Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The Resistance 16

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.
Yeah too late now. And The game would be a lot different if that first team had succeeded, though I think this was just a bad village play mostly on me as I was too busy to do anything. Still Good job Spies.

Also thanks for hosting Cliges.
 
tonkatoy5 said:
Also thanks for hosting Cliges.
Click to expand...

Hard to take credit, given what's happen.

randakar said:
How so?
Click to expand...

Either I was defaulting an order based on the first proposed team that was not approved or else I missed (or somehow misinterpreted or misimplemented) Falc's request to not sabotage, but I think it was the first. I guess the one thing that might be salvaged from it is that Falc is right that if he had went with a sabotage, the game would have turned out almost the same from that point.
 
Falc said:
The GM confirms that he did make a mistake.

Now, on the one hand, me not sabotaging the mission would have meant a different game.

On the other hand, it's not as if something happened that was against the rules, it was simply not my intention. The game would have gone 95% the same if I had chosen to sabotage.

Either way, it doesn't change the actual state of the game which is, indeed, won by us Spies as correctly analysed by Panzer.


Now, as for what we can learn:

1) Really, really, really stop accepting teams so easily. After a failed mission, the first proposal goes through? Really?

2) There's nothing wrong with Strong Leader. Yes, it won us the game, but because of a combination of coincidences. Make one change on the leader order and it doesn't guarantee us the win. If just a single extra proposal had been made earlier, it wouldn't have guaranteed us the win...

3) What I do feel we should do is make these landslides less likely. One officially endorsed rule variant that we've never tried is to allow the first Leader of a mission to decide what mission is actually attempted, ie. how many people need to be sent and how many sabotages are needed. I'm not sure we should go all the way, but I do feel that being able to take the 'requires-two-sabotages' mission once you're donw 2-0 allows the Resistance a better fighting chance.
Click to expand...
1) Totally agreed.
2) Totally agreed.
3) Err, while an enticing idea, I have no idea how should this work. What prevents Resistance from choosing every time "requires-two-sabotage" or "takes two players" mission? On the other hand, if the first leader is a Spy, he will make it even less possible for Resistance to come back.

And yes, thanks for hosting, Cliges.
 
gliomarto said:
1) Totally agreed.
2) Totally agreed.
3) Err, while an enticing idea, I have no idea how should this work. What prevents Resistance from choosing every time "requires-two-sabotage" or "takes two players" mission? On the other hand, if the first leader is a Spy, he will make it even less possible for Resistance to come back.

And yes, thanks for hosting, Cliges.
Click to expand...

You would still have the 5 current missions, you only decide the order.
So in the end if all 5 missions were done you'd have had 1 with 3 people, 1 with 5, and 3 with 4 one of which required 2 sabotages. You will always do these 5 missions, what changes is the order
 
You know, Panzer, this team could easily have been approved, or the next one, instead of us either waiting to go through all the phases orthe other team defaulting. This feels less satisfactory. But fair enough, we definitely deserved to win although my contribution to the game is now rendered meaningless.
 
Panzer Commader said:
You would still have the 5 current missions, you only decide the order.
So in the end if all 5 missions were done you'd have had 1 with 3 people, 1 with 5, and 3 with 4 one of which required 2 sabotages. You will always do these 5 missions, what changes is the order
Click to expand...
Oh, I see. Well, it can help somewhat if Spies knowledge of each other is limited, otherwise all it does is stalling for more plot cards. Why don't we give directly bonus plot cards after each sabotaged mission?
 
To hell with your game, Randy. :mad:
 
marty99 said:
You could at least make an effort to understand it :p This game hasn't been the best, but even so it's been interesting to play. Until now, where it's just ruined.
Click to expand...

It's not really "ruined", more like "over"

Really sorry if you wanted to continue, but I saw no point in delaying certain victory. Of course, it could have been fun and I see why you'd think otherwise but I did not really think that much about it, just went ahead and proclaimed the win
 
Panzer Commader said:
It's not really "ruined", more like "over"

Really sorry if you wanted to continue, but I saw no point in delaying certain victory. Of course, it could have been fun and I see why you'd think otherwise but I did not really think that much about it, just went ahead and proclaimed the win
Click to expand...
But as I see you it you delayed victory.
This team was going to be accepted. Two resistance members already approved it. I think if you hadn't done that the game would already be over by now. Now we're waiting to see what the GM thinks of the confusion. And for the resistance to concede defeat they'll need every single person to agree to it.
 
Well, on a strictly practical level, could the game go on from this point? I'm not sure that it could.
 
Reject termination
 
Cliges said:
Well, on a strictly practical level, could the game go on from this point? I'm not sure that it could.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything in the rules that says a leader can't re propose a team... Though would be a douchey way to win.
 
Well the only thing that suprised me here is that Panzer was a spy. Expected this to be a mess that the resistance couldn't win though. Was right to stop caring.
 
marty99 said:
I'm pretty sure that can't happen.
Click to expand...

I was joking/wondering. I've never seen it happen and always assumed it was a unspoken rule but don't think i ever got a conclusive answer.
 
Panzer Commader said:
SL turn passes to me.
Than Marty for the 5th proposal.
Click to expand...
Actually, after you play the Strong Leader it goes to the person it would have if randy had used it. Although that's still Alphabet Soup.


Anyway, setting aside the Strong Leader, I also have No Confidence, keep in mind. This game is over.
 
tonkatoy5 said:
I was joking/wondering. I've never seen it happen and always assumed it was a unspoken rule but don't think i ever got a conclusive answer.
Click to expand...
There doesn't need to be a rule. Given the fact it says after one proposal it passes to the next player, to have a player be able to re-propose a team you'd need that specifically to be allowed in the rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back