Quote:
Originally Posted by Plumpudding
I agree, in that I think it's imbalanced. There's no way Fascists can win a slow game, as there's no reason for Liberals to not pass Liberal policies. That means Fascists have to play a rush game, passing Fascist policies every turn they can, outing themselves in the process. Then the game hinges on Fascists getting lucky by Hitler being elected as Chancellor by a Liberal. Was my impression at least.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mighty Quinn
Yeah, I think Fascists really need to just pass Fascist policies first and find a way to BS about it later. The game isn't long enough to worry about establishing Liberal cred.
|
I watched this thread because I nominated Secret Hitler in the megapoll. Now that Game 1 is over, I want to disagree with this assertion.
It can really work for the Fascist named Hitler to pass a liberal policy on the first go. After the fact, the president who passed tiles to Hitler can lie to the table about which tiles were exchanged. In this way Hitler knows the president is an ally and the table thinks he is a liberal.
If Hitler was the president, it is great to pass a pair. A Fascist chancellor can pass a Fascist law and claim two Fascist tiles (if he is asked BEFORE Hitler) and then Hitler knows his ally. If the Fascist passes Liberal, both Hitler and the Fascist look Liberal. And he can still lie about the exchange to tell Hitler he is an ally.
I think the most common play of Hitler is as a straight up Liberal at first and I see a lot of wins. A Fascist (#A) playing the long game is rarer, but I see it work, especially if they can link a random Liberal (#B) to a "known" Fascist (#C) through their (#B & #C) joint government passing a Fascist law.