Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
53 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

The Resistance» Forums » General

Subject: Spies Go 7/8 On The Night rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Alex Burkhart
United States
Pickerington
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Note: This is my experience lately for 7-10 player games where you have 3+ Spies. I think I've stopped playing this game as a 9-10 player game since these problems are even more pronounced. 5-6 player games don't have these same problems since there are only 2 Spies.


So the group I've been playing with may have broken my favorite game. We are having trouble with the Spies winning almost every single time (yes, with the plot cards).

This may have been caused by my vocalization that, as a Spy, the optimal strategy is to fail the first mission are placed on. Since there are 3 Spies, and you only needed to fail 3 missions, your job as a Spy is done. Even if you were completely revealed as a Spy, you've done your part to put down the Rebellion.

This has mostly lead to us having very cutthroat, quick games where one of the teams wins very quickly. Either the Rebels magically pick the right people right off the bat, or the Spies fail the first missions. Putting outsiders on the successful missions is highly suspect and never passings the voting phase.

This has also had the effect of making most the cards far less useful and less fun. Strong Leader only goes to the current leader's right, cutting the people near the end of the leadership rotation even more out of the game. In The Spotlight is only useful for the Spies, since all it allows is to ensure which of two Spies openly fails the mission. Keeping a Close Eye on You is either completely useless once there are 2 opening fails, or ineffective at best ("Matt is a spy. Oh well, it still failed.") since we never seem to make it to mission 4.

I've been calling this Suicide Spy Syndrome. Once you've failed one mission, you could totally out yourself and it doesn't matter. I'm afraid that as long as you have 3 Spies who only need to fail 3 missions, you'll always have Suicide Spies.

We've been brainstorming ways to tweak the game slightly away from this imbalance, but I'm not sure what/which-ones will actually help:
- Blind Spies: No reveal phase. Makes the suicidal tendencies of spies even harsher, since they can't coordinate who fails votes.
- Spy Master: Spy 1 and Spy Master open their eyes together, then Spy 2 and Spy Master open their eyes together. This is not as extreme as blind spies. Spy Master knows everyone, Spies 1 and 2 are ignorant of each other.
- Spy Sympathizer 1: Wins if Spies win, but cannot vote Fail on any missions. Knows who the true spies are, but not vice versa. Seems too hard for Spies.
- Spy Sympathizer 2: Wins if Spies win, but cannot vote Fail except on mission 4 where there must be 2 fails. Knows who the true spies are, but not vice versa.
- Sleeper Spy: Wins if Spies win, but cannot vote Fail until missions 4 and 5. Knows who the true spies are, but not vice versa.
- Rebel Traitor: If Rebels get 2 wins before mission 4, they permanently switch sides. In a 7 Player game, the split is 4 Rebels, 2 True Spies, 1 Rebel Traitor.
- Spy Traitor: If Spies get 2 wins before mission 4, they permanently switch sides. In a 7 Player game, the split is 4 Rebels, 2 True Spies, 1 Spy Traitor. I like this better than Rebel Traitor.

We've talked about the Sympathizer variants for this either being identified by plot cards as both a Spy card or as a Rebel card. They seem interesting because a Rebel who sees the card knows they can't fail missions, but has to make interesting arguments about why to include/exclude that person from missions since their "Sympathizer" status is out of bounds for discussion.

We've also discussed lengthening the game to playing best of 7 Missions. This prevents the Spies from failing every mission immediately since they are 3 Spies who must fail 4 missions to fail. This has been discussed a lot less, so I'm not sure what the mission makeup should be to prevent a lot of successive missions passing/failing. It seems like you need N-1 Spies in the game if you must have N wins for your team to win.


Ideas? Similar experiences? I'd like to keep playing with this group, but these things have really been a drain on our games lately.

EDIT: Also, I've played this game well over 100 times and teach it to anyone who will give it a shot. This isn't a problem with us being inexperienced, but rather too experienced.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Metzger
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DjinnInTonic wrote:
Note: This is my experience lately for 7-10 player games where you have 3+ Spies. I think I've stopped playing this game as a 9-10 player game since these problems are even more pronounced. 5-6 player games don't have these same problems since there are only 2 Spies.


