Games [Danubian Federation Victory] Ausgleich '37

[iLikeToSnipe]

Just now, Retaliation said:

That was basically my argument for not just straight up trusting Orange.

It seems that a few people aren't getting this...

Also, good to know that you need an evidence key to frame somebody. In that case I'm not really sure who should go into the vault.

[Jeod]

46 minutes ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

It seems that a few people aren't getting this...

Also, good to know that you need an evidence key to frame somebody. In that case I'm not really sure who should go into the vault.

Me if you want me to vote soft.

[iLikeToSnipe]

31 minutes ago, Jeod said:

Me if you want me to vote soft.

How about soft pluralism?

[TheIrishman]

Just now, iLikeToSnipe said:

How about soft pluralism?

And Orange scoffed at my chart >.> I think I did a pretty good job guessing a few of the alignments. And it doesn't matter if Jeod "'agrees" to soft pluralism or not, he'd most likely stick to status quo as it's anonymous and his faction.

[Shade939]

2 minutes ago, TheIrishman said:

And Orange scoffed at my chart >.> I think I did a pretty good job guessing a few of the alignments. And it doesn't matter if Jeod "'agrees" to soft pluralism or not, he'd most likely stick to status quo as it's anonymous and his faction.

Yeah, those type of deals only make sense if we're actually aware of everyone's political alignment and actions.

[Shade939]

Also, given the current situation, it would make more sense for someone who supports Pluralism to make that deal instead, and have them swap their vote for this one reform in exchange for accessing the vault.

[iLikeToSnipe]

13 minutes ago, TheIrishman said:

And Orange scoffed at my chart >.> I think I did a pretty good job guessing a few of the alignments. And it doesn't matter if Jeod "'agrees" to soft pluralism or not, he'd most likely stick to status quo as it's anonymous and his faction.

I wouldn't be offering this deal if I didn't have a way of verifying it or making sure there are repercussions for breaking it. I had planned to start doing something like this on the next day, but if Jeod is going to propose it then I'm willing to go forward.

@Jeod I've got about 1 hour before I head out. If you want to go forward with voting for soft pluralism let me know before that and I will nominate you. Be warned though, if you fail to follow through on your end I will find out and you will have consequences to face.

[Shade939]

2 minutes ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

I wouldn't be offering this deal if I didn't have a way of verifying it or making sure there are repercussions for breaking it. I had planned to start doing something like this on the next day, but if Jeod is going to propose it then I'm willing to go forward.

@Jeod I've got about 1 hour before I head out. If you want to go forward with voting for soft pluralism let me know before that and I will nominate you. Be warned though, if you fail to follow through on your end I will find out and you will have consequences to face.

And what exactly do you plan on doing to him if he doesn't change his vote?

[TheIrishman]

Off topic, but I'm about to buy Hearts of Iron IV as a self-indulgent birthday gift in case anyone wants to play.

[iLikeToSnipe]

4 minutes ago, Shade939 said:

And what exactly do you plan on doing to him if he doesn't change his vote?

Stuff that will only affect him.

[Shade939]

Just now, iLikeToSnipe said:

Stuff that will only affect him.

He is a doctor you know...

[iLikeToSnipe]

1 minute ago, Shade939 said:

He is a doctor you know...

So he says. Yet he is a doctor with a seemingly radical agenda.

Again, don't think of this as mafia. If you aren't part of the radical status quo you aren't on his team.

[Shade939]

1 minute ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

So he says. Yet he is a doctor with a seemingly radical agenda.

Again, don't think of this as mafia. If you aren't part of the radical status quo you aren't on his team.

KY visited him last night so he can confirm his abilities also. That's the main reason I believe he was willing to state he's actually a Doctor so soon.

[TheIrishman]

Just now, iLikeToSnipe said:

So he says. Yet he is a doctor with a seemingly radical agenda.

Again, don't think of this as mafia. If you aren't part of the radical status quo you aren't on his team.

Again, the radical and soft and secondary to status quo and pluralism. What I mean is that if radical status quo wins the game with their secondary condition as well, radical pluralism doesn't win the game, but soft status quo does - just with one point less.

[TheIrishman]

are secondary*

[iLikeToSnipe]

What you're saying is that if your radical counterpart wins you get second place and do not win first place. I'm willing to cooperate with status quo and even with radicals for the time being, but we should be under no illusion about what will have to happen down the road.

I'm guessing that there's a wild card (i.e. the abolishment side) that would force us to work together so that they don't win and we all lose. Otherwise, everything would turn into a deadlock of stubbornness. If Jeod is willing to help me with his vote then I'm willing to help him with a nomination.

[TheIrishman]

1 minute ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

What you're saying is that if your radical counterpart wins you get second place and do not win first place. No, I am not saying that at all I'm willing to cooperate with status quo and even with radicals for the time being, but we should be under no illusion about what will have to happen down the road.

