosphere.

I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#44 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 November 2018 - 04:13 PM

Yes, the focus has been put on piece value. Your request has (little to) nothing to do with the contest/subject at hand. I've already, several times, both on the forum and in other environments, as you know, that I have no interest, at this point, to be writing about these kind of topics.

 

So, yes, it is a pointless request to which you already knew, or could have known, the answer. I find it quite disrespectful to keep nagging about it; boundaries are clear, if you don't wish to respect those, that's fine too.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#45 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 13 November 2018 - 07:56 PM

Yes, the focus has been put on piece value. Your request has (little to) nothing to do with the contest/subject at hand. I've already, several times, both on the forum and in other environments, as you know, that I have no interest, at this point, to be writing about these kind of topics.

 

You are posing a contest to elicit people's piece value estimates. The winner is the one closest to your own expert judgement. I am asking what the average player *in practice* uses for piece value estimates, and how this translates into errors *in practical play* compared to the "true" piece values. So the question was very much on topic. That you choose not to answer is fine and your right. Rest assured that I won't bother again.

 

But it had nothing to do with game theory or whatever topic you do not deem worthy of discussion. I asked another highly rated player the same question and got a perfectly reasonable answer, namely that piece values are the least of your worries (within reason) given that most games are won or lost on errors in other areas.

 

So, yes, it is a pointless request to which you already knew, or could have known, the answer. I find it quite disrespectful to keep nagging about it; boundaries are clear, if you don't wish to respect those, that's fine too.

 

Those who want respect, should also give respect. Calling my (IMO on-topic) questions "nagging" while you yourself are "bragging" about how many pages you could write about flag placement without having the intention of ever doing so in the near future is disingenuous at best. Again, if you want a positive discussion, you could also clearly set your boundaries in a much more pleasant tone of voice than you have done so far. I'll bet people would respect it if done in such a manner.

 

And whatever you think of me or my questions, you still have treated Napoleon and Don Homer in a rather condescending way as well, with your "take a guess" and "no spoon feeding" comments. I'll let them be the judge of that, however. 


I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#46 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 13 November 2018 - 10:23 PM

I tend to agree with Templaterex here. The idea behind this contest is laudable but if at the end it is your own judgement who will decide who wins then this idea becomes much less attractive. Why are you supposed to be "THE" guy who knows the best answer? Why can we not know who would win between 2 proposed scenarii? What are the elements that will influence your judgement to decide more for one answer rather than for another? Why is piece value so important? Contrarily to chess in stratego it is not the piece values that are most important but the total army value and the total army value is made from value of the pieces, value of the information known and value of the strategic position of the pieces on the board. Whose army has lost a captain but knows opponent's gen is more valuable than opponent's army. In case of a sealed flag whose army has its last miner in opponent's field is much more valuable than same army having its last miner on its back row. So the piece values only are not really of interest but the total army value at any stage of the game is of interest. This total army value changes after each move. If your initial army value is 1000 each time you lose a piece you gain information so depending on what you lose for what you gain your army value can increase or decrease. Same thing each time you move a piece on the board your strategic position changes, so your army value increases or decreases depending if your move improves your overall position on the board or not.


  • NTactical-Reboot likes this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#47 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 13 November 2018 - 10:33 PM

The hard part about this being accurate is that information plays a huge role in piece value..not just material value. Myself along with other players that I have heard stories from are more comfortable being down material and up info, does this mean that info is worth more than material, well, it can go both ways depending on mid game or end game. The same material down mid game may be detrimental in the end game where as in the mid game the player down material has time to turn their investment into higher material in the end game, the variables are exponential in comparison to circumstance. How do you judge a piece value with so many variables? I don't believe you can without a very complex algorithm. Stratego development changes piece values all game, there is no one set value to put on any piece. In an end game for example, I can give a scenario where a known marshal would be the lowest value on the board of 10 movable pieces...there is too much to consider to put a single value on a piece.
  • Napoleon 1er and NTactical-Reboot like this

#48 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 November 2018 - 10:56 PM

Wall of text incoming:

 

 

There is some fake news in here.
 
