http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa?format=rss Tribe.net. Local Connections http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#7242f509-d86b-478d-af54-f9eff9643173 I enjoy all games, but especially those with multiple real players. In any multi-player game where (at least some of) your opponents are real, the true game is the metagame. There is always the actual game, with its rules and objectives, and the obvious strategic and tactical choices to be made related to those. Then there is the metagame, which includes all of the aforementioned 'actual game' minutia AND all the additional elements, the 'unwritten' rules and objectives, the games within the game. For example, diplomacy is a factor often overlooked in written rules (not always, but often) and yet it is certainly a powerful tool. Monopoly is a common game with a vast metagame of which many players are unaware. Trading is an obvious form of diplomacy, and even written of in the rules. But the real metagame of Monopoly springs from the fact that anything the rules dont specifically prohibit is, in fact, legal. If you can do it in the world of Real Estate, you can do it in Monopoly. Elementary Monopoly metagamers will be familiar with things like free lands or immunity being offered up as part of a trade. But have you heard of options to buy, where you offer a player a sum equal to the price of a property plus something extra so that if he lands on it, he agrees to buy it and hand it over to you? Did you know the most valuable use for a Get Out of Jail Free Card is to use it for its commodity value to circumvent the rule against loaning players money (you can legally sell it for whatever a player wants to pay you to keep you in the game, and then go one step further and buy it back for a dollar if they want to sell it to you again). Do you know how easy it is to make others aware that if they allow you to be bankrupted they are hurting themselves a lot more than if they share your burden and help bail you out? Another aspect of the Monopoly metagame people are largely unaware of is the statistical side of the game. The precise odds of landing on each space on any given role from any given other space are all calculated and out there if you research it. Likewise the color groups are ranked according to which are most frequently landed upon. This comes from statistical analysis of the bell curve produced by the roll of two six-sided dice, altered by the odds of drawing the chance and community chest cards that move you, and doing the things that land you in jail...all calculated based on the starting position (go). This is very important metagame information for trademaking and building allocation to the serious player. Of course there are not as many 'serious' monopoly players as others, but there are some. There is even an annual million-dollar monopoly tourney, and you can bet those players know these things. Most games have vast metagame considerations, and they are the ones which fascinate me most. Magic: the Gathering is a good one, especially in tourney or league play. Scouting is permitted at real world tourneys and on-line leagues, so part of the metagame becomes either using your between-round time to scout your opponents decks to become better aware of what you might face, or at least to keep up with the other players scouting efforts. In such an environment, you might hold a card in your hand that you can beat your opponent with immediately if you feel you have him beat anyway with what is in play over a few turns. Why wait to win instead of just winning right away? Because of the metagame consideration that you might not want your opponent and his allies or the spectators and othe scouts to know about a win condition you possess. Ah, the metagame. Dont hate the playa OR the game, hate the metagame. Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:49:36 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#7242f509-d86b-478d-af54-f9eff9643173 Michael David 2003-12-29T10:49:36Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#b5b43386-11a4-4008-ad30-5c6d4687453a I also prefer games in which the most important things to calculate are what will be miscalulated, how, and by whom. I've been told that there is some way to run adjacent city simulators, which is something I have always wanted to do, and which I think would be more interesting than playing against algorithms connected to a computer clock. Is there any such thing? Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:02:33 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#b5b43386-11a4-4008-ad30-5c6d4687453a Orangeboxman 2003-12-29T19:02:33Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#26a6a8dd-0ff1-4901-a614-c2e5e6058e67 I also prefer games in which the most important things to calculate are what will be miscalulated, how, and by whom. I've been told that there is some way to run adjacent city simulators, which is something I have always wanted to do, and which I think would be more interesting than playing against algorithms connected to a computer clock. Is there any such thing? Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:02:49 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#26a6a8dd-0ff1-4901-a614-c2e5e6058e67 Orangeboxman 2003-12-29T19:02:49Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#2610173c-a58f-4d38-84d7-0f8e504ac644 Josh, what game are you talking about running adjacent city simulators for? Can you tell me more about the topic? Fri, 02 Jan 2004 00:13:03 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#2610173c-a58f-4d38-84d7-0f8e504ac644 Michael David 2004-01-02T00:13:03Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#5763aef5-dbc0-4b0b-9608-9596914b7eea I really enjoyed your post. I understand what you're saying about the examples you've cited, though you've put more thought into the MtG thing than I have. However, I'm trying to come up with other examples; the one that springs to mind is "Diplomacy." I've only played it twice, and was savaged by the other players; I am a bad liar, and notoriously naïve. However, I can't discern from memory if the negotiaions phase role playing/acting/lying through teeth should be considered a metagame, or just part of the main game. In Poker, playing the hand one has with a stony face is just part of the game itself, right? Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:22:22 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#5763aef5-dbc0-4b0b-9608-9596914b7eea Bwana 2004-02-18T11:22:22Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#f4af6d46-0c33-4d60-a375-f322d50fed20 To be more specific, to me the metagame is the greater game, or the totality of all the games within and around the obvious game established by any set of rules. The element of bluffing or 'pokerfacing' is part of the metagame of Poker, a game within Poker or in addition to the mathematical part. True, most poker players understand this is integral to poker, but jsut because this part of the game does not appear in the official rules for Poker makes it no less a part of the game as a whole, the metagame. With luck, a novice can win some hands without knowing the metagame, but a metagamer will win more. Indeed part of the poker metagame might involve letting a novice win a few games he would otherwise have lost to set him up. Dont get me wrong, I am not saying an element has to be strictly external to the written rules to be part of the metagame...but that makes things more obvious. I only ever played Diplomacy once and it was many years ago, but I would say the roleplaying/acting/lying part is certainly part of the metagame...integral and necessary, but a part of the game played on a different level that intersects with the mechanics of the game in critical ways (but not 'overlappingly' so). Indeed, the phase structure of that game is a mechanical way of separating several games within the greater game. Even though those games are created entirely by each phase's rules, taken as a whole they are a large part of the metagame, along with all the unwritten external stuff. Its hard to find games that dont have metagame elements, but generally the more rules there are, or the more dimensions of play, the larger the metagame. Chess is such a tightly defined two-dimensional game, it may be one of the few that has a small metagame. Though there is an intimidation factor, a scouting factor, and once you get into speed chess or street chess or blind chess, etc, additional dimensions expand the metagame. Thanks for the response, Brian, I really like this tribe's topic, and am glad to see other posts. Fri, 20 Feb 2004 03:01:52 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#f4af6d46-0c33-4d60-a375-f322d50fed20 Michael David 2004-02-20T03:01:52Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#0686700f-7191-4a9c-a124-e51ee10a6b5c I've found "Munchkin" by steve Jackson to be an easy and fun way to explore metagaing. Nice because the lassez faire rules encourage a lot of exploration within some clear rules listed in the game. It is interesting that you mention Chess as an example of a weak metagame. On one hand I agree completely, since it is played with an emphasis on the "facts" of the board. On the other hand, what motivates people to play at all in any game is the metagame, and I don't think chess can differ there. Rarely does one play a game to achieve the end result of the game. Perhaps in single player video gaming, especially poor titles, one plays simply to achieve the ending. This would be as non-metagame as I can imagine. But as soon as one starts even discussing the game with others, even learning a single tip for improving performance, one is metagaming by going outside the "box" of the game. As soon as one brags to others about beating the game the day it came out, one is metagaming again because the true prize incorporates the joy,envy, etc emotional validation of peers. Chess. There is probably no game with a more profound influence on society, from movies to books to jokes to "timeless" metaphors in the western world. Include chinese chess, and it's cultural signifigance probably surpasses any game in the world. Whatch three chess films with three different friends. Discuss the affect it has had on them in a week. The existance of Speed Chess, Chess Tournaments, Knightmare Chess, Blind Chess, these are the metagame of Chess, along with the quintesential "internal metagame" (one that exists only inside the gaming experience, but is not defined by the rules): the Gambit. </preach off!> Sun, 22 Feb 2004 04:39:28 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#0686700f-7191-4a9c-a124-e51ee10a6b5c C h o z _ 2004-02-22T04:39:28Z http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#600be408-3dc5-46fa-9cb5-7877c08b0a07 Try any of the SimCity games for a few months and then ask yourself whether it might not be more challenging to play with human-run cities next door. Mon, 23 Feb 2004 08:48:59 GMT http://gametheory.tribe.net/thread/61cd3e1e-9178-4a6a-95f3-4a4945b233fa#600be408-3dc5-46fa-9cb5-7877c08b0a07 Orangeboxman 2004-02-23T08:48:59Z