The Resistance - Game IV

[Cliges]

My thoughts exactly. Why do you think the game puts the spies at an advantage? Sure the last two games have went that way, but its far too small a sample number to comment on. What's the ratio of results like on the original forum(s)?

The Resistance has far less room for error as with the one exception, missions fail with a single sabotage.

The Spies also know each other, so they can act with a bit more security than the Resistance. While no PM means they can't truly coordinate in the usual sense, the can make safer guesses about how things will unfold.

I don't really know what things are like in other venues.

 

[Cymsdale]

Well I just thought that was a pretty balanced card. It's not really an insta-win for the resistance because they have to target it correctly, and a spy can know if they are targeted and end up dodging it. Plus, plot cards can be neutralized easily when they end up in the hands of a spy.

 

[Cliges]

It is a thought, I wouldn't rule it out completely.

 

[marty99]

The Resistance has far less room for error as with the one exception, missions fail with a single sabotage.

The Spies also know each other, so they can act with a bit more security than the Resistance. While no PM means they can't truly coordinate in the usual sense, the can make safer guesses about how things will unfold.

I don't really know what things are like in other venues.

Simple way to test it, look at the win ratios on other forums with the current rule-set.
Your logic seems sound, but if it disagrees with observation...commit it to the flames

Well I just thought that was a pretty balanced card. It's not really an insta-win for the resistance because they have to target it correctly, and a spy can know if they are targeted and end up dodging it. Plus, plot cards can be neutralized easily when they end up in the hands of a spy.

What exactly do you mean by 'dodging it'? I mean, I agree it can of course be used for the spies' advantage, but I think overall the potential benefits to the resistance are greater. That just seems obvious to me, but again, if we have data I'd much rather go by that.



Seriously, anyone know how one could go about collecting data from past games?

 

[AtreyuAtreides]

Anymore spots? If So i'm in

 

[marty99]

Anymore spots? If So i'm in

Yeah, you're the eightth player, room for two more!

Still don't know if randy's playing...did he mention it earlier?

 

[jpr123]

In!

 

[Ranger900]

In for final spot!

 

[Cliges]

In if there is room

Yes, you're the 10th spot.

 

[Cliges]

Simple way to test it, look at the win ratios on other forums with the current rule-set.
Your logic seems sound, but if it disagrees with observation...commit it to the flames

Well, I know that it is played on other forums, but I don't know which rules they use. Nor do I really know much else about it, really, including who wins most often, etc.

 

[jpr123]

I think one thing that worked against the resistance last game was that there were 7 players, 3 of whom were spies, which is the highest proportion of spies to resistance members you can have. Hopefully with 10 it's a tad easier... Then again it might be easier for the spies to hide. I guess we will find out.

 

[marty99]

I think one thing that worked against the resistance last game was that there were 7 players, 3 of whom were spies, which is the highest proportion of spies to resistance members you can have. Hopefully with 10 it's a tad easier... Then again it might be easier for the spies to hide. I guess we will find out.

That's a good point which I had meant to make earlier. In fact, the difference between, for instance, a 7-player game and a 9-player game is possibly quite large. They both have 3 spies but one has 4 resistance, the other 6 (of course an eight player game is wedged between, also with 3 spies). There is a difference in that the 9-player setup requires one more player for each mission, but is that enough to compensate? It may be or it may not be. I honestly don't know, and I don't think we can know until we have more data.
However, we do know, surely that the 10-player setup favours the spies more than a 9-player set-up does, as nothing changes except the addition of an extra spy for the 10-player setup. However, a 9-player setup seems highly likely to favour resistance more than the 8-player setup, as the only difference aside from an extra resistance player is one more plot card for 9-players. And I think plot cards on the whole don't favour spies significantly enough to balance that.


I'm not saying necessarily there's anything wrong with the variation, just expanding on jp's point and noting that number of players can make a significant difference to the odds.




And let's remember, the resistance could still have won the last game, and I'm not too sure about the one before but I think they had a chance to win it too. There's no reason to suggest the game is unbalanced because of two/three wins in a row. It may yet be unbalanced, but we need a lot more games to say that with confidence.




Resistance wins will come. I don't think there's a need to change things just yet, although if you make the change I wouldn't particularly mind it either.

 

[Cliges]

Ok, so since we're full, we can start tomorrow (why not?). I'm thinking about 17-20:00 GMT as the deadline.

I'll determine roles and leader order and those will go out tomorrow. 1 Take Responsibility and 1 Keeping a Close Eye on You are going to replace the 2 Opinion Maker Cards.

Team Approval and Mission will take place simultaneously. That means players pre-load their mission order if they are on the proposed team. Players can change team vote and mission order up until deadline (whatever it turns out to be). Spies' mission orders will default to SABOTAGE if they do not send an order before deadline.


Most likely deadline will be at 18:00 GMT. That is regular GMT, not any of the various summer times or Daylight Savings Times that occur around the world.

