Bored Bump for Bookwyrm:

"Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him."

Also, screw you for making me move my bottle of sherry cask finished whiskey to pull out that book. I couldn't remember if it was "I knew him" or "I knew him well."

My money was on "well" ... I was wrong.

Also, I miss Krypsyn!

yes, of course...

I just didn't articulate every single angle of what I was saying/elaborate the whole thought because it branches into a bunch of possibilities/contingencies, I was just posing the basic concept and wondering what others thought about "playing" it that way. It's not like I'm even proposing that we actually do that at this point, I just don't see a lot to talk about, but there are some things, sooo, *shrug*, I thought that was an interesting one. What else we doing?

I haven't seen him on/around in a bit, I'm on the fringes of beginning to become concerned.

So, question to our 3 naysayers: Why did you vote no? Any particular reason, or just a "reject the first proposal" thing?

Probably not. Since it would exclude (at least) one of them from future missions. But since they need only three fails to win (as we need only three successes) they might decide to risk it, if only one spy is on the team. Or more precisely: that hypothetical one spy might risk to 'sacrifice' himself to get one 'win' under their belt.
Don't forget: the modus operandi is somewhat different from Mafia. We don't have to find out every single spy to win. We just have to succeed three times and succeeding the first mission is a good start. But if it should fail after all, I know two persons I will vote against on future missions (though probably no captain will dare to include the three of us in any team anyhow, should this mission fail), and that's a good start too.

Voting Yes when you are unsure if you trust everyone on the team is like voting no lynch in normal mafia day 1 - you don't get enough data. Or it's similar to hammering too fast... the comparisons are not perfect.

More team proposals mean yes votes to look at and patterns to emerge of the spies trying to support themselves.

Basically I vote yes only when I'm fairly sure of a team, or want to mess with someone's head, or it's the deadline team choice (unless the team captain choosing that one is someone I think is a spy, in which case L -2 becomes the new L -1).

So it's not a reject the first proposal thing. It's a reject most proposals thing. :) You can try the approve all unless you have really strong distrust tack. Tell me how it went when we're done. ;)

So, what you are doing now, is what I would be doing the other way around normally - asking you why the heck you trust Lift and Hijack that much. But too many of you voted yes, so let's see what happens.


@ all

Most of you that are thinking failing the first mission is not normal strategy are somewhat correct. But if Lift or Hijack are spies, I expect they would fail this anyway.

@ Lift, Hijack

Prove me wrong lads will'ya? :)

Quick check in.

Brasas has a point. While it's true that any team for the moment is more or less an equal guess in picking loyal resistance members and not spies, maybe we did accept too fast. A few more team proposals may have given us a perspective on who favors which players.

Kindly explain to me how you see the future missions going, if the rest of us (6 of us, likely two spies) decide to never approve a team with any of the three of you? The mission with 5 people and needing one fail becomes mathematically impossible to pass. It's not a good start at all...

How did Yog put it? Finger of suspicion -> Lift ;)

Thank you. As I said, this is my first Resistance game, so it does help to have someone who knows a bit more explain what the possible strategies are.
Then again, I do recall Dewmi Moore's explanations of the rules to "Liar's Dice" in Leisure Suit Larry 7: Love for Sail.

Don't blame me. I'm a ninja right now. The tombstone was, like, two avatars ago.

I also thought it was "well". Oh well.

Just in case it isn't clear: only the very first captain is assigned randomly. After that, it follows the player list (RL version would have it being passed around the table).

I'll try to stop harping on rules when the first mission ends. I just want to clear any potential misunderstandings as early as possible.

OK. I can see the sense in me, as the captain, failing the mission if I were a spy, to cast a bad light on the other two.
But why do you single out HijacK as wanting to fail the mission, but not JMich? What's the difference between these two? Do you have more information on JMich than the rest of us?

But considering Mission 5, you are right. That WILL fail if any spy is on the team, so we'll have to try to make sure to only send loyal resistance there and that might make including one from Team 1 necessary as well. Difficult. But you seem to have quite some experience in this kind of game, right?

But if this Mission fails, at least I will know that either HijacK or JMich (or both) is a spy. Though that certainty will not be useful to any of you others, since you cannot just trust me on that.

Vitek and I are sitting on the patio watching Krypsyn attempt to burn his house down.

I told him I know a guy, but he insists on doing it himself.

The longer I look at your comment, the funnier it gets.

Another quick check in.

Some paranoid possibility: if Lifthrasil is a loyalist, what if one of the four captains (after Lifthrasil) is a spy? What if there are two spies in that list? Or even all bloody three?!

What I am trying to say is that not only we must do our best in determining the crew for each mission, but the captain as well.

And if captain's proposed team for the mission is rejected, the choice for that mission's team goes to another captain, right? I am on the phone, it's just easier to ask.