The Resistance V

[Tables]

AND I've just noticed there's a proposal up there. Which is an interesting one.

[Elieson]

I've received almost all the votes. If you know who you are and have not yet done so, submit your vote for Proposal 1.2 please!

[Kriemhild]

So like, I just realized that all the numbers for probabilities that I've been using were for 2-man missions, not 3-man. Sorry about that. Anyhow, if I calculated them correctly, the probabilities for the 3-man mission should be something like:

Uninformed point of view:

Zero Spies = 20%

One Spy = 60%

Two Spies = 20%

If you're included in the team:

0 moles = 30%

1 mole = 60%

2 moles = 10%

If you're not included in the team:

零　スパイ = 10%

一 スパイ　= 60%

二　スパイ = 30%

If my calculations are correct, this means there is a 60% chance of a Spy being in a 3-man from EVERYONE's perspective. Wait, what? I eat tables, do you think you can independently check those numbers? Because those can have quite a significant impact on some opinions to the teams...

[Bluedoom]

eh look I've been real busy and all so I dunno what to say. Perhaps I'll come up with something tomorrow, its a holiday for me anyway.

But I'll confirm that the card going to SlayerX was totally random. Nothing more than that.

[Elieson]

Let's go!

Round Prop [1.2]: Mission [4] by [shinori]

Team: Shinori, scorri, Luster Purge

Yes: Shinori, scorri, Luster Purge, Tableskitty

No: SlayerX, Bluedoom

Result: Yes -4, No - 2

Proposal [Passes]

Mission teammates, please PM me your mission acton.

Edited June 29, 2012 by Elieson

[Elieson]

Mission 1 went surprisingly well.

For the spy team.

Round [1.2]: Mission [4] Results

Co-Operate 2 / Sabotage 1

Mission [Fails]. Score is now Resistance - [0], Spies - [1]

Leadership passes to Tableskitty, who drew the card "In the Spotlight".

Tableskitty, you are up. Pass the card and propose a team.

Edited June 29, 2012 by Elieson

[Shinori]

So from my current eyes either proto or scorri is a spy. Now it's time to reread all this stuff between tables and proto because I can't help but feel I got some sort of buddying read from them. I guess Scorri though is giving her normal scumtell and not talking all that much though.

[scorri]

Well then. That's unfortunate. However, it tells us that at least one of Shinori and Proto is a Spy, at least FMPOV.

From here, as I see it, it would probably be best to either do a two man mission including none of the three people who were just on the mission, or do a four person mission including me. However, since you guys can't know for sure I'm resistance, and since from at least a couple people's points of view, I was less trusted than Shinori and Proto, I can understand if I'm not on the team. However, I will say this. I will be extremely wary of voting for a mission that contains either Shinori or Proto as they each have a 50% chance of being a spy FMPOV.

Currently, the mission I'd be the most in favor of would be either a two team mission composed of Tables and Slayer with the in the spotlight card played on one of them if possible, or a two team mission composed of me and someone else, once again with the in the spotlight card played on one person. The reason for this is that even though this doesn't really give us much more info, it almost guarantees a mission for us. Either that, or it gives us a 100% certain on a spy. If we had passed the last round, I'd say hold off on this move until we had one loss, but I don't want to put it off now because if we lose another mission this ploy will be useless.

Also Shinori, I see that you're saying that my scumtell is out and about but in fact, I'm at work. It's a lot easier for me to talk on IRC than it is for me to post here because IRC takes 30 seconds while this takes time to write stuff out. While I'm at home, I'll be more talkative, but I really just don't have a lot to say, and therefore don't want to talk a lot of time out of work to write down stuff that doesn't mean a lot.

[Shinori]

ITS card DOES NOT give us a 100% townie. The only truthful info it would give us is if someone is 100% scum. Let's put it this way.

X, Y, and Z do a 3 man mission, the card is used on X, X chooses to sabotage openly in front of everyone and before everyone. The ONLY way this gives us two garunteed town is if we use marth, tables, and slayer. Because if we land on the sabatour in that situation and they sabotage we would know since the first spy is among the first 3 and if he chose to sabotage he would be scum and it would give us 3 garunteed town, however that then puts us at only having 2 4 man missions and a 2 man mission left. And that also only gives us that info if we give the card to the spy correctly. If X flips chooses to support but y or Z sabotage then it's a 50/50% chance and we have a garunteed town, however if no one sabotages we know technically nothing. Unless there were two spies in the first mission compared to 1 spy, which i doubt.