"The winner is the one closest to your own expert judgement" I'll not comment on the "expert judgement" statement as you may have meant it differently from how I perceived it ("the all knowing one"). But it is incorrect. I'm curious to see who can come up with the most sophisticated realistic values and what those would be. The winner is selected on how advanced and realistic it is. I'm open minded in this and the eventual winner may present values that do not match my view, but as long as they are realistic, I don't see anything wrong with that.
 
Your question/request was:
"@Nortrom: after the contest, can you also discuss what in your opinion are the most often made mistakes (in your opinion) that you encounter when doing trades? Do people value bomb locations too cheaply, do they over-estimate the marshal vs. general, do they give up the spy for too little, do they too lightly hit a known piece with one rank higher, is info for the high pieces under-estimated etc.?"
 
You're asking me to point out what mistakes, in my opinion, players make. I don't see how this translates to the piece value topic. The eventual winning entry, that I feel is the best one that's been submitted, will contain the values for pieces (marsh vs gen, info, as you mentioned). People can draw their own conclusions, if they want, from that.
 
"Rest assured that I won't bother again." Perfect.
 
" namely that piece values are the least of your worries (within reason) given that most games are won or lost on errors in other areas." Definitely. And as said before, I'm not intending on entering debates about those "other areas" currently. I chose this specific topic, those interested can join it, those who are not, that's fine too.
 
" while you yourself are "bragging" about how many pages you could write about flag placement" Falls under fake news. I specifically said "one could write" not "I could write". What I meant to say with this, is while indeed, as DH pointed out, this is not an easy topic (quality) but imo it is not a very broad topic (scope: INITIAL values) (quantity). Anyone can come up with piece/info values within 5 minutes. They may not be well calibrated, but still, it can be a decent start. Flag placement (40 locations) (ok, 20 if you consider that the board is symmetrical..) wouldn't be doable in 5 minutes.
 
"you could also clearly set your boundaries in a much more pleasant tone of voice than you have done so far" I feel they are quite clear: I'm not going to write, currently, about game theory, something that well known, especially to you, before this topic even started. So asking something you already know the answer to, yes, does eventually get on my nerves a bit.
 
"And whatever you think of me or my questions, you still have treated Napoleon and Don Homer in a rather condescending way as well, with your "take a guess" and "no spoon feeding". Regarding no spoonfeeding: I've made it clear that one is allowed to make things as complicated (or simple) as one wants it to be. I'm not going to dictate on any specific format. I don't want to be telling contestants "you should think about info value of the 5th bomb" as I feel this limits creativity. One may think of something I hadn't thought of, so, no, I don't want to dictate or hint what people should be doing.
 
As for napoleon's questions:
 
1. Sorry, I'm not sure to understand clearly what we are supposed to put in PM. Is it possible to have an example of how you would like to see the proposals?
 
See: Entry requirements and external files. I simply don't care in what format one presents the information as long as it is easy to figure out. Description+value is sufficient "Known marshal = 64" quite a simple example. Want to use a different format? be my guest, I'm not going to limit creativity.
 
2. Sorry to ask more questions but it is still not clear to me. Shall we give the optimal value for each of the 39 pieces on the board (flag not being considered) at the beginning of the game up to max 1000 points for each piece? So theoretical maximum is 39000, right?
 
The entire original post basically answers this. The 39000 question, I don't see its relevance.
 
3. Also piece value may depend on the setup. As you can imagine a Marshall sealed behind bombs is worth less than a Marshall free to move, right?
 
Again, in the original text... Make it as simple / complicated as you like. If someone wants to calculate values for bombed in pieces, go ahead. I think it's not a useful thing to do, but I'm not stopping someone from doing that. The goal is to figure out a realistic, average, acceptable piece value. "piece value may depend on the setup" it's just completely besides the point, but then again, if someone wants to differentiate between all 40 fields for all 39 pieces (excluding the flag), be my guest.
 
