• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Other The Genius Forum Game - Over - Congratulations Blazade

How am I being whiny I am stating facts

There is literally nothing to play, there is no strategy involved. We just provide answers which the other players may or may not provide us. The other players completely and totally decide who wins.

I'll PM you with guesses to the questions at some point and just have BLINGAS do so as well, I don't see any reason we both need to be online at the same time to do this
 
Death match log

Feb 17 21:48:23 <zorbees> unclesam picked maroon
Feb 17 21:48:42 <Tanner> can we just say it publicly or
Feb 17 21:48:43 <Tanner> should we pm
Feb 17 21:48:48 <zorbees> either is fine
Feb 17 21:48:51 <UncleSam> i didnt say publicly cause
Feb 17 21:48:55 <UncleSam> it was no talking mode
Feb 17 21:48:58 <Tanner> ah
Feb 17 21:49:01 <Tanner> ok i'll pick pink
Feb 17 21:49:09 <UncleSam> do you reveal
Feb 17 21:49:11 <UncleSam> what it was zorbees
Feb 17 21:49:16 <zorbees> the correct answer was pink, unclesam is at 0 points and tanner is at 2 points
Feb 17 21:49:20 <UncleSam> or do we go to next round
Feb 17 21:49:22 <UncleSam> kk
Feb 17 21:49:28 <zorbees> orange or burnt orange, tanner first
Feb 17 21:49:31 <Tanner> Orange
Feb 17 21:49:36 <UncleSam> orange
Feb 17 21:49:46 <zorbees> orange is correct, unclesam goes up to 2 points and tanner goes up to 3
Feb 17 21:49:55 <zorbees> gold or yellow, sam first
Feb 17 21:50:01 <UncleSam> gold
Feb 17 21:50:12 <Tanner> hm
Feb 17 21:50:15 <Tanner> theres 9 people right
Feb 17 21:50:19 <zorbees> yes
Feb 17 21:50:30 <UncleSam> dw tanner i random . org'd everything ROFL
Feb 17 21:50:34 <Tanner> k
Feb 17 21:50:40 <Tanner> i'll gold as well
Feb 17 21:50:44 <UncleSam> we already know the other players chose you
Feb 17 21:50:49 <zorbees> gold is correct, sam goes up to 3 and tanner up to 5
Feb 17 21:50:58 <Tanner> honestly i dont have that many
Feb 17 21:51:01 <Tanner> but i guess its better than your none
Feb 17 21:51:02 <zorbees> lime green or neon green, tanner first
Feb 17 21:51:03 <Tanner> or few
Feb 17 21:51:24 <Tanner> neon
Feb 17 21:51:38 <UncleSam> neon
Feb 17 21:51:44 <zorbees> neon green is correct, sam up to 5 and tanner up to 6
Feb 17 21:51:54 <zorbees> teal or navy, sam first
Feb 17 21:52:07 <UncleSam> navy
Feb 17 21:52:24 <Tanner> navy as well
Feb 17 21:52:30 <zorbees> teal is correct, sam stays at 5 and tanner down to 4
Feb 17 21:52:39 <Tanner> oh you dont get - points
Feb 17 21:52:40 <UncleSam> ayyy
Feb 17 21:52:41 <Tanner> for losing first roudn?
Feb 17 21:52:49 <zorbees> going first u lose 0
Feb 17 21:52:52 <Tanner> ah
Feb 17 21:52:53 <zorbees> and get 1 for correct
Feb 17 21:52:54 <Tanner> ok
Feb 17 21:52:57 <UncleSam> thats not - points
Feb 17 21:52:59 <zorbees> going second is +2/-2
Feb 17 21:53:14 <zorbees> lavender or purple, tanner first
Feb 17 21:53:16 <Tanner> I'll go purple
Feb 17 21:53:16 <UncleSam> how many rounds
Feb 17 21:53:17 <UncleSam> are left
Feb 17 21:53:18 <zorbees> 3
Feb 17 21:53:21 <Tanner> 3 including this
Feb 17 21:53:36 <UncleSam> purple
Feb 17 21:53:45 <zorbees> purple is corrcet, sam up to 7 and tanner to 5
Feb 17 21:53:47 <Tanner> wtf
Feb 17 21:53:51 <Tanner> i have
Feb 17 21:53:52 <Tanner> 4 lavenders
Feb 17 21:54:03 <Tanner> tf
Feb 17 21:54:03 <UncleSam> random.org>your lavenders
Feb 17 21:54:08 <zorbees> white or beige, unclesam first
Feb 17 21:54:09 <UncleSam> random.org>your lavenders
Feb 17 21:54:09 <UncleSam> random.org>your lavenders
Feb 17 21:54:10 <UncleSam> random.org>your lavenders
Feb 17 21:54:23 <UncleSam> beige
Feb 17 21:54:26 <Tanner> Beige
Feb 17 21:54:33 <zorbees> beige is correct, sam to 8, tanner to 7
Feb 17 21:54:46 <zorbees> black or gray, tanner first
Feb 17 21:54:46 <UncleSam> so in other words
Feb 17 21:54:49 <UncleSam> tanners answer is meaningless
Feb 17 21:55:10 <Tanner> black
Feb 17 21:55:24 <UncleSam> will the coin
Feb 17 21:55:26 <UncleSam> decide
Feb 17 21:56:03 <zorbees> what coin
Feb 17 21:56:06 <UncleSam> k ill go black
Feb 17 21:56:08 <UncleSam> w.e
Feb 17 21:56:16 <zorbees> black is correct, sam to 10, tanner to 8, sam wins
Feb 17 21:56:17 <UncleSam> once you go black etc
Feb 17 21:56:20 <zorbees> random.org strong

