Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi all

first off wow my head hurts. Ok i don't know game theory, i've heard of it but thats about it, I can't say whether its applicable or not but Nurglitch i'm interested in what you come up with.

Arn't you going to have problem with the whole rational thing? as scubman said people arn't rational, but you also have the problem in 40k of people not recognising somethings worth. You mentioned that a rational play will always pick $2 over $1 but what if the player doesn't know $2 is greater than $1. As was mentioned newer plays often try to table the other player rather than attempting to hold objectives/limit losses.

I would ask you try and keep this layman friendly for those of us with out math qualifications, however if this thread isn't designed for layman then that cool and i'll be quiet.

Nurglitch

Thank you for explaining the rational/irrational part again e.g. 2 being better than 1 was do with the overall outcome of the game (win better than lose) rather than the indiviual elements of play. That had cleared it up a lot for me.