Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
@mispeled, on Aug 19 2007, 06:36 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
If the intelligence agent investigated mrxak last night, now would be a good time to claim. If we lynch mrxak and we're worng, that's it.
If no one claims, I think it would be good to vote no lynch today and let the intelligence agent investigate tonight.
What exactly do you mean by claim? Do you mean that the intelligence agent should reveal himself? That might be a good idea, but it sparks the risk of a false reveal (one of the dictators claiming to be the intelligence agent.) Another yet graver concern is that assuming that mrxak is a dictator, revealing now would give the other dictator a chance to get revenge on the intel agent after the UN nukes mrxak. Then the remaining countries are on their own. To break it down from our current standing: Diplomacy 1: The UN debates and selects a suspect Elimination 1: The suspect is nuked, but turns out innocent. Then the dictators nuke another innocent and mock the survivors. Intelligence 1: The intel agent either finds out a dictator or verifies an innocent. Assume he finds a dictator.
Then it could go one of several ways:
I
Diplomacy 2: The intel agent reveals, and names one dictator. No dictators try the false reveal, knowing that with this many players left, it will only lead to their demise, though there can then be at most 3 surviving innocents. Elimination 2: The UN nukes the dictator, the remaining dictator nukes the intel agent. Intelligence 2: Nothing happens as the intel agent is dead.
Diplomacy 3: The three surviving innocents must find out and nuke the one surviving dictator before he gets them, or they are tricked into attacking each other. Odds are not all that good for the innocents.
II
Diplomacy 2: the intel agent remains silent, the UN nukes the most suspicious of their number and are correct. (In this case, a high probability, I feel, as no one has come close to being as suspicious as mrxak.) Elimination 2: The first dictator is dead, and the second one nukes another survivor. The odds of hitting the intel agent are rather low, though it could still happen. Intelligence 3: with only four players left, the intel agent has a 1 in 3 chance of hitting the other dictator. If they don't, they could still form an alliance with the known survivor, which would at least tie any attempt by the other dictator to trick the other innocent into lynching one of his own. Then there is a good chance of finding the last dictator, and even if things go the worst that they possibly could, the game will end with the last innocent and the last dictator nuking each other. If things go even marginally better than that, the game will end with either 1, 2 or 3 innocents still alive, and all dictators dead. Since I am quite convinced that mrxak is a dictator, I don't think we should waste the intel agent's reveal on him, especially because if he stays hidden, the game will almost certainly end in a victory for the innocents or a tie. Revealing now would present a much greater chance of the dictators ultimately winning. For these reasons, I strongly encourage the intelligence agent to remain hidden for the rest of this round. I hope the rest of you will encourage him to as well. And as to the no-lynch strategy, I think that when we are as sure I as think we are about the identity of the dictator, we should act now. The no-lynch strategy works better nearer the beginning of the game, and after this round will become less effective.
As an aside to kickme, I think you should change your vote. GW may be suspicious, but we will be best served now by uniting against mrxak. Once mrxak is out of the way, the intel agent will get a chance to investigate GW (Which I encourage him to take) and disprove or verify suspicion against him. Then we can deal with him if he is guilty. Right now we must eliminate the taint that mrxak has spread over the entire world with his cruel regime and disregard for human life.
@mrxak, on Aug 19 2007, 08:23 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
I refuse to turn over control of the game to whoever is killing people in the night. People don't seem to understand my point of view here, so I'll explain it simply. By not voting in the security council, the only people being eliminated are those that the evil dictators pick. That's not the sort of game that I want to be in.
It's certainly an interesting new strategy here, getting the players to stop playing the game so they can be picked off one by one. Maybe the reason darwinian got killed off was because the evil dictators are so confident that they will win this way, that they're just getting rid of people at random while I'm made to be the bad guy.
Even worst case scenario, and no-lynching doesn't help us, we have nothing to lose. We still get the chance to lynch two people. Our chances are significantly better because we have more time to discuss, and, more importantly, the intelligence agent gets an extra chance to investigate. And, as brutal truth, our chances tomorrow to lynch a dictator would be 2 out of 5 instead of 2 out of 6. Our goal is to eliminate the dictators, not to make everyone survive.
Quote
You talk about the intelligence agent, but in none of our games has the intelligence agent made any difference. They will especially make no difference if there are many players not playing.
Those are more fast-paced games, and the intelligence agent would only get one night to investigate. Give him two nights and he will be significantly more effective.
@darth_vader, on Aug 19 2007, 08:24 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
What exactly do you mean by claim? Do you mean that the intelligence agent should reveal himself? That might be a good idea, but it sparks the risk of a false reveal (one of the dictators claiming to be the intelligence agent.) Another yet graver concern is that assuming that mrxak is a dictator, revealing now would give the other dictator a chance to get revenge on the intel agent after the UN nukes mrxak. Then the remaining countries are on their own.
