Benchmark Almanac

Cooperate to Compete (C2C)

Not in model cards

Multi-player conquest game with private non-binding negotiation and secret asymmetric objectives. LM agents scored by win rate against humans and other agents.

Includes an 82-game human study with matched AI-only games from the same starting positions.

In the authors’ words

Language Model (LM)-based agents remain largely untested in mixed-motive settings where agents must leverage short-term cooperation for long-term competitive goals (e.g., multi-party politics). We introduce Cooperate to Compete (C2C), a multi-agent environment where players can engage in private negotiations while competing to be the first to achieve their secret objective. Players have asymmetric objectives and negotiations are non-binding, allowing alliances to form and break as players' short-term interests align and diverge. We run AI only games and conduct a user study pitting human players against AI opponents. We identify significant differences between human and AI negotiation behaviors, finding that humans favor lower-complexity deals and are significantly less reliable partners compared to LM-based agents. We also find that humans are more aggressive negotiators, accepting deals without a counteroffer only 56.3% of the time compared to 67.6% for LM-based agents. Through targeted prompting inspired by these findings, we modify agents' negotiation behavior and improve win rates from 22.2% to 32.7%. We run over 1,100 games with over 16,000 private conversations totaling 15.2 million tokens and over 150,000 player actions. Our results establish C2C as a testbed for studying and building LM-based agents that can navigate the sophisticated coordination required for real-world deployments. The game, code, and dataset may be found at https://negotiationgame.io/c2c.

Abstract of Cooperate to Compete: Strategic Coordination in Multi-Agent Conquest (arXiv:2604.25088, CC0)
Made by UC Berkeley Released Apr 2026 Multi-agent games All tasks public
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Ranked by matches Models play against each other, and the results become ratings.
Answers
Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.

No scores here yet

We have no scores for Cooperate to Compete (C2C) yet.

See the live leaderboard on negotiationgame.io

No lab model card reports it yet

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.

More in Games and long tasks

All 68 in Games and long tasks
  • ARC-AGI-3 In use Interactive game environments where agents must explore, infer goals and rules, and act efficiently without instructions. GPT-6 Astra 100%
  • MineDojo Fading Agents complete open-ended tasks in Minecraft, such as mining blocks and fighting mobs, from a large simulation suite. Programmatic checks score many tasks. Seed2.0 Pro 49%
  • Orak Fading LLM agents play 12 popular video games across most genres through an MCP interface. Scores come from in-game progress or outcomes per title. Nemotron 3 Nano 4B 22.9
  • GameWorld Only in system cards Multimodal game agents play 34 browser games across 170 tasks. Outcomes are checked from the game state. Gemini 3 Flash 41.9%
  • Swarm Bench Only in system cards Models orchestrate agent swarms on complex tasks that benefit from coordinated decomposition and parallel execution. Kimi K3 76.3%
  • TextQuests Only in system cards Agents play 25 classic interactive fiction games. Measures game progress and harmful actions per 100 steps. Muse Spark 2.40