Secret Hitler (Game Over)

[northsidegal]

does that assume that everyone has been telling the truth about the cards?

[inspiratieloos]

It only assumes you and NM are Liberal (and that Reck is probably Liberal), and I'm personally pretty sure about those.

[inspiratieloos]

Well, it should also still work if Reck is Liberal and one of nsg and NM is Fascist.

[BuJaber]

SS/me vs. Mitillos/BuJaber

Interesting grouping.

I don't know mitilos' alignment. Neither should SS know yours if he is actually a liberal.

It's BuJaber vs. Inspi, SS vs. Mitilos.

That's what's actually known.


Also if it skips all the way back to Reck reck can't choos Nm on his turn so let's say he picks nsg. NM would be president next but wouldn't be able to pick reck or nsg. Who does he pick that people will agree on? You say 5/4 is worse case but isn't it 6/3 snd a loss? (3 skips, random fascist policy for 4/3 then 3 F policies drawn by Reck, for 5/3, then the random policy by skipping 3 again draws F and we lose)

Yes that's unlikely but that's the worse case scenario and it's pretty darn bad. Especially if one of reck/nsg is playing the long con.

[BuJaber]

Oh no reck can't even pick nsg.

It's ruined right from the start.

[Mitillos]

We are not skipping three times, because we are not potentially burying two of the three available liberal cards out of our reach, and we are not giving up one of our two chances to execute Hitler. After a couple more governments, if we know that all the liberal cards are gone, we can consider the merits of skipping three times, particularly since by then we will be getting close to the (BuJ, inspi, S_S, mallow) region, where we will be forced to skip, anyway.

[BuJaber]

Just want to say that I was against never using me/inspi/ss/mitilos and now look where we are. If it was proven who was town in the investigations we'd have a bigger pool to choose from.

[inspiratieloos]

SS/me vs. Mitillos/BuJaber

Interesting grouping.

I don't know mitilos' alignment. Neither should SS know yours if he is actually a liberal.

It's BuJaber vs. Inspi, SS vs. Mitilos.

That's what's actually known.


Also if it skips all the way back to Reck reck can't choos Nm on his turn so let's say he picks nsg. NM would be president next but wouldn't be able to pick reck or nsg. Who does he pick that people will agree on? You say 5/4 is worse case but isn't it 6/3 snd a loss? (3 skips, random fascist policy for 4/3 then 3 F policies drawn by Reck, for 5/3, then the random policy by skipping 3 again draws F and we lose)

Yes that's unlikely but that's the worse case scenario and it's pretty darn bad. Especially if one of reck/nsg is playing the long con.

Mitillos has made it really obvious he's your buddy and it's not me/Mitillos because if you and SS are both Liberals we wouldn't have that many Fascist policies passed, even though yes, technically we don't know for certain that it is not you/SS.

And Reck can choose NM, because after 3 skips the repeated chancellor rule doesn't apply.

[inspiratieloos]

We are not skipping three times, because we are not potentially burying two of the three available liberal cards out of our reach, and we are not giving up one of our two chances to execute Hitler. After a couple more governments, if we know that all the liberal cards are gone, we can consider the merits of skipping three times, particularly since by then we will be getting close to the (BuJ, inspi, S_S, mallow) region, where we will be forced to skip, anyway.

After a couple of more governments the game is over anyway. And the choice is simple. Either we take a 50/50 deduction gamble on 2.718 and NR now and risk losing if we're wrong and they execute an important Liberal or we take a 90+% chance of just winning off the cards with trusted Liberals and then take a 50/50 deduction gamble on me/BuJaber if that fails.

It's objectively the best Liberal play regardless of whether you think BuJaber or me is a Fascist, because we'd probably win before it becomes relevant anyway.

[BuJaber]

Mitillos has made it really obvious he's your buddy and it's not me/Mitillos because if you and SS are both Liberals we wouldn't have that many Fascist policies passed, even though yes, technically we don't know for certain that it is not you/SS.

And Reck can choose NM, because after 3 skips the repeated chancellor rule doesn't apply.

Thanks

That's all we needed.

Now with just 1 election we can prove the alignment of 4 people.

When Reck is president he can choose 1 of us 4 . If an F passes 4 people's alignments are confirmed and reck gets the bullet shot. And we don't have to skip my presidency as I would be proven liberal.

If an L passes it most likely means the chancellor is liberal but even if they are a fascist and do that that's a free liberal policy. You can then skip to nsg's turn.

About the skipping rule: is that really the case? I don't think my board game group play like that in real life. Seems like an easy way around the chancellor rule when you have elections to spare.

[Something_Smart]

Which of the 4 are you thinking he would choose?

[BuJaber]

It doesn't matter.

I'm betting the game on Reck being liberal. So even if he chooses Inspi, Inspi is forced to put an L or expose himself.

We couldn't do that earlier because you were being vague and not confirming if you are inspi's buddy or not. Inspi had multiple opportunities to distance away from you and buddy mitilos but he is sticking to your side. He reeeeeally doesn't want mitilos to get towncred.

[Something_Smart]

It doesn't matter...?

Seriously?

[Something_Smart]

It doesn't matter except that if we choose the wrong person we

lose the game on the spot.

That matters.

[xRECKONERx]

bu's recent posting is nice

[BuJaber]

Inspi wouldn't play like this as hitler he'd be a whole lot more focused on appearing like a lib.

Mitilos is likely liberal because of inspi's and to a lesser extent your actions.

