Daniel Trakulhoon
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
For example, a person can simply state "if you're a spy in a mission with another spy and wants one fail one pass, have the person whose name comes first alphabetically be the one to vote fail." I want to clarify that this isn't one person saying to one other person, but having Everyone in the group know about this system beforehand. I've known about this system for a long time but never wanted to introduce to the group and I really fear someone will think of this and say it out loud.

I know that this would make the game a lot harder for the good guys (atleast it would be in my gaming group). But would this make the game better? or worse? I'm not sure if this will make the game more fun and I'm looking for your feedback. Thx for your help.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moe45673
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
The game is already hard enough for the good guys, why would you make it harder?
 
 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
It makes it less fun for sure - part of the joy of being a spy is saying things so all can hear, but only the other spy will understand.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dorkmaster Flek
msg tools
Isn't it kind of responsible for the spies to have such an understanding in place? I think this situation doesn't come up as often as you might think. It would probably make the biggest difference on something like the first or second mission. If two spies fail the first mission, they've almost guaranteed a loss right there. That just leads to a bad game all around, and I'd like to think the whole group would like to avoid that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Courtight
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say it is best if all communication about strategy should be openly talked over the table. While, I do not think these pacts would ruin the game they can take some fun out of the game for the spies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm ambivalent on the matter, except that I'm sure someone will say that arranging such a system is cheating and I quite disagree with that.

Personally, I think the game works much better for a variety of reasons if the spies don't have such a system. Besides the obvious dilemma it puts the spies in, it's also a source of good information. Spies are less likely to want to have another spy on a team, so it can be telling if you pay attention to who proposes which teams.

So, clearly I think it's better for the game. However, I'm also very much against unenforceable rules, and disallowing such systems this is the epitome of an unenforceable rule. In fact, it's so bad that the mere knowledge of such a system warps the game, and once you know it you can't very well forget it.

So... yeah. Ambivalent.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dorkmaster Flek
msg tools
Wouldn't the spies want to generally only have one of them on a team? Maybe not all the time, but probably most of the time. Even if they did have a system like this worked out, isn't it easier to only try to get a single spy on the team than to get all the spies?
 
 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
Ask yourself this: when you are a loyal servant, would you like the minions to have these arrangements in place?

I don't want to have any off-table agreements like it. You can just as well stop playing right there. It is however another thing to openly talk about strategy on the table, and let everyone decide what behavior they adapt.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DorkmasterFlek wrote:
Wouldn't the spies want to generally only have one of them on a team? Maybe not all the time, but probably most of the time. Even if they did have a system like this worked out, isn't it easier to only try to get a single spy on the team than to get all the spies?


Well, you keep the rebels guessing more if they don't know that a team was single spy.

I actually think spies favor multiple spy missions when they can get away with it because it adds more confusion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mateenyweeny
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Raks Raks Raks
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Also without a standard convention, it lets you say to another rebel on your 1-spy mission that they should pass the mission and you'll throw the fail in a little too obvious manner that totally ruins their chances of getting on another mission.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
B C Z
United States
Reston
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lets assume a group has a 'system' in place:

"First person alphabetically will be the 'fail'"

Now I am Resistance and on a mission with two other people, and there is a fail card thrown.

I know I didn't throw it.

So that leaves two people, lets call them Anne and Bob.

The situations:


Anne Bob
spy loyal Anne threw the card
loyal spy Bob threw the card
spy spy Anne threw the card


And for everyone else's perspective, depending on where I am in the alpha-order...


Anne Bob Charles
spy loyal loyal Anne threw it
loyal spy loyal Bob threw it
loyal loyal loyal Charles threw it
spy spy loyal Anne threw it
spy loyal spy Anne threw it
loyal spy spy Bob threw it


That's observable information, and can be used to manipulate future team formations to verify things.

Do you really want to introduce such certainty?

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dorkmaster Flek
msg tools
Hmm. Well based on that line of thinking, if it introduces knowable information into the game, then it actually helps the good guys. So the spies being more organized actually hurts them? I like this, if it's true. That means the issue is moot. It's counter-intuitive, though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are many coordination schemes. In order to mess with spies, you can always say, "I play by no coordination scheme. If I am a spy, I will fail missions 50% of the time."
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
zombie homer
msg tools
designer
Having an uncanny understanding between 2 spies and getting the desired outcome is one of the best parts of the game! Conversely, having 2 spies failing the mission and giving themselves away also provides a good laugh!

So, no systems for us. It's fair when you get new players on board.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alabaster
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I find that after a lot of games, groups tend to develop coordination schemes without trying to...
There doesn't have to be any kind of agreement in place for spies to just naturally know what to do, if they've played with each other enough.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank F.
Germany
Rettigheim
BW
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it's a great part of the game, that the spies must sometimes coordinate in plain sight, however your game-group handles it.

My group always argues who receives which weapon, so saying something like "Don't worry, I'm the Sniper. I've got this mission" is one way, trying gestures, etc. is another.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Skinner
United Kingdom
Southend-on-Sea
Essex
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you play with Excalibur, this convention could be helpful for loyal players. Players with names earlier in the alphabet would get stabbed more frequently, which I'm sure would prove frustrating.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
byronczimmer wrote:
Lets assume a group has a 'system' in place:

"First person alphabetically will be the 'fail'"

Now I am Resistance and on a mission with two other people, and there is a fail card thrown.

I know I didn't throw it.

So that leaves two people, lets call them Anne and Bob.

The situations:


Anne Bob
spy loyal Anne threw the card
loyal spy Bob threw the card
spy spy Anne threw the card


And for everyone else's perspective, depending on where I am in the alpha-order...


