|
See this is why I don't frigging trust TMM! Also I believe it's six to win; fascist policies 4 and 5 are both assassinations, so there have to be six.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:13 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 06:27 |
|
Byers2142 posted:So, the only way this makes sense is TMM wanted two fascist bros in government to guarantee the fascist policy passes. But then there is the special election that could prevent TMM from getting Hitler elected next round and fascist winning. So he came up with a reason to double him up in government, ensuring the President never leaves fascist hands. Yeah, I'm baffled. I guess we could skip both AA and TMM and go right to you next. But we can talk about it after AA gets rejected. Waiting on Kumba's confirmation of cards received then I'll vote no.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:14 |
|
And on a reread of TMM's posts, suddenly I feel a lot more hesitant of going with the plan to Chancellor KB or CPig after the third fascist policy. Because yesterday, TMM was all for it, specifically calling KB as his choice.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:15 |
|
CapnAndy posted:See this is why I don't frigging trust TMM! Fascists need 6 to win.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:15 |
|
CapnAndy posted:See this is why I don't frigging trust TMM! Its five liberal to win, six fascist to win.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:16 |
|
King Burgundy posted:Your plan is super bad TMM. Like, I can't even. Like I said, it was a crazy idea. I would have been much more willing to consider it viable if AA had selected someone other than RF. Plus at the same time, I am still paranoid that somehow you and CPig are playing me/everyone and authorizing an AA/RF government would provide a check on that at a time when we aren't really in much danger. As I said the only real dangers would be AA drawing 2L1F and the two them saying that they drew 3F since that would put us at 5F4L at the end of the current deck. But again, if they only drew 1L and lied about it then one of the next two governments will absolutely draw the last L. And from my perspective, I am the only person I know is liberal so trying to engineer it so I get the last two governments is just prudent in my opinion. Plus, I'm a bit of a gambler and like crazy plays.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:16 |
|
Byers2142 posted:And on a reread of TMM's posts, suddenly I feel a lot more hesitant of going with the plan to Chancellor KB or CPig after the third fascist policy. Because yesterday, TMM was all for it, specifically calling KB as his choice. Maybe he was planning for this hail mary play to make me look bad? I still can't imagine a world where people think either me or Pig are Hitler. Would be crazy play from both of us. Especially in our first games when we aren't trying to quadruple bluff our existing metas or something.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:18 |
|
I think once again I'm not quite getting my thought out there clearly since I'm on a phone and using slightly rushed thoughts. I'll see if I can't explain a bit more fully when I get home even though it doesn't actually matter at this point since the idea clearly isn't going to happen. But I'll urge you all to consider that my idea makes sense (at least in the abstract) from my point of view which is that I'm the only person I can be positive is liberal and as such it is in mine and the liberals best interests if I was to be President twice in a row when last 6 cards of this deck are played since 1 of those 6 cards will almosr certainly be a liberal card and if it's not then I personally would have proof that AA is a liar.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 01:32 |
|
I got 1 liberal 2 fascist so yeah tmm got 1 and 1 after I threw out a fascist card
|
# ? May 19, 2018 02:22 |
|
Alright, I'm at home, so let's see if I can try to explain what my idea was a little more clearly even though it's obviously not going to happen. First, we have to consider the deck. We just reshuffled and had 3 liberal out 12 cards and kumba picked the first 3 which contained 1L2F (I was presuming that before but it's 'confirmed' now) so now we have 2 liberal cards left out of the remaining 9. With 9 cards left, we will have exactly 3 governments before the reshuffle unless we go through a chaos period. The next government has the LOWEST chance of picking one liberal card at a little under 60%. Now those are pretty good odds to draw a liberal card, but KB had a 66% chance to draw one liberal card from a deck of 11 when there were 3 liberal cards left during his Presidency and he picked 3F (or at least that is what we are assuming since it could still be that he lied and the DB government just got lucky pulling the last liberal card in the deck), so it very possible that the next 3 cards will be 3F. In fact, the chance to pick a liberal card with the next government is lower than it was for kumba to pick a liberal card. So after the next government, there will be 6 cards left and most likely 1 or 2 liberal cards left which means that if one person controlled the last 2 governments, that person would see the final 6 cards (provided the game didn't end after the first of their governments by passing a liberal policy) and KNOW what AA actually drew. Second, as I said, consider things from my point of view: I am the only person I can truly know is liberal. Everything else is based on assumption and trust and while I'm certainly