Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Pre-XVII Werewolf Metagame Analysis

I don't think anyone was suggesting that the next person in line shouldn't be the one to start the thread.

I hope people playing the current WW will not be asked to chose between playing and breaking 'gym rules. I don't see which rule was broken, though. Why was the game canceled?
 
FWIW, putting on an external for this game only was in the best interest of the game and the players.

In order to properly approach running multiple games on the gym, it would be best to first have an example of why it works.

It's also worth noting that the anonymous portion of this game would have been explicitly impossible on the PokeGym. And let's face it, the PokeGym playerbase needed to experience having to exercise mental capabilities to get reads based on a uniform "scum read" rather than a player's past experience.

I saw absolutely no harm in what Ikrit did in how he organized this game, and applaud him for thinking outside the box to bring the change in mentality that 90% of players said needed to happen in this very thread. When faced with actually having to play this way, I bet it's interesting to see who really meant what they said. (Not that I do or ever actually will know this)


Restoring principles of actual Werewolf in this forum was a necessary task, and props to Ikrit for trying. Anon-werewolf was a necessary evil in the process (FWIW, I vastly prefer regular WW, Anon is just missing something to me), and one I'm glad was figured out and carried out. It serves a great purpose in forcing us to rethink how we play the game, which, again, is a good thing.



[FONT=arial, sans-serif]I honestly don't see how what Ikrit did was against the Terms of Service, as he did not post a public link, he pmed a link. Besides which the only people playing over there are gym players and this other website's only content is this werewolf game and nothing more. He has limited the speech and other such restrictions to effectively the same as pokegym, and his stated intent is the game over there and then everyone back to the gym.[/FONT]
 
I don't think anyone was suggesting that the next person in line shouldn't be the one to start the thread.

I hope people playing the current WW will not be asked to chose between playing and breaking 'gym rules. I don't see which rule was broken, though. Why was the game canceled?


The Rules:

Thank you for not posting:

  1. references to profanity
  2. personal attacks on individuals
  3. apparently just for the sake of arguing
  4. content or links beyond a PG rating
  5. unhelpful, unkind or rude remarks
  6. the same point or request over and over
  7. polls, duplicate topics or personal requests
  8. off-topic remarks, personal info or links to other sites
  9. that your or someone else's opinion or group isn't welcome
  10. too much information about your personal life or experiences
  11. inside jokes, terms or acronyms not understood by the majority
  12. about your annoyance with this list or its enforcement

I don't see anything that was broken. I'm as confused about BJJ's post as you are.
 
There's no reason why anyone can't run their own WW game on whatever site.

There are probably going to be some issues with what happened here though.

1. It takes the game away from Gym members who enjoyed following the thread. I guess they could PM for info but that's not the point. It's a Gym game that's . . . not on the Gym.

2. Gym members are recruited for a site of unknown moderation standards. It's probably all PG friendly etc but . . . how can the Gym be sure of this unless they oversee it? How can they endorse sending members off to this unknown site?
 
There's no reason why anyone can't run their own WW game on whatever site.

There are probably going to be some issues with what happened here though.

1. It takes the game away from Gym members who enjoyed following the thread. I guess they could PM for info but that's not the point. It's a Gym game that's . . . not on the Gym.

2. Gym members are recruited for a site of unknown moderation standards. It's probably all PG friendly etc but . . . how can the Gym be sure of this unless they oversee it? How can they endorse sending members off to this unknown site?


1.) Every player in the game is a gym memeber, players who wish to watch were offered a link via PM (so as to not break the TOS). It was a gym game hosted in a place where it would not break the rules.

2) Ikrit told the mods that he would send them the link, several times, so they could see themselves.

That said, this part is as much Ikrit's fault for not informing the mods ahead of time. He could have showed them the site beforehand, explained what he was doing and why, etc.
 
1. It takes the game away from Gym members who enjoyed following the thread. I guess they could PM for info but that's not the point. It's a Gym game that's . . . not on the Gym.

