Board Game Secret Hitler 1

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Your plan is still fucking over the best case scenarios which is really triggering my WIFOMeter right now as to whether these best cases are likely.
You literally have to know he is fascist if you liberal, it can't trigger your wifom meter, YOU'D KNOW 100% HE IS TRYING SOMETHING SHADY.

See this is my problem, I'd be so confident if either of you got paired with anyone else, that that anyone else was the liberal.
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
your Idea zorbees would have only worked if I picked Xayah, because if I choose Exploudit again, Xayah has to pick someone not Exploudit or I, WHICH IS FAR WORSE for not hitting Hitler, than keeping it to the minimum people possible.

So I will whether we Nein or Ja pick Xayah next, because it's the correct play, yet you are fine with that and would not Nein it? Tell me if you would nein that too to ascertain votes? Because you then pass presidency in either Blazade's or Hitmon's hands or we play the top card where YES the kill goes poof.

The check will have no bearing till Xayah, and now that you announced that you want to check it, any fascist will play according to what keeps things the most vague. The point of checking for vote strategy goes out the window, the second you announce and people become conscious of vote counting(though it's questionable from the get go as it requires and agreement to nein this and then they just nein it).

You either fascist or still stuck on res strats. The problem is this is a game that'd work better as a NOC, since you need communication from everyone, which we didn't have either here or the discord. You have to have constant input from everyone, expect reasonings from them, while too many got away with just picks and says nothing. So yes we stuck on this 41% as our best.
 
You literally have to know he is fascist if you liberal, it can't trigger your wifom meter, YOU'D KNOW 100% HE IS TRYING SOMETHING SHADY.

See this is my problem, I'd be so confident if either of you got paired with anyone else, that that anyone else was the liberal.
What are you talking about? I am strictly talking about a fascist sowing plans here. Would he want us to move off exploudit or create distance with a scumbuddy?

You can get into a logic pissing contest with me all game but I'm a fucking liberal and that's not gonna mean shit this game.
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
oh I misunderstood, I thought you meant WIFOM as in is zorbees actually concerned over this or is he trying to disturb the plan because he is fascist. Which is why I called you out as that should not be a possible thing for you to think. Now if you meant whether zorbees is doing this to get us off or on earlio, then yeah I have nothing against your statement, sorry.

I'd say on the matter, I'd ignore both of your stances as far influences on who gets picked, because I'd rather keep people out on their own play, and earlio not testing makes me pick exploudit anyways and I'm not gonna get in a wifom fight with zorbees over that.

Zorbees, top cards sucks, we need to get 3 of the 4 remaining libs to be in the top of the deck. Specifically the top 5. Made the calcs, it's fucking 15,151515151515151515% chance we can win by top decking. Even if we take the 41% and multiply it for the odds of hitler being in our 3, we get 25,625% (because anyone but zorbees and blazade could be a possible hitler). So there, math literally says, it's better to bet on this plan and picking this 3, than topdecking 5 times and hoping there is 3 libs within that 5. This is ignoring hitler being shot(1 in 5 if this group doesn't have hitler, this is in the pool of chance no one in the 3 is hitler, but the we don't get 3 libs out in the next 4 pulls).

I dare you to beat my math zorbees, saying that risking topdeck is better.
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Yes, advocating for people to judge everything on not wanting to elect a potential hitler IS asking to top deck the rest of the game. Worse yet, topdecking means we don't touch the bottom two cards in the deck, which may or may not mean we have a harder time subbing all the needed lib cards before reshuffle, where we will be worse off unless we completely fucked in drawing.

You haven't presented an actual argument against why X over Y should be in the picked group, you merely said you prefer Earlio and as Blazade said and on the other hand BECAUSE Blazade said it and for the same reason he said, anything from the two of you with or without a reasoning will be interpreted as a WIFOM because one of you is trying to get hitler elected. Sooner or later, we will have to elect Exploudit, it's literally unavoidable, unless we touch someone completely unknown, so I'd rather get it done now than end up topdecking a few throwing away the best deck we will have at this point with the best situation to 41% of the time get through 3 libs with between 3 people over 4 rounds.
 