willing to play that game, I would also be dumb not to recognize that if I saw the last 6 cards then I could have hard evidence for myself regarding AAs draw and know that if I passed someone a liberal card and they went fascist then they would be a fascist. Again, the only real danger I can see would have been that AA somehow drew the 2 liberal cards and then lied about it. My assumption was that he would pick 1 liberal card and lie about it, but that wouldn't matter since there would be a liberal card left in the next two governments and if I was the President, I KNOW it would get passed on. To try and break it down a little: the presumptions were AA/RF = [9 cards, 2 liberal] - draws 1L2F, doesn't matter what AA passes, RF enacts fascist. They both say that 2F was passed and AA says he drew 3F. AA gets the special election and picks me (and if he doesn't then we automatically deny the next government to get to me). If he actually does draw 3F, then so much the better. [4L3F policies] TMM/? = [6 cards, 1 liberal] (special election) - draws either 3F or 1L2F. If I draw the liberal card, it gets passed and if the chancellor doesn't enact it, then they are a fascist. My chancellor picks at this point would likely be one of KB or Byers, possibly CPig. If AA drew 3F, then I could possibly get 2L and force the win. [4L4F policies or win] TMM/? (normal election) = [3 cards, either 1 or 0 liberal] - Now if the game didn't end on the last round, then it's because I either picked 3F or because the chancellor I picked was a fascist. At this point if I had passed 1L on the last turn and the chancellor burned me, then I guess we would be danger since there wouldn't be any liberal cards left in the deck (assuming AA did pick one liberal card), but after my turn we'd be looking at a new 9 card deck with 3 liberal cards (like a 75% chance to pick 1 liberal card) and Byers coming up as President. However, if AA didn't pick a liberal card, then we would automatically win if my chancellor this round isn't fascist since I would pass the last liberal card. [5F4L or win] On the other hand, this is how it plays out now: AA/RF = Denied TMM/? = [9 cards, 2 liberal] - I would probably choose Byers or maybe DB as chancellor here. as I said, I would have a little under 60% chance to draw a liberal card here. If I drew 1L2F and passed the liberal along and Byers is a liberal, then we win. If I drew 3F, then we are forced to go fascist and I get the Special Election. At this point, I'm not exactly sure who to appoint. I suppose it would probably be Byers or maybe DB, but I'm sure I'd be willing to go along if the thread had a better idea. If I passed 1L2F and Byers goes fascist, then it locks both me and him out of government. [4L3F or win] ?/? (special election) = [6 cards, 1 or 2 liberal] - This is where it starts to get into trouble because the election order after me is Byers/PMush/CapnAndy/KB/CPig. So we would be kind of stuck depending on what I pulled in my hand. I don't know that Byers is actually a liberal, so it's harder for me to want to let him be president for 2 elections. Regardless though, if I picked 3F in my last hand, this government would have like an 80% chance to pull a liberal card. [4L4F or win] Byers/? (normal election) = [3 cards, ? liberal] - Again, this is where it gets harder to predict simply because I don't know if I can count on the actions of others like I can count on my own actions. If there was only 1 liberal card left in the deck and whomever I picked for the special election drew it, discarded and lied, then Byers is screwed here and is forced to pass fascist and we end up at the same spot as the previous scenario. [5F4L or win] So as you can see, my plan is a maybe a little crazy, but all I'm doing is willing to let a presumably fascist government pass a fascist policy that is very likely to get passed anyway and leave us in a good position to win after that policy is passed given my own limited view of actual truth (that I am the only confirmed liberal in my mind). In fact, Byers, if it he a liberal, should essentially be thinking the same thing as me, except he should of course want AA skipped and then let me play and if my government goes fascist, he should be demanding that he gets appointed President for the special election so that he could get doubled up and KNOW the truth of the last 6 cards if they all need to be drawn. I mean I guess when I originally proposed it, I didn't really think about skipping AA, then using me as the intermediate government and doubling up Byers if I have to go fascist, but again, I don't actually KNOW for a fact that he is liberal and can only assume it. I understand that is why you are all worried about me proposing this idea, but I hope by now you can see that it absolutely makes sense from my point of view.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 03:38 |
|
Actually, thinking about it some more, if he is a liberal Byers should be proposing that he is selected as the next Chancellor and be given the special election presidency if it happens so that he can essentially control the next 3 governments and ensure that the game is won for liberals.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 04:16 |
|
##vote no Hardly keeping up at all and I still know I don't like RF.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 04:40 |
|
##vote no Tmm, I suggest KB as your nom. Pass a lib policy and we win, or pass a fas and special elect myself or cpig. If I'm special elected, I would nom Byers. Cpig, who would you nominate if special elected?