But lets say for all purposes they sabotage in the open, and we get two confirmed townies. Now they do the 2 man mission and put us at a 1-2 scenario in points. That's not all that good. With only 4 man missions left we have 2 confirmed town and then 2 other people which is going to be based off of the first mission which was just sabotaged. and if we get the other spy on there, which is about 66% chance of that happening, we lose. We can't afford to necessarily do that. putting us at a 0-2 scenario right now would be BAD. We need to win the next mission from my PoV.

However going back to something mentioned previously, marth giving slayer the card. This makes me feel better about slayer, it could be marth giving the card to someone randomly that wasn't his scum buddy if he was scum. However he could be a townie giving it to somone randomly, which brought me to look at the first mission proposal brought up by marth.

Me, scorri, and marth. Now me and scorri were on the completed mission with a sabotage, there is a 50% change that scorri was scum from that perspective but why would marth, if he's scum, put his own scum buddy on the team, unless this was a subtle hint as to tell her to do the sabotage, which still seems stupid from my perspective. So from this IF marth was to be scum, I would call it as marth/proto as the current scum team.

However if marth was town that means slayer could be scum, and it goes back to a 50/50 from my perspective on proto/scorri.

[scorri]

I uh, never said that the ITS would give us a 100% townie. Please read what I said. I said that either it would give us a passed mission, or it would give us a 100% scum and 2 100% townie *if* we used it with two people who were not on the last mission. If we did a two man mission with, let's say, Tables and Marth. We used ITS on Tables. Tables doesn't sab the mission, but the mission is sab'd anyways. That means Marth is 100% scum, Tables is clear because he wasn't on the first sab'd mission, and Slayer is clear because he wasn't on the first sab'd mission. That would of course, not be the ideal situation since there's a 33% chance the third person on the next mission will be a spy from the cleared people's views, or a 50% chance FMPOV if I'm not the one chosen.

However, if the spies choose to not sab the mission, then it's tied 1-1 and the odds are exactly the same as they were before. This is, I think, the best use of the ITS card because it gives us a better chance at getting the two person mission passed and if the two person mission fails, it gives us the maximum information.

[Shinori]

The only issue is that if we use it on a 3 man mission it doesn't garuntee that unless we land it on the spy himself. And the chances of that is 33%

[scorri]

I never talked about using it on a 3 person mission. I specifically said that we should use it on a two man mission. Please go back and read what I said.

[Shinori]

I uh, never said that the ITS would give us a 100% townie. Please read what I said. I said that either it would give us a passed mission, or it would give us a 100% scum and 2 100% townie *if* we used it with two people who were not on the last mission.

Isn't this part in accordance to a 3 man mission?

[Shinori]

Oh no I understand what you say in accordance to a 2 man mission. I was talking about 3 man mission though in specific.

[Shinori]

However if we used it on a 2 man mission with the 3 people who weren't on the first sabotaged mission that does not mean that we have 1 scum and two town. Let's say they all support, what if none of those 3 is actually a scum and in all relity there is 2 scum on the first mission proposal, I doubt this, but i figured I would state it.

[scorri]

Then we're in the scenario where I said we don't know anything for sure, but we have a passed mission so we can move on from there in a better position than where we are now.

[scorri]

Also, I really don't think a 3 man mission is in our best interest right now. I will most likely support only a two man mission used in accordance with the ITS card at least for the first few suggested missions.

[Tables]

Well, this isn't the worst case scenario from the first mission, I think (worst is no sabotage but there was a spy).

I think I like Scorri's plan, but I need to think carefully about it. It guarantees us a mission, or gives us a lot of information, either of which is good.

Alright, I've looked back. Shinori's proposal seems based on what had a majority consensus, which makes me somewhat still comfortable about him. On the other hand if I assume he's a spy, what he did would also make sense, choosing two of the people more considered resistance, with himself on the mission, which would make it likely to pass (especially given I'd said I was likely to vote yes). And... actually, this makes more LESS comfortable. Hmm...