An easy PM stating that you would like to read the game...and you would be able to as soon as I saw it.

2. Gym members are recruited for a site of unknown moderation standards. It's probably all PG friendly etc but . . . how can the Gym be sure of this unless they oversee it? How can they endorse sending members off to this unknown site?

Well for one...if they ask to see it...they can and then very easily can discern the moderation standards. They can be very sure of it simply be looking. They were not asked to endorse sending members off to the site...nor to endorse the content of it. The were simply asked not to revoke something that did not break any stated rule.

It would be endorsement if I had posted the link in a forum, because at that point it would be a public item on the forum that stated to go to X. However I intentionally did not. I privately sent it to members on the gym who had expressed interest.

I don't think that anyone on the gym expects the gym to endorse the contents of a private message unless it is from a member of gym staff. As for why I did not make my intentions known to the moderation community, I did not feel that I was doing anything to break the rules and as such did not find it necessary to inform the moderators as to me doing something that was allowed.

Thank you for commenting. I am looking forward to discussing this further with you and anyone interested.
 
I think it was a good idea, but I do agree that there were problems on both sides.

I don't think that just locking it was the best reaction, but if there is nothing we can do about it...
 
1. It takes the game away from Gym members who enjoyed following the thread. I guess they could PM for info but that's not the point. It's a Gym game that's . . . not on the Gym.

2. Gym members are recruited for a site of unknown moderation standards. It's probably all PG friendly etc but . . . how can the Gym be sure of this unless they oversee it? How can they endorse sending members off to this unknown site?


According to my OP, the post I quoted, the 6P experiment, and the other data collected, for the Gym WW community to play better it is a very necessary move. However those members or mods would only have to ask, and they would be able to read the game.

2. Ikrit hit the nail on the head.

If you think that an Anon game would be feasible on the Gym, please let me know! WW would sincerely like to have the opportunity to have an Anonymous game here once in a while, to allow players to relearn the strategies they've forgotten for the poor playstyle of veteran reverence.
 
So, here are a few thoughts...

Before I voice these thoughts, let me explain that I have read all the convo involved to this point.

1. It is possible for the Admins to set up a private forum, that only is accessible, whether to view or post, to people with the proper permission. We have several of them now. It is also possible to create accounts that are as such - WW12PlayerX... That takes all the vet factor out and also is easy for the Admins to search and delete at a later point when the game is complete. All that is needed here is to ask the Admins to help out with this. It would take about a half hour to make this happen.

2. I have seen that there is at least one Staff member involved with the game... Communication from that person would have slowed things down in regards to the response that was given. Communication of any kind in regards to the desires and intention of this game would have really caused things to be looked at differently. Also, in regards to open communication, PM the Staff that was questioning the game in the first place, or the Sr Staff, which is SD_Pokemon, BJJ and myself the link so that we could see what was going on, instead of taking the defensive right off would have been helpful to both sides of this matter.

3. In the past, members have reported PM's that they have received directing them to off site links, we have also acted in a similar manner with those folks, in some cases, those folks were banned from this site.
 
So, here are a few thoughts...

Before I voice these thoughts, let me explain that I have read all the convo involved to this point.

1. It is possible for the Admins to set up a private forum, that only is accessible, whether to view or post, to people with the proper permission. We have several of them now. It is also possible to create accounts that are as such - WW12PlayerX... That takes all the vet factor out and also is easy for the Admins to search and delete at a later point when the game is complete. All that is needed here is to ask the Admins to help out with this. It would take about a half hour to make this happen.

That would be wonderful. We had heard that in the past such things had been asked and been declined. I am very glad to hear that that has completely changed! I know that several people have asked for a multiple games of WW concurrently and/or a seperate forum dedicated to their use and been declined...as I said I cannot stress enough that I am glad that has changed.

2. I have seen that there is at least one Staff member involved with the game... Communication from that person would have slowed things down in regards to the response that was given. Communication of any kind in regards to the desires and intention of this game would have really caused things to be looked at differently. Also, in regards to open communication, PM the Staff that was questioning the game in the first place, or the Sr Staff, which is SD_Pokemon, BJJ and myself the link so that we could see what was going on, instead of taking the defensive right off would have been helpful to both sides of this matter.

