I voted no for the mission actually. We need another 24 hours to talk @thrynki @Uno @Zone Q11 @Axiel For some reason, Zone Q11 is being very suspicious. I don't want to believe he is a spy because I assumed he was from the very beginning.
Well, that was my own view on it, on my own reply to the post you replied to... The one that said that you made a kickeable offense, was Arc-chan. Hmmmmmm... I think she meant you meta-gamed, like basing replies on the timing of people's answer (I don't remember this tbh, but I trust Arc-chan on those things) when they could simply be sleeping or working, or basing things on GM's behavior to discover what the role of someone is. Like... Technically speaking, Resistance is a game meant to be played without a GM, IRL, facing the people and judging their expressions... This is already an adaptation, but the GM shouldn't be a factor anyone takes into account, because the GM shouldn't even exist in the first place... That's kinda why I said that basing your mistrusts on the GM is bad, because the GM isn't something that should exist in the original version of the game, so the online GM should be as neutral as possible. Oh no, you have 5 attempts to make a team, Thrinky's team is the first one, it means you have 4 more attempts. The only team you'll be forced to accept, is Zone's team.
Eh, I was being lenient cause I thought the dude died. Didn't really affect anything either apart from the fact that he couldn't vote or choose missions. Actually, it would be better for Resistance when he wasn't voting, because that would be 1 guaranteed non-mission-fail, as he wouldn't vote. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ However you guys take it is up to you.
Yeah, I understood that the "kick" was from Arc-chan. I just mentioned it to you because you didn't think I broke the rules but Arc-chan thinks I did something kickable. I'll just have to wait it out to hear what Arc-chan has to say. I understand that the resistance game is meant to be played without a GM and I totally agree with you that this is an adaptation. One difference between real life and this game is concerning how we can assume it is a fair team game (specifically dealing with troll members). In real life, we can assume that people are playing not to troll because there are real life consequences (people don't like you or play with you). In the online world, because we don't know/trust each other, moderators are the reason why we can trust in a fair team game. If the online moderator doesn't seem to be correcting what we perceive as a troll, then we have to trust the moderator is doing his/her job, therefore the "troll" isn't doing anything against his own team. The difference of having a moderator is related to what we are talking about. This is because our trust in a fair game that no one is trolling relies on the GM, not each other player. Spoiler: Curious if you would like to answer If some player (resistance or spy) was trolling (not participating in his objective of the game), would you reprimand or remind the player? Also concerning what I said about failing the mission, I was under the assumption that we had only 2 attempts. I asked the GM about it but we must've had bad communications because I didn't get a clear response about whether it is 2 or 5 attempts. You can see it earlier where I asked in this forum whether it's we'd lose on the second attempt. @NZPIEFACE
I know you don't want me to comment on the GM's response or share my thoughts about it with others. But can you delete your third sentence? If you don't, I'll have to comment on it.
If someone wasn't voting, I would remind them to vote on the 1st time, and kick them on the 2nd time. If they were trolling though, I'd let them do as they please, trolling is a valid strategy, trolls are the hardest to read IMO, so if someone acts as a troll in every game they play, nobody will ever know their allegiance, because they always troll. It can be a good, or bad thing though, it depends.
Trolling may be a valid strategy in some games. But certainly not this game. Here is my analysis. Assume player A is a resistance member. Spoiler: IF HE TROLLS Let's say he trolls, defined as not participating in his team's objective. That would make this game basically from 4 resistance member vs 3 spies to either 3 resistance member vs 4 spies (resistance pov because they don't know each other) or 3 resistance member vs 3 spies vs 1 troll (spies pov since they know each other). This would be unfair for the resistance team because a trolling teammate would hugely leave them at a disadvantage Assume player B is a spy. Spoiler: IF HE TROLLS Let's say he trolls, defined as not participating in his team's objective. That would make this game basically from 4 resistance members vs 3 spies to either 3 resistance member vs 2 spies vs 1 troll or 4 resistance members vs 2 spies. This would be unfair for the spy team because it would leave them at a huge huge disadvantage if they get revealed. There is no advantage of playing a troll. The best strategy is either proving yourself innocent OR pretending to be the resistance. Also, side note warlokid, if he is a spy, is NOT a troll. He would be playing legitimate nevermind how bad he may be.
Time zones are a bitch, so is daylight's savings. The team from @thrynki is @Zone Q11 @Uno @thrynki @m7vpc. They are to fight @Tony in this final confrontation! You have 23 hours to vote. @Axiel @warlokid @GonZ555
Can we review @Zone Q11's innocence. I know I claimed he was innocent because I thought he was very helpful from the beginning, but these past few missions he did not vote for the mission (which shouldn't happen in the original game). Even if something occurred in real life, can we review why @Axiel and @thrynki thought he was suspicious. I'm still not getting what mission he proposed was very suspicious.
My kickable is just in reference to metagaming, not to the fact that I would kick you if I was GM. And my response was simply giving examples of metagaming, which I am not a fan of. Regardless, no argument should ever be prefaced by discussing a GM action or inaction, that is a bad argument and should never be used and doing so is a sure way to annoy any GM. Everything that @brasca123 has said about metagaming and the game being an adaptation pretty much covers all my thoughts on the subject. That's all I was trying to say. Actually brasca is incorrect. You have 4 attempts to make a mission. In resistance you will always have one more mission attempt then there are spies, to prevent a mission from being an automatic fail, due to all potential mission captains being spies.
That is technically what the rules say. But my variant (and the way my friends play) allows for there to be 5 spies which could result in an automatic mission fail if there were only 5 captains, so we have always played the number of spies plus one.
Ooh? So 1 round get 4 tries(for the current game)? I thought it was an accumulative type between 5 rounds.. There goes my plan to auto fail them all..