The Resistance 6 (Game Thread)

[The Candy Lane]

Hmmm. the only time I recall making it on a team was the one run by WS, perhaps it was because I was unfamiliar to the stated and unstated rules of the game but I used the pm thread to send my success votes, as stipulated there. > < as you can see I was a resistance member. Now that that's hopefully a bit more clear...


I don't think WS's reasoning is completely flawed, as I know it makes sense to 'stick with what you know works.' Unfortunately the only person I know is in the resistance is myself, and odds are at least one other member of the previous team. Maybe all three of us really are resistance and I'm just being my paranoid self but I have a feeling one, or both, of the other members delayed their vote while they mulled over the strategy. I'll cast my vote after I've thought over my paranoia.

[Ater Nox]

Apr 10, 2014 13:41:20 GMT -5 Ardreas said:

Yes I was going to be requiring votes from everyone. That's how it goes down in the real life version. Everyone on the mission passes their voting chips into the center of the table, face down and then they're flipped over to see how the mission went. All players on the team have to vote, resistance and spies alike. My previous game here I had to send PMs to Barry with my votes, so I assumed the forum version was the same as the real life version in that respect. Guess I didn't think about how since this is a forum and you can't see people voting, I don't actually have to require it of non-spies. So it was suggested to me that I don't need to keep doing that, since resistance can only vote yes, and you can't see them voting like in real life, I can just say the mission succeeded when there's only resistance members on it.

Again, my apologies for not thinking that part through.

Anyway, you can all rest easy now. Mission #1 was a Success! So chalk up 1 point for the resistance!

For future missions I'll keep in mind that resistance members don't have to PM me, so we should have no more issues.

I think you need to wait for resistance members to pm you, otherwise you wouldn't need to wait when an all resistance mission happens which gives away the roles of everyone on the team. Also, if someone on the team hasn't logged on and you say the mission succeeds or fails we all know they are resistance. I'm pretty sure we had this discussion a few games back and decided that everyone needed to send in a vote regardless of their role.



As for the team, I will need to have a bit more of a think about it, especially since we can't change our votes. I don't think that we can be certain this first team is only resistance members at all, but to be fair that is still a possibility.

[Shizensky]

I'll admit that I could easily be looking for too much with the vote issue. As I said, my own experience in voting as a resistance member is pretty limited.

[Randomain]

We of course can't be certain that the first team was only resistance members but there's still a good chance (about .23 if I counted correctly) that it was so I'd feel safer in adding one player to that compared to composing a completely/partly different team. Even if this is the spies strategy we'd be drawed at 1-1, but if not then we'd be sitting at a nice 2-0 with the third round also having a 4 member team. So I'm inclined to vote for this team, but with the no vote change rule I'll leave it open for now to hear some more arguments just in case

[Control]

That's my thoughts. I am inclined to approve this team, but I don't want to be stuck with a vote I regret. Anyone have any strong reasons against?

[Barry]

Yeah, I'd require everyone to vote for the reasons Ater gave above. Some folks are very good at reviewing the sign-ons (*glances at Aerso*), which could give the roles away if the fail/succeed result is reported prematurely.

Apr 10, 2014 14:59:45 GMT -5 Shizensky said:

I just remembered that Barry posted all of the voting records at the end of the last game. I was on the very last team, and I never sent him my vote. That's not as conclusive since it was the last round, though.

Last game, I got everyone's vote before announcing the mission's result, except for the last one, since as Shiz pointed out, the game itself was over when I received the 'fail' vote and there was no purpose to be served in waiting. Otherwise, I would have required Shiz to vote even though he was Resistance.

As to W&S' team, I'm not confident. TCL & W&S concern me the most. In Ardreas' video, the spies let the first two missions succeed. That threw the Resistance members into total confusion when the spies won their first mission after trailing 2-0, and they never recovered. So I don't think it's totally unlikely that could happen here. The video showed a great and entertaining strategy that everyone should watch if you haven't.

