Forum Games

What's something that you've learned in previous games that you find helpful or otherwise worth bearing in mind, now?
Don't ignore a gut feeling, but don't base everything on it. Reassess prior reads and compare with the new material, and don't let someone slip under the radar easily.

@blanketgender <3

Hey guys! So I'm gonna go back and read everything I missed tomorrow because I'm too tired now to understand any of it, lol.

My name is Aviva. You can call me that, of Viva, or Fariy, or whatever. When pinging me, please be aware that it is Fariy not Fairy, the R is before the I, contrary to usual spelling. As I said, I'm not online on saturdays, so don't call me inactive when I disappear every week. I will try to be as active as possible, but I am in school during the day and have homework in the evening, so forgive me if I'm not the most active player on here,

On that topic, what do I think of inactive players?
I don't love them, obviously, but I don't hate them all. There is definitely a difference between a lurker and someone who isn't ever online. But I'm wary of saying to just ignore inactives, because I've been in several games with inactive mafia members. They rarely or even never posted, but they were submitting night actions. How can you know? So I wouldn't like to lynch someone just because they are inactive, because that's a completely random lynch, but I wouldn't ignore someone and write them off the list either. I would try to use the active people to deduce who is who and use process of elimination.

Things I've learned from my past games
Hm...this is hard to think of, because all games are so different. I think seperare the person from the player. Meaning, focus on their posts, not their personalities. Any personality can be any role in the game. Does that make sense?

[quote name="BerryBagel" date=2017-05-20 13:08:33] Also, thought it'd be worth commenting that so far as first impressions go, @JoYoon is initially giving me town vibes. I feel like [i]immediately[/i] lying about a role PM would be a pretty unnecessarily gutsy move for a non-town player. That being said, JoYoon, I disagree with you about the helpfulness of vigilantes killing inactive players. I'd leave that to the mod. [/quote] @BerryBagel Re: your read on JoYoon - Short answer is too-limited info to form a full read on. While I see that as something that could at least potentially be a good sign, I wanna see more behavior first, see if it all seems to match up. (And I've been burned on reads based on a single post before.) I do think it's worth noting (and noting that you noted it, too, hue) in trying to get a bigger-picture read, tho. I am kiiinda liking [I]your[/I] tone so far, and several of the things you've pointed out seem like they might be coming from a town pov? [s]Unless ofc you and JoYoon are scumbuddies.[/s] (I especially don't think you're likely to be any kind of third party, at least an antitown one, with the kind of spec as you've done there.) @JoYoon I do happen to be town, yeah, but see above--that kind of thing is very limited data to base a read on. Like if someone states a townread on me, I'd be concerned if the basis of it was just [i]that[/I]. And speaking of limited data...I know a lot people seem to be busy this weekend, but am really hoping we can get more discussion going tomorrow? Slow pace is nice for catching up when you have to work and the like, but trying to get a lot out of six pages is kind of ehhhh.

@Tsaiah

Yeah, things are a bit slow around here xD


Edit: Do you like your role? (I know this isn't the best question, but at least it'll continue the discussion somewhat?)

Since someone will probably tell me to answer first: Yes, it sounds pretty neat. I hope I'll be able to use it well.

@JoYoon

Eh, it's okay. Not my fave, but I do like the way Poly builds roles.



Question for later on down the road, for you, @blanketgender, and myself (and anyone else who throws out a general question):

After people have finished answering it--what's the purpose behind the question you asked? What made you think to ask that particular thing?

@Tsaiah

I'll keep that in mind.

I'll also say that my role isn't my favorite, but it's still a good one.

I think the inactive question was a really good question. It gets into people's strategies, and it's very common for people to just try to lynch an inactive day one. As we near towards end of day, lots of people don't scum hunt and just rely on inactives, which other people think is silly.

@JoYoon

I really like my role, I think I'm going to enjoy it.

We really need to start more discussion, because we have to lynch, and I really don't want to vote for anyone with so little discussion. I believe that @LittleFirefly is the only one who hasn't posted anything yet, though several people have posted once or twice and left.

So far BerryBagel is seeming, not really town, as it's too early in the game for that, but at least active and willing to discuss, which is good. Blanket and Tsaiah also seem helpful, and seem to be acting similarly to previous games. I also have a somewhat good feeling about VivaFariy and JoYoon right now, but these are all very tentative and just good feelings, not positive town reads. Plus it could very well be biased based on the fact that these are the only people wjo have really contributed at this point.

I do want to bring up that BerryBagel's point about @SpectralDragon is a valid one, and I definitely want to hear more from them.