So the group I've been playing with may have broken my favorite game. We are having trouble with the Spies winning almost every single time (yes, with the plot cards).

This may have been caused by my vocalization that, as a Spy, the optimal strategy is to fail the first mission are placed on.
Wow, um...wrong? Continue, though...
DjinnInTonic wrote:
Since there are 3 Spies, and you only needed to fail 3 missions, your job as a Spy is done. Even if you were completely revealed as a Spy, you've done your part to put down the Rebellion.
Not true. Your job as a spy is to completely confuse the Resistance team - not give them solid information. While it may be working in your games, it's not a smart plan in mine.

DjinnInTonic wrote:
This has mostly lead to us having very cutthroat, quick games where one of the teams wins very quickly. Either the Rebels magically pick the right people right off the bat, or the Spies fail the first missions. Putting outsiders on the successful missions is highly suspect and never passings the voting phase.

This has also had the effect of making most the cards far less useful and less fun. Strong Leader only goes to the current leader's right, cutting the people near the end of the leadership rotation even more out of the game. In The Spotlight is only useful for the Spies, since all it allows is to ensure which of two Spies openly fails the mission. Keeping a Close Eye on You is either completely useless once there are 2 opening fails, or ineffective at best ("Matt is a spy. Oh well, it still failed.") since we never seem to make it to mission 4.

I've been calling this Suicide Spy Syndrome. Once you've failed one mission, you could totally out yourself and it doesn't matter. I'm afraid that as long as you have 3 Spies who only need to fail 3 missions, you'll always have Suicide Spies.


DjinnInTonic wrote:
EDIT: Also, I've played this game well over 100 times and teach it to anyone who will give it a shot. This isn't a problem with us being inexperienced, but rather too experienced.
Well, let's start with what's really going on here:

Your whole group is doing it wrong.

You say that you've played the game over a hundred times...but I can't honestly believe that someone who has played it this much hasn't developed advanced and creative strategies such as:

- Strong-arming everyone into doing your wishes (especially how the leader doles out plot cards).
- Throwing out wild ultimatums in order to glean information ("do this, or you're a spy.")
- Using sudoku-type logic to isolate a spy into a group of 2-3 players WITHOUT going to a mission.

We're still figuring out ways to play this game.

The goal of the Resistance is to nail down multiple spies when they get the chance. It sounds like your group is playing way too "close-to-the-vest," hiding their team. That's not the game - the game is proving to everyone else that you're not a spy. All players are assumed Resistance from the start. My group rarely sees round 1 fail, but when we do we get a lot of information.

Anyways, it's much easier to pinpoint 1 spy out of 6 than it is 3 spies out of 8.

---

The Resistance is not a traditional round-based game, you have to understand this. Whenever I teach the game, this is what I say:

"Each round, three things happen:

1) The leader picks a mission team.
2) We vote on that mission team.
3) Go on the mission.

Between steps 1 and 2, we yell at each other."
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Metzger
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't really mean to offend, I just...this is NOT AT ALL how our games play out. The only time the spies go 3-0 is when my sneaky conniving girlfriend plays dumb and tricks me.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Worthington
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
2010 Releases ........................................ The Resistance, Haggis & Triumvirate ..................................... Now accepting submissions for 2011 releases ........................................ www.IndieBoardsandCards.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You should join one of the groups that think the plot cards are too powerful and the resistance wins every time when they are used

I think that mixing it up in any of the ways that you've described will help break through patterns to your game - and I think that after playing any game over 100 times in less than a year might benefit from being mixed up!

The other thing that you could try would be to use 3 plot cards a round. Or as an alternative you could take out some of the weaker plot cards. In either case getting more of the cards out that can be used to reveal identities into the game early (or even the threat of doing so) will reduce the tendency for the spies to suicide.

Keep your eyes open, Don Eskridge has been working hard on more resistance goodness. Let us know if you find any of your variants (some of which Don is already looking at) work well for you.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lee Fisher
United States
Downingtown
PA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Strong Leader only goes to the current leader's right, cutting the people near the end of the leadership rotation even more out of the game.


Are you saying that the leader is always passing strong leader card to the player to the right of them?

What happens when two spies are on a mission?

What happens on mission 4 when two failures are required?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Burkhart
United States
Pickerington
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
metzgerism wrote:
Wow, um...wrong? Continue, though...