No PMs between players in this game. PMs to the GM are fine. Spies will know the identities of the other Spies, but they cannot PM each other.

If anyone wants to sign on to sub, feel free. We almost needed one the last game.

 

[unmerged(281782)]

By the way, I take it with deadlines combined players have to announce they will play In the Spotlight before team is approved, and preload via PM Keeping a Close Eye on You before a team is approved as well.

 

[Cliges]

Yes, though unless it states otherwise or needs to be done in the open out of necessity, a player can play a card without saying so publicly.

 

[randakar]

Will you be joining us, randy?

Not today ;-)

Yeah, you're the eightth player, room for two more!

Still don't know if randy's playing...did he mention it earlier?

Nope.

By the way, I take it with deadlines combined players have to announce they will play In the Spotlight before team is approved, and preload via PM Keeping a Close Eye on You before a team is approved as well.

Yes, though unless it states otherwise or needs to be done in the open out of necessity, a player can play a card without saying so publicly.

If I may suggest, it may be wise to put a table in the first post describing, step by step, what happens at the deadline.

Something like:

Deadline:
1) Team is approved / rejected

If APPROVED:
2) Mission support vote is tallied and takes effect
3) Plot card A resolves, if played. (Looking at someone's mission support order, can't be bothered to look up which that is)
4) ....
5) Phase ends, results are posted and team building phase restarts.

Team building phase
1) Next leader gets plot cards, if applicable, and distributes them.
2) All "Use immediately" plot cards resolve.
3) Team leader proposes next team
4) New round of votes

etc.

 

[Cliges]

Not today ;-)



Nope.






If I may suggest, it may be wise to put a table in the first post describing, step by step, what happens at the deadline.

Something like:

Deadline:
1) Team is approved / rejected

If APPROVED:
2) Mission support vote is tallied and takes effect
3) Plot card A resolves, if played. (Looking at someone's mission support order, can't be bothered to look up which that is)
4) ....
5) Phase ends, results are posted and team building phase restarts.

Team building phase
1) Next leader gets plot cards, if applicable, and distributes them.
2) All "Use immediately" plot cards resolve.
3) Team leader proposes next team
4) New round of votes

etc.

I will clarify the new processes, rule changes, etc, before we start in earnest.

Roles will go out today or tomorrow, and the game can start in earnest at that point with the first deadline being the day after whichever of those is the first.

 

[randakar]

Clarifying is fine, but please update the first page with it as well.
That way there is only *one* place to look for the rules, and it's crystal clear what happens when.
With this early run of games, it's doubly important that we get the first page *right*.

 

[Cliges]

Yes, I'l be sure to do that.

Resolution of cards shouldn't be too much of a problem. I'm thinking that if anyone plays a No Confidence, any cards played relating to the mission itself will simply be considered unplayed and players keep them, and it will not be revealed that people attempted to use them (unless the player feels like saying so in the thread itself).

No Confidences and Strong Leaders will be treated as first come, first served based on the time they are sent to me. That is, the first one played per day goes into effect and any other of the same card is unplayed and the player keeps it. Again, only the one that actually gets to go into effect will be mentioned in the update and the others will only be revealed if the player cares to say so in public. Also, it won't be revealed to the second player (or third, for that matter) trying to use one of the same cards that another has played it until the update. Whether or not anyone wants to say they are going to play a card in public is their own choice, which means that someone can try to bluff and prevent another from playing a card by insisting falsely that he has played one of the same already.

 

[randakar]

Yes, I'l be sure to do that.

Resolution of cards shouldn't be too much of a problem. I'm thinking that if anyone plays a No Confidence, any cards played relating to the mission itself will simply be considered unplayed and players keep them, and it will not be revealed that people attempted to use them (unless the player feels like saying so in the thread itself).

So that comes in between the team vote tally and the mission phase, then.
Treating it like that - like an ordered list of events - has the advantage that it makes a lot of implicit thing explicit. Like this "if someone plays that the rest of it doesn't resolve" falls naturally out of the order.

No Confidences and Strong Leaders will be treated as first come, first served based on the time they are sent to me. That is, the first one played per day goes into effect and any other of the same card is unplayed and the player keeps it.

Sounds fine.

Again, only the one that actually gets to go into effect will be mentioned in the update and the others will only be revealed if the player cares to say so in public. Also, it won't be revealed to the second player (or third, for that matter) trying to use one of the same cards that another has played it until the update. Whether or not anyone wants to say they are going to play a card in public is their own choice, which means that someone can try to bluff and prevent another from playing a card by insisting falsely that he has played one of the same already.

lol. That sounds .. 'fun'.
I think this should be treated the same as votes though: Public play counts, private play is an option. Especially with No Confidence - if that is played (publicly or not), there is little reason to continue the phase. Instead we should just abort it, and move on to the next leader. Whoever that might be.