Anne Bob Charles
spy loyal loyal Anne threw it
loyal spy loyal Bob threw it
loyal loyal loyal Charles threw it
spy spy loyal Anne threw it
spy loyal spy Anne threw it
loyal spy spy Bob threw it


That's observable information, and can be used to manipulate future team formations to verify things.

Do you really want to introduce such certainty?



I think your reasoning is flawed. Who threw the failure is immaterial. What matters is who the spies are. Bottom line is, if a single failure comes up, all you can say for certain is that there's at least one spy on that team.

Let's say there are two people on the team, Alice and Bob, out of five in all. One failure is thrown. Then we know one of the following is true:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F.
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F.
Both are spies. Bob threw the F.

Now, figure out the likelihood of each statement. The chances of both of them being a spy, given that at least one of them is a spy, is 1/4. Thus:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F. = 3/8
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F. = 3/8
Both are spies. Bob threw the F. = 1/4

In particular, note that who threw the F has no bearing on calculating the likelihood of each situation. In other words, without throwing in any expansions, this gives no additional information to the resistance.

Likeless wrote:
If you play with Excalibur, this convention could be helpful for loyal players. Players with names earlier in the alphabet would get stabbed more frequently, which I'm sure would prove frustrating.


This is an excellent point. Suddenly, who throws the F really, really matters. I think Excalibur would make a fantastic foil to this sort of coordination. Its mere existence warps the whole dynamic and returns the state of balance to the game, where spies have to find ways to coordinate at the table during the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Bredon
United States
Sunnyvale
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Asmor wrote:

I think your reasoning is flawed. Who threw the failure is immaterial. What matters is who the spies are. Bottom line is, if a single failure comes up, all you can say for certain is that there's at least one spy on that team.

Let's say there are two people on the team, Alice and Bob, out of five in all. One failure is thrown. Then we know one of the following is true:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F.
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F.
Both are spies. Bob threw the F.

Now, figure out the likelihood of each statement. The chances of both of them being a spy, given that at least one of them is a spy, is 1/4. Thus:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F. = 3/8
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F. = 3/8
Both are spies. Bob threw the F. = 1/4


Your math is slightly off - there are only 7 possibilities here:
A&B spies
A&C spies
A&D spies
A&E spies
B&C spies
B&D spies
B&E spies

the probabilities are:
Alice only spy and threw Fail = 3/7
Bob the only spy and threw Fail = 3/7
Both spies, 1 threw fail = 1/7
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abredon wrote:
Asmor wrote:

I think your reasoning is flawed. Who threw the failure is immaterial. What matters is who the spies are. Bottom line is, if a single failure comes up, all you can say for certain is that there's at least one spy on that team.

Let's say there are two people on the team, Alice and Bob, out of five in all. One failure is thrown. Then we know one of the following is true:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F.
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F.
Both are spies. Bob threw the F.

Now, figure out the likelihood of each statement. The chances of both of them being a spy, given that at least one of them is a spy, is 1/4. Thus:

Alice is the only spy. Alice threw the F. = 3/8
Bob is the only spy. Bob threw the F. = 3/8
Both are spies. Bob threw the F. = 1/4


Your math is slightly off - there are only 7 possibilities here:
A&B spies
A&C spies
A&D spies
A&E spies
B&C spies
B&D spies
B&E spies

the probabilities are:
Alice only spy and threw Fail = 3/7
Bob the only spy and threw Fail = 3/7
Both spies, 1 threw fail = 1/7


You're right. Did the math from the start (i.e. from choosing teams randomly) and then got rid of the teams without a spy, and it matches your numbers.

The annoying thing I can't quite figure out what the flaw in my original logic was... It seems like it should be sound. Statistics!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moe45673
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
You're saying there's a 2 in 8 chance both of them are spies. Perhaps you're assuming that group A&B and group B&A are different (they're not)? It's the difference between combinations and permutations.

I'm not sure where you get the denominator from, though. Why 8?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Moe45673 wrote:
You're saying there's a 2 in 8 chance both of them are spies. Perhaps you're assuming that group A&B and group B&A are different (they're not)? It's the difference between combinations and permutations.

I'm not sure where you get the denominator from, though. Why 8?


I'm going off the likelihood that there are two spies on the team, given that we know there's at least one spy on the team. Thus a 1/4 chance that the other is a spy. The denominator comes from trying to divide the remaining 3/4 between the other two options.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan Powell
Ukraine
Berdyansk
flag msg tools
badge
I'm in my prime.
Avatar
mb
Seems like you are subtracting the fun from the game. I don't remember wins and loses separate from the lies, machinations, finger pointing, subtleties, etc. of the games. Watch the Tabletop episode of the Resistance. You're missing the point of the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moe45673
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
If there are 5 people in the game and one of them is the spy, then the odds are 1/3 that the other person on the team is a spy. You know you're not a spy, there are 4 other people. Two of them are on a team and at least one of them is a spy.

What are the odds the other is a spy? 1/3
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Stewart
United Kingdom
Newcastle-upon-Tyne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Moe45673 wrote:
If there are 5 people in the game and one of them is the spy, then the odds are 1/3 that the other person on the team is a spy. You know you're not a spy, there are 4 other people. Two of them are on a team and at least one of them is a spy.

What are the odds the other is a spy? 1/3


That only works if you know which of them failed the mission - if you just know that one of them is a spy, then there are 5 possible pairs of spies (AB, AC, AD, BC, BD) and a 1/5 chance that they're both spies.

---

What having a system for single-failing reliably when there's multiple spies on a mission does is:
It increases the chance there were multiple spies on the mission when a single-fail came up.
It decreases the chance there were multiple spies on the mission when it succeeded.

It's unclear whether it helps either side win, but it makes the game less interesting by removing one of the Spies most interesting decisions.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  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.