Uncalled for.

metzgerism wrote:
Not true. Your job as a spy is to completely confuse the Resistance team - not give them solid information. While it may be working in your games, it's not a smart plan in mine.


Well our Spies are very good at confusing the Rebels. The problem is that the Spies aren't completely revealed if they fail a mission every time. The Rebels either exclude everyone in that failed mission from the next missions or investigate some of those with plot cards. If we don't draw the right cards, give plot cards to other Spies to use, or inconclusively investigate, there isn't a lot of information for the Rebels to make decisions on.

metzgerism wrote:
You say that you've played the game over a hundred times...but I can't honestly believe that someone who has played it this much hasn't developed advanced and creative strategies such as: *snip*


Of course we've done these things. We've discussed this stuff to death. This group-think is part of the problem.
- Leaders after successful missions don't have a lot of choices. If they completely mix up the team from what just worked, it gets voted down every time. On an early failed mission and we didn't find anything about who the Spy might be, nobody from that group goes on the next mission or two. On a late failed mission, well, I can't remember making it to mission 5 lately.
- Most of the assignment of plot cards is very much ultimatums. "I'm going to give Open Up to you, and you must show this person. If you don't, you're not going on the mission." These are intelligently chosen ultimatums, but they are always solid Rebel logic. At this point, Spies just submit to the ultimatum and then fight the accusation until it becomes a lost cause (this is often long enough to do the damage).

metzgerism wrote:
The goal of the Resistance is to nail down multiple spies when they get the chance. It sounds like your group is playing way too "close-to-the-vest," hiding their team. That's not the game - the game is proving to everyone else that you're not a spy. All players are assumed Resistance from the start.


Nobody is hiding their team. Everyone is a Rebel! We just don't trust anyone unless we start passing missions. The only reason we start trusting them is because it's simpler for Spies to just fail them up front.

metzgerism wrote:
My group rarely sees round 1 fail, but when we do we get a lot of information.


We are having completely different experiences with this game at the moment.


lfisher wrote:
Are you saying that the leader is always passing strong leader card to the player to the right of them?


This is a group think thing. We've discussed this at length and come to the conclusion that the best thing for any leader to do is give the Strong Leader card to the person on their immediate right unless someone else has somehow been proven 100% to be a Rebel. This is because the leader knows they are a Rebel (of course!) and that the leadership will pass back to them after the Strong Leader finishes their turn.

lfisher wrote:
What happens when two spies are on a mission? What happens on mission 4 when two failures are required?


When a Rebel leader unwittingly puts two Spies on the mission, it usually gets voted down. Our Rebels have a pretty skeptical voting record, so if all the Spies start voting No it often cancels the mission. In the event that both Spies actually go on the mission, it is a tossup. I don't think I've seen a double-Fail in quite a while. But the times when you get double-Spies passing the mission are the only games where we are hitting mission 4 anymore.

Raid1280 wrote:
Well Alex, the first thing I noticed is that you're from Ohio, and if you lived closer to Toledo I'd suggest you bring your posse up to Toledo so we could mix groups and see what happens.


Buckeye Game Fest is coming up. You could bring your group down here. The Battlestar Galactica Tournament is going to be interesting.

Raid1280 wrote:
The first thing I'll say that the 9 and 10 player version of the game is much more intense...


Unfortunately my opinion of 9/10 player is that it isn't a game anymore. We argue for a bit and then the Spies win on mission 3. Without fail. All of the 7/8 player problems I'm discussing in this game are even more pronounced in the 9/10 player game.

Raid1280 wrote:
Try to keep track of these items:


Yep. But our Spies are good.

Raid1280 wrote:
1) It has been said many times before, but perhaps you're group is not voting 'NO' enough. *snip*


We are pretty cautious. We have people who will vote No even if they are the leader who set up the mission in order to look at the votes. We don't get burned too much on the auto-lose, but don't usually go on the first mission proposal early in the game. Lots of discussion happens here.

Raid1280 wrote:
2) Discuss, as a group, the optimization of the plot cards when the leader gets them.