UncleSam has advanced and taken BLINGAS' garnets. I'll get the Main Match post up sometime tonight.
 
Last edited:
This round's Main Match will be called Robbing and Mugging.

Each player starts the game with $50 in their bank account and $50 in their wallet. Money cannot be given away or traded, and all transactions will be in increments of $1.

Each Round, one random player will become the burglar. It will not be publicly revealed who the burglar is. There will be 10 rounds, with each player being the burglar once.

Each round, the non-burglars will withdraw or deposit money from their bank account. The burglar will choose to either rob the bank, or mug a player of their choice. Robbing the bank will allow the burglar to take half of the money from each player's bank account, rounded down. Mugging a player will allow the burglar to take all of the money from their target's wallet. The burglar's choice will not be made public, but each player will be alerted to any changes in their bank accounts or wallets.

The money count of each player will not be revealed publicly until the end of the game.

Each player can call the cops and the detective one time each during the game. When a player calls the cops, he will be unable to be mugged during the round, and the burglar will fail if he targets them. When a player calls the detective, they will state a round, and learn who the burglar was/is/will be during that round.

Players can exchange garnets for $10 per garnet, added to their choice of waller or bank account, by PMing me "Round X - Exchange # garnets - [wallet/bank]". However, during a round in which a player exchanges garnets, they may not withdraw or deposit money from their bank account. Additionally, players cannot exchange garnets on the round in which they are the burglar.

The player(s) with the most total money at the end of the game will be the winner(s). The player(s) with the least total money at the end of the game will be the elimination candidate(s). Additionally, all players except for the winner(s) and elimination candidate(s) will receive 2 garnets at the end of the game.

Timetable:

Round 1: 48 hours
Rounds 2-10: 24 hours.

Round 1 ends on 2/19 at 10:00 PM EST.

Current Garnet Count:

PokeguyNXB has 11
idiotfrommars has 10
internet and UncleSam have 9
U-Turn Out has 8
ButteredToast, Da Letter El, and LightWolf, have 4
Shaka Brah has 2
Blazade has 0
 
This is a Public Service Announcement:

If working with US please make sure he isn't pulling the assure his own survival first card. You know like in last round when her had 4 points before everyone in his alliance(not that that helped him in the end).

This has been a Public Service Announcement sponsored by LightWolf
~LightWolf, making people lose with the most people winning since 199round2

Join the LightWolf alliance today, we only require your credit card information and your housekey
 
I had no reason to give people wins round 2, but I did.
I had no reason to give people a win round 3, but I did.
Neither time did what I messed with positively impact me winning in any way, both round 2 and round 3 I had plans to prevent my loss, but I went out of my way both times to make the game more interesting and save some people all to build trust. All you did US was leech off the trust I built round 2.

There is no bullshitting here, US cares more about himself than you guys, his choice for the death match proves that, his choice to secure 4 points to himself before everyone else does too. I have consistently been helping people indiscriminately and with assurance that it'd work, simply because unlike you, I deal with plans that aren't that easy to backstab. None of this is bullshit, these are facts, you got backstabbed, I didn't.

I merely am getting in a preemptive strike before you make a massive bullshit post while I'm in class and limited internet :P
 
You solely tried to fuck as many people over as possible because you found it 'more interesting' to fuck with me/others. I meanwhile did my best to make sure that as many people as possible won and despite your best efforts everyone except for me won. My choice of BLINGAS was solely because he also fucked over people in round 1 (not me, but people who he had claimed to be helping), and I have only ever tried to fuck over people who backstabbed or lied (I have never even lied to you, in fact I tried to help you last round LightWolf even after all your lying to me!). Hell, I legit haven't lied to anyone in this game and have at every possible opportunity tried to ensure that anyone who indicated a willingness to work with me could win.

