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

×
avatar
GameRager: What does this mean, if I may ask? What purity are you talking about here?
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/secret_hitler_3_beyond_stardom/post257

avatar
GameRager: Why don't the rules allow for such?
I explained it in the very same post. The second player might want to make his decision based on what the first player does. In some cases he MUST take into account what the first player does (termlock).
It's for the same reason rules of chess don't allow for simultaneous moves even if both players "know" what the likely sequence of moves is going to be.

avatar
GameRager: Also what would happen if they nominated at the same time at random/by coincidence?
...

huh?

I don't understand the question.

How can both nominate at the same time if only one is nominating?

It's like Tuesday has to come after Monday. There is no way Tuesday and Monday happen at the same time at random/by conincidence.
Missing votes:
- GameRager
- RedFireGaming
GameRager
What you are missing in this game is this isn't a game about figuring out who is scum or not. The sole goal is passing Liberal policies. Your plan of testing everyone is a sure way to lose because you are giving the Fascists policies for nothing. It usually only takes 1 Fascist in a government to turn it into a Fascist vote. And after the reshuffle, the situation gets even worse for the Liberals because all passed Liberal policies are excluded from the deck and you only started with 6 of them in the first place.

It's a bad idea to "test" unknowns when you already have 4 likely Liberals. Even if you assume someone might be Hitler and just playing along, that means there are only 2 more. The odds are testing unknowns means most likely a Fascist policy and to make matters worse, it potentially leaves a dark mark on Joe unnecessarily and forces us into the reshuffle governments where even two Liberals are hardly guaranteed of seeing a Liberal policy out of the 3.
I agree. Fascists will need at least 3 policies on the bord to have a chance of winning. As long as they don't have that, even Hitler isn't dangerous to us. So, barring the first round, Fascists usually play Fascist policies whenever they can. At least if they want to win. They can either use those policies to create conflict or they pretend to have drawn 3F.

The only exceptions are, when there are two fascists in the same government. Then they probably don't want to get both banned from future governments. Especially when a regular fascist is paired with Hitler. Then they will do everything to make Hitler look liberal.

But by now we have liberal passing governments that are spaced in a way that we can cycle between them without risking a random policy. So we should do that until the first conflict appears. Or at least until the first F is played. Then we can re-evaluate depending on the circumstances. But as long as only L are played, we just continue. Don't change a winning system and we only need two more L policies.
avatar
Microfish_1: I really want to see more of @RedFireGaming. he is the only person who has posted less than me, I think, and I am really curious as to his opinions.
I'll do my best to appear a bit more.
avatar
RWarehall: What you are missing in this game is this isn't a game about figuring out who is scum or not. The sole goal is passing Liberal policies.
Maybe that would explain why I'm having trouble thinking of things to post. Most discussions have been centered around rules or strategy, which I don't know well enough to join in on. Add to that the fact that indicating voting preferences helps fascists, and there isn't that much for me to talk about.

avatar
Lifthrasil: But by now we have liberal passing governments that are spaced in a way that we can cycle between them without risking a random policy. So we should do that until the first conflict appears. Or at least until the first F is played. Then we can re-evaluate depending on the circumstances. But as long as only L are played, we just continue. Don't change a winning system and we only need two more L policies.
Makes sense.
avatar
ZFR: I explained it in the very same post. The second player might want to make his decision based on what the first player does. In some cases he MUST take into account what the first player does (termlock).
It's for the same reason rules of chess don't allow for simultaneous moves even if both players "know" what the likely sequence of moves is going to be.
Thanks for that....I must've missed that when reading(lack of sleep and meds are taking their toll a bit).

avatar
ZFR: huh?

I don't understand the question.

How can both nominate at the same time if only one is nominating?

It's like Tuesday has to come after Monday. There is no way Tuesday and Monday happen at the same time at random/by conincidence.
I misread(for same reasons as bit above).....sorry about that.
=============================================================

avatar
PookaMustard: Missing votes:
- GameRager
- RedFireGaming
Sorry for the "slacking"....i've been under the weather.....will be sending my vote in in a bit.
============================================================
To everyone else who replied to me: I read them all as best I could.....I would reply more in depth to them but I am not in the best of states to formulate much in the way of replies.

I will be voting in a minute then I will likely try to get some more rest & recover(or if that fails I might watch yt/etc in bed) for the next 12-14 hours.
"What? You're saying this is another no-go?" Bookwyrm read yet another agenda that was produced by Beatrice. She nodded. "Huh. Strange. Do even I need to know why?"

President Microfish's and Chancellor supplementscene's government has been rejected!

1. GameRager..................ja!
2. JoeSapphire.................nein
3. RWarehall.....................nein
4. Lifthrasil........................nein
5. Microfish.......................ja!
6. ZFR................................nein
7. RedFireGaming...........nein
8. supplementscene........nein

The government tracker has moved by one step. If the next government is rejected, the top deck policy will be enacted!

avatar
ZFR: ...
ZFR must now nominate a Chancellor.
Post edited January 15, 2020 by PookaMustard
Is Gamerager Hitler desperate for one of his fascists to save him by putting some fascist policies on the board? We shall see in due course
I nominate Joe
avatar
supplementscene: Is Gamerager Hitler desperate for one of his fascists to save him by putting some fascist policies on the board? We shall see in due course
stay tuned
President ZFR has nominated Joe for Chancellor. Do stay tuned.
I was really tempted to go with "Gotacha! I nominate Lift"
avatar
PookaMustard: President ZFR has nominated Joe for Chancellor. Do stay tuned.
Does that mean we vote now?
avatar
RedFireGaming: Does that mean we vote now?
Yes! Vote already!
avatar
RedFireGaming: Does that mean we vote now?
avatar
PookaMustard: Yes! Vote already!
But you said to stay tuned.