Yup - this mission is the best chance remaining to get it right. The next one is much more likely to fail.

If my equation has it as a 75% chance of there being no spies in it, then it's a 25% chance of there being two spies (and 0% for one or three, because of personal beliefs and simple math respectively.) If rejecting the mission allows me to confirm or deny that suspicion, then I don't see why I wouldn't. The fact that the last two rounds went on the first proposal is honestly repulsive.

in the first set-up, why would I not fail mission 3? in the second, same question if Zinger's my buddy.



so in that case, if Neo reproposed the same team, would you be willing to approve it this time?

and? did you confirm or deny it? what was the result?

I don't see how rejecting the mission helps you confirm or deny anything, but if there's some reasoning to it I'd love to hear. as for the last bit, . sure, on principle, there should be more rejections. but that by itself isn't an excuse to reject any given team. that's just lazy, and I know you're better than that.



PS: the graph remains mirrored, again ignoring Zinger's column.

I didn't imply that I rejected to "balance the scales" or anything, it was just a general statement. Of course I'm better than your fictitious assumption.
Obviously, I can't confirm anything with absolute certainty, but I would say that rejections at this stage would presumably be a good indicator. Of course, if me, zinger or garren is the third spy, then it's not unlikely that we would still vote no to not out ourselves for the last mission. Maybe garren pretended to misread the rules so he could seem to have a more legitimate reason to accept it the next go-around, I don't know. It sounds pretty outlandish, but I don't know how you would miss that detail either, or at least not go "hey guys, why are you okay with inviting spies?" at some point.

If everyone thought like that, making one "bad move" would be enough to single-handedly win the game.

If everyone thought like that it would still be mathematically inferior and be entirely lacking in upside.

If everyone thought like that, if that team had 1 scum they could have thrown a single day to ensure that they won the next two. How would that be entirely lacking in upside?

Thinking in absolutes based around optimal play leaves you susceptible to being destroyed by players making illogical moves.

Let's say rag is a spy, because he came to mind first. This team gets approved. He now HAS TO fail it, along with someone else.
Would you then not be willing to suspect rag because he didn't fail the previous one? Maybe the new guy laid down two by himself? No, of course he didn't. The only thing you achieved was give away a turn, and paint a statistically larger target on your head.

D3: Rag (only scum on the mission) passes the mission.
D4: A team is formed with the core 3. Scum manipulate it so that only one with a 2nd scum will pass. Double fail. Rag and the new guy.
D5: Assumption is made that there were two scum in the D3 team. D5 team will absolutely fail based on this assumption.

how would they accomplish that?

so basically I think you're right that that's something that should be kept in mind, but I don't think it becomes a relevant strategic factor until after we've seen if mission 4 fails. if it does then we need to consider a long-con model when considering possibilities for mission 5, since just automatically assuming that whoever the fourth was is town could lead to death. but if we're willing to consider that option then, then there's no strategic upside to considering it now, and there's no real reason to make that play in the first place. right now, the vastly more likely possibilities are that there were three town or there were two spies. in fact, I think the latter is vastly unlikely too, since I can't imagine Rubikscum inviting a buddy without a plan to avoid a double-fail, and while I know I can't prove this, I can tell you that if Neo and I were scum I absolutely would've interpreted their no vote as a green light to fail. (Green Light To Fail, new pop punk band name, I call dibs)

anyway, I'm still not really sure on this one. I'm pretty damn confident that this team is safe, but the fact that Garren proposed it when I'm pretty sure they're a spy and spies can't launch a safe team is messing with my head.

Yeah. I didn't say it was heavily likely, but I think discounting it entirely like Mown was doing is absurd.

It's entirely possible that Zinger downed the last proposal out of desperation hoping that a team without us three would eventually be passed. I'm more confident that a team with us 3 and zinger would pass than a team with us 3 and Garren, but I think it's far more likely that it's irrelevant who our fourth is.

yeah it's possible I'm wrong about Garren. if Garren's town and we're all town that leaves Zinger/Nik/Mown as scum, which has some irregularities in terms of votes, but nothing too impossible. it doesn't explain Garren's blatant overreaction to Neo day 2, but it's possible that was just bad town play. the biggest issue it has is the voting on 3.1, but the Garren/Nik/Mown team has that problem too, and can be explained the same way: scum thought they could sneak a yes vote onto a sinking ship to look good, and a lack of communication caused them to double up and accidentally approve it. given that no other explanation for any team seems particularly more likely I'm willing to accept that explanation.

alright, I'm gonna accept this proposal, but if it goes and fails I'm not dismissing a 1-scum model for mission 3 anymore.

I made the claim that no other scum team's explanation for the vote record on 3.1 made more sense, so I figured I'd do the experiment. for reference:

round|nominator|team|Garren|Mown|Neo|Nik|Raz|Rubik|Zinger||Go?|Fails
1.1|Garren|Garren, Raz|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no||{color=red}no|NA
1.2|Neo|Neo, Mown|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no||{color=red}no|NA
1.3|Nik|Nik, Neo|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no||{color=red}no|NA
1.4|Zinger|Zinger, Garren|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes||{color=yellow}yes|{color=green}0
2.1|Mown|Mown, Zinger, Garren|{color=green}yes|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes||{color=yellow}yes|{color=red}1
3.1|Rubik|Rubik, Raz, Neo|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes||{color=yellow}yes|{color=green}0
4.1|Raz|Raz, Rubik, Neo, Zinger|{color=red}no|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no|{color=green}yes|{color=green}yes|{color=red}no||{color=red}no|NA

I'm not including teams with me on it, not because I'm trying to trick anyone, but because doing so cuts the amount of work here almost in half, and I'm mainly trying to convince myself. if someone wants to do the 12 teams I'm on, feel free. I'm also not including scum teams that include no one from 2.1 for obvious reasons.

1. Garren/Mown/Neo: Mown and Neo rejecting here makes little sense, as does Neo's lack of sabotage. highly unlikely.
2. Garren/Mown/Nik: Garren and Nik may have tried to sneak a yes through on a dead vote since Neo said they were rejecting. unlikely.
3. Garren/Mown/Rubik: Rubik nominated the team, why reject it, then pass it? and did Mown reject? makes no sense.
4. Garren/Mown/Zinger: same as #2, unlikely
5. Garren/Neo/Nik: Neo's rejection and passing make no sense here, highly unlikely
6. Garren/Neo/Rubik: Neo and Rubik may have both rejected out of fear of double-fail, but why did Rubik nominate this team in the first place if that was a fear? maybe turned off by Neo's rejection, but why wouldn't Rubik just take that as a sign that they were going to pass so the double-fail wasn't a threat? unlikely.
7. Garren/Neo/Zinger: same as #5, highly unlikely
8. Garren/Nik/Rubik: same as #3 except without Mown's rejection, but still, makes no sense
9. Garren/Nik/Zinger: all three scum accidentally approved a scum-free team? ridiculously unlikely.
10. Garren/Rubik/Zinger: same as #8, makes no sense
11. Mown/Neo/Nik: same as #1, highly unlikely
12. Mown/Neo/Rubik: Mown's not afraid of double-failing, and like for #6 it seems implausible that Rubik would invite Neo without a plan to avoid double-failing so it doesn't make sense that they were afraid of it. unlikely.
13. Mown/Neo/Zinger: same as #1, highly unlikely
14. Mown/Nik/Rubik: same as #3, makes no sense
15. Mown/Nik/Zinger: same as #2, unlikely
16. Neo/Nik/Zinger: same as #1, highly unlikely
17. Neo/Rubik/Zinger: same as #6, unlikely
18. Nik/Rubik/Zinger: same as #8, makes no sense

I seem to have missed one, since there should be 19 if my math is correct, but I can't figure out which I missed. anyway, point is, none of these explanations are all that reasonable. the only way the voting pattern makes sense is with a scum team that is me plus two of Garren, Nik, and Zinger, but then why didn't I fail? I'm going to be very interested when this game ends to find out what the scum were thinking on that mission.

Yes I would. It's why I've suggested the same time this team around minus the guy I thought was scum.

I'm pretty confused, and having limited access is not helping cuz I can't scour the thread, but I have strong suppositions that Neo is scum. I think Garren is probably his scumbuddy, and then I am not too sure who the third could be but I am leaning on razorborne cuz he keeps making big lists that look like they are designed to narrow down who is scum but really just confuse me more.

I think the best choices for this mission are myself, rubik, nik, and any fourth. It doesn't really matter who the fourth is because odds are that the fourth is going to be scum, assuming that 3/4 of the remaining choices are scum (assuming I am right about Rubik and Nik not being scum), and it doesn't really matter with mission four anyway.

Lot of assumptions, but gut feelings is all I've been able to go on this game since I haven't really been able to thoroughly investigate the thread with my limited access.

Six of Seven votes in, and 25 hours remaining in this voting period.

Maybe one day I'll have a group of nine people so I can finally say: Seven of Nine.

you just did!

I'm now pretty sure that Zinger and Nik are spies. Not sure who the third is...I'm 60/40 that this mission will pass, if it's approved.

Mission 4

Proposal 2

Leader: Garren_Windspear

Team: Garren_Windspear, razorborne, Rubik and Neosilk

Niklor - NO
NeoSilk - YES
Zinger2099 - NO
Garren_Windspear - YES
razorborne - YES
Rubik - YES
Mown - NO

Result: The proposal passes!

--------------------------------------

And for the mission: You have fewer than two Imperial Spies on the mission! The Resistance has won! Congratulations to The Resistance.

yay
we won guys
hooray