I'm guessing that there's a wild card (i.e. the abolishment side) that would force us to work together so that they don't win and we all lose. Otherwise, everything would turn into a deadlock of stubbornness. If Jeod is willing to help me with his vote then I'm willing to help him with a nomination.

5 minutes ago, TheIrishman said:

Again, the radical and soft are secondary to status quo and pluralism. What I mean is that if radical status quo wins the game with their secondary condition as well, radical pluralism does NOT win the game (they lose, same as soft pluralism in this case), but soft status quo does win - just with one point less.

 

[iLikeToSnipe]

Out of game/character comment:

I'm playing to win all of my conditions because I think that will make the game more fun. We could all cooperate, gang-up, beat the other side, and be content with silver; but that wouldn't really be fun.

[iLikeToSnipe]

If I win the game with 10 points and you win the game with 9 points who's the winner between the two of us?

[Shade939]

2 minutes ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

Out of game/character comment:

I'm playing to win all of my conditions because I think that will make the game more fun. We could all cooperate, gang-up, beat the other side, and be content with silver; but that wouldn't really be fun.

That's why we have three parties in this game instead of two.

[Jeod]

24 minutes ago, iLikeToSnipe said:

I wouldn't be offering this deal if I didn't have a way of verifying it or making sure there are repercussions for breaking it. I had planned to start doing something like this on the next day, but if Jeod is going to propose it then I'm willing to go forward.

@Jeod I've got about 1 hour before I head out. If you want to go forward with voting for soft pluralism let me know before that and I will nominate you. Be warned though, if you fail to follow through on your end I will find out and you will have consequences to face.

As far as I’m aware there’s still 25 hours left.

[Shade939]

The goal of the Abolishment party is to prevent both sides from wining, to which effect they will switch their alliance to whatever side is losing in order to advance their own third party objective.

[iLikeToSnipe]

1 minute ago, Jeod said:

As far as I’m aware there’s still 25 hours left.

You are correct... I'm tired and I've been out of it trying to catch up after power outage. Take your time to think it over. To make sure there's no confusion, here's what I'm proposing:

• I will nominate you for the vault
• If you get access to the vault you will vote for whatever the soft pluralism option is

You have no risk at all with me backing out since you will vote after your nomination (hopefully) succeeds. But I will find out tonight what you voted for and I will target you during the next day or night phase with an action if you agree to this and fail to meet your end of the bargain.

[iLikeToSnipe]

1 minute ago, Shade939 said:

The goal of the Abolishment party is to prevent both sides from wining, to which effect they will switch their alliance to whatever side is losing in order to advance their own third party objective.

Because the only voting options are for status quo and pluralism I think you're on the right track. Since Jeod claims to be status quo and is pushing radical votes I would think that causing a civil war is not the victory condition for abolishment, it's what they need to do in order to have a chance at winning.

[Shade939]

Just now, iLikeToSnipe said:

Because the only voting options are for status quo and pluralism I think you're on the right track. Since Jeod claims to be status quo and is pushing radical votes I would think that causing a civil war is not the victory condition for abolishment, it's what they need to do in order to have a chance at winning.

There's also the problem that Jeod isn't the only one who can switch his vote, and it's in the Abolishment parties best interest to maintain the stale mate between the two side as they try to start a civil war. After all, if both sides are equally as powerful as each other when a civil war starts, that increases the odds that both sides will wind up taking each other out allowing the Abolishment party to win.

[iLikeToSnipe]

Just now, Shade939 said:

There's also the problem that Jeod isn't the only one who can switch his vote, and it's in the Abolishment parties best interest to maintain the stale mate between the two side as they try to start a civil war. After all, if both sides are equally as powerful as each other when a civil war starts, that increases the odds that both sides will wind up taking each other out allowing the Abolishment party to win.

Then if you are against abolishment I suggest you vote for pluralists today.

[Category 5 Hurricane]

I think I'm in favor of this, actually. Seeing if Jeod will actually follow through with his barking and commit to his own plan and also do what he's told to in return could be very interesting.

[Category 5 Hurricane]

6 minutes ago, Shade939 said:

There's also the problem that Jeod isn't the only one who can switch his vote, and it's in the Abolishment parties best interest to maintain the stale mate between the two side as they try to start a civil war. After all, if both sides are equally as powerful as each other when a civil war starts, that increases the odds that both sides will wind up taking each other out allowing the Abolishment party to win.

Shade, you seem awfully well informed about what the Abolishment team's objectives are and how to achieve them.

[TheIrishman]

Well, I'd rather go to the vault. My action costs PP and decreases stability. If Jeod is the Doctor, he only has 2P, which means if he wants to protect someone while voting he can't do anything in the vault. If we send him to the vault, it'll be preventing our doctor from saving lives unless he chooses not to follow through with iLTS's offer.

##nominate TheIrishman

[Shade939]

Just now, Category 5 Hurricane said:

Shade, you seem awfully well informed about what the Abolishment team's objectives are and how to achieve them.

Am I?