We absolutely do this. Regardless of whether I'm a Rebel or a Spy, I would say that the overall advice/demand of the group is the best way for the Rebels to distribute the cards. This eliminates most of the people at the table for who receives a plot card. This however has just enough wiggle room for a Spy leader handing out the cards to give them to their favorite. And even then, our Spies are very persuasive even if they are outed by a Rebel. I've been burned so many times as a Rebel because I don't know which side of a "He's a Spy!" argument to take.

Raid1280 wrote:
3) Judging from your 'if a spy is going on a mission they should just sabotage' rule of thumb, it sounds to me like you guys are being a little quick with your mission proposals.


That might be true if a Rebel leader handing out cards knew anything concrete in the first two missions. As it is, its just a crapshoot. If a Rebel leader puts themselves on the mission in 9 player, there's 3 Spies and 5 Rebels left. Picking 2 other Rebels on mission 1 is possible (but Spies are manipulative). Picking 3 other Rebels on mission 2 if mission 1 failed is almost impossible.

Raid1280 wrote:
4) The last thing I would suggest is talking more.


Well, lately our games have been shorter since teams (mostly the Spies) have been sweeping the game. I'd say before this started happening, our games were clocking in at around 45 minutes. Now they are down to 25-35 minutes.

Raid1280 wrote:
6) If someone pulls an 'appeal to emotion' play...and bury them.


Absolutely! Dirty Spies! Also, I've had several games where Rebel werewolf-players end up as Spy MVP.

Raid1280 wrote:
Why does Strong Leader only get passed to the left?


It only gets passed to the current leader's right. The current leader becomes the next leader if that person uses it. If the only thing I know in the game is that I'm a Rebel, that's who I'm giving it to. I agree with you that this isn't very fun in a large 9/10 player game because some people have no chance of ever being leader.

Raid1280 wrote:
In the Spotlight is so useful for finding spies and outing them publicly that you need to be using those cards to the best of your groups ability.


We are having issues with the Spies just playing Fail face up in front of everyone. Even if they don't, the problem isn't solved. It just delays things. This card just gives a false sense of security without any real information if the player passes the mission. I view it as a dead card no matter when I draw it.


T Worthington wrote:
You should join one of the groups that think the plot cards are too powerful and the resistance wins every time when they are used

I think that mixing it up in any of the ways that you've described will help break through patterns to your game - and I think that after playing any game over 100 times in less than a year might benefit from being mixed up!

The other thing that you could try would be to use 3 plot cards a round. Or as an alternative you could take out some of the weaker plot cards. In either case getting more of the cards out that can be used to reveal identities into the game early (or even the threat of doing so) will reduce the tendency for the spies to suicide.


Their Spies must be terrible! Why wait around passing missions when someone could just as easily out you as a Spy without you failing a single mission? Having more concentrated or simply more identity-revealing plot cards is a double edged sword. Those plot cards are super powerful in the hands of the Spies. They are the best tools the Spies have for sowing dissent or gaining trust. Even the simple act of taking those cards out of the hands of the Rebels where they are useful is extremely damaging to the Rebel team.

T Worthington wrote:
Keep your eyes open, Don Eskridge has been working hard on more resistance goodness. Let us know if you find any of your variants (some of which Don is already looking at) work well for you.


Awesome news. We have just been brainstorming stuff to make it harder for one team to sweep the game without unbalancing. The best games are the games where we go to mission 5. I'd love to hear more of your or Don's thoughts and suggestions for my group's current problem.

---

I don't think that arguing about whether I'm playing the game wrong or missing some essential Rebel strategy is particularly productive at this point. Travis personally taught me how to play Resistance and I feel like we argue now even more than we did in Berkeley. I don't think we're missing some obscure rule or not talking enough.


I think the central problem is that one team is completely crushing the other and sweeping the first 3 missions in a row. I believe this to be mainly caused by:
- Too much incentive for a Spy to fail each mission they are placed on. (leads to Spy sweeps)
- No reason for Rebels to shake up the mission lineup if the previous mission passed. (leads to Rebel sweeps)
- Cards are either useless (In the Spotlight), exclusionary (Strong Leader), or extremely powerful for both the Rebels and the Spies (Identity-peeking cards).

I'd like to discuss ways to change these things. Anyone have thoughts on the changes I listed in my first post?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Metzger
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I playtested with Travis, too, and the results of your games seem to be the complete opposite of mine - I really think it's your group not having enough strong voices trying to win the game...this is very intriguing and I'd love to mix my group with yours to see what the hell is going on...
1 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Burkhart
United States
Pickerington
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Raid1280 wrote:
To be honest, everything that I posted above is a way to 'fix' the problems you are experiencing. The game itself doesn't need to be fixed. There's nothing wrong with it. What's wrong is your groups approach to the larger games. I'd be interested in hearing exactly how many times you've played with 9+, and the mix of new players to veteran players, and if you were among the spies when you did play.

I've been playing this game since before it was published. I was part of Don's playtesting team, and I'm currently working with Don in regards to his new material. I've never experienced the situation you're talking about, except when you have quite a few new players, the group isn't discussing the information, or someone is making a mistake.


I don't believe we are playing the game very differently. I think the only difference between our games is that my group as a whole has realized how powerful it is for the Spies to fail missions early. This is a recent development, but it's ruining the games we are playing lately. It has been a problem in very few of the games I've played overall and I'm concerned about how I can fix this problem for my particular group.

How long are your games? Ours would previously run between 40-50 minutes. Now when we don't have any discussion for missions 4 or 5 we are still running around 25-35 minutes per game.

Raid1280 wrote:
If you actually are open to hearing other peoples opinions as opposed to just deciding that the game is broken based on your plays, then I think you should try it again with the above that has been mentioned by various players and see if your play experience is imitated.

The game has been published for quite some time, and you would have to believe that there would be a larger outcry if more people were finding this situation.

metzgerism wrote:
I playtested with Travis, too, and the results of your games seem to be the complete opposite of mine - I really think it's your group not having enough strong voices trying to win the game...this is very intriguing and I'd love to mix my group with yours to see what the hell is going on...


I'm not saying the entire game is broken. This is my favorite game. My group has gotten stuck in a degenerate strategy where we rarely make it beyond mission 3. I'm listening to the feedback in the thread, but much of the feedback is that we don't talk enough and that we're playing the game entirely incorrectly, when that isn't the case. I wouldn't be writing up so much stuff here if I didn't care or didn't like the game.

I admit 100% that this is entirely a group-think problem. I'm just curious as to why we've arrived at this conclusion and no-one else has.

---

Maybe I'm phrasing the question wrong. Ignore my criticism of the plot cards for the moment. I don't believe them to be the central issue.

As a Spy, why aren't you failing the first mission more often? I think people who haven't tried doing this are underestimating the pressure it puts on the Rebels.

As a Rebel, if the mission passes, why would you trust anyone new on the mission that isn't necessary (because of mission size increases)?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Metzger
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DjinnInTonic wrote:
I don't believe we are playing the game very differently. I think the only difference between our games is that my group as a whole has realized how powerful it is for the Spies to fail missions early. This is a recent development, but it's ruining the games we are playing lately.

----

As a Spy, why aren't you failing the first mission more often? I think people who haven't tried doing this are underestimating the pressure it puts on the Rebels.

As a Rebel, if the mission passes, why would you trust anyone new on the mission that isn't necessary (because of mission size increases)?
Ah...I think that I understand the situation a little bit better now.

You may have stumbled across a problem that rears its ugly head after a hundred games, I'm not doubting that...but in all honesty I think that you're playing it wrong, still. I suspect that, in the case of a Mission 1 fail, your group may be conceding the game and not posing the questions, feeling that it is just "going through the motions."

This is one of the few games where "phoning it in" just doesn't work. If you go through the motions, you may still catch a spy out.

Last I checked, the only limit to the number of ways that you could play the game was the number of characters you can act out. You probably all know each other well enough to know that it's time to break out of your shells. This isn't a suggestion for your whole group though - just do it yourself, and others may follow suit.

* If you are the dominant personality of the group, sit back this game. I had a game where I refused to talk, confusing the hell out of EVERYONE.

* If you are usually passive, try being super-aggressive and taking charge of the game (I figure this is not you since you enjoy the game so much).

* Start using ultimatums on the leader: "You give your spot on the mission team to him, or else I know you are a spy." They have to have some logic to them, but I've clinched games with the ultimatum.

* Give plot cards only on the condition that they vote for your mission team - if they change their position, you may have them figured out.

