[Nevyn]

I think we have no choice but to enact a random policy and move along at this point.

I don't trust Tatts.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 March 2018 - 03:26 PM

[Tattersail_]

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:25 PM, said:

I think we have no choice but to enact a random policy and move along at this point.

I don't trust Tatts.

but you trust Mess???

I'm not arsed, play it your way. If I couldn't be sure whether or not Mess was Hitler, my play was right, AND I pretty much told you I was doing it two turns ago. I couldn't say on thread because it would have clued in the fascists that's what I am doing and they could have adjusted their motivations accordingly.

What's the WCS in what you're suggesting?

What's the BCS?

[Nevyn]

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 08:25 AM, said:

 Dolmen 2.0, on 07 March 2018 - 08:17 AM, said:

 Macros, on 07 March 2018 - 07:19 AM, said:

It's split down the middle

Nein - cause, Tatts, d'rek, nom
Ja - nevyn, mess, venge, dol

This is telling us something vital. I have no clue what it is.

Well you know that one of me or D'rek is fascist and that we voted no to Mess. Means Mess cannot be Hitler. Venge cannot be fascist because he'd have voted no to Mess as its too risky for a fascist to vote for a liberal when we only need one liberal policy and you are VPI Liberal.

Cause is Hitler and D'rek and Nom are fascists. That's my take anyway.

And here is why your strategy was absurd if you were liberal.

Good government, bad government, you knew that Dolmen, Mess, Venge, and I were voting Ja. So if Messremb is hitler, Drek always votes Ja, AND YOUR VOTE DOESN'T MATTER.


But if the team was safe, Drek would vote Nein. Which means that if you truly were liberal, a Ja vote by you could have won the liberals the game but could never have lost them the game.

Thats why I said your plan was both obvious and terrible.



Now what you have done instead, is a "safety" check that could have prevented nothing, that puts the rest of us in a position of trusting either you or Drek. And while non hitler chancellor matters MORE , President is VITALLY important here.


Your terrible strategy for a liberal would have been a good one for a fascist. Because now they push through the same team, can force a fascist policy, and then kill one of the trusted liberals, in this case likely Dolmen, which would force Venge to look for a new chancellor.

Which is why we now need to enact a random policy and shoot for the win on the next government.

[Tattersail_]

Honestly, can we lose the game if you agree to my Presidency? No.

WCS is a fascist policy gets enacted.

Then next President is Venge who can have Dolmen as his Chancellor. We are in a win win situation.

[Nevyn]

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:33 PM, said:

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:25 PM, said:

I think we have no choice but to enact a random policy and move along at this point.

I don't trust Tatts.

but you trust Mess???

I'm not arsed, play it your way. If I couldn't be sure whether or not Mess was Hitler, my play was right, AND I pretty much told you I was doing it two turns ago. I couldn't say on thread because it would have clued in the fascists that's what I am doing and they could have adjusted their motivations accordingly.

What's the WCS in what you're suggesting?

What's the BCS?

Of course I trust Mess. I know all 3 fascists within a group of 4, and he is not in it.

And no, your play was not right. If Mess was hitler and you were liberal, you were losing anyway. The only thing your nein prevented was a win.


I could have explained all this to you in advance if you weren't so in love with your top secret plan. But since you wanted to announce it but keep it a secret, if I layed out what was wrong with it, you would have accused me of signalling Drek.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 March 2018 - 03:44 PM

[Tattersail_]

I thought if a fascist policy gets enacted this term i'd only get a policy peek, not an execution. Makes more sense for Venge to have that, if a fascist policy gets enacted on his term

[Nevyn]

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:36 PM, said:

Honestly, can we lose the game if you agree to my Presidency? No.

WCS is a fascist policy gets enacted.

Then next President is Venge who can have Dolmen as his Chancellor. We are in a win win situation.

THIS PRESIDENT KILLS A PLAYER IF THEY ENACT A FASCIST POLICY


The WCS is you pass fascist policy #4, kill Dolmen, and Venge can't make Mess OR Dolmen chancellor. It also means we lose a liberal vote, so the fascists only need to trick 1 liberal to put Hitler on as chancellor.

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

I thought if a fascist policy gets enacted this term i'd only get a policy peek, not an execution. Makes more sense for Venge to have that, if a fascist policy gets enacted on his term

Incorrect, convenient misunderstanding.


We are still fine, but it is far safer to bypass you.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 March 2018 - 03:42 PM

[Tattersail_]

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:33 PM, said:

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:25 PM, said:

I think we have no choice but to enact a random policy and move along at this point.

I don't trust Tatts.

but you trust Mess???

I'm not arsed, play it your way. If I couldn't be sure whether or not Mess was Hitler, my play was right, AND I pretty much told you I was doing it two turns ago. I couldn't say on thread because it would have clued in the fascists that's what I am doing and they could have adjusted their motivations accordingly.

What's the WCS in what you're suggesting?

What's the BCS?

Of course I trust Mess. I know all 3 fascists within a group of 4, and he is not in it.

And no, your play was not right. If Mess was hitler and you were liberal, you were losing anyway. The only thing your nein prevented was a win.

If Mess was Hitler then my play was certainly right. Your play in voting yes would have been wrong. The liberals voting Hitler for him to win would have been wrong and I would have been right.

That's also why I hinted two turns ago for you to think about it.

Turns out Mess was not Hitler AND we have just confirmed that.

That means, Dolmen and Mess are in the clear so we have 2 safe chancellors.


The difference between you and me here, is that you had a find. You knew Nom and Cause, and one of d'rek or myself was fascist. You had more information than me, I needed to be sure.

[Tattersail_]

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:36 PM, said:

Honestly, can we lose the game if you agree to my Presidency? No.