No one else has posted enough for me to get any kind of read on at this point.

My role's gonna be tough to do right, but if I make it work it'll be fun.

@Tsaiah [quote]After people have finished answering it--what's the purpose behind the question you asked? What made you think to ask that particular thing?[/quote] since people have mostly answered the question, i'm going to go ahead and give my reasoning for asking it! i initially was going to make a more specific/detailed question than "what do you think of inactives?" but after thinking about it, i left it more vague on purpose. i kind of wanted to see what was at the forefront of people's minds when asked about inactivity, to see if people came up with forms of inactivity that weren't just "not posting at all anywhere." that, and asking about it early also makes it somewhat more difficult for scum to pull off a lynch on inactive townies if everybody has already expressed their opinion on inactives. you can't go "let the mod take care of inactives!" and then try to lead a lynch on an inactive. likewise, if the overwhelming town mood is that lurking is scummy and mafia parrots that mood for town points, they can't later defend a lurking scumbuddy. as for the answers: i'm getting okay vibes from @Leremis both for being the first person to answer, for bringing up replacements, and for talking about another form of inactivity: [quote]Depends on replacement availability and whether that player is posting elsewhere. If they've just disappeared off the face of the earth, I'm alright with waiting for the mod to replace them. If they're being active elsewhere and avoiding the thread, then that pings me off something fierce.[/quote] @Imraldera isn't pinging me off [i]too[/i] hard, but i'm still a little leery about the need to stress that lurking is NAI/unhelpful rather than scummy. [quote]Inactive players are always unhelpful to town, however I don't think inactivity is AI in and of itself. Sometimes things happen and people can't get on. However, lurking and keeping up with the thread while not posting, is more unhelpful because you have the ability to post and discuss things but you choose not to. While this isn't always AI, it is definitely something to watch and if whoever is lurking seems scummy in other ways it can be part of the reason to suspect them.[/quote] @BerryBagel gives me Good vibes for bringing up several varied forms of inactivity/lurking. difficult to quote because of bullet points, but [url=http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/forga/2191504/2#post_27332018]this[/url] is the post. some of their other posts have seemed kinda scummy, but i think it can be at least partially chalked up to playing a kind of mafia i'm not used to. (particularly i find the speculation of jesters and executioners strange, but those are very common roles on ToS, so...) i'm still a little thrown off by Berry bringing up investigative roles and then calling me out for drawing attention to investigative roles. i'm getting more neutral vibes because of that. just question-wise, though, the vibes are good. @JoYoon pinged me off slightly with her answer. [quote]My experience in forum mafia so far has shown that inactive players are best left to the mod(s) to take care of, or a town-aligned killing role (ex. vigilante), if there are any.[/quote] bringing up a vigilante was a little strange, but there's not much else here for me to work with, so i'm not sure what kind of conclusion to draw from it. @TheNightDancer gave a pretty good answer--inactivity is not necessarily scummy, while lurking is. @Limelight gave a pretty neutral answer, so i'm getting pretty neutral vibes from that. [quote]NAI to me but it depends on players, and if they were inactive from start or suddenly went inactive or started being active during what time. Sometimes it can be signs of scum, sometimes not.[/quote] same with @LibreNoctre--they give a short and not-very-detailed answer. [quote]Real life stuff happens. If they are lurking though, that is a whole different thing, but if they cannot play at all sudden then it's fine.[/quote] @Raya36 gives an answer that sounds like Imraldera's a bit, but doesn't seem hard-pressed on the NAI aspect of it. neutraly [quote]I don't necessarily think being inactive points towards scum since things in real life do come up, however, if someone is inactive on the thread but active on other FR threads that's completely different. It still isn't strong evidence of being scum, amd could just be unhelpful town, but with other evidence added it could point towards scum.[/quote] @SpectralDragon gives probably the shortest answer of all, and it's worded kind of strangely. notably, they don't give an indication about what to [i]do[/i] with inactives or how they actually feel about lurking. [quote]Inactives: maybe they're not scum, but they're still causing trouble. especially if they're active everywhere else but the thread.[/quote] i like Tsaiah's answer for it, for bringing up that inactives are an easy place for scum to push mislynches and making a distinction between "not posting much of substance" and "periods of inactivity, but with obvious contributions." those kinds of distinctions are, well, decreasing the potential for a mislynch, which seems like a town thing to me. @VivaFariy's answer to the question seems solid enough, saying that we should allow the replacement process to happen but also not let them completely fly under the radar just by virtue of being inactive.