I'm almost inclined to believe Blazade is 100% fascist lol, has nothing to do with the cards he's played but his responses to literally everything involve aggressive accusations backed by misinterpretations of arguments (see: immediately accusing me of trying to frame him when I gave him two fascist cards without me even saying anything)
 
Man I really read that wrong and I'm sorry Whydon but if I'm a fascist getting 2 fascist cards I'm not playing it like that. I really thought you had set me up because I didn't think pulling 3 fascists was likely cause I hadn't done the math.

What else have I "misinterpreted"? I'll admit to being aggressive this game (pretty much just cause I got put in a 50-50) but I have never been illegitimate.
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Good news everyone, I have discovered a 3% loss rate expansion to the current plan.

If the 41% does not happen, at least one of the people preventing the president passing from Exploudit will always be dead.(we never kill in the three, and have no reason to shoot zorbees or blazade, that literally leaves only hitmon of those not in the 3 man row, ergo someone in 3 man is gonna get shot). Therefore I can be the president again, and in that case we have a new deck of 6 fascist and 2 lib card. But we have the VETO POWER. If both of us agree we can ditch a hand and draw anew. And the chances that within those 6 cards all are fascist is a mere 3 percent.

So please, if you dare think about neining this, please bring up a substantial reason why the 3 man group is wrong, because the plan is now flawless.
 

sam-testings

What a beautiful face, I have found in this place
Blazade: Ja
Hitmonleet: Ja
Xayah: Ja
zorbees: Nein
Exploudit: Ja
Earlio: Ja
Whydon: Ja
Granny Pie: Ja
Lightwolf: Ja

Congrats to President Lightwolf and Chancellor Exploudit! We must check if the Chancellor is Hitler aaaaaaaaand...


Exploudit is not Hitler!
 

sam-testings

What a beautiful face, I have found in this place
Blazade: Ja
Hitmonleet: Ja
Xayah: Ja
zorbees: Nein
Exploudit: Ja
Earlio: Ja
Whydon: Ja
Granny Pie: Ja
Lightwolf: Ja

Lightwolf is president for a second term, with his new chancellor Xayah!
 

Xayah

San Bwanna
is a Community Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Welp. Presumably, this puts us with 3 Libs/3 Fas in deck, which is pretty good. Now we simply Nein Blazade and Hitmonleet so that I take Exploudit as chancellor and get a Lib card through, and then we Nein until Exploudit is prez and takes Lighwolf as chancellor, and we should win
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
I'd just like to thank the reasonableness of people not automatically jumping at me for drawing three fascists. It was a bit of a stretch we'd win with no more fascist played anyways.

I want to shoot Earlio, any defense or contra argument? He is my main Hitler suspect and also lies in the way of the merry go round.
 

Xayah

San Bwanna
is a Community Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I'd just like to thank the reasonableness of people not automatically jumping at me for drawing three fascists. It was a bit of a stretch we'd win with no more fascist played anyways.

I want to shoot Earlio, any defense or contra argument? He is my main Hitler suspect and also lies in the way of the merry go round.
About this, I calculated the odds of pulling triple Fascist here and it was 5/18, or approximately 1/3. That is by no means an unbelievably low chance, but it also means I still don't 100% trust you.

Also, I'm fine with shooting Earlio, but if something goes wrong in our plan, who is going to be our backup then?
 

LightWolf

lightwoof
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
I don't want Earlio be our backup then anyways? I mean the only thing that can go wrong is you or Exploudit are non Hitler fascists, and shot me or the good one from you.

The only cases we lose one of us three, is if we lose because Chancellor Hitler(which at this point could only happen with me) where needing backup is pointless, or we lose two of us by one of us mrdering another of us, in which case unless I kill Hitler here, we need to pick 2 out of 3 people who at that point guaranteed hide Hitler (assuming I kill one of them now and it ain't Hitler) so Earlio alone wouldn't even suffice and if Exploudit isn't the surviving member, Hitmonleet literally can't merry go round with you. Also let's not ignore if I fail to even shoot a fascist here that case we end up in a scenario where fascist can Nein tie every vote that isn't electing them.

My point is not only do I not agree with Earlio as a backup, we are not even gonna encounter a scenario where such a backup may be useful.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top