Here, even assuming that all three team members last mission were Resistance, that means 3 of the remaining 6 players are spies. Since I'm Resistance, it actually means to me that 3 of 5 are spies, so there's a 60% chance that W&S is a spy. The numbers tell me to reject this team, even if all three members of the last mission are Resistance.

Vote Against 

[Ardreas]

Apr 10, 2014 17:07:53 GMT -5 Barry said:

Yeah, I'd require everyone to vote for the reasons Ater gave above. Some folks are very good at reviewing the sign-ons (*glances at Aerso*), which could give the roles away if the fail/succeed result is reported prematurely.

Apr 10, 2014 14:59:45 GMT -5 Shizensky said:

I just remembered that Barry posted all of the voting records at the end of the last game. I was on the very last team, and I never sent him my vote. That's not as conclusive since it was the last round, though.

Last game, I got everyone's vote before announcing the mission's result, except for the last one, since as Shiz pointed out, the game itself was over when I received the 'fail' vote and there was no purpose to be served in waiting. Otherwise, I would have required Shiz to vote even though he was Resistance.

Oh you DID require everyone to vote? Not just spies? Well that's interesting to know. Someone was trying to convince me through PM that it wasn't required of spies last time and that I goof'd by asking everyone to PM me this game. Well then, that being the case, and since that is also how the real life version goes, I will stick to the tried and true.

For every mission I will require votes to be sent to me via PM by everyone on the team, resistance member or spy. This way it is 100% consistent and there are no advantages or loopholes people can exploit. I thought that's what we were doing from the start, but apparently some people didn't understand it that way. But now we should all be on the same page.

[Shizensky]

Thanks for clearing that up, Barry. Even if TCL turns out to be a spy, I'll feel a lot better knowing that it wasn't explicitly revealed in the game thread

I don't regret my vote against this team, though. While I know that I'm innocent, I can't know anything about either of the people I selected. By allowing that first team to pass, the spy makes himself more trustworthy in the later game. This is crucial, because now he gets to hide in a team of 4 or 5 instead of a time of 3. Remember the video - this was exactly the tactic they used.

The success of the first time only means the first team was successful. I don't think the outcome is enough to guess on anybody's innocence.

[Aersoldorf]

Hold the phone. Someone tried to say that sending in a vote wasn't required of the SPIES? That's weird, they're the ONLY people who can vote for or against a team. The rest of us are stuck voting only FOR, which isn't a bad thing since that's the only way for us to win. I'm struggling to not slip over the edge and go all conspiracy theory with this statement. First it seems that Ardreas was confirming that Control and Shiz are good guys, or does it? If he was waiting on them to vote then it could also be because it was a possibility that one of them could have voted to fail the mission. The statement then that 'someone (had to be a spy, or why bring it up) said that the spies don't need to send in a vote' would seem to strongly indicate that one of those two is a spy for sure - or is he (Ardreas) trying to overcompensate for making it appear that they were resistance members to begin with? The more I think about it, the muddier the waters seem to become. I'm really more nervous about this team now than I was before. Earlier I thought that if we accepted the team and it failed then we could just eliminate W&S and TCL from future teams and feel like we had 1 or 2 of the spies out of the way. Now I don't know what to do. I hope I'm not the last vote again, I just need more time to process this.

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2014 17:52:17 GMT -5 Aersoldorf said:

Hold the phone. Someone tried to say that sending in a vote wasn't required of the SPIES? That's weird, they're the ONLY people who can vote for or against a team. The rest of us are stuck voting only FOR, which isn't a bad thing since that's the only way for us to win. I'm struggling to not slip over the edge and go all conspiracy theory with this statement. First it seems that Ardreas was confirming that Control and Shiz are good guys, or does it? If he was waiting on them to vote then it could also be because it was a possibility that one of them could have voted to fail the mission. The statement then that 'someone (had to be a spy, or why bring it up) said that the spies don't need to send in a vote' would seem to strongly indicate that one of those two is a spy for sure - or is he (Ardreas) trying to overcompensate for making it appear that they were resistance members to begin with? The more I think about it, the muddier the waters seem to become. I'm really more nervous about this team now than I was before. Earlier I thought that if we accepted the team and it failed then we could just eliminate W&S and TCL from future teams and feel like we had 1 or 2 of the spies out of the way. Now I don't know what to do. I hope I'm not the last vote again, I just need more time to process this.