These are just a few ideas for HOW to play the game differently.

---

We've had spies play dormant, approving Missions 1 and 2 and getting the game all the way to round 5. I don't remember any of them actually winning in this scenario, but it does make for a much closer game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Wilson
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DjinnInTonic wrote:
Maybe I'm phrasing the question wrong. Ignore my criticism of the plot cards for the moment. I don't believe them to be the central issue.

As a Spy, why aren't you failing the first mission more often? I think people who haven't tried doing this are underestimating the pressure it puts on the Rebels.

As a Rebel, if the mission passes, why would you trust anyone new on the mission that isn't necessary (because of mission size increases)?


Here's the thing, though. Groupthink in any game can be exploited simply by going against expected behaviour.

Why wouldn't I sabotage at the earliest opportunity? Precisely because the group thinks I will.

Say I'm a spy on the first mission, and I pass it. I'm now in the 'trusted group', because spies always sabotage.

Next mission a new person is added to the same team. This time I sabotage. The group assumption is that the new guy is a spy.

So third mission is the trusted group again, plus someone else. I sabotage again. I've now gotten two sabotages on my own, and the resistance don't have much solid information; either they think the two new guys were both spies, or they're starting to suspect there was a spy in the trusted group after all. Either way, all they need now is one mistake and it's game over.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gordy Crozier
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As a spy I like nothing more than passing the first test I'm in to gain trust with a suspicious group, only for a late game stampede. Early victories are important but man is it more fun to keep them dancing on the wire, as you argue that things passed under your watch. Ah how I love the game! We found as resistence gets more cany so the spies have to up their game and think about not going for the easy win but sacrifice the rest of the game. In our group it tends to be that we have few clean sweeps and more early wins and then a race for that elusive 3rd win.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If spies can't get on missions 1 through 3 they can't suicide it. Why are you assigning spies to missions?!? Does no one have any tells in Toledo?!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
(on iPhone, no onhover)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Agree. Spies outing themselves should actualy HELP Resistance. It's s horrible strategy for spies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, like Raid, I'm convinced your Resistance players need to get better with logic puzzles. This can be tricky, and takes some practice. The game is like one big Sudoku puzzle when Spies have few tells.

Okay, here's a scenario for all of you spy hunters, ala Raid's above. The logic puzzle was solved by one of the players at the table during last night's game. For the purposes of this game, please assume we were playing some weird variant that we'll call "Half-Blind Spies." In Half-Blind Spies, the first spy knows the second spy, but the second spy does not know the first spy. Our table considers this a pro-spy variant, meaning it tilts the game towards favoring a spy win. This is a 6-player game, featuring:

Clyde (was dealt leader card, so players are clockwise from him)
Emily
Adam
Ryan
Katherine
Becky

Mission 3, a 3-person mission. At this point, the game is 1-1. Mission 1 passed with Adam and Katherine, Mission 2 failed with Clyde, Katherine, and Adam. Up to this point, no one is certain who the spies are.

In the most recently proposal (also for Mission 3), Clyde proposed Adam and Ryan to go on his mission with him. This proposal fails, 3-3, with Clyde, Becky and Katherine voting yes, and Ryan, Adam and Emily voting no.

In the next proposal, Emily proposes Ryan and Adam as well. This passes 4-2, but the entire table is quite dismayed: Adam, claiming he is Resistance, has voted NO, along with Clyde, also voting no. This leave two people NOT on the mission, Katherine and Becky, voting for the mission. Emily and Ryan vote yes on the mission as well.

Miraculously, the mission cards flip over and it's three passes. Adam and Clyde are convinced a spy was on the mission but hid.

Who are the spies?

(Yes, it was absolutely called by one of the players at this point, and yes, I have given everyone enough knowledge to deduce them as well. The trick to this logic puzzle involves the Half-Blind Spies and explaining why, given a 4-2 vote with one person on the mission voting against it, it would still pass.)