|
# ? May 19, 2018 05:48 |
|
Dick Bastardly posted:##vote no Probably byers.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 06:03 |
|
##vote no
|
# ? May 19, 2018 06:27 |
|
Spring 1932 Eyes are rolled all throughout the country as the most obvious Bad Idea of a government fails to gain any confidence. Life continues as normal. Game status: 9 cards in the policy deck 2 cards in the discard pile 2 Fascist policies passed 4 Liberal policies passed 1 failed government. Presidency order: TMMadman Byers2142 PMush Perfect CapnAndy King Burgundy CapitalistPig Dick Bastardly Retro Futurist kumba Anomalous Amalgam Previous administration was kumba and TMMadman. Nomination deadline: 22st May, 13:00 GMT Dancer fucked around with this message at 13:28 on May 19, 2018 |
# ? May 19, 2018 12:32 |
|
As I said, I will likely nominate Byers or possibly DB. I could also possibly see nominating KB or possibly CPig right now as well even though we aren't in the Hitler zone. I think I would probably want to go CPig first since I am less sure of him being liberal than I am about KB. And I still stand that my idea was not actually bad and perhaps should essentially be moved to Byers (ie, if my government is forced to go fascist or my Chancellor burns us) then I select Byers as the Special Election president and allow him to to have two terms as President. As far as I can tell, we should absolutely be able to achieve a liberal victory within the next three governments as long as we have a liberal President and they choose a liberal Chancellor for at least two of them. Of course, the liberal Chancellor isn't needed if a liberal President manages to draw the only 2 liberal cards remaining, but I consider that a slim possibility. This is also why I thought my plan, while a bit crazy, was also a workable one.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 13:00 |
|
Actually, let's get a some discussion going about Byers here. If I was to select Byers as Chancellor and we are forced to go fascist and then selected him to be the President with the special election after which he would become the regular President, he would actually get to see 8 of the last 9 cards in the deck if it goes that far. Obviously, if Byers is liberal, then this is a very good thing. However, if Byers is fascist, then we would get a check on him right now since I will absolutely pass 1L1F if I draw 2F1L, so if he chooses fascist there then I'd know not to pick him as president for the special election. Now the problem here is if Byers is a fascist and I draw 3F, then he gets a free pass to enact fascist and then we've got a fascist as the President while in the Hitler zone.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 13:10 |
|
Your idea was bad because it started with the idea of knowingly electing a fascist government and then hoping they would do what you wanted with the special election. This one is better, but it still worries me you're thinking of putting KB and CPig in a pre-Hitler government. I still think you're getting way too fancy considering the game situation, and it almost reads as desperation. I'm not going to turn down the chance to see half the deck, though, even if there's little chance we get that far before winning.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 14:14 |
|
TMMadman posted:As I said, I will likely nominate Byers or possibly DB. Do not elect pig.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 14:25 |
|
AA says, "thread opinion is already changing on you and KB" Pig says, "what thread are you reading?" This one, right here, right now.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 14:28 |
|
Couldn't we just cut out the middle man and elect DB?
