If its a tie, i'd assume it would come down to whoever has the most remaining members?
Oh, and micro. It's a little suspicious that he's anti mass love. Cant we all just get along?!?
No, I just don't believe in randomly allying with someone on Day 1 when I have NOTHING to go on. It's suicide. After results in a couple of hours time I will make my final decision. It's just the decision is irrevocable. It's madness.
If its a tie, i'd assume it would come down to whoever has the most remaining members?
Oh, and micro. It's a little suspicious that he's anti mass love. Cant we all just get along?!?
No, I just don't believe in randomly allying with someone on Day 1 when I have NOTHING to go on. It's suicide. After results in a couple of hours time I will make my final decision. It's just the decision is irrevocable. It's madness.
To be fair, if you don't ally day one and you die, then you stand a much greater chance of losing.
We don't know if we can even win dead. I figure a Day 1 death is, pretty much, a loss anyway, even if the fates roll my way and I miraculously win a game 5 days later that I played little or no part in - it certainly won't feel like a win. So - I'd much rather fail playing a sensible game and not giving away my panties to the first gentleman caller that comes along rather than lie spread eagled on the bed and let 17 guys called Brad have their wicked way with me.
But that's where I believe you fail, micro. I don't like playing phalla by just sitting on the side lines cheering on the team. No, I believe in making the big plays to get the touchdown. I'm the Quarterback, not the mascot. And I wouldn't be a Tom Brady.
The American Football analogies don't work for me I'm afraid. A more appropriate example for me would be the spin bowler in cricket - he waits for the fast bowlers to tire themselves out lugging down quick ball after yorker after bouncer, waits for the game to be set up, and then comes on with a bit of skill and guile to start cutting in to the middle order.
Basically - I'd rather have information rather than shoot in the dark, and then use that information to call my big plays rather than call plays before knowing what sort of defence I'm up against.
No, I was thinking more along the lines of: 'Let's see who's dead - ooh, what a shame, all of the Military are wiped out, PHEW, glad I didn't ally with one of them'
Actually:
If your ally dies, can you then re-ally with another player of your choice?
See, what I'm doing to seeing who jumps in, see what they got to prove that they are who they say they are and then day 2, my team is working together while your team is one step behind and doing what I'm doing now, but on day 2. I could have waited until day 1 was over but then I would get the PMs that go like this:
See, what I'm doing to seeing who jumps in, see what they got to prove that they are who they say they are and then day 2, my team is working together while your team is one step behind and doing what I'm doing now, but on day 2. I could have waited until day 1 was over but then I would get the PMs that go like this:
Change samurai to person B, my successor. Trust me, every move has been well placed for this game of chess. Some pieces need to contact me so we don't have the first PM tomorrow.
Well, this is certainly an interesting first day so far between Sam and Robo's shenanigans. I respect you both putting yourself out there, but I still don't believe contacting either of you is a good idea for anyone. Even if you think your working in the best interest of your newly formed network, you are really just making things more convoluted in a setting where we honestly have no idea what is going on (i.e. fluctuating victory conditions, true alliances, shaky faction system, unknown zone system, etc.).
Considering this rumor about a military group seeking to put us all down, it makes it suspicious that you are so willing to blindly step up and start coordinating. It sends a message that you may have a more organized goal in mind or a clearer picture than the rest of us who are just here for the shinies.
Trying to win through a treasure-hunting alliance is an awful idea unless you have a really good character. If your partner dies, the amount of treasure you can collect is effectively halved, thus putting you at a significant disadvantage against the other alliances.
Why not wait until the end of the game to form an alliance, then? Wouldn't that lessen the risk of ending up with a dead partner? Yes, it would, but by that point other will be part of pre-existing alliances and are more likely to kill you for your treasure than work with you.
Compare that to going for a faction victory. If someone in your faction dies, you still have a numbers advantage over the people who are working for a treasure win. Furthermore, the odds of being backstabbed are far reduced since a faction victory is only possible through cooperation. Backstabbing also doesn't expedite a faction victory, whereas a treasure victory will likely go to the person who backstabs the people with the most treasure.
kias: Convolution isn't a legitimate concern. Play things simple and the simplest route to victory, the one that ends with only three players on top, is going to prevail. The only reason you could want that is if you're confident you'll end up on top, and if you're that confident then we have a ton of reason to suspect you're a bigger danger to us than I am.
