blotunga: Scene I understand, however I don't understand our agent nor SirPrimalform. Are you guys fascists trying to signal Hitler who you are? Or maybe ar you all three fascists/Hitler and scene gave you the signal how to vote to show yourselves?
Right, if you are Liberal, that leaves 5 other Liberals, 3 Fascists and 1 Hitler. From any Liberal's perspective there is a 4/9 or 44.4% chance that there is either a Fascist or Hitler President. There is a 3/9 or 33% chance that there is a Fascist President. And therefore there is a 33% chance that Hitler is chancellor. Because Fascists will always nominate Hitler at the earliest opportunity. That is why using Random.org on the first pick is so suspect.
Based on this from the start there is a 55.6% chance ZFR is Liberal given there are 5 other Liberals, 3 Fascists and 1 Hitler. Assuming ZFR is both Liberal and he genuinely used random.org that leaves 4 other Liberals, 3 fascists and Hitler. So there is a 50% chance Joe is either Fascist or Hitler and 50% chance he is Liberal. In this scenario there is 12.5% chance Hitler would be chosen at random.
So that means there is in total a 33%+12.5% = 42.5% chance that Joe is in fact Hitler. Assuming a fascist doesn't start the game with the the taregt of muddying a liberal instead, which seems the weaker strategy.
So with regard to Agent/APF I can't speak for them, either they have looked at the maths or ZFR is Liberal and they are voting against him because they are fascists
The Fascists don't need to signal to Hitler through votes or giving in game tells. Because Hitler will get an idea who the Fascists are when players are supporting his cause to be Chancellor or nominating him. Is there a strategic advantage for Hitler to even know who the Fascists are? I don't think there is. All Hitler needs to be concerned about is playing ultra liberal, be polite and not draw attention to himself. Then he can let the Fascists do the work of getting him into power after 3 Fascist cards are drawn. Hitler is probably a poster 'looking busy' while providing no critical analysis. He almost certainly will have voted 'Yes' when it was clear from opinions that the majority were going to vote Yes. The only player I'm marking 'not Hitler' so far is Trent as his play has been the most aggressive.
Signalling to 'Hitler' through bickering or voting against majority opinion would amount to the same as giving tells to Liberals from a Scum perspective. To an extent Scum benefit more from lurking and allowing town on town suspicion to divide their opponent. Ofcourse tarring a Liberal or 2 would also be a Fascist ploy to. But it could be more beneficial for a Fascist President to await an investigation in order to lie and to tar both a Liberal Chancellor and another Liberal in one foul swoop. If the Scum play looks Liberal enough they can probably get Hitler into power after 3 Fascist Cards are drawn.
As the game goes on and there are less Liberal cards in play the likelyhood of 3 Fascist cards becomes more likely so some rounds will draw 3 Fascist cards and we probably will have to discredit Liberals at this stage. This is when the probability maths becomes increasingly important.
blotunga: Scene I understand, however I don't understand our agent nor SirPrimalform. Are you guys fascists trying to signal Hitler who you are? Or maybe are you all three fascists/Hitler and scene gave you the signal how to vote to show yourselves?
rtcvb32: It is curious that sometimes the fascists will vote together when they really shouldn't. So while this is a decent theory, there still isn't enough information yet if they are puppy-kicking facists (
beyond what ZFR says publicly). Though we could refer to their previous voting record later once a couple policies are passed.
Regardless, let's see what
Hitler Dog says...
Hitler was apparently big on animal rights to be fair. He liked German Shepards, this is probably an argument for ZFR being Liberal. Unless ofcourse he's just a fascist pretending to enjoy kicking dogs.