4. And also you say that the total value of your army at beginning of game is important, but at beginning of game no pieces are known, so how shall the remark that a known marsh is worth less than an unknown marsh be integrated? At beginning of the game there are only unknown pieces? 
 
I don't recall me saying that. Surely this doesn't take rocket science to figure out: You tell your opponent, at the first move, where your marshal is located, how much value do you feel you lost? (or how much did your opponent gain, whichever approach one prefers). 
 
5. Thanks for the explanations but what is it what someone needs to win this contest? Isn't it the highest value of your army after swapping with another one's army? For example if I have one scout with a value of 1000 and another one has a marsh for 600 and a gen for 400, can I swap my scout for his marsh and Gen? What is it that you need to win this contest? 
 
What is it someone needs to win this contest: See the original post. I can't make much out of the rest of the question. 
 
6. Again the value of a piece depends also on your opponent
 
Feel free to add this to your entry (again, see original post..)
 
7. So again my question from before who would win the contest if 2 participants would give exactly same values for all movable pieces but one would give a low value for bombs and the other one a higher value for bombs? 
 
So yeah, after a few questions that can be answered by reading the original post and some others that don't make sense, I do get a bit tired of it. This question is also answered in the original post. "Realistic values". How am I supposed to answer a question like this? "the one that gives bombs a higher value wins"? it comes down to whatever values presented are more realistic. If you consider each individual bomb to be worth a general, well, guess what, your entry probably won't come out on top. The "Take a guess" was meant to let the one asking the question think of what kind of answer would come forth out of a question like that.

  • NTactical-Reboot likes this

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#49 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 November 2018 - 11:01 PM

"Why can we not know who would win between 2 proposed scenarii?" it is already explained that the more complex, but realistic, the more appreciation I will have for an entry. I don't want to be guiding contestants towards a certain kind of thought. Creativity.
 
"What are the elements that will influence your judgement to decide more for one answer rather than for another" it's in the original post. Guidelines are given, you can implement those however you want.
 
"In case of a sealed flag whose army has its last miner in opponent's field is much more valuable than same army having its last miner on its back row." --> you're free to take these things into consideration.
 
 
 
" I can give a scenario where a known marshal would be the lowest value on the board of 10 movable pieces...there is too much to consider to put a single value on a piece. " exactly why this has a scope of: initial values.

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#50 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 13 November 2018 - 11:24 PM

Well said Nortrom, in a nut shell, I think we have over complicated this. To all that want to participate, I think Nortrom is saying that initial piece value is all that is necessary but to those that want to come up with a complicated diagram or algorithm that makes since, it's all up to the descretion of the person submitting their work. Nortrom is not claiming to know the perfect answer, he is simply allowing the person that comes up with the best one to be recognized as it would probably be relatively obvious after all work is submitted.

In a simple form, all questions from this point forward should just be answered as "yes" and the best entry will win. Do whatever you find makes logical and detailed since. No idea is blatantly wrong, it just might not be the best. Submit whatever you want! It's all acceptable. That's my take on this.
  • Nortrom and texaspete09 like this

#51 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 13 November 2018 - 11:34 PM

Your question/request was:

"@Nortrom: after the contest, can you also discuss what in your opinion are the most often made mistakes (in your opinion) that you encounter when doing trades? Do people value bomb locations too cheaply, do they over-estimate the marshal vs. general, do they give up the spy for too little, do they too lightly hit a known piece with one rank higher, is info for the high pieces under-estimated etc.?"
 
You're asking me to point out what mistakes, in my opinion, players make. I don't see how this translates to the piece value topic. The eventual winning entry, that I feel is the best one that's been submitted, will contain the values for pieces (marsh vs gen, info, as you mentioned). People can draw their own conclusions, if they want, from that.
 
Specifically, I asked for trade mistakes based on incorrect piece value estimates. This is perfectly on topic, I simply disagree with you on that. 
 