Proto: Regarding your probabilities, for a 3 man mission:

To an uninformed observer:

0 spies: 20%

1 spy: 60%

2 spies: 20%

If you are in the mission (non-spy):

0 spies: 30%

1 spy: 60%

2 spies: 10%

If you're not (non-spy):

0 spies: 10%

1 spy: 60%

2 spies: 30%

So yeah, regardless of if you are on the mission the chance of their being one spy stays the same, but the chance of their being no spies changes considerably. But I... don't hugely see the relevance of these numbers actually.

Looking back at Scorri: I like her proposals, they seem to make sense. As a spy, it's... a way of getting little extra information into the game I guess? She did make the 'that was unfortunate' statement, which definitely raises my suspicions as spies, especially ones who know the mission would be sabotaged (equivalently in mafia, knowing who was going to die) are far more likely to say it. If Scorri is a spy, she was happy for the hypothetical mission with Slayer on (Mission E), but not one without herself or Slayer. From everyone else's perspective, this applies equally well to myself. On the other hand, mission A would suggest I was the spy from us two, and then mission C means... Well, if Scorri and Slayer are both spies, this could well be a prod that Slayer was supposed to sabotage it. But overall, assuming Scorri is a spy seems to make more questions than answers, so I'm less suspicious of her.

Finally Proto. He hasn't said much since the mission, so I don't have much more of a read on him. The fact this mission was sabotaged obviously raised my suspicions on all three of them, Proto included, and means that only one of Marth and Slayer could be a spy (from my point of view, very likely exactly one).

So I think Scorri is now my strongest town read, followed by... I'm not sure out of Proto and Shinori, and both Marth and Slayer need to talk more.

I'm very tempted to implement Scorri's plan. Any objections? Anyone think of something better to do?

[Kriemhild]

Elieson, it was Shinori that proposed it, not Bluedoom. Also, can we please have the mission results in the second post?

Anyhow, I kinda expected the mission to be sabotaged, which now leads us to partition the players in groups of three. Shinori, scorri, and Proto in one group, and Blues, Slayer, and I eat tables in the other. Each group likely contains 1 Spy, with the possibility of the first group having two. For the first group, I can't see much difference between Shinori and Scorri here since their votes have been completely identical so far. Shinori was the one who proposed the mission though, but it doesn't mean much to me at this point.

From the second group, the fact that I eat tables voted Yes while Blues/Slayer voted No finally lets me form an opinion on I eat tables' alignment. Here's the thing, the second Spy knew that the first Spy was in the proposed team, so I would expect this second Spy to vote No for the mission, to avoid being interrogated as to why they would support a mission that they weren't included in that also got sabotaged. This makes I eat tables look more like Resistance imo.

As for what to do next, scorri's plan seems to be pretty good and it's definitely the best way to use a 2-man mission. What I'm unsure of is whether it's the best use of the In The Spotlight card. We most definitely have to use it RIGHT now since it's useless when Spies have two points, and 2-man would work better than 3-man. As scorri pointed out, if the 2-man mission is sabotaged anyways, we would 100% confirm the identity of one Spy, but it tells us nothing about the players in the other group, which could be troublesome when we have to go through a 3-man right after it which must be a success, as well as the 4-man that follows it (Mission 5, if we ever get there, would be an auto-success since Spies would auto-sabotage Mission 3).

If we went with a 3-man mission instead, then even if it's a failure, at least the missions that we need to succeed on will be 2-man and 4-man (as opposed to 3-man and 4-man if we go with 2 now), but the info gained from a 3-man ITS sabotage is less conclusive as the 2-man ITS sabotage unless we end up using the card on the Spy. Still though, 2-man has a higher chance of succeeding (since there's a possibility that the Spy won't even be on the mission) so I'm definitely supporting a 2-man ITS over a 3-man ITS.

[Shinori]

I'm not entirely sure why but I have this massive gut feeling that scum team is Proto/Tables. Something really doesn't sit right with me between the two. I should stop being lazy and read it up. I will have to do that, however that being said IET is next lead so he could technically pick something that is helpful for them being scum team, while looking town. I mean if you think about it if we do the 2 man mission and use the card and one of them sabs it then we have a garunteed town and a garunteed scum which will help us in the long run and put us at 0-2 scenario. leaving us with 2 town 1 scum and 3 unspecified with only one mission left to go for scum to win. I REALLY DON'T LIKE THOSE ODDS.