It was explicitly stated in thread that if anyone wanted to read the thread they simply needed to pm me to ask for a link. A mod, Psyduck did...and I immediately sent him a link. I do not think I took the defensive...and as of right now am not on the defensive. I honestly feel that this was done in complete honesty and does not violate any of the rules stated in the Terms of Service.

PM me to set you up. I would love for you guys to read it.
It is not being done by pm. If you would like to read it. PM me and I will set you up.

Not to mention that waynegg is clearly still very interested and did not think it was a problem at all.
Sign me up please!

3. In the past, members have reported PM's that they have received directing them to off site links, we have also acted in a similar manner with those folks, in some cases, those folks were banned from this site.

So my PM's were reported to moderators as being inappropriate, unwanted, or the like? It was my perception that the issue was one of discovering that we were simply playing elsewhere temporariliy

I would still like to know exactly what role PMing links to people violated as it was not posted anywhere. Note that the word post connotes a public statement. From dictionary.com(the rest of the definitions have to do with sailing or nounal versions of the word post:

7. to affix (a notice, bulletin, etc.) to a post, wall, or the like.
8. to bring to public notice by or as by a poster or bill: to post a reward.
9. to denounce by a public notice or declaration: They were posted as spies.
verb (used without object)
14. Computers .
a. to send (a message) to a newsgroup.
b. to place (text) on a Web site.​
15. Computers .
a. to send a message to a newsgroup.
b. to place text on a Web site.​

As such this was done in private... with no untoward content being present either in the pm or on the external site.

I am really glad to see we are able to discuss the situation. I was kinda worried that it wouldn't be allowed after the abrupt locking of the topic that this discussion honestly belongs in.
 
Last edited:
That would be wonderful. We had heard that in the past such things had been asked and been declined. I am very glad to hear that that has completely changed! I know that several people have asked for a multiple games of WW concurrently and/or a seperate forum dedicated to their use and been declined...as I said I cannot stress enough that I am glad that has changed.

If you fully explain why you wish to have something do, and cite the reasoning, there should be no reason that this cannot be done. Whether it will is not my decision, I was just pointing out that it is possible within the software that the forums are operated with....

It was explicitly stated in thread that if anyone wanted to read the thread they simply needed to pm me to ask for a link. A mod, Psyduck did...and I immediately sent him a link. I do not think I took the defensive...and as of right now am not on the defensive. I honestly feel that this was done in complete honesty and do not violate any of the rules stated in the Terms of Service.

I am not arguing this point with you, not in the slightest bit. Communication ahead of time would have been the key here.

Not to mention that waynegg is clearly still very interested and did not think it was a problem at all.

I am glad that Wayne, as well as others are very interested in the game... WW games have always been a big hit, with many people waiting 2 or 3 games on a list to get in... That says something very positive about the players and the way the games are run.

So my PM's were reported to moderators as being inappropriate, unwanted, or the like? It was my perception that the issue was one of discovering that we were simply playing elsewhere.

No, your PM's were not reported, I didn't say that. I said that in the past... I was giving an example of what past history was and how it had been handled. To possibly clue you all into the reasons that it was handled this way now.

I would still like to know exactly what role PMing links to people violated as it was not posted anywhere. Note that the word post connotes a public statement. From dictionary.com(the rest of the definitions have to do with sailing or nounal versions of the word post:



As such this was done in private... with no untoward content being present either in the pm or on the external site.

I am really glad to see we are able to discuss the situation. I was kinda worried that it wouldn't be allowed after the abrupt locking of the topic that this discussion honestly belongs in.

Replies in red...
 
If you fully explain why you wish to have something do, and cite the reasoning, there should be no reason that this cannot be done. Whether it will is not my decision, I was just pointing out that it is possible within the software that the forums are operated with....

It is my understanding that this has been asked for before, and denied. So I think it is a moot point if the software can do something when it is not allowed by the operators of the software. Perhaps I misunderstand what your point is however. I understand acutely that it is possible, I have been staff on a forum before and am implementing exactly that functionality on the other site currently.

It was explicitly stated in thread that if anyone wanted to read the thread they simply needed to pm me to ask for a link. A mod, Psyduck did...and I immediately sent him a link. I do not think I took the defensive...and as of right now am not on the defensive. I honestly feel that this was done in complete honesty and do not violate any of the rules stated in the Terms of Service.

I am not arguing this point with you, not in the slightest bit. Communication ahead of time would have been the key here.

You stated in effect that communication was not open and that I had taken a defensive and then ceased or inhibited my communication with staff. It was open completely...and has never ceased to be opened. Even still I am more than willing to get any member an account to read the game. No one has asked for such.

This is why it is so important what from the terms of service I have purportedly broken. I have not done anything that is against the terms of service as I understand and read them. As such it makes no sense that I should inform anyone as to my intention to do something that is allowed. Similarly it makes no sense to punish me or the players by locking the thread when there was nothing done against the rules.

I am glad that Wayne, as well as others are very interested in the game... WW games have always been a big hit, with many people waiting 2 or 3 games on a list to get in... That says something very positive about the players and the way the games are run.

My point is not/was not that waynegg is interested...but rather that because of his interest and the fact that iirc 4 mods are currently playing... it is clear that many who are in positions of authority did not consider this a violation of the rules.

No, your PM's were not reported, I didn't say that. I said that in the past... I was giving an example of what past history was and how it had been handled. To possibly clue you all into the reasons that it was handled this way now.

I am sorry. My perception of your point was that you were pointing to the same situation to point to how it was handled the same as in the past. I can only surmise that if members reported such PMs then there was content of a negative nature within them, and that was the reason why they were reported. In that instance it makes perfect sense because untoward content breaks the terms of service.

However as I said earlier I am still unaware of what in the terms of service I broke. I have asked as much and received no response. As such it seems strange to me that a thread was locked over someone not breaking the rules.
 
Going back to the Werewolf Metagame Analysis.

I'd like to make a recommendation for future WW games. I think it would be profitable for the mod to make a Role-Dump Post at the end of the game (where all roles are available in one single post). As well, I would like them to also personally tabulate the data that I collated for the MWAT.


That data would be:
1) Player number, Town number, Wolf number, Indie number (also split into 3rd party/non3rd party indies)
2) Winning Faction, number of pages and posts the game was, the number of cycles, the end cycle (Night 9, etc).
3) The number of roles of these powers: Seer, Priest, Roleblocker, Other Information, Vigilante, Serial Killer/Last Man Standing Indie, number of Wolf Power Roles, and the type of Wolf Power Roles.

This would be EXTREMELY helpful in continuing the data analysis and help Mods get feedback immediately after their game ended, and point future games in the right direction. If one T/W percentage really worked well, or power role layout, that would be a great way to notate it for future consideration or whatever.
 
Hey, everyone. It's been a while since I last visited the 'Gym, but I stopped by to do a quick checkup. I have some topics I'd like to touch on. Please note I didn't get deep into all the data, and I mostly skimmed through parts of the discussion.

The first big problem I see is the lack of vanilla roles. This is bad for the game for a couple reasons. Firstly, the main excuse for not having many vanilla roles is that they're boring to play. I contest that anyone who can't stay interested in the game with a vanilla role is just as likely to flake in any given situation. While they are somewhat less interesting, they are an important factor when it comes to game balance. I believe this is why the town has such an overwhelming percentage of wins, and the wolves have done so poorly. Anything you do to dance around having to put more vanilla roles in the game will only be a band-aid fix to the issue of game balance. The town is over powered. Let us not forget, at their most basic level, power roles are simply meant to be a counter balance to the fact that wolves have information and the town does not. "Fun," "whacky", and "unpredictable," doesn't always mix so good with "well-balanced". Ask yourself, "Which is more important to have for the health of the game?"

Secondly, receiving a vanilla role forces people to actually play the game. When the game is properly balanced and everyone and their momma don't have power roles, 90% (I'm just throwing out numbers here) is reading what goes on in-thread and gleaning what information you can from that -- and, at its core, that's really what this game is all about. Vanilla roles force new players, and experienced player alike, to learn how to play the game well and constantly improve on their strategies. If 90% of the game is reading what goes on in-thread, 90% of your information should come from within the thread. I mean, when you stop and think about it, it only makes sense. Anyone can shout out, "I got a role PM! YOU'RE BUSTED!!!" but it takes a special skill to catch wolves in a well-crafted lie. The addition of more vanilla roles will make this a more skillful game in my opinion.


The issue of vet reverence really just makes me frustrated. It shows that players will put their blind trust into anyone if they have the right excuse, which shows a fundamental lack of concept of how this entire game works. Every time vet reverence is brought up in a game, newbies need to be explained why it is bad and why they should never mention it again, and vets need to be instantly shot down for using poor reasoning as any sort of defense or excuse. The only line of logic used for not lynching someone should be, "They haven't done anything suspicious enough to warrant being lynched," definitely not, "Well, they're experienced, so they'll be helpful." Generally, it is the job of wolves to come up with reasons to keep people, while it is the job of townies to come up with reasons to lynch them! It is inevitable that townies will die. Protecting townies should almost always be secondary to lynching wolves.

Other small issues I saw:

A couple of quick points:

1. Mods should write their own rules for their game. Rules should be about 10-15 and be concise. General explanation of how mafia is played should live elsewhere and not clutter up the opening posts.

QFT.

Roles should always be assigned 100% randomly. Period.

Role revealing should not be banned under any circumstance.

Co-mods are awesome. I was going to suggest that before my hiatus.
 
Last edited:
Hey, everyone. It's been a while since I last visited the 'Gym, but I stopped by to do a quick checkup. I have some topics I'd like to touch on. Please note I didn't get deep into all the data, and I mostly skimmed through parts of the discussion.

The first big problem I see is the lack of vanilla roles. This is bad for the game for a couple reasons. Firstly, the main excuse for not having many vanilla roles is that they're boring to play. I contest that anyone who can't stay interested in the game with a vanilla role is just as likely to flake in any given situation. While they are somewhat less interesting, they are an important factor when it comes to game balance. I believe this is why the town has such an overwhelming percentage of wins, and the wolves have done so poorly. Anything you do to dance around having to put more vanilla roles in the game will only be a band-aid fix to the issue of game balance. The town is over powered. Let us not forget, at their most basic level, power roles are simply meant to be a counter balance to the fact that wolves have information and the town does not. "Fun," "whacky", and "unpredictable," doesn't always mix so good with "well-balanced". Ask yourself, "Which is more important to have for the health of the game?"

Secondly, receiving a vanilla role forces people to actually play the game. When the game is properly balanced and everyone and their momma don't have power roles, 90% (I'm just throwing out numbers here) is reading what goes on in-thread and gleaning what information you can from that -- and, at its core, that's really what this game is all about. Vanilla roles force new players, and experienced player alike, to learn how to play the game well and constantly improve on their strategies. If 90% of the game is reading what goes on in-thread, 90% of your information should come from within the thread. I mean, when you stop and think about it, it only makes sense. Anyone can shout out, "I got a role PM! YOU'RE BUSTED!!!" but it takes a special skill to catch scum in a well-crafted lie. The addition of more vanilla roles will make this a more skillful game in my opinion.


The issue of vet reverence really just makes me frustrated. It shows that players will put their blind trust into anyone if they have the right excuse, which shows a fundamental lack of concept of how this entire game works. Every time vet reverence is brought up in a game, newbies need to be explained why it is bad and why they should never mention it again, and vets need to be instantly shot down for using poor reasoning as any sort of defense or excuse. The only line of logic used for not lynching someone should be, "They haven't done anything suspicious enough to warrant being lynched," definitely not, "Well, they're experienced, so they'll be helpful." Generally, it is the job of scum to come up with reasons to keep people, while it is the job of townies to come up with reasons to lynch them! It is inevitable that townies will die. Protecting townies should almost always be secondary to lynching scum.

