![]() For a given board, one can always react to the way the other player is playing. The population can certainly have a preference on different strategies, but it is pure suboptimality. The population preference is the current metagame. How you choose one among is really by preference, and is the hidden information I am talking about. This is what meta is about: you have several mutual exclusive strategy options which counters each other (while nash equilibrium would be a probability mixture of them). But if your opponent knows this then you will lose all the time. If you just play one game, you will do as good as you can by always play rock. Meta is called meta because it is something that affects the game that is outside the game. If you know for certain what your opponent will do then there is not much of a game right? Of course since dominion has a decent luck factor still you might always pick the best strategy and still lose, so evaluating when luck was a big factor is also an important thing when trying to improve your game.įuture information does not count as hidden information. You gotta evaluate if the optimal strategy in a given board is a late blooming engine that can overcome an strategy that greens early, or if the early greener can potentially build enough of an early lead that it becomes insurmountable. You seem too be talking about when to green, but that's not meta, that's evaluating strategy. So being first player in a game like this (specially since a strategy like workshop/gardens generally requires commitment from turn 1) you really have too ask yourself what do you think the other players will do. If three players go for the same engine, there might not be enough components for all of them, and a fourth player going BM might end up with a clear road to victory, in another case there might have a big engine available, but if all three other players go for something like workshop/gardens, your engine will never have a chance to get running. Multiplayer dominion on the other hand should have a lot of meta. What I see frequently happening is that there are two competing strategies and one is stronger than the second only if the other player doesn't mirror, so in the end both players end up somewhat suboptimally. ![]() I don't think two player dominion has much of a metagame. The perceived meta can only be from the population adhering to playing in some non-optimal way. In the case of dominion, there certainly are strategies that beat one another, but since it is turn based, the optimal strategy exists between these strategies. On the other hand a part of the reason why meta exists, especially when the game is young, is just because that the game has not been figured out and it takes a lot of practice to play a certain strategy good enough to know whether it is really good enough. For one you can't know for sure what your opponent is doing so your strategy really depends on the expectation of what he is likely doing. StarCraft is an ideal example that has both. ![]() In theory they are just non optimal strategies but the difference is just too small to matter or it is just very hard to play in the optimal way. In reality when the play is far from optimality or when the strategy landscape is very frustrated then there can be meta i.e., what kind of strategy people tend to play. Since there is no hidden information in dominion (opponent cannot build deck without being seen) in principle there should be no meta. Meta originates from hidden information in a 2p game. If you cut your losses and just go single Prov, your only hope is that they trip and you don't. You're already behind - are you close enough to a milestone point that you can build and catch up? Maybe it's going Prov Duchy instead of double Prov - sooner than you planned but soon enough to overtake a single Prov player with a head start. If they started greening, greening strictly reactively as soon as they start isn't always the ideal though. In the scenario you're laying out, you definitely do let the time and rate of your opponent's greening override your original plan, being careful not to let Points Panic get to you. That fixed point they build to is a function of both the metagame and the strength of a traditional / average board. Lots of engine players tune themselves to win the mirror, or to build to a certain fixed point, when they should be more fluid and reactive. Some more blatantly than others, but usually to some extent. It manifests itself in how your opponent plays and how you predict they will play, and which strategies are dominant.Ī lot of various strategies are sort of "rock paper scissors" with each other.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |