• 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.

Voting must be done in private for the first Mission. Reason is that most players know and assume Mission 1 will go all the way to proposal 4 or even 5, so some players have started making random votes in Mission 1. It is my hope that private voting will have the same effect of breaking predictable patterns.
 
Health was Team Leader and proposed: Health, Hazbot
  • 3 votes REJECT: Panzer Commader, AsdfeZxcas, aedan777
  • 3 votes APPROVE: Health, jeray2000, Hazbot

Proposal is REJECTED 3-3

@jeray2000 is the next Team Leader and must make a proposal of 2 players.

Mission modifier remains, ie. all votes must be made in private.

JermanTK has managed to make his way through all the paperwork and may now be included in proposals. He must also vote from now on.
 
jeray2000
Hazbot

Working off the logic I know that I'm Resistance, so I'm clear. If Health is a spy, he wouldn't want to associate himself with other spies so Hazbot likely wouldn't be a spy. If Health is resistance, then his guess at who is not a spy is equally good as mine, i.e completely random. If there are flaws in my logic, I'd be glad to here them, I am new to Resistance.
 
Voted
 
VOTED
 
jeray2000
Hazbot

Working off the logic I know that I'm Resistance, so I'm clear. If Health is a spy, he wouldn't want to associate himself with other spies so Hazbot likely wouldn't be a spy. If Health is resistance, then his guess at who is not a spy is equally good as mine, i.e completely random. If there are flaws in my logic, I'd be glad to here them, I am new to Resistance.

It's really not about "associating" yourselves since mission 1 only needs one sabotage to fail so if you're a spy and you're on it you really don't care who's with you - you don't need another spy, it's pretty much random. But putting a resistance member on does have the one advantage of gaining you more votes. Because usually, a proposing spy can count on the approvals of his spymates and the other members of his team, so the less overlap between them the better.

eg: A, B and C are spies in a game with players A, B, C, D, E, F and G. If A proposes a team of A and B, he would expect to get the following approvals:

A(on the team), B (on the team, spymate) and C(spymate)

If he proposes instead A and D he'd get:

A(on the team), B(spymate), C(spymate) and D(on the team)

Of course it's rarely that simple. Sometimes random resistance members will approve just because, sometimes spies will reject a team with one of theirs on it for some reason or other, but in general, it's a good idea as a spy, if you want your team passed and expect it might be, to put a non-spymate on, but to maximize votes rather than from fear of association.

The "if you expect the team to be passed" is important too, since this is a special variant. You shouldn't forget Jerman wasn't allowed to vote or be on the team. If he's a spy, it's very unlikely the spies could've gotten a team passed then and if Health was a spy, he might have wanted to put the last spy on to give him goodie points then. If German isn't and Health is, this might've been a golden opportunity for the spies to get a team passed with one less opposing vote, so that *would* make Hazbot a likely resistance member.

And of course, if Health wasn't a spy which is actually the most likely(4/7), then his choice of a teammate means nothing at all.

TL;DR, Mission 1 votes still useless for analysis. There might be a 0.1% increased chance of Hazbot being Resistance, but that's about it.
 
Voted
 
Hmm. I see the logic in jeray's proposal. If Health is a spy, he doesn't need another spy on the team. Too early to draw conclusions, though.

Voted
 
Right then:

Hazbot
Panzer

I can trust myself, Panzer not so much although I thought it would be more useful to propose someone who hasn't been proposed before than it would be to repeat a previous proposal.

Voted.
 
Makes sense....I guess.

Voted
 
Voted