Yeah, claim would be when IA reveals himself and tells the results of his investigation. If the IA knows we're about to lynch an innocent, though, he should say so, because his welfare won't matter if we lynch an innocent and it's over. I think our best course of action now is to vote mrxak, and if there's no IA claim then go ahead and carry out the lynch. If someone claims mrxak to be innocent, we can either vote no lynch or lynch someone else if we see a good reason to.
vote: mrxak
One person has controlled this game right from the beginning, and so far he's used it to get you to all abstain rather than voting (when he was first accused, I might add), and then he turns around with a revenge vote and leads you all to vote for me. When I am killed and found innocent, I hope you certainly consider Mispeled as having led you down this path.
If Mispeld was really trying to do nothing but deflect attention from himself, why did continue with the no lynch voting when he could have easily bandwagoned(?) against 1Eevee1 and saved his own skin? I know that 1Eevee1 died and Mispeld lived, but it was only by one vote, and Mispeld made no move to protect himself from you, mrxak, when the vote was still one to one and could have easily swung in his favor. No, Mispeld is innocent. I am quite sure you are not.
Edit: removed some potentially sensitive information and speculation that was a bit far-fetched.
This post has been edited by darth_vader : 19 August 2007 - 10:10 PM
Okay, I might as well come clean. You all seem so determined to off me, but I would still like the innocents to win so I'll tell you the truth. I'm the intelligence agent. I tell you this because I'm dead either way. You kill me in security council or Mispeled and his friend votes me out in the night. I had wished you would see through Mispeled's rather clever strategy of taking away the security council's vote, but apparently not, and more drastic measures need to be taken. So yes, the reason nobody's stepped forward to say they've investigated me is because the intelligence agent investigated Mispeled last night, and his original suspicions were confirmed. I urge you to vote Mispeled, or at the very least try to suss out his coconspirator.
Mispeled too pointed a finger early, and randomly in his own words (what did he care? he knows exactly who the innocents are). When faced with a backfire, he convinced you all that it was better not to vote, depriving you of your only power in this game. Then, with this new bed of support, and two innocents dead, he attacked his biggest threat. It's a classic evil dictator move. Don't buy it. Change your vote, not to save the intelligence agent but to save yourselves. I'll be dead in a round anyway, but it's not too late for you.
You say that he refrained from voting 1Eevee1, staying off the bandwagon, and that's a sign of his innocence. Did I not do the exact same thing when I kept my vote as Mispeled even as it became clear that 1Eevee1 was going to be voted off no matter what? I could have killed him with no chance at retaliation, but I took the risk that you all might listen, and yes, I made myself a target in doing so.
If I was in Mispeled's shoes, during the night, would I have killed darwinian? Absolutely. To kill mrxak in that round would have been stupid, I'd have become an obvious evil dictator. I congratulate Mispeled on playing so well this game, he's certainly set me up for slaughter in an almost perfect way. Of course I don't think he expected me to actually be the intelligence agent. Make him regret his mistake, I beg you for your own good.
@mrxak, on Aug 19 2007, 11:56 PM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
and snip
I'm willing to let this play out, especially if no one else claims to be the IA. Mispeled
I am more convinced now than ever that mrxak and Gutless are the dictators.
(Edit) You must have realized that the primary reason to try to vote a Not Lynch was because the number of players was even. This clips the number of meaningful phases of diplomacy by one. If we lynch an innocent today, then the dictators kill and win in the night, as there would only be 4 players left the next day, two of them dictators.
If Mack hadn't killed 1Eevee1, or if we had voted No Lynch today, we would effectively have had one more day for diplomacy.
You cannot possibly have not realized this.
But you're a dictator. You didn't want us to have that one extra day.
If you are the intelligence agent, you've done about as good a job as Mispeled did his time around.
GutlessWonder, your partner, voting against you was to throw suspicion off of himself, and now that it's clear you're going down, he's trying to save you. Claiming to be the I.A. is a convenient excuse for him to switch votes.
(Edit 2) A short history of GW's statements this game: "I have no one I can trust, everyone is too suspicious. For the lack of any better reason, I shall also vote for 1Eevee1." "The only way to end this nightmare is to destroy everyone who isn't me. 1Eevee1 must fall." "Too much talking, not enough blood flowing in rivers down the streets. mrxak is too crafty for our own good."
And Now: "I'm willing to let this play out, especially if no one else claims to be the IA. Mispeled"
I'm not the only one who's noticed the tone of these statements, and I won't be the only one to notice the shift in tone now that your fat's in the fryer.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 20 August 2007 - 10:19 AM
It's a false claim. The intelligence agent, if anyone, would see the reason behind the no-lynch.
confirm vote: mrxak.
@eugene-chin, on Aug 20 2007, 09:24 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
Shift in tone? I want mrxak to burn, but if he's right then he and someone else will both burn!! I'm no dictator, I want the bunnies to burn as well. This is nuclear war, and as long as someone is willing to supply the bunnies with weapons, I'll try to kill anyone I can't trust, which is right now...well...everyone.
Believe me or not, I will be vindicated in the end.
