Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The Resistance - Game IV

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Update

Team of tamius23, Falc, jpr123, and RepBentley is APPROVED 5-4

APPROVE: jpr123, Falc, tamius23, marty99, esemesas

REJECT: Cymsdale, Xarkan, gliomarto, citizen1oo1

esemesas and citizen1001 have voted by PM

gliomarto has changed his vote by PM

NV:RepBentley


Mission 3 was a SUCCESS. There were no Sabotages.

with 3 Successful Missions, the True Resistance has won.


Resistance Victory




Like last time, I'll hold off on announcing the spies' identities.



 
Huh, I'm kind of disappointed it wasn't sabotaged...

Wait I'm confused... Ese accepted the team? But Bentley didn't sabotage it? I thought Ese was one of the spies...

Cyms and Glio are probably spies, I suspect Xarkan is as well. I thought the last was Ese but perhaps I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
Nope JPR. I was not a spy.

I'm not proud of this win, because the only reason we did win was because of the ridiculous handling of non-votes (for two of the missions!).
 
Yeah, Ese's vote is surprising.
But I'm more surprised nor Marty neither Cyms used no confidence, I was certain they were spies.
 
I will say that this game may have anti-climatic but I still stand by the handling of non-votes, with the partial exception that the final count here might have possibly been held off longer. That is, I'm still ok with having no votes count neither way, at least under the set of rules for this particular game, but a decision had to be made with regard to how long to wait for the last vote.
 
Cliges said:
I will say that this game may have anti-climatic but I still stand by the handling of non-votes, with the partial exception that the final count here might have possibly been held off longer. That is, I'm still ok with having no votes count neither way, at least under the set of rules for this particular game, but a decision had to be made with regard to how long to wait for the last vote.
Click to expand...

It's completely wrong, and I'm not going to participate in a game with such NV handling. It's supposed to be HARD to get enough consensus for a mission to be pushed forward, and the handling of NV's likely caused mission approvals that would not have been approved otherwise. You handed us a win we might not have gotten otherwise.
 
Cymsdale said:
It's completely wrong, and I'm not going to participate in a game with such NV handling. It's supposed to be HARD to get enough consensus for a mission to be pushed forward, and the handling of NV's likely caused mission approvals that would not have been approved otherwise. You handed us a win we might not have gotten otherwise.
Click to expand...

I don't say that it ought to be codified permanently into the way it was handled, but making it into a default reject without having such an idea explicitly stated for this game's rule set didn't seem quite right.

But, if you don't mind spoilers, I could say a few things privately in PM that might make my position look a little bit more reasonable.
 
Actually, I believe the better handling would be this: Teams can be approved only by an absolute majority, that is 51+% of votes, not by the relative majority. In our case, unless there are 6 approvals, team can't go.
 
My mind was too out of the game. Sent in the Approve as a standing order because I forgot who the spies were. Forgot about the game later :D
 
gliomarto said:
Actually, I believe the better handling would be this: Teams can be approved only by an absolute majority, that is 51+% of votes, not by the relative majority. In our case, unless there are 6 approvals, team can't go.
Click to expand...

Well I agree, but defaulting votes to reject essentially is the same thing as what you described.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back