Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
[A] The Agency - GAME OVER -- SPIES WIN
- Thread starter ravenvii
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OK, due to the deadline I'm going to go ahead and post some of my thoughts. I agree with DP regarding the theory that Twietee and Sythas are likely agents thus forcing WoodNUFC to vote publicly. It's a worthwhile sacrifice for the spies to get a second victory and only have one of them outed for sure.
With that being said my thought is to put together a team of myself, Twietee, Sythas, DP and QOS.
Yep, let that sink in.
Here's the thing, the spies need two fail votes to win this round. We certainly believe that either DP or QOS is a spy, but the chances of them both being a spy is unlikely. Putting them both on the team ensures us that if the Open Up card comes out then we can give it to one of them and get a definite answer. If we take the team to a vote then the agents should win 4-1 and tie the game at 2-2 with a great chance of taking round 5. I understand this strategy is kind of like going "all in" at the poker table, but what other choices do we have? It's a bold move, but I think it's going to require a bold move for the agents to win this one.
My concerns about Sythas' team are...
1. He's not on it and is likely an agent
2. We know little to nothing about Fenris so going with him is another shot in the dark
3. Without QOS on the team we can't get any further information about her.
With all of that being said, NAY
I actually don't think this is a bad idea. I'm of the opinion that the previous team contained 1 spy - Wood, since he had to vote publicly. If there was an option for another spy to vote fail, I would think they would seize the opportunity to save Wood for the final dagger/victory round. Then again, they could have sacrificed Wood to hide someone else for the final round - in which case I think we'd be screwed anyway.
With mscriv's suggestion, if things work out the way we imagine there would only 1 spy on the team. I can't think of a better idea, although I will have some time in a bit to go through the thread again in light of Wood's betrayal.
I'm an agent. In my favour:
I suggested switching the under surveillance to Wood - which has outed a spy.
I voted Nay on both the failed mission teams.
Explain why I'd have done that if I was a spy.
Ok - I've read back through the thread and that post that looks most like a spy instruction is this.
This was shortly after TechGod confirmed his team, which ended up with Wood voting fail. This could be an instruction from Twietee to Wood to fail the vote and allow the other spies to stay under cover. It's not conclusive but has anyone else had chance to review those posts and come up with anything else?
post #673, by twietee can also be construed as suggesting to vote fail (as mentioned earlier), but it could also be just a normal analysis of the situation
darn, i was going to yay this mission but now i have doubts. and i certainly don't like mscriv's proposal.
if twietee turns out bad, mscriv's clearing becomes semi-worthless, althoguh it wouldn't mean he is also a spy. it would also change QoS position in my view
OK, just got back to the thread and caught up. You guys bring up some good points about the risk of putting one known spy on the team. I was just trying to think of a way that we could minimize risk by going with folks we feel fairly solid about instead of taking a chance on unknowns.
DP can you please clarify your statement above? If Twietee is a spy then how does that change your thoughts on QOS? We know from mission two that either you or her voted fail.
I think one of our best options might be to try and clear the combo of Koodauw/DP. The challenge though is how to go about doing that. If we can get an Open Up on DP and he's double proven to be an agent that doesn't necessarily clear Koodauw, as was the case with WoodNUFC and me. If we can get an Open Up on Koodauw and he's proven to be an agent then I think that would certainly lead to the conclusion that he was being truthful about DP. In this manner we could potentially confirm two agents with one plot card.
If we get an Open Up on QOS we could possibly clear her and identify Koodauw/DP as spies. That is surely advantageous, but what if QOS comes back a spy. We have only identified two spies and that point and we are still only guessing about Koodauw.
I must say that at this point in the stalemate between QOS and DP I'm leaning in the direction that DP is the agent. Sorry QOS, but the piece of evidence that is currently tipping the scales for me is the fact that when he was the leader, Koodauw gave the Under Surveillance card to WoodNUFC. It seems unlikely that a spy would do that to a fellow spy. Now that we've seen how well it worked it's a great strategy and one we will have to look out for in future games, but this being the second game I don't think an advanced move like that would have been considered. And thus, if Koodauw is an agent there is no reason to believe that he would lie about DP when he used the Eavesdrop earlier in the game.
I went back through everything looking for any possible communication between wood and anyone else and this was the only thing I could find as well. As DP said, it really could go either way. I'm trying not to see something that wasn't there just because I'm looking for it.
Wood YAY'ed the team so I'm inclined to NAY it but, he may be playing with us.
I'm not in love with mscriv's idea, but we do still have a no confy so I'd be willing to go along with it if everyone else is on board.
Do what you think is right, but you're wrong on this one. I am not throwing in the towel, but for the first time in these games all the outright lying and deceit that is going is getting to be a bit tiring for me.
If you cleared me, you would have DP/Koodauw outed as well, so obviously I hope that's the route you take. But if not, I did my best and that's all I can really do here.