If we do the two man mission and scum sabs it and we get the guess wrong for either a the 3 man or b the 4 man mission then we lose and it's gg and that's that. I really don't like the idea of that. However that being said, if scum doesn't sab it then it's 1-1 and we don't learn anything about any one of the final three, if the mission succeeds we waste a card, get a free point, and don't actually learn anything about who is more scummy or more town-like.

Sadly all this being said it's most likely our only idea. But at the current moment I will be declining any two man mission that has either proto or IET until I reread each of their posts in this thread.

[Kriemhild]

Shinori, here's the thing. If we go with a 3-man team that is composed of an entire group that was partitioned in 1.2, then I'm almost certain it'll be sabotaged (unless 1.2 had two Spies and we either pick the sitting 1.2 group with no Spies or the participating 1.2 group where both Spies cooperate hoping the other will sabotage). On the other hand, if we go with a 2-man mission, there is like, a 33% chance that the Spy will be left out, which gives us a 33% chance of a success, with a 100% confirmed Spy if it fails.

So yeah, I'm going to reject any 3-man proposal that uses the an entire 1.2 group. We should go with a 2-man mission. Maybe a 3-man mixing between the groups could be okay, like I Eat Tables + two people from the participating group where one is ITS'd, but eh, 2-man is much better imo.

[Shinori]

I stated that because of that I agree 2 man is probably our best bet, but i really don't like how it will play out, it is our only choice of finding anything. Either we go 1-1 or we go 0-2 with scum ahead and a high chance of losing the game. We will find out. I still think something like a 2 man of slayer/marth is probably best bet. Since people don't trust people in the first group and atm i don't trust proto or tables, I need to reread stuff however and i could be off on that read.

[Bluedoom]

Ok, I'm back, and I see our first mission failed. Info gained- One of Shinori, Proto and Scorri is a spy. Or well, there could be two of them in that mission as well.

I dunno which is more important now, but for info sake I'm leaning on the four man mission- with two from the last mission and two new players into the proposal. I'd want to be in the proposal, but eh.

If we want to tie the scores, we kinda can right now. I think its very unlikely the spies are going to sabotage the two man mission since they'd be giving away their identity this early, so yeah.

[Zanarkin]

Holy crap... I have so much to reread... Thats what i get for buying a new game and getting sucked into it... I'll reread tomorrow morning... I'm going back to play...

[Tables]

From the second group, the fact that I eat tables voted Yes while Blues/Slayer voted No finally lets me form an opinion on I eat tables' alignment. Here's the thing, the second Spy knew that the first Spy was in the proposed team, so I would expect this second Spy to vote No for the mission, to avoid being interrogated as to why they would support a mission that they weren't included in that also got sabotaged. This makes I eat tables look more like Resistance imo.

It's probably a terrible idea for me to do this, but this is pure WIFOM, and I don't think I need to explain why. As either a spy or a Resistance, I'd have had a good reason to vote yes:

1) I get the plot card, which is good regardless of my alignment

2s) The mission will be sabotaged, and I can easily argue away the reasons for my vote

2r) The mission had my three (albeit weak) Resistance reads, making it the most likely mission excluding me to pass. In addition, a failure would give me the valuable information that one of those said reads needed to be corrected.

Obviously, I'm going with 2r over 2s as my reason.

I'm going to ##Give In the Spotlight to Shinori - that bit doesn't really matter, as if whoever I give it to doesn't use it this round, they're auto-spy in my book. I will then ##Propose mission 1 with Myself and Bluedoom

In the long run, I don't think my choices are hugely important to this. I think we probably prefer to pass than have a confirmed 1 spy, 2 Resistance, so I'd like to maximise the chance (FMPOV) of this passing if the vote succeeds. That means myself and one of Bluedoom or Slayer. I think if Blue was a spy he'd have more likely given No Confidence to a spy (it's WIFOM, but I think that's the more likely case), and we know they can't both be spies, so I'm a little more confident in Blue than Slayer.