" namely that piece values are the least of your worries (within reason) given that most games are won or lost on errors in other areas." Definitely. And as said before, I'm not intending on entering debates about those "other areas" currently. I chose this specific topic, those interested can join it, those who are not, that's fine too.
 
I didn't ask anything about any other topic than piece values, and their consequences (namely, most frequently occurring incorrect trades based on misconceptions in that).
 
" while you yourself are "bragging" about how many pages you could write about flag placement" Falls under fake news. I specifically said "one could write" not "I could write". What I meant to say with this, is while indeed, as DH pointed out, this is not an easy topic (quality) but imo it is not a very broad topic (scope: INITIAL values) (quantity). Anyone can come up with piece/info values within 5 minutes. They may not be well calibrated, but still, it can be a decent start. Flag placement (40 locations) (ok, 20 if you consider that the board is symmetrical..) wouldn't be doable in 5 minutes.
 
You wrote "I think one could write", which I interpreted as "I could write", since if you couldn't write this, well, who could? :) 
 
"you could also clearly set your boundaries in a much more pleasant tone of voice than you have done so far" I feel they are quite clear: I'm not going to write, currently, about game theory, something that well known, especially to you, before this topic even started. So asking something you already know the answer to, yes, does eventually get on my nerves a bit.
 
I know perfectly well your general reluctance to share stuff about game theory. That topic, by the way, can be defined as narrowly or as broadly as you like, depending on taste or precision. As I said before, I wasn't asking anything about game theory. All I actually asked was about your observations in practical play, based on incorrect piece values. If you deem this to part of game theory as well, fine.
 
But there is absolutely no need to be irritated about it, or calling me disrespectful or nagging. This is the game of Stratego, where players like me try to learn stuff. It's not the cult of Strategology where the uninitiated are not allowed to question the high priests.
 
You know perfectly well that I respect your accomplishment and also like you as a person based on my live play experiences. You read way too much bad intention in my questions, which was asked for genuine reasons of curiosity. Perhaps it's a side-effect of MT duties that you have to deal with abuse and trolls, but I assure you, I wasn't doing anything of the kind ;)
 

I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#52 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 14 November 2018 - 08:01 AM

Thanks for the answers. Then if I understand correctly what is asked is what you would trade in your initial 39 pieces army for your marsh, your gen etc...

So for example I guess nobody would like to trade his marsh but maybe you could think to accept such trade for 2 gens. So your initial army would have no marsh but 3 gens (and will have 41 pieces instead of 40). Is this the way to understand the question?... at the end the question is: what would be your ideal initial army, right?
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#53 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 14 November 2018 - 09:36 AM

The restriction is that the initial pieces are taken into consideration. This makes it impossible to have three colonels for example. 

 

It is not so much about what you would want as compensation for yourself, but from your opponent. If you value, at the start of the game, two captains higher than one colonel, you shouldn't list a colonel as 500 and captains as 200.

 

You would play with -1 colonel, your opponent would play with -2 captains.

 

Hope this explains it better.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#54 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 14 November 2018 - 09:52 AM

"Specifically, I asked for trade mistakes based on incorrect piece value estimates. This is perfectly on topic, I simply disagree with you on that. "
 
We can agree to disagree. My request was about asking how players value specific pieces. Your question is about mistakes people make in putting value to pieces. I'm interested about the opinion, input, from players regarding piece value. This does not include telling people how they should value pieces. At the end, the most sophisticated and (in my opinion) the most realistic entry, will win. Players can draw their own conclusions, if they want, from that.
 
"I didn't ask anything about any other topic than piece values, and their consequences (namely, most frequently occurring incorrect trades based on misconceptions in that)." 
 
Yes, but this has, in my view, nothing to do with providing a list that would say: Marshal = xx value. General = yy value.
 
"All I actually asked was about your observations in practical play, based on incorrect piece values"
 
People will eventually learn from their mistakes. In play, "initial values" don't apply much as standings are too flexible and complicated to be applied without adjustment. So, yes, this does fall outside of the scope of "initial piece values".
 