That baffled me as well. After hearing about that gameplay strategy, I assumed that Spies always voted and chose how they wanted to vote.

I think you're reading a bit too much into Ardreas' statements, though. Remember, he was also waiting until he got confirmation from every player before he even started the game. He might just be trying to give all of the players a chance to give their input/votes.

[Ardreas]

Ok ok... You guys need to speak up now if this game is too confused to continue. I thought I was being completely clear with the rules from the beginning, sticking as close to the table game version as possible in all areas. I assumed everyone knew to vote when they were on a mission. I didn't even consider that resistance fighters would think it unnecessary. Now everyone seems confused for some reason and trying to leverage my words to find out who is what. That's not how this should be played. I should be pretty much invisible while you guys sort things out.

Do we need to reset this game? Try it again from the top now that everyone's (theoretically) on the same page with the rules?

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2014 20:48:57 GMT -5 Ardreas said:

Ok ok... You guys need to speak up now if this game is too confused to continue. I thought I was being completely clear with the rules from the beginning, sticking as close to the table game version as possible in all areas. I assumed everyone knew to vote when they were on a mission. I didn't even consider that resistance fighters would think it unnecessary. Now everyone seems confused for some reason and trying to leverage my words to find out who is what. That's not how this should be played. I should be pretty much invisible while you guys sort things out.

Do we need to reset this game? Try it again from the top now that everyone's (theoretically) on the same page with the rules?

It's not that confusing, don't worry. Everything is pretty clear, I think someone is just purposely making it confusing to throw us off a bit.

[Shizensky]

I really had no idea the resistance was supposed to suit a vote. As I said, I never actually had an opportunity to do so, even when I finally ended up on a team. It always just made sense that I didn't have to, I assumed it was implied by the rules.

I am completely up to speed now, however.

[Control]

For the first time, I'm posting after Shiz and agreeing with him, instead of him doing that to me. I always thought that since Resistance automatically voted yes, they didn't have to vote.

[Deleted]

Well for the resistance it makes sense. Why would they vote to fail a mission? But for active purposes, it always just made sense to me that they'd be required to actually vote as well, even if the host and them already know what they're going to say.

For the spies it just seemed like it would make sense for them to have a choice. Since they're pretty much the saboteurs of the game, it just makes sense that they'd be able to pass missions as well to throw everyone in a loop.

[The Candy Lane]

Am I a suspect here because I cast my vote before shiz and control? I find that kind of funny since I was just following the rules, which as other's have pointed out, were also used in previous matches. Wouldn't it seem more likely that a spy would want to draw the vote out as he thought over his/their strategy? The other thing is that there could've been no spies on the team and Ardreas was just waiting for the votes as per the rules, but I guess only Ardreas knows that for sure.

[Control]

I believe TCL is the only one on that team who had been on a team before, so it makes sense that he would know to vote. It would also make sense if he was a spy.

[Randomain]

Apr 10, 2014 21:26:10 GMT -5 Shizensky said:

I really had no idea the resistance was supposed to suit a vote. As I said, I never actually had an opportunity to do so, even when I finally ended up on a team. It always just made sense that I didn't have to, I assumed it was implied by the rules.

I am completely up to speed now, however.

Apr 10, 2014 21:45:06 GMT -5 Control said:

For the first time, I'm posting after Shiz and agreeing with him, instead of him doing that to me. I always thought that since Resistance automatically voted yes, they didn't have to vote.

Apr 10, 2014 22:16:35 GMT -5 The Candy Lane said:

Am I a suspect here because I cast my vote before shiz and control? I find that kind of funny since I was just following the rules, which as other's have pointed out, were also used in previous matches. Wouldn't it seem more likely that a spy would want to draw the vote out as he thought over his/their strategy? The other thing is that there could've been no spies on the team and Ardreas was just waiting for the votes as per the rules, but I guess only Ardreas knows that for sure.

