I just found your post via a search engine. I wanted to quickly follow up on your last paragraph, as I have designed and recently published an equilibrium concept that extends superrationality to non-symmetric games (also non-zero-sum). Counterfactuals are at the core of the reasoning (making it non-Nashian in essence), and outcomes are always unique and Pareto-optimal.
I thought that this might be of interest to you? If so, here are the links:
(public version of the accepted m...
Thank you for your comment, Vladimir_Nesov.
It is indeed correct that "the result be BE" is a false proposition in the real world. In fact, this is the reason why they are called counterfactuals and why the subjunctive tense ("would have") is used.
Nashian game theory is based on the indicative tense, for example common knowledge is all based on the indicative tense (A knows that B knows that A knows etc). Semantically, knowledge can be modelled with set inclusion in Kripke semantics: A knows P if the set of accessible worlds (i.e., compatible with A's actua... (read more)