It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionSecret Hitler 3 - Beyond Stardom!(800 posts)(800 posts)
(800 posts)
Pages:
1
10
13
14
15
16
17
30
40
50
54
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 08, 2020
avatar
ZFR: zeo used to post on who has voted so far. Maybe that's an idea?
Votes came in pretty quick today so I didn't think it would be necessary.

Only vote missing is Lift.
Posted January 08, 2020
avatar
PookaMustard: Only vote missing is Lift.
So scene voted without a single post of discussion after second L was passed.

Could be lack of time I guess.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
RedFireGaming: Right now I'm trying to process the different proposals for good and bad governments.
avatar
supplementscene: ...
avatar
RedFireGaming: So scene, your meta strategy, starts with chancellor picks from the middle of the player list and works downward, which would follow Lift's logic that chancellors should be picked from the end of the list. Your current proposed strategy was to pick chancellors who already have or will be in government. I'm having trouble seeing how both these plans benefit Liberals, so would you please explain?
However, the opposite acting nature of these plans seems somewhat in your favor, since it means you aren't picking strategies that favor certain players. If I'm wrong about how the original plan would have acted though, I'll check again for overlap.

avatar
Lifthrasil: @GR: about your nomination: nominating the very next player in line would have been bad. It would give the nominated player the chance to participate in two successive governments. Once as Chancellor, once as President and as long as we don't know anything about players, that's a conglomeration of power that is to be avoided. Personally, I would have nominated someone from the lower half, but well, what's done is done.
avatar
RedFireGaming: Wouldn't the person be held accountable if they passed a fascist policy? Or if they would have an advantage if they were a fascist, please elaborate.


There's 2 principles to my startegy.

1) Repeat couples that play Liberal Liberal policy. So the next government after this one should be ZFR and Joe. Joe should be the player ZFR can trust the most at this stage. So if ZFR picks someone else it will look suspect.

2) Try to space these couples out across the board in order for only 4 people to touch the first deck (unless fascist policies are played - and then new couples are introduced). This principle hasn't been met so we'll essentially be forced to play 6 people in the first deck.

Why is this strategy an advantage? Because at the end of the deck we will see how many blues come out. If there's less than 5 there's a 90% chance someone dropped a blue.
avatar
RWarehall: 2) Selecting GameRager who should be 100% unless he was a sandbagging Fascist at the start. Even as Hitler and an impending 3-0, he'd still have to pass a Liberal card.
There is also the possibility one of the first 2 presidents received 2 Liberal Policies and discarded a blue. But from your POV Rager looks your safest bet
avatar
ZFR: I hoped to hear scene's input first.
Not really much to discuss, I'd consider not voting for a Gov that previously played a Liberal policy and hasn't played any fascist policy to be outing fascist.

Will you pick @joesapphire as your chancellor? Because from your POV he should look like the player you can trust the most. If so I will happily nein both Microfish and Lift. Then we skip back to Rager RWarehall if they play another Liberal Policy

In the unlikely but possible event yourself, Rager, Joe and RWarehall are all Liberal it could be a quickly won game.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Lifthrasil: I'm hiking today, so I won't be posting here until tonight or tomorrow.
Well yer the last vote, pal......when you get back make sure to do so so we can see how we proceed. :)
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Lifthrasil: I'm hiking today, so I won't be posting here until tonight or tomorrow.
avatar
GameRager: Well yer the last vote, pal......when you get back make sure to do so so we can see how we proceed. :)
Sorry for my absence. Voted now.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Microfish_1: I personally am finding it difficult to fault Scene's logic, even if I don't always agree with it. However the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing bears looking into. [...]
^ Can anybody summarise what fish means by " the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing"?

Is it what scene and lift have been arguing about?
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Microfish_1: I personally am finding it difficult to fault Scene's logic, even if I don't always agree with it. However the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing bears looking into. [...]
avatar
JoeSapphire: ^ Can anybody summarise what fish means by " the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing"?

Is it what scene and lift have been arguing about?
Before the very first government passed, scene said that he trusts you and is willing to vote NO to any government until yours: skip to Joe.

After the first government passed and made an L policy, scene wanted to skip you and go to RW: skip Joe.

Lift mentioned it as suspicious. Micro picked up on it too.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Microfish_1: I personally am finding it difficult to fault Scene's logic, even if I don't always agree with it. However the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing bears looking into. [...]
avatar
JoeSapphire: ^ Can anybody summarise what fish means by " the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing"?

Is it what scene and lift have been arguing about?
Right. I wanted to reply to that, but forgot. Now ZFR already summarized it neatly.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
Lifthrasil: Sorry for my absence. Voted now.
Well now we just wait for the votes to be tabulated....anyone got anything to eat?
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
JoeSapphire: ^ Can anybody summarise what fish means by " the whole "skip to Joe" vs "skip Joe" thing"?

Is it what scene and lift have been arguing about?
avatar
ZFR: Before the very first government passed, scene said that he trusts you and is willing to vote NO to any government until yours: skip to Joe.

After the first government passed and made an L policy, scene wanted to skip you and go to RW: skip Joe.

Lift mentioned it as suspicious. Micro picked up on it too.
And I also stated I wanted to skip Joe if RWarehall passed a Liberal policy. Much like I now want to skip Micro and Lift now you've passed a Liberal policy.

I asked you whether you'd agree to nominate Joe. You haven't replied to this yet. Why not? I'd find it highly suspicious if you nominated anyone else.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
supplementscene: I asked you whether you'd agree to nominate Joe. You haven't replied to this yet. Why not? I'd find it highly suspicious if you nominated anyone else.
OK
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
ZFR: OK
KO?
K-----O...daylight come and me wanna go home
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
supplementscene: I asked you whether you'd agree to nominate Joe. You haven't replied to this yet. Why not? I'd find it highly suspicious if you nominated anyone else.
avatar
ZFR: OK
So you're just avoiding the question because Joe is your scumbuddy and you want conflict another player who's Liberal?
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
supplementscene: So you're just avoiding the question because Joe is your scumbuddy and you want conflict another player who's Liberal?
I dunno whether to be happy or sad that you seem to see near everyone as fascist. On the one hand it's good liberal play....on the other it's also a tad extreme.
Posted January 09, 2020
avatar
ZFR: OK
avatar
supplementscene: So you're just avoiding the question because Joe is your scumbuddy and you want conflict another player who's Liberal?
You caught me.
Pages:
1
10
13
14
15
16
17
30
40
50
54
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionSecret Hitler 3 - Beyond Stardom!(800 posts)(800 posts)
(800 posts)