-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Sorry explain to me again how I'm a spy? What did I get from rejecting it if I was a spy? And if there are 2 spies on that team why did Falc accept it? I'm happy to be suspected when you have real reasons to suspect me but at the moment all you are jumping on me for secretly changing my vote, something I knew would come out when Cliges posted an update. Hardly a master spy strategy...
Well, this is interesting. Why the same team, tamius? I think most rejections came because of we wanted to see a different team, now we have a different leader, but the team is basically the same.
REJECT
REJECT
I'm leaning more on the side that jpr is not a spy. Changing one's vote when it will be revealed publicly what it is would not be a smart move as a spy. If tamius is a spy, he may be proposing his team based on the crowd leaning the jpr/Falc spy duo, allowing him to slip in a nice single sabatoge.
Reject
Reject
Spies must really hate this team. I think there is a lot of information to be gained from its results.
That's what I'm afraid of myself. I think several resistance members would immediately think I'm a definite spy if this mission was sabotaged and Tamius knows that... That would also make my declaration of Falc being a resistance member worthless.
I agree that we can learn a lot, lets see what we would learn in each situation.
If we have a success, there were either NO spies, or TWO OR MORE spies on the team who did not want to multi-sabotage, either way we get a success under the belt.
If we have a single sabotage, it is likely there was only one spy, and really bad if there was more than one spy and they somehow managed to not double-sabotage.
If we have a multi-sabotage, we are in a nice spot.
Now that I re-think it, we are probably in a good spot, changing my vote:
Change vote to ACCEPT
In the event of immediate use cards coming into play in the future, I think there is no need to give them their own 24 hour period if they are passed and used quickly enough. I'd say by about 22:00 GMT for that-so if it comes up again, the deadline for the next team vote will be extended only if necessary.
As a side note, it looks so far like deadlines for this game aren't a bad idea. I'll ask every new leader to try and propose their team and pass cards if they have them as soon as they can after each deadline/update occurs.
As a side note, it looks so far like deadlines for this game aren't a bad idea. I'll ask every new leader to try and propose their team and pass cards if they have them as soon as they can after each deadline/update occurs.
Accept
I'm still not convinced by anyone about what will occur during the mission. We will only learn something by pushing a mission through no matter what.
I'm still not convinced by anyone about what will occur during the mission. We will only learn something by pushing a mission through no matter what.
I'm trying to get either no spies or two. As far as I'm concerned, if there's only one spy, it must be jpr, but it's more likely either both Falc and jpr are spies or neither of them are.
Last edited:
Falc can't be a spy if I'm resistance as he revealed his role to me. If he is a spy then I must be too.
I'm wondering if this is just stupid or a Spy getting his lies mixed up.
This.
REJECT
I can't really see why your arguments should show that this team is good, they are kinda valid for any and all team of 3.
That is to say, I can totally see the only spy still not sabotaging to keep us confused.
Small point of math and logic:
While eliminating possibilities is fine and valid, simply counting how many times a given name shows up and using that as a meter of how likely someone is a spy, really isn't valid.
Proof in point:
There's 210 possible Spy combinations for a 10 man game.
Each name shows up 84 times, giving a ratio of 84/210 or 4/10. Correct so far.
But!
By vouching for me, JPR eliminates all the possibilities where I'm a Spy and he's not.
That leaves 154 possibilities.
JPR's name still appears 84 times.
Mine is down to 28.
Everyone else is at 63.
In percentages, that's:
JPR: 55%
Others: 41%
Me: 18%
Now, okay, that I'm a less likely Spy makes sense, right? But what on earth has JPR done wrong to warrant him now being more likely a Spy than not? Nothing, right? That's what doesn't make sense and that's why simply counting occurrences of names is NOT a valid approach.
While eliminating possibilities is fine and valid, simply counting how many times a given name shows up and using that as a meter of how likely someone is a spy, really isn't valid.
Proof in point:
There's 210 possible Spy combinations for a 10 man game.
Each name shows up 84 times, giving a ratio of 84/210 or 4/10. Correct so far.
But!
By vouching for me, JPR eliminates all the possibilities where I'm a Spy and he's not.
That leaves 154 possibilities.
JPR's name still appears 84 times.
Mine is down to 28.
Everyone else is at 63.
In percentages, that's:
JPR: 55%
Others: 41%
Me: 18%
Now, okay, that I'm a less likely Spy makes sense, right? But what on earth has JPR done wrong to warrant him now being more likely a Spy than not? Nothing, right? That's what doesn't make sense and that's why simply counting occurrences of names is NOT a valid approach.
Well, to be fair, he did nothing wrong, he simply gave us information that
So, if we suppose that all possibilities have equal weight (which we have no reason to), then his chances of being a spy are really going up. This may seem odd to some from the point of common sense, but is perfectly legal from math point.
I'm not saying the math is wrong, I'm saying it's the wrong approach for playing the game.
I disagree. I think it has its place and can help if we are low on ideas. Clearly it's useless this early on, but later when there are far fewer possible teams we can get a good idea using it as well as other methods, such as looking at team proposals and peoples behaviour, of which people are more likely to be spies. I don't think there's any one method that can be used in this game to accurately tell who all the spies are.
I only skimmed your post, but I agree with it because of this conclusion. Counting instances of names is not proper analysis. At best, it's simply something to do when you have no other information, but it can easily lead you down the wrong path.