A number of people have posted tips and tools for solving missions, but I haven’t seen a lot of posts about peoples’ general methodology for solving missions. Below I reveal some of the deep voodoo I try to use to keep my brain on track. I am interested what everyone else does. For me the gist of solving a mission is to first understand what the answer is supposed to be, not just to discover it what the answer is at the end. I first try to reach that “Aha!” moment where I believe I understand the nature of what it is I am supposed to be looking for and then follow up with the work of finding it. Up until that moment I consider my searches as just part of an information gathering and analysis stage. After that moment I consider my searches more like tracking down a somewhat defined or localized but elusive prey. The technique I rely on most is mind mapping. Often I just initially construct a map in my head. If the mission seems complex or my investigation starts to drag on, then I’ll actually take the time to draw out my mind map with pencil and paper. The longer my investigation goes, the more likely I am to revisit my map, clarify and re-associate elements in it, break it down into sub maps, etc. Here is a cleaned up copy of my master mind map for Jarobi’s Sandbox Mission 1 part 1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxrSKQaKljc4T3BtMXROTDJmdms/view?pli=1 [SPOILER ALERT: I replaced the actual answer with the term “The Answer”, but the map will still lead you directly to the solution.] That mission took me a while, so it is a larger than usual map. I did not actually use this specific map in my investigation (I prefer PnP), but it is a reproduction of a messily hand drawn one I did use. I made this one at http://mindmup.com. That is not my favorite mind mapping tool, but it is free, online and easy to use. This map shows all of the things I found during the information gathering stage that I thought might be relevant. Initially I just started with observations about what the clues physically are or could be said to be or some characteristic about them. Some of these I broke down further, but I generally don’t like to go more than two or three hops from a clue unless I think I am onto something. Usually by that point I stop merely elaborating on some aspect of the clue and start trying to associate things with it. I marked the nodes in green where I thought I might have been onto something and spent some time actively researching. Everything else was just some potentially useful fact I encountered during info gathering or some less probable lead to record and return to only if need be. Words in quotes were terms that fit the answer format, so I tried them. Only the green quoted word were ones I thought might actually be the answer. The others I tried just for shits and giggles, and because until a mission is solved we can never be too sure about what the answer isn’t. The biggest advantage I found to mapping things out this way is that when I find I am going nowhere I can trace things back to see what lead me to think I was onto something and re-evaluate the situation. As you can see, I had a few false aha moments before the true one. Anyone else care to share?
Well, seeing as I came here from more linear riddle stuff, like Clever Waste of Time and such, my methodology to solving these things is obviously a bit more linear. I do need to get in the habit of writing stuff down more, but for now, I just end up keeping everything in my head. I don't find it very helpful to write down as many ideas as possible, for me it just clutters things instead of making it clearer. The fastest way between points is a straight line, after all. Then again, I may have to change up my strategy if I'm going to get the most out of this experience .
I use a very similar method to @Rohva's, but I use Evernote instead. I favour notes over mindmaps because I find them more flexible. In the link below you can download an export of all the notes I used during the Beta missions. Beware, solutions are included https://mega.co.nz/#!GY4yyZpR!zW2Oj9xfeV1daZCXthIBGVcvxWDgwENL4qllm1KNGaI
While I haven't thought about it actively, when looking in retrospect, I can see I tend to take a rather heuristic approach. It may be easier to visualize if you imagine a spiral: Imagine that the very first clue of a mission is the center of a two dimensional spiral that will spiral outward. Each semantic frame is another arm add. And each revolution out by an arm signifies less direct linkage with the central point (initial clue), albeit it may be coherent with the previous revolution of its own arm. Each solution and new clue is followed by moving that arm up along the y-axis, and starting a new spiral above the old one (i.e. 2D -> 3D, increasing in height with each step, hopefully allowing to see intersections between arms "down through" the spirals, and thus connections that seem relevant to the mission as a whole) I start by researching the initial semantic frame that a given clue envokes in me. (spiral-arm creation) I then take one step out of the "center" , and see if the most basic information found by following that first semantic frame seems to be of any relevance to the clue - and by "most basic" I mean "most obvious (to me)". I then proceed out one revolution further, and research the more in-depth information related to the envoked semantic frame (arm). Ideally, the information should still hold some apparent relevance to the center (spiral arm curving inward), but if it seems very disconnected (straight line away from center), I take one step back, look for other relevant information relating to the semantic frame, and try again. If the vast majority of the information I find seems to point away from the center of the spiral, I go back and review the clue, and try to see what other semantic frames it might produce in me - and then repeat the process. If all frames come up empty, I revisit each frame (arm), and see if digging deeper along one of the straight lines produces anything (i.e., I take "leaps of faith"). Alternatively, I revisit the "base" of each arm, and see if I missed some basic information earlier. When the solution is discovered, I move that arm up along the Y-axis (making that arm take on a tornady shape), and use that as a reference point when starting the next clue. A good example of this process for me would be Jarobi's 2nd Mission: Spoiler: May contain spoilers For clue #1, I initially assumed the years were of primary importance. So for each year, I looked up a brief overview of notable events, but found little for each individual year. I also tried looking up all years together, but this also brought up little. (So that would be 5 "straight" arms in the spiral now). I then went back and reviewed the clues, and more specifically, what frame the titles of them envoked in me. I first thought it may be "part of the answers" that were needed from each answer, i.e. 1½ of the answer for clue #1, but this quickly became another "straight arm". I then considered them more in context, and assumed it was a recipe of some sort ("A dash of.. 1½ parts .."), and thought the most likely form of recipe would be a drink (due to "1½ parts"). Using this new frame, I added "cocktail" to my previous search terms involving the years, and quickly came across the relevant information pertaining to each. Moving on to the next clue (in retrospect), the same basic methodology was used to find the answers - to take an example, let's say Step 2: Cocktail and Malaria only reliably produced Tonic (i.e. Gin and Tonic), so I instead went back and reconsidered the clue - the fact that it was written in french, and that there were colors associated with the word, somehow: Linking the three, the most basic search terms would be: Cocktail, quinine (Malaria), and blanc/rose/bordeaux (French - alcohol frame). Which again produced the answer relatively quickly. And so on. ^^ I don't write down my ruminations, as I find that I'm prone to get stuck in a single frame if I do - and that the need to break free from certain frames have, in the past, been paramount in order to discover the solution. Right now, I'm working primarily on the early stages of my research, as I've found I have a tendency to travel out a given arm too fast, and thus overlook answers that were otherwise found in the very basic information. ^^ *coughrrecchiOgallalaorangesandlemonscough*
I just got started with ARG's and TBW. This is a great post and I really enjoy reading how you guys think these things out. I really like the mind map idea. It gave me an idea about having a board in the game that you can share with other people. So it would be like a white board or something that you can type, draw or even put post it notes or even index cards on it. Then you can save your notes, mind map and images on this one board and everyone else can see and add their own findings.
For coop mindmapping purposes, this could be useful: https://www.mindmeister.com/pricing. I linked directly to the pricing since there you can see what's possible for a free account. If someone knows a better web-tool for free, please post it.
Some options, but not all of them are for free: http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page https://coggle.it/ https://mural.ly/pricing
http://www.freeplane.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page (a must for me) http://blog.mindmup.com/ http://www.wisemapping.com/