Eugene Chin makes good points. Your story is full of holes, mrxak. It's a clever ruse, but I don't believe it. Did I not predict this false reveal? And we all know that you are too good at this game to have played as badly as you must have if you were the IA. My vote remains for you, mrxak.
@gutlesswonder, on Aug 20 2007, 11:43 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
Of course he's not right, Gutless. It's a desparate last-ditch tactic that's not even particularly good. He's sealed his own fate. Even if it did manage to convice enough people that he was innocent, he would live only long enough for everyone to realize he's not the intel agent. Anyway Gutless, mrxak and someone else will still both burn. He's only one dictator, and the other one will nuke another one of us tonight. If we don't eliminate mrxak now, the innocents lose. If we fail now, the dictators and innocents will have 2-2 on the Security Council. We've got to have 3-1 to win the next round.
At midnight tonight (28 minutes from now) this round is over. And things will go properly this time.
Here is the final tally:
mrxak - 3 votes Mispeled - 2 votes GutlessWonder - 1 vote
And without further ado
mrxak is brought before NATO and the UN and under interrogation, it is revealed that his country was supplying the bunnies with weapons. In retaliation he is executed by a military tribunal and his country is nuked to oblivion.
One dictator is still at large. Will he be found before more innocents die?
Dictator, PM me with your choice of target. Intelligence Agent, PM me with your guess as to who the last dictator is.
Knew it! We'll soon have the other dictator too, and then the world can finally live in peace. At least until Round 5.
So wait, when I sent in my PM to ask if darwinian was an evil dictator I was really ordering him killed?
Okay yes, I was one of the evil dictators. But I have a few parting (yet non-game-spoiling) comments.
The no-vote thing is silly. My argument would have been exactly the same no matter what my role in the game actually was (this is generally true, even when I play as an evil dictator I play in the security council as if I am looking for the "real" evil dictators, and generally pick out who I think they "are"). If anything, killing an innocent first increases the odds that the intelligence agent will find a real evil dictator when it is their time to investigate, and by seeing how people vote the first round can give valuable clues to everybody the next and subsequent rounds. Also, the ties problem is self-correcting. If there is a deadlock, a round where nobody is killed happens anyway in a more natural way. And of course finally, it's perfectly possible to kill off a dictator in the first round. Wouldn't that be a nice way to start?
You're absolutely right that I wasn't on my A-game. I've driven 18 hours in the last half a week and I've been in 3 different states, each with various reliabilities of internet. I spent very little time planning out my moves, and truth be told I was half-hoping I'd get killed off early in the game so I wouldn't cause undue disruption to it by being less reliably checking in to vote, kill people off, etc. Don't worry, next game I'm a player in you can expect me not to end up killed so easy, no matter what my role is.
Ya'll should've figured it out a lot sooner by keeping track of when things happened and my own absences from the boards :p.
You're all totally going down. The bunnies will rain nuclear fire upon all of your cities. I shall be avenged!
In the late hours of the night, the UN is rocked with the news that darth_vader has been assassinated and his country nuked. As the survivors pick up the pieces, the UN clamors for vengeance.
Who will die next?
It strikes me that mrxak may be pulling a preplanned Xanatos Gambit with his mention of forum activity. It actually spurred me to look, but I can't make heads or tails of any of the information.
Mackilroy didn't mention if darth was the Intelligence Agent.
I'm hoping he wasn't.
Seems there is three options left for who is the dictator.
As both Mispeled and Eugene Chin were very vocal against mrxak, I assume that they are fellow innocents
@gutlesswonder, on Aug 16 2007, 05:55 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
I have no one I can trust, everyone is too suspicious.
@gutlesswonder, on Aug 18 2007, 07:04 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
The only way to end this nightmare is to destroy everyone who isn't me.
@gutlesswonder, on Aug 20 2007, 06:00 AM, said in Global Thermonuclear War:
Too much talking, not enough blood flowing in rivers down the streets.
Sounds like someone who would help kill everyone. Thus I vote for GutlessWonder.
I know I'm not the Dictator. I know I'm not the I.A.
Gutless couldn't possibly be the I.A. or he wouldn't have fallen for mrxak's ploy. His actions and his statements have made him seem like a likely dictator, make us want to believe he is the dictator.
Mispeled probably isn't the I.A. as he was asking him to come forward on page 2. The idea that he and mrxak were double-teaming all of us is frightening... but unlikely.
kickme.
Why did you edit your old vote in the round one tie-breaker? It originally read: "As Mispeled seems to be a pacifist, I change my vote 1Eevee1"
And it now reads: "As Mispeled seems to be a pacifist, I change my vote No lynch"
With an edit time-stamp well after 1Eevee1 had been bombed into paste, well after your next vote.
(Edit) OMEFGOMEFBBQ!!11
The time stamp is FIVE MINUTES after Mack announced mrxak's bombing!!
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 22 August 2007 - 03:27 AM
kickme wants war, eh? I shall reciprocate. kickme shall burn brightly, the fires from his country lighting my evening dinner.
Edit: messed up the bolding tags
This post has been edited by GutlessWonder : 22 August 2007 - 07:17 AM