Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Yeah, that's a bad sign.
Seriously, you guys never listen to me.
Well s###. I suspected that would happen. (Traitor could be croc, Crow or Tech, I honestly don't know anymore.)
Well I put in my mission result vote a while ago, in case this proposal was approved. Hopefully some others on the team did as well so we don't have to wait too long.
My vote's in. Will find soon enough what happens here.
Nope, I need two more votes.
I believe we are only waiting for Techerakh.
sigh
I can say this for sure, this mission WILL fail and the traitors WILL win!
...unless the traitors on the mission decide to make the mission succeed for some bizarre reason.
This post has been edited by retep998 : 21 August 2012 - 09:13 PM
Unless the other two traitors were croc and Techerakh the chances that there were two traitors on this mission are slim.
There's definitely at least one traitor though, judging by the voting.
This post has been edited by JacaByte : 21 August 2012 - 11:17 PM
Anyone feel like fessing up? We'll find out soon enough, of course, hopefully in the morning.
So there was actually exactly one traitor on this mission. Why? retep998 was the only innocent to reject the proposal, which is exactly what innocents should do. That means SIB and darth_vader are most definitely traitors. The question is, who is the third traitor? (My bet is on Crow)
@jacabyte, on 21 August 2012 - 11:20 PM, said in GTW 40:
???? Explain this to me Jaca.
Congrats to mrxak/croc/Crow if we lose this
This post has been edited by Techerakh : 22 August 2012 - 07:19 AM
@crow-t--robot, on 22 August 2012 - 06:41 AM, said in GTW 40:
If it is mrxak, one has to wonder why he never failed any of the first two missions he was on. If it is croc, one has to wonder why he didn't fail the second mission and stirred up more chaos between myself and mrxak. Though I have to admit, you'd make a really poor traitor.
@jacabyte, on 22 August 2012 - 08:16 AM, said in GTW 40:
If it is mrxak, one has to wonder why he never failed any of the first two missions he was on.
@jacabyte, on 03 August 2012 - 04:34 PM, said in GTW 40:
The only person I'd credit with being clever enough to lie low on a second mission were he a traitor is mrxak.
Of course we all know the truth now. SoItBegins was clever enough. I busted him two rounds later though. I definitely think it's Crow T. Robot if it's not retep998. I've been saying it since practically the beginning. Either way, both of them need some lessons in how to behave like an innocent. It's definitely not croc, as he voted against the SoItBegins proposal.
If Techerakh posted, that really should have been our last remaining vote. Everyone else has been active on IRC or these forums since the proposal vote results were posted.
@mrxak, on 22 August 2012 - 08:43 AM, said in GTW 40:
Of course we all know the truth now. SoItBegins was clever enough. I busted him two rounds later though. I definitely think it's Crow T. Robot if it's not retep998. I've been saying it since practically the beginning. Either way, both of them need some lessons in how to behave like an innocent.
(1) You weren't saying I was evil at the beginning,
(2) Until after Mission #3, almost no one suspected me.
(1) Did I say I said you were evil at the beginning?
(2) Okay.
(3) Where is Mackilroy?
Mission #5 Ahmad Sukarno Succeed: 4 Fail: 1
Ahmad was being tailed by members of the Detasemen Khusus 88 on the Indonesian island of Aceh, where he was rumored to be meeting with former Gerakan Aceh Merdeka fighters in an effort to revive the group and give himself a secure home base. When the men reached the purported meeting point they were caught in a crossfire and only narrowly escaped, leaving half their number behind. It was later discovered they’d been tailing a double of Sukarno while the real man met with the GAM representatives elsewhere. Sukarno will continue to terrorize innocent civilians and convulse Indonesia for years to come.
Final result: Innocents -- two wins Traitors -- three wins
The traitors have won. I'll let them reveal their identities, should they choose to do so, and if not, I'll post on Friday revealing who they were.
A few notes: - JacaByte: don't let your assumptions about what I'd do color who you think is evil or not. - late voters: I know real life interferes (it obviously has for me), so perhaps in the future we should work out a better system for allowing those who are slow or have other commitments to vote and not hold up the game. - mrxak dominated the game, making nearly thirty percent of all posts. That gives him an unprecedented amount of influence upon you all. If you're not sure of his allegiance, don't give him that much control.
Should you care to see who voted how, and what time (and what day starting with Motion 7) I've made my voting spreadsheet available here. ****
Not revealing until later is kind of mean. I'm not mean though, I'll tell you. The good guys were: croc Crow T. Robot JacaByte prophile/Techerakh retep998
Hmm...
I really begged Mackilroy not to make me a bad guy, this first time I actually played this game. I knew we were going to win, and it'd be seen as further evidence this game is unwinnable by the good guys, despite the fact that I've personally won as a good guy many multiple times. I really wanted to show you all how it was done, but sure enough, I got assigned to the bad guy team and was forced to destroy you.
I did, however, root for a win for the innocents, and did my best to argue for strategies that might lead to that eventuality. I was honest when I said I play publicly as a good guy in every game, and I hope my advice given in this game isn't tainted by my role in this particular game. I'll be saying much of the same things next time we play this game, hopefully I'll actually be innocent then.
