1: \begin{abstract}

2: We consider polymatrix coordination games with individual preferences where every player corresponds to a node in a graph who plays with each neighbor a separate bimatrix game with non-negative symmetric payoffs.

3: %and additionally derives a non-negative payoff only depending on his own strategy. 

4: %These games generalize several well-studied setting such as party affiliation games. 

5: In this paper, we study \emph{$\alpha$-approximate $k$-equilibria} of these games, i.e., outcomes where no group of at most $k$ players can deviate such that each member increases his payoff by at least a factor $\alpha$. 

6: We prove that for $\alpha \ge 2$ these games have the finite coalitional improvement property (and thus $\alpha$-approximate $k$-equilibria exist), while for $\alpha < 2$ this property does not hold. 

7: %In general, $\alpha$-approximate $k$-equilibria may not exist for $\alpha < \varphi$ and $k \ge 2$, where $\varphi$ is the golden ratio. 

8: Further, we derive an almost tight bound of $2\alpha(n-1)/(k-1)$ on the price of anarchy, where $n$ is the number of players; in particular, it scales from unbounded for pure Nash equilibria ($k = 1)$ to $2\alpha$ for strong equilibria ($k = n$). 

9: We also settle the complexity of several problems related to the verification and existence of these equilibria.

10: Finally, we investigate natural means to reduce the inefficiency of Nash equilibria.

11: %In particular, we show that payoff distribution rules are too weak to reduce the inefficiency. 

12: Most promisingly, we show that by fixing the strategies of $k$ players the price of anarchy can be reduced to $n/k$ (and this bound is tight). 

13: \end{abstract}

14: