[The Resistance] Statistics and General Discussion Thread

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The main differences are that players have roles that include some type of knowledge and that there are no cards (though apparently some people do like to include the cards of the original game, though it doesn't seem the norm.). This is the 5th time I think that I've had to dig up this post :p:



Link one: a review of the game

Link 2: a forum playing the game-with some explanation of the roles, etc, at the start


Cymsdale proposed an attempt of a game that isn't Avalon, but has no cards but does include roles of our own devising.
 
I reckon we should try this avalon version then just for varieties sake. And I disagree with what Falc said about the assassin being too strong (at least I think it was Falc). It's up to the Merlin player to hide well if he actually wants to win the game.
 
By the way, speaking of custom roles, how about a multi-scan that says whether there is a spy among n target players, where n depends on the overall number of players(4 for 7, not sure which number to pick otherwise, probably the number of Resistance in game). It's generally weaker than ordinary scan(spy result eliminates only one spy team), but if you hit right you may find them all.
 
I reckon we should try this avalon version then just for varieties sake. And I disagree with what Falc said about the assassin being too strong (at least I think it was Falc). It's up to the Merlin player to hide well if he actually wants to win the game.

My main issue is that even if the Merlin player does it perfectly, there's at least a 1/6 chance for the Spies to win by pure luck.

Now, granted, the non-Merlin Resistance could give him a hand by making themselves at least a bit suspicious, but still, I don't quite like those odds. Especially not since it's some sort of deux-ex-machina appearing at the end of the game.
 
Well 1/6 isn't that high. Obviously if the spies are winning through pot luck of randomly guessing Merlin it would be quite a hollow victory anyway. I still reckon it looks like quite a balanced set up - especially as people are actually playing the card game and don't seem to have an issue with it.
 
Yeah, 1/6 isn't too high when you consider a player starts with a 50/50 chance to be one of the winners.

I was thinking maybe no assassin but include the Excalibur option to balance it out.
 
Without the assassin what's to stop Merlin just stating who the spies are right from the off? Obviously spies could also claim to be Merlin but it wouldn't take long to see who is telling the truth...
 
Without the assassin what's to stop Merlin just stating who the spies are right from the off? Obviously spies could also claim to be Merlin but it wouldn't take long to see who is telling the truth...

Well, deepening on which roles you include, Merlin might not see all the Spies from the start, and, like you say, anyone claiming to be Merlin would have to prove it, but you are right that it would be hard to configure for maximum balance.
 
I'm up to host a standard game.

At some point, interest in The Resistance is probably going to outstrip the 10 spaces in each game, and we'll have to have 2 games running concurrently. Of course, we'd have to get permission from jacob-Lundgren or Blade!. We could do that now and we could have a standard game and Avalon/somewhat otherwise modified game side-by-side, but with 6 players rather than 10 in each.
 
Is there any reason why there couldn't be 2 games running each with up to a 10 person maximum? I wouldn't cap a game at six if there were more who were interested. There might have to be a protocol, though, on players who want to participate in both at the same time. Something along the lines of a new game would give priority to those who aren't in the current game, and if there are any spaces left, anyone can take them.

Also, I'll see how my schedule goes, and if I do have time and management permits 2 at once, I'll do an Avalon or Avalon-esque game sometime later in the coming week.
 
Last edited:
It wouldn't be capped at six, but I imagine that the two games might split the numbers a bit.

I'll put a thread up for game seven, then.

As for numbering, I think we ought to just carry on - so if you put up an Avalon game after game seven goes up, call it game eight.
 
Last edited:
Game 7's up.

Is there any reason why there couldn't be 2 games running each with up to a 10 person maximum?

I just spotted this in the rules of the OT Forum Games forum:

Blade! said:
There shall be no more than 1 large WW game. There shall be no more than 2 WW Lite and 1 WW Micro games at any one time, but no player may play in more than 1 WW Lite/Micro game at a time. There shall be no more than one of any other individual other game at one time (e.g. there can be a Zombie game and a Battlestar game going on, but not 2 Zombie games. Some larger, quasi-RP games, may have supplemenatary threads for data consolidation with mod approval.)

So someone would have to get special permission. That said, the World in Revolution games tend to have multiple going at once and I think BSG might do too.
 
Yes, there are 2 seasons of BSG going at the moment, using different rulesets. But first mod's approval would be necessary, obviously.
 
I have requested permission to run an Avalon or similar role based variation on the Resistance simultaneous to a standard version. If we are allowed, I'll probably run one in the near-future.
 
Do we really need two games at once? By all means host an Avalon version when the current game is done, but we already have problems with a general lack of activity... I could see people playing in both resistance games just making the problem worse. Like if you get a good role in Avalaon but are just resistance in the regular game, I can see people becoming bigger zombies than they already are in that game.
 
Do we really need two games at once? By all means host an Avalon version when the current game is done, but we already have problems with a general lack of activity... I could see people playing in both resistance games just making the problem worse. Like if you get a good role in Avalaon but are just resistance in the regular game, I can see people becoming bigger zombies than they already are in that game.

I have had no time to follow the current game, so I'm unable to to comment on it.
 
I have a win! :D

And yeah, that game was inactive enough that we can't really justify two at a time.
 
I've always had a sneaking suspicion that the real rules are at the very top of the sticky, namely that this subforum "requires minimal modding, minimal trouble, and their bosses don't mind".

I strongly doubt a second Resistance game would be a bigger issue than some of the other things going on around here.
 
They don't mind as long as the games are run with different rules. So having 1 normal game and one with Merlin & Co. should be fine. Running 2 games with the same ruleset will invite divine retribution.

You can use the Blade!phone sticky to ask the Powers That Be but that is the current interpretation AFAIK.
 
I imagine they wouldn't mind us running two games, but would we really be able to get enough active players to justify two games? I really doubt it.