So really only viable hitler candidate would be you and ideally reck doesn't pick you anyway. But if I were to bet I'd say hitler is in nico/2.7/nsg/reck.

Would be super well played by reck.

[BuJaber]

Forgot mallow. Mallow is possible hitler. He seems very confused

[Something_Smart]

So, your arguments are predicated on your own innocence. That's a great way to get nobody to listen to them.

(Also in what world do I force a fascist through and then 1v1 somebody as Hitler?)

[BuJaber]

I didn't think you're hitler but you *could* have been though tbh 538 probably never comes from hitler.
But you're the one afraid of hitler being in us 4 so like I don't see what you're worried about. If you think the bahavior in brackets prpves you're not hitler, how would you not think inspi's or mine would? From your pov I could maybe see you thinking mitilos is hitler but as far as I recall you haven't brought up that idea before.

Also...

You were president not chancellor. The only way for a president to 'force a fascist' would be if you threw a liberal policy. Thanks for confirming that.

Was a close game up until this page

[Something_Smart]

Yes, the assumption is that several presidents threw liberal policies. If you think I'm probably fascist, it should be because you think I threw a liberal policy (and the converse should be true as well; in a world where I am fascist, I probably did discard a liberal).

And I totally think Mitillos could be Hitler (and I've totally brought that up before).

[Something_Smart]

Also, I'd like to point out, to everyone outside of BuJaber/Mitillos/inspir: Both BuJaber and Mitillos are looking for every opportunity to call everything I do scummy (in this case he even went so far as to say that I confessed rather than asking himself why I would do that AS EITHER ALIGNMENT). They have been wholly focused on their own perspective and trying to push the idea that the way they see the game is the way that everyone should be seeing the game.

I have been trying to provide information that will be helpful even if I am not trusted, knowing that I have good reason not to be trusted. I have no interest in pointing out how scummy Mitillos is-- and I don't even think his play is that scum indicative (it seems like he'd play very similar as either alignment)-- and if you did trust me over him based just on rhetoric like that, I'd be questioning your judgement anyway.

I don't object to BuJaber's plan, so long as he has absolutely no say on who within that group is chosen. For self-centered reasons (I know I'm not Hitler), I would LIKE it to be me, and also for objective reasons there is a compelling case to be made as to why I'm not Hitler. But there's no point focusing on the former; if you agree with my objective reasoning (that I wouldn't have played how I did as president), good. If not, do what you like, and we'll hope it works out.

[BuJaber]

The scumslip is simple you were using it as a way to question why I would ever think you're hitler. But I have no way of knowing for sure that you threw away a liberal as opposed to NM/mallow/reck so I could never think of that question for you specifically, but knowing that you threw it you could think of it for yourself.

But anyway yes my plan is good. It's the best approach because of how the president order is. If we didn't have so many untrustables in a row we could do it differently. I would have liked for people to have agreed with this earlier, when there wasn't any danger of electing hitler anyway so that we have more info to work with, but we're here now.

[BuJaber]

so long as he has absolutely no say on who within that group is chosen.

Can you explain this part? How would I have any say in it anyway. It's up to the president and then the votes.

[Something_Smart]

The scumslip is simple you were using it as a way to question why I would ever think you're hitler. But I have no way of knowing for sure that you threw away a liberal as opposed to NM/mallow/reck so I could never think of that question for you specifically, but knowing that you threw it you could think of it for yourself.

It's a given that a president threw away a liberal. Very likely two did. From your perspective, it should be extremely likely that, if I am fascist, I threw away a liberal.

You said you trust Reck, N_M drawing three liberals is astronomically unlikely, so it just leaves me and mallow anyway.

so long as he has absolutely no say on who within that group is chosen.

Can you explain this part? How would I have any say in it anyway. It's up to the president and then the votes.

Well, yes. But I don't want you to then say, "I think we should make someone in Bu/inspi/S_S/Mitillos chancellor, therefore let's make Mitillos chancellor." I want to make sure they don't listen to that, because otherwise a very obvious scum motivation for the plan emerges. (if Mitillos is Hitler, that's probably your motivation for suggesting it anyway.)

[inspiratieloos]

Mitillos has made it really obvious he's your buddy and it's not me/Mitillos because if you and SS are both Liberals we wouldn't have that many Fascist policies passed, even though yes, technically we don't know for certain that it is not you/SS.

And Reck can choose NM, because after 3 skips the repeated chancellor rule doesn't apply.

Thanks

That's all we needed.

Now with just 1 election we can prove the alignment of 4 people.

When Reck is president he can choose 1 of us 4 . If an F passes 4 people's alignments are confirmed and reck gets the bullet shot. And we don't have to skip my presidency as I would be proven liberal.

If an L passes it most likely means the chancellor is liberal but even if they are a fascist and do that that's a free liberal policy. You can then skip to nsg's turn.

About the skipping rule: is that really the case? I don't think my board game group play like that in real life. Seems like an easy way around the chancellor rule when you have elections to spare.

I'm pretty sure we've established your playgroup doesn't exactly follows the official rules. Bottom left of page 4, under the heading Election Tracker.

And yes we can prove the alignment of four people with one election, but we should only do that after we've had trusted people pass as many Liberals as possible. Why take the risk of being wrong and losing when we can probably win the game already before it becomes relevant?


Anyway 2.718, you should probably nominate someone at some point, I'm going to be neining anything you do anyway and I think every Liberal should.