WCS is a fascist policy gets enacted.

Then next President is Venge who can have Dolmen as his Chancellor. We are in a win win situation.

THIS PRESIDENT KILLS A PLAYER IF THEY ENACT A FASCIST POLICY


The WCS is you pass fascist policy #4, kill Dolmen, and Venge can't make Mess OR Dolmen chancellor. It also means we lose a liberal vote, so the fascists only need to trick 1 liberal to put Hitler on as chancellor.

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

I thought if a fascist policy gets enacted this term i'd only get a policy peek, not an execution. Makes more sense for Venge to have that, if a fascist policy gets enacted on his term

Incorrect, convenient misunderstanding.


We are still fine, but it is far safer to bypass you.

Sorry but reading the rules policy peek comes first.

Investigate

Call Special Election

Policy Peek

Execution

How have I got that wrong?

[Nevyn]

Again, is Mess was Hitler, there would have been 5 Ja's before your vote. It does not matter whether the vote was 5-3 or 6-2

Your vote only mattered if Mess was safe, which is why your vote had to be Ja. This is not an advanced concept. If you wanted to deny Drek the opportunity to put through Hitler as chancellor, you had to be convincing Venge to vote Nein at all. Having not done that, your plan was a waste.


I have behaved in more trustworthy fashion that you all game, and you were still testing Mess because YOU didn't trust ME. Given that, why would you ever expect ME to trust YOU as president here?

[Tattersail_]

Honestly looks like the next power is policy peek, but if it is Execution then I agree to random card and Venge next president.


It doesn't matter now we know who's what.

[Nevyn]

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:36 PM, said:

Honestly, can we lose the game if you agree to my Presidency? No.

WCS is a fascist policy gets enacted.

Then next President is Venge who can have Dolmen as his Chancellor. We are in a win win situation.

THIS PRESIDENT KILLS A PLAYER IF THEY ENACT A FASCIST POLICY


The WCS is you pass fascist policy #4, kill Dolmen, and Venge can't make Mess OR Dolmen chancellor. It also means we lose a liberal vote, so the fascists only need to trick 1 liberal to put Hitler on as chancellor.

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

I thought if a fascist policy gets enacted this term i'd only get a policy peek, not an execution. Makes more sense for Venge to have that, if a fascist policy gets enacted on his term

Incorrect, convenient misunderstanding.


We are still fine, but it is far safer to bypass you.

Sorry but reading the rules policy peek comes first.

Investigate

Call Special Election

Policy Peek

Execution

How have I got that wrong?

Go look at the board screenshot I sent you.

The powers change based on the number of players. Part of the reason I have been providing them to keep the game state clear for people. And you are reading a rules section that explains each power, not one that lays out at what point that power happens.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 March 2018 - 03:53 PM

[Tattersail_]

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 03:50 PM, said:

Again, is Mess was Hitler, there would have been 5 Ja's before your vote. It does not matter whether the vote was 5-3 or 6-2

Your vote only mattered if Mess was safe, which is why your vote had to be Ja. This is not an advanced concept. If you wanted to deny Drek the opportunity to put through Hitler as chancellor, you had to be convincing Venge to vote Nein at all. Having not done that, your plan was a waste.


I have behaved in more trustworthy fashion that you all game, and you were still testing Mess because YOU didn't trust ME. Given that, why would you ever expect ME to trust YOU as president here?

I don't.

You should be trusting Mess as Chancellor but if execution is a thing then bypass is fine by me, only if you think that's right.

[Tattersail_]

I was working off the OP, and assumed that order that Macros posted in the rules.

[Tattersail_]

What post number Nevyn?

[Nevyn]

925.

Ive also been talking for pages about the strategy implications of the kill.

It was why the worried about gap between Dolmen and Vengeance was largely irrelevant, for example. If you had approved the team you should have and dolmen gotten 3 policies, he could have killed Nom/Cause, and suddenly no gap.

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 07 March 2018 - 04:14 PM

[Tattersail_]

Before people vote can we get a definitive answer from Macros that if the next President enacts a Fascist Policy that they get a kill? I think that would affect the votes.

[Tattersail_]

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

925.

Ive also been talking for pages about the strategy implications of the kill.

It was why the worried about gap between Dolmen and Vengeance was largely irrelevant, for example. If you had approved the team you should have and dolmen gotten 3 policies, he could have killed Nom/Cause, and suddenly no gap.

So random policy may be best to be cautious, but I'd honestly just kill D'rek if I got one, yet Liberal cards wins us the game. Prefer the latter, why is it two kills this game, instead of Policy peak then kill?

[Nevyn]

 Tattersail_, on 07 March 2018 - 04:18 PM, said:

 Nevyn, on 07 March 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

925.

Ive also been talking for pages about the strategy implications of the kill.

It was why the worried about gap between Dolmen and Vengeance was largely irrelevant, for example. If you had approved the team you should have and dolmen gotten 3 policies, he could have killed Nom/Cause, and suddenly no gap.

So random policy may be best to be cautious, but I'd honestly just kill D'rek if I got one, yet Liberal cards wins us the game. Prefer the latter, why is it two kills this game, instead of Policy peak then kill?

It is always 2 kills.


5-6 players, there are no powers for the first 2 fascist policies, the third is a peak, then 2 kills.

7-8, no power on first, then investigate, then special election, then 2 kills

9-10, investigation on first 2, then special election, then 2 kills.

The policy peak is only a power for the shorthanded game, mostly because the next president thing is mostly moot at that few.

[Tattersail_]

Well you could trust I picked Mess not Nom like D'rek did.

WCS fascist policy enacted, liberal player killed, Venge next Pres. 4 Liberals, 3 fascists.

Next WCS, random policy enacted, its fascist, Venge next pres.

BCS we win the game