If you answer (especially you Raid!), please put spoiler tags around it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
matthew glass
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
metzgerism wrote:

You may have stumbled across a problem that rears its ugly head after a hundred games, I'm not doubting that...but in all honesty I think that you're playing it wrong, still. I suspect that, in the case of a Mission 1 fail, your group may be conceding the game and not posing the questions, feeling that it is just "going through the motions."



we are defiantly not playing it wrong at all.
we are not conceding.
this is not whats going on

the problem is that the best spy strategy is to act completely like a rebel, to vote like a rebel, and never to lie about anything(other than their identity, and if they fail a mission). this gives the rebels absolutely no info to go on.

i love puzzles, but in the last 10 or so games we have played since it was pointed out that if there are three spy and each one fails a mission then the spies win(if you are a spy and you fail the first mission you are on, then your job is done, just sit back and sow dissent, also to fail any other missions you get placed on), the only games i have won is when i was a spy.

the problem is there hasn't been any actual info. if the spies vote with the rebels then how do you go about finding spies based on voting?... the answer is you can't
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
auratus1985 wrote:
the problem is there hasn't been any actual info. if the spies vote with the rebels then how do you go about finding spies based on voting?... the answer is you can't
Hmm. So, okay, if spies are all voting no, then Resistance should start voting yes.

If spies aren't talking, Resistance member should start talking and force spies to make a mistake.

Even more to the point, before a single mission goes, if you're Resistance, grill, grill, grill every single person at the table before you'll take them on a mission. All you need to do in the 7p version is fine ONE of the other 3 Resistance members. You have a 50% chance you'll randomly stumble across one of them, but only by talking a whole lot will you edge that towards something like 66%.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Raid, I feel like I've lead you astray, as your analysis is a bit off. Concentrate less on the mission I proposed that split 3-3 and JUST on the 4-2 pass mission. I believe all of the info you need is right there. (And, if not, you should at least be able to come up with a plausible sounding explanation for why the mission passed, one that is so accurate that'd be hard for the spies to argue against the logic.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Worthington
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
2010 Releases ........................................ The Resistance, Haggis & Triumvirate ..................................... Now accepting submissions for 2011 releases ........................................ www.IndieBoardsandCards.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
clydeiii wrote:
So, like Raid, I'm convinced your Resistance players need to get better with logic puzzles. This can be tricky, and takes some practice. The game is like one big Sudoku puzzle when Spies have few tells.

Okay, here's a scenario for all of you spy hunters, ala Raid's above. The logic puzzle was solved by one of the players at the table during last night's game. For the purposes of this game, please assume we were playing some weird variant that we'll call "Half-Blind Spies." In Half-Blind Spies, the first spy knows the second spy, but the second spy does not know the first spy. Our table considers this a pro-spy variant, meaning it tilts the game towards favoring a spy win. This is a 6-player game, featuring:

Clyde (was dealt leader card, so players are clockwise from him)
Emily
Adam
Ryan
Katherine
Becky

Mission 3, a 3-person mission. At this point, the game is 1-1. Mission 1 passed with Adam and Katherine, Mission 2 failed with Clyde, Katherine, and Adam. Up to this point, no one is certain who the spies are.

In the most recently proposal (also for Mission 3), Clyde proposed Adam and Ryan to go on his mission with him. This proposal fails, 3-3, with Clyde, Becky and Katherine voting yes, and Ryan, Adam and Emily voting no.

In the next proposal, Emily proposes Ryan and Adam as well. This passes 4-2, but the entire table is quite dismayed: Adam, claiming he is Resistance, has voted NO, along with Clyde, also voting no. This leave two people NOT on the mission, Katherine and Becky, voting for the mission. Emily and Ryan vote yes on the mission as well.

Miraculously, the mission cards flip over and it's three passes. Adam and Clyde are convinced a spy was on the mission but hid.

Who are the spies?

(Yes, it was absolutely called by one of the players at this point, and yes, I have given everyone enough knowledge to deduce them as well. The trick to this logic puzzle involves the Half-Blind Spies and explaining why, given a 4-2 vote with one person on the mission voting against it, it would still pass.)

If you answer (especially you Raid!), please put spoiler tags around it. :)


Spoiler (click to reveal)
Katherine and Clyde are the spies, with clyde being the blind spy
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow, this is proving trickier than I thought! Okay, I will give one more hint.
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Ryan is the player that called this, and Ryan was Resistance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Solution:
Spoiler (click to reveal)
Perhaps I'm leaving out a key bit of information here.