I'm not going to bother arguing anymore because anyone with half a brain can figure out what you're trying to do lol.
 
billymills said:
idk what the big issue was with that game. It seems like an incomplete information bluffing game? Seems pretty decent.
Click to expand...
The problem laid in the way the information was distributed; specifically, the information was completely distributed to solely the non-deathmatch players.

If the information had been incompletely distributed to other players while the deathmatch players got better information (for example, if non-deathmatch players got hints like 'there are more players with Pink than Gray' which are mostly useless on their own, while deathmatch players got 3 such hints and a guaranteed answer to one of the color choices) then the game would've been quite good. Instead, the 'game' had only two parameters: how many non-deathmatch players favor each deathmatch player, and how lucky each player gets; neither of those is ideal as a deathmatch parameter. In fact, in the limit of all non-deathmatchers overwhelmingly supporting one deathmatch player the luck factor can be neglected completely, leading only to an simple vote by the other players, thus leading to my original complaint. Indeed, there is only a very limited capacity for each player to bluff specifically because the information is so complete, and there is no room whatsoever for deduction. Hell, there wasn't even any room for memory, meaning that all of the hallmarks of a good deathmatch were completely neglected.
 
Firstly "tried"? I'm p sure I succeeded. Secondly name the people I fucked over, because I'm fairly sure there is but a single person who I cost a win. I'd also love to see the conversation with your alliance where you told them you are assuring yourself 4 points before anyone else. Omitting information is just as bad, difference is I admit to lying and not telling the full story, internet had no idea I was just looking for a small crack to start the avalanche that'd make everyone cave into winning while US loses. But that was for the sake of the plan simply because it was too complex to pitch along with the hole finding business.

Fact is you are spouting bullshit here, with a clear lie biased by the fact I made you lose last round and your best argument against me is essentially "Nuh uh!".

I raise this question, was last round fun till I started messing with it? What is the point of this game if you just sit around doing nothing, who cares if you got to the top X before losing if that is only because US had to cut some loses at that point or you ran into a team based game that split your group apart. Sticking to US blindly forever is foolish, because I'm around, and there will be a game where I will come out on top sooner or later. US won't choose me, his reason for picking Tanner is just an excuse, he was threatening to pick me to get me to stop and threatening not to pick DLE(DLE fetishizes death matches or what) just so he could avoid to lose, and I think it is as clear as day that he had way more of a reason to go after me than Blingas.(also that's another lie you made) He will make sure I can't face him in a death match, and sooner rather than later he will try throwing his allies at me to take me down rather than risking himself, while I'm set to take the bullet for those I'm working with.

So dear players, why not entertain working with me for once, or you know coming to me to spy on behalf of US works too.
 
UncleSam said:
The problem laid in the way the information was distributed; specifically, the information was completely distributed to solely the non-deathmatch players.

If the information had been incompletely distributed to other players while the deathmatch players got better information (for example, if non-deathmatch players got hints like 'there are more players with Pink than Gray' which are mostly useless on their own, while deathmatch players got 3 such hints and a guaranteed answer to one of the color choices) then the game would've been quite good. Instead, the 'game' had only two parameters: how many non-deathmatch players favor each deathmatch player, and how lucky each player gets; neither of those is ideal as a deathmatch parameter. In fact, in the limit of all non-deathmatchers overwhelmingly supporting one deathmatch player the luck factor can be neglected completely, leading only to an simple vote by the other players, thus leading to my original complaint. Indeed, there is only a very limited capacity for each player to bluff specifically because the information is so complete, and there is no room whatsoever for deduction. Hell, there wasn't even any room for memory, meaning that all of the hallmarks of a good deathmatch were completely neglected.
Click to expand...

If all of the other players dramatically favour one of the two participants, no game with their involvement should be fair. The point of the game is to see if superior organizational and bluffing skills can overcome an information disadvantage. If the outsiders are relatively split(3-6 or closer), getting them all to vote for the same color without leaking their votes to the other player is important.
 
I guess we just fundamentally disagree on what a deathmatch should be then.

I think that a deathmatch should be such that the two players are on relatively even footing going in and have to rely on their own wits to survive, with minimal interference from the outside world. The best deathmatches in the show were of this kind, and there is undeniably something pure about theoretically being able to solo the other twelve players if you are legitimately that much smarter than the rest of them.
 
sorry for not posting earlier, i'm extending round 2 until tonight (2/21) at 9 PM EST. If you are keeping your bank/wallet the same, please tell me in the future. Note that these rounds are 24 hours also, not 48. I will probably not extend again in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top