To everyone confused about the prisoner's dilemma (pd) and how it relates to this event card,
This event card is heavily inspired by the pd, but is not a true pd itself. The following tables attempt to illustrate this using the average card advantage Team A would receive.
| Player B honours | Player B betrays |
Player A honours | -9 | -12 |
Player A betrays | -6 | -15 |
Player A is better off betraying if Player B honours, however if Player B betrays then Player A is better off honouring. A true pd would look like this.
| Player B honours | Player B betrays |
Player A honours | -9 | -15 |
Player A betrays | -6 | -12 |
In this scenario, Player A will always be better off if he betrays Player B. This means that the pair will fall into a cycle of betrayal a vast majority of the time.
What we have is a cleverly modified pd designed to encourage more teams to choose honour, lest we have a repeat of round 3's bias of a specific event card. Unfortunately this means that a team saying that they will betray will cause their opponents to be honourable, reinforcing their decision to betray.
Unless of course the team who has been told this WANT their opponent to suffer, in which case the team who declares that were betraying would be better off being honourable.
Enjoy picking up those pieces of brain scattered around the floor. *Grabs popcorn*