The Compleat Strategyst: Being a Primer on the Theory of Games of Strategy (Dover Books on Mathematics)
J. D. Williamsamazon.com
The Compleat Strategyst: Being a Primer on the Theory of Games of Strategy (Dover Books on Mathematics)
Generally, when the larger of the row minima is equal to the smaller of the column maxima, the game is said to have a saddle-point; and the players should stick to the strategies which intersect at the saddle-point. To discover that there is a saddle-point, each player must examine the game both from his own and the enemy’s point of view. He lists
... See moreThe contexts of interest to us are those in which people are at cross-purposes: in short, conflict situations.
We have indicated that the number of persons involved is one of the important criteria for classifying and studying games, ‘person’ meaning a distinct set of interests. Another criterion has to do with the payoff: What happens at the end of the game?
the sensible object of the player is to gain as much from the game as he can, safely, in the face of a skillful opponent who is pursuing an antithetical goal. This is our model of rational behavior. As with all models, the shoe has to be tried on each time an application comes along to see whether the fit is tolerable; but it is well known in the M
... See moreYou will recall: we require that the scheme for our game be reduced to a payoff matrix—a rectangular array (possibly square) of numbers, indexed against the various strategies which are available to the players.
One should always look first for a saddle-point; the process is painless and concludes the work if there is one. Recall that we inspect each row to find its minimum, select the greatest of these, and then inspect the columns to find the maxima, selecting the least of these. If the two numbers (called, incidentally, the maxmin and minmax) are equal,
... See moreThus we come to believe it is significant. to count the number of sets of opposing interests around the table, rather than the bodies.
This is one of the fundamental distinctions in Game Theory, namely, the number of persons—distinct sets of interests—that are present in the game. The form of analysis and the entire character of the situation depend on this number. There are three values, for the number of persons, which have special significance: one, two, and more-than-two.