Well to be fair it does say in both the game starting post and the mission starting post to message Ardreas (and OP states that the mission ends when all the messages have been received) so it's a bit strange that so many seem to be confused about the rule.

[Barry]

I'm sorry if there's any confusion over whether pm's have to be submitted by team members. But Random cites one part of the OP that is specifically underlined and I thought it was pretty clear.

Another section reads: "Each member of the selected team is to PM me their choice of whether the mission at hand is to succeed or fail. Resistance team members MUST vote for the mission to succeed. Spies may vote for success or failure. After all PMs have been received, I will compare the votes to the requirements for that particular round and announce whether the mission is a success or failure."

In the table top version -- especially if the "host" is also a player in the game -- it's clear why you would physically have put your "succeed" card in the center if you're a Resistance member. In our forum version you need to do it so that your role can't be determined by following the log-in times....For example, let's say I'm Resistance and put on a team. The Host calls for the votes. Then I don't vote or log-in between the time the Host calls for the votes and announces the result of the mission. Someone can check my log-in activity, see that I didn't log-in and could not have sent a pm to the Host, so the Host had to have counted me as a required "succeed" voting Resistance member.

As Host last game, I didn't run into a problem. With the first two missions, both the spies and resistance members pm'd me their votes. Again, in the 3rd and final mission, I didn't wait for the resistance members to pm me, since the game was over when the spy failed the mission and I saw it when logging in -- there was no reason to drag the ending out. I'm sorry if my doing that caused anyone any confusion in this game.  

[Randomain]

Apr 11, 2014 5:22:20 GMT -5 Barry said:

In the table top version -- especially if the "host" is also a player in the game -- it's clear why you would physically have put your "succeed" card in the center if you're a Resistance member. In our forum version you need to do it so that your role can't be determined by following the log-in times....For example, let's say I'm Resistance and put on a team. The Host calls for the votes. Then I don't vote or log-in between the time the Host calls for the votes and announces the result of the mission. Someone can check my log-in activity, see that I didn't log-in and could not have sent a pm to the Host, so the Host had to have counted me as a required "succeed" voting Resistance member.

And this is why I'm like 99% sure Shiz is resistance. I wasn't online myself at the time so I cant know if he was but it looks like there's no posts by Shiz anywhere between the time when Ardreas posted that Control and Shiz hven't PM'd him and when he ended the mission phase with success.

[Barry]

And I think Control is most likely Resistance because he posted the question.

Apr 10, 2014 13:39:37 GMT -5 Control said:

Just to clarify, Ardreas, are you asking Resistance members to vote as well?

I believe he thought he didn't have to vote.

[Aersoldorf]

Fine, I'll bite

Vote: For

[Ardreas]

Ok, well now that that's clear as mud

Voting currently stands at 2 For 3 Against. Unless I missed any votes.

[Control]

I think Shiz is most likely resistance, and I know I am. I am inclined to think that CL is a spy because of his prompt vote, but he could have simply paid a bit more attention. However, I think our best bet is to give this team a shot, and lock W&S and CL out of the future teams if it fails.

Vote: FOR

[Aersoldorf]

That's pretty much what I'm thinking too

[Randomain]

As I said earlier and with added above reasons I'll, too go for

Vote: For

[Ater Nox]

I don't know, I guess we could give it a go and see what happens. Vote: For

[The Candy Lane]

Fine, I'll bite

Vote: For

really Aerso? usually you put a bit more thought into your posted votes, that's kinda suspicious looking.

The last team worked, I get why the fingers are pointing at me but I of course disagree. I'm definitely resistance through and through. If there is one or more spy on this team the worst that can happen is we end up tied, the other case is they could pass this mission as well - though I doubt they'd risk that at this point - and try earn our trust. I will side with the Majority here.

Vote For

[Aersoldorf]

I've already stated my reasons. If the team fails - we lock you and W&S out and try again

[The Candy Lane]

Aw come on Aerso, where's the trust?