Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

The Resistance» Forums » General

Subject: First quest rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Cameron Zemek
Australia
flag msg tools
In our group the first quest (where have to pick 2 people to go on the quest) they always vote up whatever the first leader picks. I can not convince anyone else to vote down the first pick. My friend argues there no information to be gained in the voting for the first quest and its an easy win to just vote the first mission up. There also a tendency for the first mission to never fail even with a spy in it.

I try to break this group think by failing the first quest if I'm a spy but still can not do anything to the majority just always voting up the first quest. Due to the way voting is working in our group I feel if the spies win is largely random on seating position cause there also a tendency to always pick the following player to go on this first quest.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Spy seating does play a large role in determining who wins.

Clearly Avalon helps counter this since Merlin will steer rebels in the right direction.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasi Ojala
Finland
Tampere
flag msg tools
Get the Imperial Assault Campaign module for Vassal from http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:Star_Wars:_Imperial_Assault
badge
The next Total Solar Eclipse holiday in 2024 in USA? See you there!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
grom358 wrote:
I try to break this group think by failing the first quest if I'm a spy

Next step to break group-think: put two spies on M1, then fail it (or randomly pass it).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jack elfrink
United States
McKees Rocks
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Even if there is no info to gain on the mission voting (there is, but lets skip that argument since they are stuck in their way of thinking anyway), there is still info to gain on mission proposals. Who suggests who on a team?

Did Alex put himself and Bob on a team only to have Bob put himself and Alex on a team? Did Charlie put Doug and Eric on a team and not choose himself? Does any of them pick the person coming next in turn order? Coming before them in turn order? There is a ton of info that can be gained from any or all of those situations.

But if the first proposal gets sent out right off the bat, that is only one proposal to gain info from. Even if you ignore how people vote on the proposals (and again, proposal voting DOES contain info but lets just pretend it doesn't), that still means there are four mission proposals that you will never have the opportunity to see.

The more info available, the better off it is for the resistance. So resistance members would want to see "who does he pick for the mission" from as many people as possible. So throw a guilt trip out that only a spy would want to keep mission proposal info to a minimum.

That likely still may not work. You could try starting the game by asking every player at the table "If you had been the start player, who would you pick for a team?". Then vote down proposals yourself and justify it with "Well, I want to see if he would actually propose the mission he claims he would."
4 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron Zemek
Australia
flag msg tools
jackelfrink wrote:
Even if there is no info to gain on the mission voting (there is, but lets skip that argument since they are stuck in their way of thinking anyway), there is still info to gain on mission proposals. Who suggests who on a team?


I have suggested that too.. but the counter argument is mission picking is arbitrary and ends up being always the leader and next player.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasi Ojala
Finland
Tampere
flag msg tools
Get the Imperial Assault Campaign module for Vassal from http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:Star_Wars:_Imperial_Assault
badge
The next Total Solar Eclipse holiday in 2024 in USA? See you there!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
grom358 wrote:
but the counter argument is mission picking is arbitrary and ends up being always the leader and next player.

If it's that, then it is even more important to see how the off-team people are voting. If you are not in the team (of course everyone knows themselves to be good), a team is more probable to have at least one spy, so any off-team accept votes are suspect.

As a leader, propose the next two people (and not yourself), then vote down the team. See what happens.

Spies are happy to put themselves and the next player to a mission. Then they should fail it and accuse the other team member (whether the other member is good or a spy comrade). Failing the first quest gives better chances for the spies to win the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jack elfrink
United States
McKees Rocks
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
grom358 wrote:
I have suggested that too.. but the counter argument is mission picking is arbitrary and ends up being always the leader and next player.
If they are all actually claiming that spies pick members arbitrarily and make no effort to avoid the 'two spies on the same team' trap, then I would have to say the group is beyond hope.

I have been in groups like this too. I have played with groups where the mission voting came back 100% approve and I try and explain that this means the spies voted for the mission and have been thoroughly rejected. With everyone else at the table insisting that a 100% approve vote must be good news for the resistance and that I must be a spy if I am sowing dissent. Just two weeks ago I was playing with a group where in the 'perfect match' missions where resistance members in the game exactly match to the number of players chosen for the mission, people who were not picked for the mission were voting yes. I could not convince anyone that this was spy like behavior.

This game is not for everyone. And that is ok.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alejandro F
Spain
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Maybe it's somewhat subtle but there's an idea. Vote no for the first propossal of the first mission four or more games in a row. Then, as a spy, vote yes. If they don't get paranoid, something is very wrong with your group-think.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eugene Wong
Canada
Surrey
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jackelfrink wrote:
That likely still may not work. You could try starting the game by asking every player at the table "If you had been the start player, who would you pick for a team?". Then vote down proposals yourself and justify it with "Well, I want to see if he would actually propose the mission he claims he would."


I think that that is a good suggestion, because players might be afraid of voting no, but they might be willing to talk about it. It's still important to propose and vote, but since they won't believe it, then getting them to talk before proposing is better than nothing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eugene Wong
Canada
Surrey
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
a1bert wrote:
If it's that, then it is even more important to see how the off-team people are voting. If you are not in the team (of course everyone knows themselves to be good), a team is more probable to have at least one spy, so any off-team accept votes are suspect.


I think that you've forgotten what it is like to be new to the game. On the hand, maybe you're just good at this to begin with.

The problem with many people, is that they believe that voting according to the group consensus is what helps to avoid suspicion. Oddly enough, last night spies voted in favour of 3 clean teams. It was ridiculous. They actually intended to let rebels win the first 2 missions, just so that they could appear to be supportive.

The challenge is to convince them that they don't have to be that way. I don't want them to be that way, so that the game will be more challenging, enjoyable, and balanced.

a1bert wrote:
Spies are happy to put themselves and the next player to a mission. Then they should fail it and accuse the other team member (whether the other member is good or a spy comrade). Failing the first quest gives better chances for the spies to win the game.


I agree, but it's tough to convince them that. That's what this discussion is for.

Perhaps an idea is to coach them through an example game before the roles are dealt. We would have to actually spell out the odds of winning the game. If you show them the tokens and then explain it, [e.g.: "3/4 of the next games will have to be spy victories"], then that might make it real to them.

Another idea is to discuss, whom we want to go first [e.g.: Albert], but before we hand that leadership token to that player, we ought to hand it to the 4th player before him, so that "Albert" can go on M1.5. That seems crazy, but assuming that the group has all ready agreed to go with that player, then it shouldn't hurt to play around with the leadership token and then voluntarily vote down M1.1, M1.2, M1.3, and M1.4. If we can't trust everybody to cooperate, then that is an important dynamic of the game that needs to be addressed...I think.

Also, there needs to be an understanding of some kind of tournament mode. We aren't here to make the resistance win. We are here to win ourselves. I want to win every game, whether I am a spy or a rebel. Making our team win is a means to an end, and not the end itself.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eugene Wong
Canada
Surrey
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fisico wrote:
Maybe it's somewhat subtle but there's an idea. Vote no for the first propossal of the first mission four or more games in a row. Then, as a spy, vote yes. If they don't get paranoid, something is very wrong with your group-think.


That could do it! If I play lethargically with a no-vote every normal time, and then get enthusiastic, when voting yes, then it could really break it through to them.

On the other hand, the group-think could be really wrong.

Another important factor is that somebody might understand, but also might recognize the group think. If, before the role cards are dealt, and before each vote, I mention that I will normally vote against, then that could give courage to people to vote with me. In a 5-6 player game, I would only need 2 more players to help fail a mission. That would be enough to disrupt things a little.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.