"where players like me try to learn stuff" 
 
Perfect. Keep it up. We've seen players improve a lot lately, look at major nelson for example or josephwhite, who beat hielco in WCO yesterday. Anyone trying to learn something is appreciated, however, I more often than not, do not feel necessity to take on the role of public school teacher.
 
I've set the scope to initial piece values because it's a topic I find interesting. That would mean a list of pieces, values and possibly an explanation. "mistakes" are not part of that.

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#55 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 14 November 2018 - 10:10 AM

Well said Nortrom, in a nut shell, I think we have over complicated this. To all that want to participate, I think Nortrom is saying that initial piece value is all that is necessary but to those that want to come up with a complicated diagram or algorithm that makes since, it's all up to the descretion of the person submitting their work. Nortrom is not claiming to know the perfect answer, he is simply allowing the person that comes up with the best one to be recognized as it would probably be relatively obvious after all work is submitted.

In a simple form, all questions from this point forward should just be answered as "yes" and the best entry will win. Do whatever you find makes logical and detailed since. No idea is blatantly wrong, it just might not be the best. Submit whatever you want! It's all acceptable. That's my take on this.

I've highlighted the most important things from your summary. Quite spot on.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#56 TemplateRex

TemplateRex

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 755 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 14 November 2018 - 10:50 AM

"I didn't ask anything about any other topic than piece values, and their consequences (namely, most frequently occurring incorrect trades based on misconceptions in that)." 

 
Yes, but this has, in my view, nothing to do with providing a list that would say: Marshal = xx value. General = yy value.
 
Sure it does: given the submitted lists of "best" values like above, I am interested in the same list of "actual" values that the mass of beginning players hold. Same list, different origin of values. If you are talking about "raising the skill level", this would be of value (pun intendend :)). But never mind, given the outcome of this contest, I can draw my own conclusions based on the opponents I face. 
 
[...] more often than not, do not feel necessity to take on the role of public school teacher.
 
There is a difference in asking to explain elementary arithmetic over and over, and asking "dear headmaster, which arithmetic mistakes do first grade students most commonly make".
 
I've set the scope to initial piece values because it's a topic I find interesting. That would mean a list of pieces, values and possibly an explanation. "mistakes" are not part of that.

 

Fine. I already submitted my entry. Hopefully I am not the only one and there will be at least 5. Looking forward to your thoughts on that, either here or by PM.


I hereby grant explicit permission to all my opponents to record and publish my games as they see fit.


#57 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 14 November 2018 - 01:26 PM

The restriction is that the initial pieces are taken into consideration. This makes it impossible to have three colonels for example. 
 
It is not so much about what you would want as compensation for yourself, but from your opponent. If you value, at the start of the game, two captains higher than one colonel, you shouldn't list a colonel as 500 and captains as 200.
 
You would play with -1 colonel, your opponent would play with -2 captains.
 
Hope this explains it better.


If it is as simple as that then I would assign the value of the marsh equal the sum o the values of all the other 38 pieces and my initial army has no marsh while my opponent's army has no 38 pieces and basically has only marsh and flag, right?... Sure to win the contest with this proposal, right?
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#58 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 14 November 2018 - 01:40 PM

Napo, I'll make a deal, next time we play, I'll give you my marsh and you give me your 38 pieces. Ok? Only because I'm feeling generous and I want you to have the value advantage (according to your value analysis), you can keep a few scouts as well...or any other ten pieces you like :)...is the marsh really worth that?
  • UnladenSwallow likes this

#59 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,676 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 14 November 2018 - 01:47 PM

I'm afraid you may finish at the bottom of the contest with this level of unrealistic values - but you're free to try of course.


  • Wogomite likes this

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#60 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 14 November 2018 - 04:17 PM

For anyone interested I've made a post listing all the previous discussions of this topic I could find. Though it's probably not exhaustive you can see it here: http://forum.strateg...f-piece-values/

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users