Mission 3 proposal by Emily:
Emily - yes
Adam - no
Ryan - yes
Katherine - yes
Becky - yes
Clyde - no

No plot cards being used here, so the mission must go, much to the dread of the table, especially Adam, who says upfront this mission will fail. Miraculously, it flips over 3 blues. Clyde immediately says, there has to have been a spy on this mission, they must've just hid.

Everyone is quite confused. Ryan says, no wait, there's only one way to explain this.

It would've been silly for spies to hide on that mission, so let's assume for a second that that was a clean mission. What if the Blind Spy believed a spy had gotten onto the mission? They would've voted yes for it. Also under this assumption, Adam is clean and voted no because he was just paranoid. Clyde, voting no, implies he's a spy, wanting to get a spy onto the mission. That leaves Katherine or Becky as the Blind Spy. Since Katherine's already passed the first mission, let's put Katherine on the next mission and if it fails, she's the spy, if it doesn't, we've won the game.

And indeed, Clyde and Blind Becky were the spies, with Becky believing that Adam was the other spy.
.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gordy Crozier
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
clydeiii wrote:
auratus1985 wrote:
the problem is there hasn't been any actual info. if the spies vote with the rebels then how do you go about finding spies based on voting?... the answer is you can't
Hmm. So, okay, if spies are all voting no, then Resistance should start voting yes.

If spies aren't talking, Resistance member should start talking and force spies to make a mistake.

Even more to the point, before a single mission goes, if you're Resistance, grill, grill, grill every single person at the table before you'll take them on a mission. All you need to do in the 7p version is fine ONE of the other 3 Resistance members. You have a 50% chance you'll randomly stumble across one of them, but only by talking a whole lot will you edge that towards something like 66%.


Completely agree! Its a game where you have to try to read people and you have two pieces of information: their mission votes and if chosen the outcome of their mission. Add to this how they react and how they use plot cards (if applicable). In games I've played spies tend to be nervous and their logic for chosing certain teams and people they believe to be spies will be suspect. You have to read the game and how players play it. One of my friends if he is resistence uses horrible logic as he knows he is the only one he can trust in but when he's a spy will use others logic and try to back it up. My girlfriend gets properly annoyed if she gets accused of being a spy when she's in the resistence. You have to look out for all these little signs and its only through discussions does that happen. If a mission goes through and everyone voted for it you can be sure spies voted it through, thats the hint. Question people why they voted how they did. Discussions with our group tend to be more complicated as we get to know the game rather than less. We talk more as we understand more about each others tells and how they play.
And an outed spy gets to play fun games, people will examine how you vote. I kept a game going for an extra 20 minutes as I voted through a team (I had opinion maker) which my girlfriend was convinced was all resistence (which it was). It changed how everyone voted. They lost confidence in it. Due to a well played strong leader card after a team with a spy on it had been voted through, the spies did win. But everyone can keep involved its about how you use whats been given to you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph DiMuro
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Forgive me for being dense, Clyde, but...

Spoiler (click to reveal)
Why would it have been silly for the spies to hide on that 3rd mission?

Let's say Blind Becky had been right, and Adam was indeed the other spy. Which actions by you or by Adam wouldn't make sense under that assumption? It sounds like a reasonable scenario to me.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TrojH wrote:
Forgive me for being dense, Clyde, but...

Spoiler (click to reveal)
Why would it have been silly for the spies to hide on that 3rd mission?

Let's say Blind Becky had been right, and Adam was indeed the other spy. Which actions by you or by Adam wouldn't make sense under that assumption? It sounds like a reasonable scenario to me.


Spoiler (click to reveal)
For one, why would Adam vote no to a mission on which he was the spy and then pass it? Second, I can't imagine a scenario in which it's a good play for spies to hide on the third mission. They might exist, but I can't think of one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Miller
United States
Stigler
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
T Worthington wrote:
The other thing that you could try would be to use 3 plot cards a round. Or as an alternative you could take out some of the weaker plot cards. In either case getting more of the cards out that can be used to reveal identities into the game early (or even the threat of doing so) will reduce the tendency for the spies to suicide.


If the goal is to buff resistance in general that's one thing, but if the goal is to discourage aggressive sabotaging I think this is likely to have the opposite effect. Fear of people getting to look at my character card is an incentive to sabotage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
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.