iLikeToSnipe

Killing You did mention that Jeod was "harmless", so I don't think there's any need to investigate him again. I'm going to try and look through people to investigate. But right now my gut is pointing towards Shade or Retal.

I didn't say that you're explanation is wrong, just that it's less likely given what we know. Your hostility isn't helping. If you're goal is civil war, then you would want to get stability lower. If you're by yourself, it's safe to assume that you aren't going to get the votes for your own radical proposal. So why not vote for the other radical option? There's probably somebody else who's going to be voting for it. With your votes combined you have a better chance of forcing a tie to create political deadlock or getting a radical option passed and decreasing stability. Your nationality, the content of your posts, and your voting actions are all at odds with each other. I'm not going to accuse you of being a warmonger looking to start a civil war, we don't have proof of that yet. I'm only saying that it's a plausible explanation.

Facts: You're a Galician You voted radical status quo The simplest explanation for those two facts is that you are for pluralism or abolishment and wish to achieve this goal through a civil war. Why would a Galician support status quo? And why would somebody who doesn't want a civil war vote for a radical proposal? Yes, you could theoretically be given a screwball role by Nodlied where you're goals go against your nationality and you could be going for some gambit to gain more power. But what is the most likely explanation? With what we know, I think that you're looking to start a civil war. You're political goals aren't as clear, but I'm just hung up on the thought of a Galician going "hey, I think Austria and Hungary are the best and should be superior to us". It's extremely slow for me. Takes almost a minute to post.

What if you're status quo and your secondary goal is to achieve that through a civil war? Or what if you're looking to abolish the empire through a civil war? There is no proof that you are who you say you are. Based on who you are, your actions, and what you've said I'm a little suspicious of you.

We don't have proof either way, but the simplest explanation is that Jeod is lying. How heavily was the last game based on lore?

I'm not too familiar with the KR lore behind Austria-Hungary, but I would think that a Galician would not be a supporter of the status quo.

I'm way behind due to a power outage and I'm not caught up on everything. From the context, it sounds like you're saying that supporting pluralism is bad. Ergo, you are not a pluralist.

Are you saying that you are not a pluralist?

After almost 48 hours I finally have power... Going to be reading through everything that happened the past day. Will try and make a post before next day.

I vote for public utilities more reliable than a MidEast country like Saudi Arabia...

Assuming power is back on within the hour I'll be making a few posts in detail and carrying my votes.

That's the beauty of cellular devices. Been doing some reading and playing boardgames. Speaking of boardgames, if you like Company of Heroes checkout Heroes of Normandie. We've had a blast playing it here without power.

It's getting close to 30 hours of no power... Power company says that the power will be on in two hours. For real this time...

My power has now been out for over twelve hours. Because Michigan, USA is apparently a third world country. Just saving phone battery and sparingly checking in.

Here's my personal theory. We have 2-3 primary goals; goals like unify, split up, etc which will determine the winning group. Everybody has their own unique secondary goal to determine an overall "winner". That way we have to work together, but we're still competing. I think we need to stop treating this like mafia and like politicians.

Sounds like something somebody not loyal to the empire would say...

I'm starting to think that there isn't "town" in this game. Probably 2-3 main sides with varying degrees of friendliness between them. So we might have cooperation between groups until towards the end when all the backstabbing starts. I agree with Orange. I don't know who could be on my team so I want to keep my cards hidden for now to avoid being stabbed in the back.

I'd imagine like HoI4 and KR it can go in either direction really fast if we mess up.

I believe so.

I would like to get more information on both Orange and Shade. Of those two, I think Shade has a historical impact of muddying the waters. ##investigate Shade Since this isn't as permanent as a lynch, I think we just need to "bite the bullet" and get it out of the way. I don't have any kind of scum vibe coming off of Orange, and Shade has a permanent scummy vibe to me the way he plays.

So Jeod starts out with a solid meta-game reason to investigate Orange. Orange decides to go with the investigation because he wants to clear himself. And Shade wants to investigate Orange for... reasons? I'm leaning towards an Orange or Shade investigation today. There's both meta reasons (finding out more about either would be very good) and minor in-game reasons (i.e. slightly suspicious bandwagony vote).

I do think we should investigate somebody today; preferably Orange, Jeod, or myself since we tend to drive discussion in mafia games. But an investigation that looks like any target is "all clear" should not prevent us from investigating somebody again.

I don't think we could call you "cleared" after an investigation. I don't know everything about how these types of games work, but my first instinct with having innocent, suspicious, and hostile isn't a direct correlation with town, third party, and mafia. Rather, it's a state affected by your alignment and your actions. In other words, I would think it's possible for you to be a "good guy" and suspicious or a "bad guy" and innocent. You can have bad intentions but not have done anything yet.

It's pure speculation that a military reform would be a safer reform than an economic reform... The logic is that economic reforms would be less likely to do something to make a civil war more likely in real life.

Does it cost PP to investigate somebody?