Unfortunately, even when I named my cohorts specifically, and even told you as-directly-as-I-could that I was the third bad guy, you all kind of ignored me. retep998 rolled over and died, rather than fight against me as I hoped after I spelled it out for him who and what I was. Others of you really just played poorly, against your own interests. I was serious about looking through the topic trying to make the best case possible for my team in the fourth round, but I just couldn't make it all the way through. There was just too much suspicion everywhere, and the least suspicious people were frankly the bad guys. The rest of you acted like chickens without their heads, only the heads were still screaming, and your chicken bodies were on fire as they ran around all by themselves.
Mmm, tasty.
But look, you should have figured it out sooner, and not just because I admitted I was the third bad guy, kinda-sorta. If nothing else, how about how I convinced you to go against JacaByte for a simple mistake no bad guy would have really made. It's always going to be the innocents making silly mistakes, not the bad guys who are on guard. When JacaByte was later proved to be innocent, nobody really cared. Then there was the fact that I claimed to have given up figuring out who was bad, and used a silly mathematical model to determine the fifth name on my list. The mathematical model, I should point out, was designed for, and had the effect of, ramming a proposal through with as little discussion as possible. If I was truly innocent, I'm pretty sure I would have spent more time really figuring out all the scenarios, rather than devising a clever and obscure way of of justifying getting any proposal through I wanted. I would want to win, after all. Nobody called me on my laziness. Of course, nobody else really went back and tried looking, either, it seemed. I do suggest people go back and look now. While you're there, try to take a notice of how many times I gave public advice or instructions to my cohorts, in plain sight, always under the guise of educating you innocents and making predictions about the future. I'm very curious to hear from SoItBegins and darth_vader just how many of those messages to them were understood loud and clear. Either way, they both performed magnificently.
But it's hard to imagine anyone actually pointing the finger at me, when you all established clear tests for me, which I knew exactly how to pass. How did I know? You told me. JacaByte wanted to test me in the second round, which made it easy for me to declare he was setting me up, reject the proposal, and succeed at the mission. Techerakh set up some tests as well, and while I tried to give permission to other innocents in case they wanted to take on Techerakh's ire, I made sure to walk the line carefully, and I sucked up to him plenty later to eliminate any doubt about my own innocence. Of course, I did set precedence in the first round with my own test. After I told you all how not to fail it, you all went along happily with my instructions. Later when you went and did the same sort of tests, is it any wonder none of the bad guys failed?
This game went for four weeks. That's a long time, and hard to remember everything that happened. I'm sure I'll have other comments later.
I can speak, at least for myself, that there was no coordination of votes among myself and the other sleeper agents. Assuming there was no communication between SoItBegins and darth_vader as well, this marks the first truly "clean" game of The Resistance we've played. Things were certainly difficult for the bad guys, and mistakes could have been easily made at several occasions. The two fail votes on the third mission is arguably one of those mistakes, though at the time I was hoping for, and doing my best to publicly encourage, that exact result. But those are the sorts of situations good guys need to take advantage of. I do want to congratulate Techerakh on the strategy he proposed for the fourth round. While it failed this time around due to an honest slip-up by JacaByte and you people letting me get away with "choosing" between two bad guys, it may prove quite successful in future games, and I expect I'll be advocating the use of it, in similar situations. Ultimately that's how this game is won, by figuring out a core team of good guys, and putting them on all the missions. It's why I argued for the same thing based on the earliest successes (though, of course, that would not have worked then either, with me and SoItBegins on that core group).
Anyway, I got off point. This was the first clean game of The Resistance where the bad guys did not communicate in secret to coordinate their votes and fails. I think the next time we play it, if everyone can be trusted to follow the rules, it should be fine for the bad guys to know who each other are from the start. The fact that we've had three bad guy wins should not sour people on the game, because the bad guys have had a significant advantage previous to this game. and they don't really count. This game is really the first time the bad guys have won it. We'll call the first two times mere practice rounds to learn the rules. People's strategy has improved dramatically over the course of this game, and I think the innocents (especially if I am one :p) will be able to hold their own going forward after a period of reflection.
Anyway, I look forward to being accused of aggression and long posts as proof that I'm evil in the next several games because of this :rolleyes:. Thanks Mackilroy.
Last (for now) but not least, I want to provide the final Resistance Trust Index scores for everyone. If you're low on this list, the lesson you should take from it is that you need to work on your game. Whatever behaviors you used, they caused people to be suspicious of you and deny you opportunities to go on missions, so stop using those behaviors. Note that the highest score here was accused of being the most contentious and aggressive, and the person who posted the least in the topic is at the very bottom. Laying low is not an effective strategy if you want to be trusted, and you have to be trusted to be on winning teams for your side.
Final RTI Scores: mrxak 31 SoItBegins 24 croc 22 retep998 21 JacaByte 19 prophile/Techerakh 18 (score may have been higher if not for prophile's awful playing initially) Crow T. Robot 17 darth_vader 5
Average RTI for bad guys: 20 Average RTI for good guys: 19.4
Good guys need to learn to be more trustworthy than the bad guys. Or, good guys need to be less trusting.