NAY
This is the million dollar question. If we don't get the cards that will help, we're going to waste our no-confy and we'll be in an awful position going into the next round.
Either we put a team together of guys/gals we think are agents and move forward or we try to find spies. We just don't have a lot of room for failure.
Yeah - he's probably playing with us - but it may be an indication that there aren't enough spies on the team - hoping people will go against him and block it - hard to tell.
not exactly, we know from mission two that either QoS, myself or YOU voted FAIL
my believing QoS is a spy is based on my believing that you are not, since one of you two is.
this is based mostly (but not exclusively) on your having being doubly cleared, by wood and twietee.
however now one of the two is a certified spy, and the other we don't know. if it turns out twietee is also a spy, then your clearing, as mentioned above, is not particularly valuable and thus you go back into the same boat as QoS, that is 50-50 a spy (from my perspective). in fact, the pendulum would then swing more in your direction again
thus for me an essential part would be to clear Twietee, which in turn would clear you for good.
basically you and I are in the exact same situation again, with one uncleared person who has cleared us.
in fact, i think just talked myself into not wanting a team with both you and twietee in, so NAY
I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think mscriv/Twietee/Wood are spies. I've only got a few things to go on.
1) Twietee's possible instruction to Wood to fail mission 3
2) Wood being vocal in the DP/QoS debate and trying to make out DP was lying and had to be a spy..
3) The chance of mscriv as an agent picking a team with 2 or more spies on it and giving the establish confidence to a spy randomly is < 1/3 ~ 28.6%
They are all circumstantial and its possible I'm totally wrong but my vote is NAY
1) Twietee's possible instruction to Wood to fail mission 3
2) Wood being vocal in the DP/QoS debate and trying to make out DP was lying and had to be a spy..
3) The chance of mscriv as an agent picking a team with 2 or more spies on it and giving the establish confidence to a spy randomly is < 1/3 ~ 28.6%
They are all circumstantial and its possible I'm totally wrong but my vote is NAY
Honestly? This is becoming more plausible in my mind. I just did a re-read and now I'm not so sure. We really have no one cleared.
Last edited:
Wow, I really don't know what to say about the turn of events that is taking place with you guys considering me. DP I was beginning to feel that you might be trustworthy, but single handedly trying to cast doubt on the most trusted and cleared player in the game... me... is really suspicious. Fenris, your willingness to do the same is also discouraging.
Here's one thing I know for sure. The spies are having a field day watching us turn on each other. With the way the rules have been adjusted there is no way to know for sure that someone is cleared due to the fact that all evidence is delivered via PM to another player. I've done nothing but try to help by posting consistent theories and I've tried to stay level headed about it the entire time as opposed to simply guessing on emotion. I haven't posted anything that could be construed as secret spy messages or instructions. There is no doubt that one could over analyze and hypothesize the guilt of any player in the game. What we've got to focus on is finding as many connections as possible to produce a more cumulative base of evidence as opposed to just isolated "could be's" and running with those.
No one with the exception of QOS has responded to my last post regarding the way WoodNUFC's confirmed spy status has opened up new possible clues about Koodauw's possible innocence, which in turn could clear DP. There's a possible chain of evidence and surprisingly no one has a comment or thought about that... really???
Here's one thing I know for sure. The spies are having a field day watching us turn on each other. With the way the rules have been adjusted there is no way to know for sure that someone is cleared due to the fact that all evidence is delivered via PM to another player. I've done nothing but try to help by posting consistent theories and I've tried to stay level headed about it the entire time as opposed to simply guessing on emotion. I haven't posted anything that could be construed as secret spy messages or instructions. There is no doubt that one could over analyze and hypothesize the guilt of any player in the game. What we've got to focus on is finding as many connections as possible to produce a more cumulative base of evidence as opposed to just isolated "could be's" and running with those.
No one with the exception of QOS has responded to my last post regarding the way WoodNUFC's confirmed spy status has opened up new possible clues about Koodauw's possible innocence, which in turn could clear DP. There's a possible chain of evidence and surprisingly no one has a comment or thought about that... really???
Last edited:
DP hardly did it single handedly. It was me that found the post from Twietee that may have been a spy instruction and pointed out the chance of an agent picking that mission 1 team. Unfortunately for you, Wood being a spy makes the Establish Confidence clearing look suspicious. Giving Establish Confidence to a fellow spy is exactly what I'd have done when I was a spy turn 1 if I'd been given that card. And the chance of an agent randomly picking a 2 or more spy team and then giving that card to one of the spies on the team is less than 1/3 (28.6%) - not too low to make it suspiciously unlikely but low enough to make it more likely a spy chose that team and gave out the card.
Also, If the post we found from Twietee is an instruction to a fellow spy it makes the clear from Twietee worthless too. As I said, I could be totally wrong and the spies are laughing at us, but I'm considering all the possibilities.