As for rumors of a military sub-faction, it's pretty moronic to grant credence to those when the person who started them hasn't said anything to legitimize his claims. He also contacted me offering to work with The Crew, so even if you do believe him you still must grant that nothing he said serves as an argument against joining me.
Well, this is certainly an interesting first day so far between Sam and Robo's shenanigans. I respect you both putting yourself out there, but I still don't believe contacting either of you is a good idea for anyone. Even if you think your working in the best interest of your newly formed network, you are really just making things more convoluted in a setting where we honestly have no idea what is going on (i.e. fluctuating victory conditions, true alliances, shaky faction system, unknown zone system, etc.).
Considering this rumor about a military group seeking to put us all down, it makes it suspicious that you are so willing to blindly step up and start coordinating. It sends a message that you may have a more organized goal in mind or a clearer picture than the rest of us who are just here for the shinies.
The shinies are a part of the plan. The lone digger will find it hard to collect said shinies if everyone on his side is stealing them. As a group, you have better chance of not losing said shinies and/or your head.
Change samurai to person B, my successor. Trust me, every move has been well placed for this game of chess. Some pieces need to contact me so we don't have the first PM tomorrow.
My question, then, is that how is person B confirmed? It's kind of the missing link.
Trying to win through a treasure-hunting alliance is an awful idea unless you have a really good character. If your partner dies, the amount of treasure you can collect is effectively halved, thus putting you at a significant disadvantage against the other alliances.
Why not wait until the end of the game to form an alliance, then? Wouldn't that lessen the risk of your partner dying early on? Yes, it would, but by that point other will be part of pre-existing alliances and are more likely to kill you for your treasure than work with you.
Compare that to going for a faction victory. If someone in your faction dies, you still have a numbers advantage over the people who are working for a treasure win. Furthermore, the odds of being backstabbed are far reduced since a faction victory is only possible through cooperation. Backstabbing also doesn't expedite a faction victory, whereas a treasure victory will likely go to the person who backstabs the people with the most treasure.
a) I don't need my ally to work with me.
b) You assume that a faction win is even possible. If the factions are balanced then that means 20 kills in 6 days. Maybe only 15 kills in 6 days if you get a perfect alliance going. Still a lot, especially if you count out day 1 where your "network" is just forming.
I'm wondering if we find treasure first and then take actions/vote kill. If so, I envy the guys in the Twisted Common, as they get a shot at samurais loot. :winky:
Change samurai to person B, my successor. Trust me, every move has been well placed for this game of chess. Some pieces need to contact me so we don't have the first PM tomorrow.
My question, then, is that how is person B confirmed? It's kind of the missing link.
That's been taken care of. I see your concern, and from the outside, it does look like a problem. But that has been addressed and taken care of.
Change samurai to person B, my successor. Trust me, every move has been well placed for this game of chess. Some pieces need to contact me so we don't have the first PM tomorrow.
My question, then, is that how is person B confirmed? It's kind of the missing link.
That's been taken care of. I see your concern, and from the outside, it does look like a problem. But that has been addressed and taken care of.
So you say. But you're asking for people on the outside to contact you. You can't say, "trust me, but I'm not going to tell you why."
It's all well and good that you can trust yourself, but you need to convince us. Silly.
Trying to win through a treasure-hunting alliance is an awful idea unless you have a really good character. If your partner dies, the amount of treasure you can collect is effectively halved, thus putting you at a significant disadvantage against the other alliances.
Why not wait until the end of the game to form an alliance, then? Wouldn't that lessen the risk of your partner dying early on? Yes, it would, but by that point other will be part of pre-existing alliances and are more likely to kill you for your treasure than work with you.
Compare that to going for a faction victory. If someone in your faction dies, you still have a numbers advantage over the people who are working for a treasure win. Furthermore, the odds of being backstabbed are far reduced since a faction victory is only possible through cooperation. Backstabbing also doesn't expedite a faction victory, whereas a treasure victory will likely go to the person who backstabs the people with the most treasure.
a) I don't need my ally to work with me.
b) You assume that a faction win is even possible. If the factions are balanced then that means 20 kills in 6 days. Maybe only 15 kills in 6 days if you get a perfect alliance going. Still a lot, especially if you count out day 1 where your "network" is just forming.
I'm wondering if we find treasure first and then take actions/vote kill. If so, I envy the guys in the Twisted Common, as they get a shot at samurais loot. :winky:
gumpy wouldn't make a faction win impossible.
20 to 15 kills-6 kills through votes (which the stronger faction will control)=14 to 9 kills before game's end. That's only 2 to 3 kills per day, which is easy once we've gotten organized. Furthermore, other dudes killing each other will help out a great deal.
Are the odds of winning 100%? No, but neither are the odds of winning any other way, which are far lower.
I'm wondering if we find treasure first and then take actions/vote kill. If so, I envy the guys in the Twisted Common, as they get a shot at samurais loot. :winky:
I'm joke broke, dude. Ya'll be picking pocket lint.
samurai6966 on
0
Options
adventfallsWhy would you wish to know?Registered Userregular
Posts
I don't think I've voted though? Micro for daring to suggest having someone in second place!
What happens in the event of a tie?
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Le sigh
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
FACTION. GAMES.
Steam
Steam
Oh, and micro. It's a little suspicious that he's anti mass love. Cant we all just get along?!?
No, I just don't believe in randomly allying with someone on Day 1 when I have NOTHING to go on. It's suicide. After results in a couple of hours time I will make my final decision. It's just the decision is irrevocable. It's madness.
To be fair, if you don't ally day one and you die, then you stand a much greater chance of losing.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
God I miss school.
Basically - I'd rather have information rather than shoot in the dark, and then use that information to call my big plays rather than call plays before knowing what sort of defence I'm up against.
Actually:
If your ally dies, can you then re-ally with another player of your choice?
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Even in death
Then here we are again. So I've decide not to waste day 1 and just get the above over with so the PM's look like this:
But how does that go if you die tonight, as you expect?
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Considering this rumor about a military group seeking to put us all down, it makes it suspicious that you are so willing to blindly step up and start coordinating. It sends a message that you may have a more organized goal in mind or a clearer picture than the rest of us who are just here for the shinies.
Trying to win through a treasure-hunting alliance is an awful idea unless you have a really good character. If your partner dies, the amount of treasure you can collect is effectively halved, thus putting you at a significant disadvantage against the other alliances.
Why not wait until the end of the game to form an alliance, then? Wouldn't that lessen the risk of ending up with a dead partner? Yes, it would, but by that point other will be part of pre-existing alliances and are more likely to kill you for your treasure than work with you.
Compare that to going for a faction victory. If someone in your faction dies, you still have a numbers advantage over the people who are working for a treasure win. Furthermore, the odds of being backstabbed are far reduced since a faction victory is only possible through cooperation. Backstabbing also doesn't expedite a faction victory, whereas a treasure victory will likely go to the person who backstabs the people with the most treasure.
kias: Convolution isn't a legitimate concern. Play things simple and the simplest route to victory, the one that ends with only three players on top, is going to prevail. The only reason you could want that is if you're confident you'll end up on top, and if you're that confident then we have a ton of reason to suspect you're a bigger danger to us than I am.
As for rumors of a military sub-faction, it's pretty moronic to grant credence to those when the person who started them hasn't said anything to legitimize his claims. He also contacted me offering to work with The Crew, so even if you do believe him you still must grant that nothing he said serves as an argument against joining me.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
It is a fools dream.
The shinies are a part of the plan. The lone digger will find it hard to collect said shinies if everyone on his side is stealing them. As a group, you have better chance of not losing said shinies and/or your head.
My question, then, is that how is person B confirmed? It's kind of the missing link.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
a) I don't need my ally to work with me.
b) You assume that a faction win is even possible. If the factions are balanced then that means 20 kills in 6 days. Maybe only 15 kills in 6 days if you get a perfect alliance going. Still a lot, especially if you count out day 1 where your "network" is just forming.
I'm wondering if we find treasure first and then take actions/vote kill. If so, I envy the guys in the Twisted Common, as they get a shot at samurais loot. :winky:
That's been taken care of. I see your concern, and from the outside, it does look like a problem. But that has been addressed and taken care of.
So you say. But you're asking for people on the outside to contact you. You can't say, "trust me, but I'm not going to tell you why."
It's all well and good that you can trust yourself, but you need to convince us. Silly.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
gumpy wouldn't make a faction win impossible.
20 to 15 kills-6 kills through votes (which the stronger faction will control)=14 to 9 kills before game's end. That's only 2 to 3 kills per day, which is easy once we've gotten organized. Furthermore, other dudes killing each other will help out a great deal.
Are the odds of winning 100%? No, but neither are the odds of winning any other way, which are far lower.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Why?
I'm pretty much the only person who has vaguely taken into account what you said earlier. Jeez, talk about gratitude.
Uh. That never happened, I had voted for !Samurai all along.