|
# ? May 19, 2018 14:31 |
|
Byers2142 posted:Your idea was bad because it started with the idea of knowingly electing a fascist government and then hoping they would do what you wanted with the special election. But see that's the thing, either AA gave me the special election or it would fail and then we'd just go through me and you. Now again, from the point of view that I am the only confirmed liberal that I know of, it's basically the same gamble as doubling you up with the special election since I don't know for sure that you are a liberal. Sometimes, I think you guys need to think outside the box a little bit. Plus, we do not actually know for a fact that AA is fascist. We are all trusting right now that KB/CPig are both telling the full truth. I guess the bottom line is that I am more willing to take a gamble on some things.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 14:57 |
|
Byers2142 posted:Your idea was bad because it started with the idea of knowingly electing a fascist government and then hoping they would do what you wanted with the special election. Also, you get the chance to see more than half the deck. If I select you as chancellor and the special election president if it happens, then you could see 8 out of the 12 cards from this deck. I'm not really thinking about putting KB/CPig into the government, but I felt there could be use in discussing them, but they would be much more dependent on what I pulled for the 3 cards. For example, if CPig is lying about AA and actually a fascist, then if I was to select him as chancellor now and draw 1L2F, passing long 1L/1F, then we would know one way or the other about CPig. Since a liberal CPig would win us the game and a fascist CPig would absolutely enact the fascist policy. Of course, if I drew 3F, then we wouldn't actually learn anything and that's the problem. I don't think I'm really trying to get fancy, so much as I am simply trying to talk out all the possibilities, even the crazier ones, simply because it focuses me on getting to the best option. KB should actually recognize some of type of thing from our Soldiers masonry. It actually concerns me slightly that you haven't been pushing more for you to be elected chancellor and given the special election presidency since I feel like at this point liberals should be aggressively trying to get themselves into government. Or at least aggressively trying to setup a good chain of governments.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 15:13 |
|
TMMadman posted:As I said, I will likely nominate Byers or possibly DB. I am fine with this, We should only put in me and KB if there isn't a choice since we are both in doubt, but we should definitely be first over AA and RF because those are the only two I know for sure 100% are fascist.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 15:15 |
|
I like Byers as chancellor here and possible special election target. I think this version of the plan is pretty reasonable.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 15:16 |
|
TMMadman posted:I don't think I'm really trying to get fancy, so much as I am simply trying to talk out all the possibilities, even the crazier ones, simply because it focuses me on getting to the best option.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 15:22 |
|
Dick Bastardly posted:##vote no After re-evaluating I think I'd like to see tmm nom cpig here. Of the group that I trust most, cpig is the one that I feel I have less of a solid read on. So if cpig is nommed here, best case senario we pass a lib policy and win. Worst case is we pass a fas policy and tmm has to special elect. If the worse case comes to pass, I'd much rather see myself or KB as special electee, since I know myself to be lib and even though I may have some slight doubt about cpig, I truly think cpig was being honest with the investigation. I think a lib cpig would obviously tell the truth, but I strongly believe a fas cpig (especially if Hitler) would want to tell the truth and gain lib cred at that point in the game. So I'd rather have cpig nommed now, so as to have KB or myself available for special election if need be, and to keep cpig out of the running for chancellor if a fas policy is indeed passed this cycle. This is all of course based on my current understanding of the rules about special elections and prospective nominations for chancellors in a special election senario. I may be mistaken about the details and if so, I implore anyone to please point out any potential flaws in this.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 15:54 |
|
Poke, no quoting please. Like, this particular case is not too bad, but I should be consistent with the rules (and we'll discuss after the game whether this was truly a good idea).
|
# ? May 19, 2018 16:31 |
|
My apologies. I forgot to switch gears from maf. I'll make a conscious effort to avoid that in the future.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 17:20 |
|
Fascists: DB Pig TMM RF KB as patsy by association if poo poo went South. KB Capn Kumba Mush Myself Anyone I left out Lib
|
# ? May 19, 2018 18:21 |
|
Byers, sorry byers
|
# ? May 19, 2018 18:22 |
|
Pig is probably hitler. Pig tends to lurk from time to time, but I want to point out how he's mostly around only when prompted or called out. Who has more to lose by being forthcoming in this situation liberal or fascist Who has more to gain by avoiding participating liberal or fascist I think he's played a safe game, and has avoided actually participating and is being set up for victory.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 18:27 |
|
I guess tmm and pig could both just be fascists pushing fascist policies for another player
|
# ? May 19, 2018 18:30 |
|
DB As Hitler...
|
# ? May 19, 2018 18:31 |
|
Anomalous Amalgam posted:DB As Hitler... If this were the case I would be declining or discouraging my own nomination nod from Tom for this cycle as it would take me out of the special president's nomination pool (if I understand the rules correctly)
|
# ? May 19, 2018 19:07 |
|
Tmm, not Tom. Phone posting.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 19:08 |
|
|
# ? May 19, 2018 19:24 |
|
If I'm Hitler, I want to be in the special president's nom pool. If I get nom'd this cycle, I won't be able to get nom'd for the special president's chancellor. Then the game would be all but lost for me. So if I were Hitler, I'd decline or discourage tmm's current nod at me for his nom.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 19:34 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 06:27 |
|
I am in fact not opposed to my nom this cycle, but believe my aforementioned suggestion to be optimal.
|
# ? May 19, 2018 19:36 |