Fair enough, but note I play more for fun than winning(though winning is still important to some degree).

Seems fair. Still, I mainly want to have fun and playing it safe when we have so many L policies played(to me) seems a bit boring....dunno if this makes sense to you/others or not though.

That is why I hope I get the L card that's left so I can pass it on.

What bothers you about that? The seeming exception he made or something else? Just asking before I make my pick in about 20 or so minutes.

He told a player that if he's F he can lie about getting FFF with impunity.

A fascist president always has a dilemma when dropping an L and passing FF: should he lie and claim FFF or should he lie and say he passed FL and enter into conflict with the chancellor. What do you think he'll do if he knows he can lie about FFF with no consequences?

What he says no one else has to follow, though.....one can make up their own minds on what to believe if someone says they were passed FFF. :)

Welp nominated....hope everyone approves of my choice...but if not no skin off my nose. :D

Umm no, you have to nominate in public. Use this bump to do it.

Thanks...forgot about that.

Nominate Rwarehall

Statistically a 5 Liberal Policy (why can't I say blue it's easier??) is more common than a 6 Liberal Policy deck and we have 2 players that played 2 Liberal governments. If we had a 4 or 3 Liberal Policy deck I would lock the player but that isn't the case.

Let's say the next 2 hands are both fascist draws - Joe has a 38% draw of 3 fascist policies and Rager has a decent percentage chance. Who would you prefer RWarehall to pick as chancellor? Rager or an untested player?

For me, I think it's more likely that the last L is still in the pack and that everybody's legit. Skipping four more governments is a good idea.

You could say it but some might get confused. You could shorten liberal to just the letter L(capital L), though, to save time. :)
=================================================

Seems a bit risky...might be fun, but would still be risky....decisions, decisions.

I'm not complaining about what you plan to do. I'm complaining about you telling GR that.

yeah, maybe yeah.


I was just thinking about zfr's point that 'the likelyhood zfr and joe dropped an L is equal' is not verifiable; and it got me thinking about the possibilty zfr had 3 Ls and lied and knows the next governments is doomed to fail and that made me remember how he pointed out the flaws in scene's plan and questioned me about whether I thought it was a good idea or no
- if I imagine zfr knew that getting two free Fs passed before the next government is doomed would be good for him, but knew that he'd have to be the one to lead the doomed government it makes sense that he's be non-commital maybe...

also scene's been asserting that zfr is more tested than joe, but as RW points out it's not so. Maybe zfr's offense at scene's recent treatment of gamerager is creating a little distance between an overzealous teammate?

does that make sense with what I think about zfr's character? Maybe the last bit is a little fanciful.

hum...

While I'm voting for him and he might not be, my prediction is Rager is Hitler. It would explain him voting yes to every single goverment. If he's Hitler he's desperate for a fascist to rescue him. I'd predict his fascist buddies would be within Lift, Microfish, Redfire and Joe. Not aiming to shade anyone, but just some fun predictions, we'll see how far off base I was at the end of the game.

Joe could investigate Rager on the event of 3 fascist policies or a conflict. The only downside is if Joe is a fascist who got 2 Liberal policies when he was President and if Rager is Hitler. Also it maybe beneficial for Joe to investigate you for the special election.

If ZFR was Fascist and you were Liberal why would he not go into conflict with you and instead play a Liberal policy? Even if ZFR was Hitler it would be optimal to pass a liberal card in case he's playing with a fascist.

Okay I hadn't read your calculations until after making that post. The 38% must be when less L Policy is on the table.

ZFR was forced to play Liberal policy if he was playing with a Liberal. But why would a fascist play Liberal policy by choice with a Liberal in the first place? So the only way ZFR is fascist is if Joe is also fascist or if ZFR is Hitler is another possibility.

Also believe it or not I've played a good few games where 3 fascists were 4 of the players in play and they played all L Policy until they hit 4 Liberal cards on the table. While I'm not sure it's optimal it tends to give them Liberal credit when they start claiming 3 fascist policy cards