Thanks for the information about Koodauw. At first glance it does seem that maybe it makes it less likely that Koodauw is a spy. But you should take into account the the fact Koodauw was originally going to give under surveillance to QoS until I suggested and was backed up by DP that swapping it might be a good idea (due to the fact both QoS and Wood were happy for QoS to be put under surveillance) - finding out later Wood is a spy you could suppose he preferred QoS to be put under surveillance because he was a spy. Now knowing Wood is a spy, this possibly lends additional credibility to the fact that QoS is an agent.
Purely from a chance of winning perspective it would be better for us agents if you or DP were the spy that failed mission 2 - since in both cases that would give us 3 known spies and we're trying to figure out the final one, wheres if QoS was the spy we still have two to find. Picking 5 out of 6 where 1 is a spy we have a better chance than picking 5 out of 7 where 2 are spies.
interesting turn of events.
@FenrisMoonlight , DP did question my post about WooDNUFC right at the spot. I already answered to him back then (and on more than one account) why I said that nontheless. You seemed to have missed quite some things.
And QoS/fenris: so you guys read the whole thread and think the mscriv/twietee/woodNUFC combo the reasonable scenario we should go along with!? I outright accused mscriv and hence woodNUFC (my first argument with him) right after mscriv's plot distribution. because that makes so much sense right at the start of the game. You may call that plausible - I call that convenient...
...and take QoS occam's phaser and point it directly to her - and Fenris. I liked how Fenris basically gave QoS a reasoning for me being chose by her after she picked me "out of the blue /DP "the spy"- team into her tentative list. And she just followed that reasoning as if it were crystal clear that I'm semi-clear (lol - even I questioned that). Just like she followed the mscriv/twietee/wood reasoning of him - well subtle but still. Her tentative doesn't make Fenris look more innocent as well btw.
Pretty sure the obvious spy-team is WoodNUFC'/QoS/Fenris + X although I'd go out on a limb that it's Moyank. It's highly unlikely for QoS to single out somebody (Moyank in that case) that early in the game without one single evidence or indication except that she's too trusting. I disagree with Moyank's explanation since there is a difference between some minor bickering and outright putting somebody on the bottom of the list openly. I never saw QoS play like that. And she would know that none of us would just follow that assessment since it was based on nothing substantial at all. Not to say that Moyank's explanation ("We do that all the time") contradicts QoSs ("Always too trusting").
---
Bold moves all alround now which brings me to the conclusion that Sythas wasn't doing that bad with his line-up. woodNUFCs yay can be neglected either way- nothing but a smokescreen.
It's a pity Koodauw ran into the woodworks and never found out again.
@FenrisMoonlight , DP did question my post about WooDNUFC right at the spot. I already answered to him back then (and on more than one account) why I said that nontheless. You seemed to have missed quite some things.
And QoS/fenris: so you guys read the whole thread and think the mscriv/twietee/woodNUFC combo the reasonable scenario we should go along with!? I outright accused mscriv and hence woodNUFC (my first argument with him) right after mscriv's plot distribution. because that makes so much sense right at the start of the game. You may call that plausible - I call that convenient...
...and take QoS occam's phaser and point it directly to her - and Fenris. I liked how Fenris basically gave QoS a reasoning for me being chose by her after she picked me "out of the blue /DP "the spy"- team into her tentative list. And she just followed that reasoning as if it were crystal clear that I'm semi-clear (lol - even I questioned that). Just like she followed the mscriv/twietee/wood reasoning of him - well subtle but still. Her tentative doesn't make Fenris look more innocent as well btw.
Pretty sure the obvious spy-team is WoodNUFC'/QoS/Fenris + X although I'd go out on a limb that it's Moyank. It's highly unlikely for QoS to single out somebody (Moyank in that case) that early in the game without one single evidence or indication except that she's too trusting. I disagree with Moyank's explanation since there is a difference between some minor bickering and outright putting somebody on the bottom of the list openly. I never saw QoS play like that. And she would know that none of us would just follow that assessment since it was based on nothing substantial at all. Not to say that Moyank's explanation ("We do that all the time") contradicts QoSs ("Always too trusting").
---
Bold moves all alround now which brings me to the conclusion that Sythas wasn't doing that bad with his line-up. woodNUFCs yay can be neglected either way- nothing but a smokescreen.
It's a pity Koodauw ran into the woodworks and never found out again.
yay, no cards to distribute! I was anxious to do that.
On the other hand, now it's really hard to separate the spies talking us into believing something and pinpointing futile post
--------------
Hummm forgot to post this yesterday Nifty forum to remember it this morning
On the other hand, now it's really hard to separate the spies talking us into believing something and pinpointing futile post
--------------
Hummm forgot to post this yesterday
Nifty forum to remember it this morning
Odds in round 1 mean very little when you are an agent. The 1st team leader is picking blind.