Long time, no see, Toxic. You'll probably enjoy reading the current werewolf game, where a lot of these issues are fixed or at least less rampant.
 
Long time, no see, Toxic. You'll probably enjoy reading the current werewolf game, where a lot of these issues are fixed or at least less rampant.
Cool deal, I'll check it out when I get a chance.

The other big issue I didn't mention was lurking. Have any lurking countermeasures been discussed? That's definitely something that needs to be dealt with.
 
Toxic ~ I definitely concur with most of what you say in your post.

I'd definitely encourage you to go back through and deeply review the OP. The data isn't very strenuous and it proves a lot of what you say in your post. That data is the basis of a lot of the issues that we talk about (the other being Vet Reverence).


In fact, I'd say you boiled down the OP into a short, concise post which hits the primary highlights. VT's force players to play the game. Playing the game forces players to get better at the game. Vet Reverence perpetuated poor play across the board, intensifying the inward helix began with the lack of VT's.


Theory can be discussed as well. Though I will abstain from posting my opinion until after the current game is finished. (I don't want to influence current playing.)



I will also be posting a stand alone thread for analysis of WW XVII and its impact, goals, and analysis after the game has concluded, in addition to another post here to update the data.
 
On this issue of suicide:

Yes, suicide is a valid tactic, but it must be done within the bounds of the game. Breaking the rules in order to achieve suicide is still breaking the rules. The only legitimate ways to achieve this are to self-hammer, etc. "I want to strategically end the Day, so I'm going to commit a mod-killable offense," is bad, bad, bad.

BAD.

Any attempt to gain a strategical advantage by breaking the rules should be met with a ban, regardless of whether they thought they were legitimately furthering their win condition or not. Period.


vote: suicide mechanic is equally as bad, just without the whole breaking the rules thing.


Just to say, why does Jason actually play Werewolf? He doesn't do anything, except for doing a simple one day post to stay in. He doesn't seem to care about the town when he's a townie, and he doesn't really care about the wolves when he's a wolf. He always seems to be Indie, no matter his alliance.

Thoughts?

If Jason isn't going to post, he shouldn't be allowed to play. Simple as that. This game is, as I mentioned before, fundamentally rooted in discussion between the players. Power roles are merely a supplement. Jason's continual lurking is, in most cases, probably against his win condition (even when you're a wolf and you don't want to post, "too much," completely refusing to participate in the discussion draws unnecessary suspicion). Playing against your win condition is unsportsmanlike.

Suppose Jason draws a Vanilla Townie role. He has no role to send in during the Night phase. He won't post anything during the Day phase. What will he do the entire game? Absolutely nothing? This behavior must stop immediately. He takes a spot away from another player who probably wants to actually play the game for real.

This is why I asked what has been considered as far as lurking goes. I know you guys don't want PokeGym werewolf to be the exact same as MafiaScum, but there is a reason they have a prod system. Lurking is bad for the game and must be dealt with. Lynching lurkers is not always the town's optimal play, and forcing the town to deal with lurkers on a game-by-game, case-by-case basis is unhealthy for the game.
 
Last edited:
There are a few issues with dealing with lurking. One has to take into consideration the case-by-case basis that the lurker does.

If a player lurks 1 day out of 9, does that mean that they should be modkilled/replaced?

If a player lurks 4/9?

If a player lurks 7/9 but has ONE STRONG post for every "lurk" day does that count as participation?


Where do you draw the line?


I don't want to add more work to the job of the Mod, but I do think that if you are signing up to play you should play.


The way I've done it is through PMs to the "lurking players" based on an internal number of days that they have either been active or not. This is a lot easier to deal with when the number of players is within reason (i.e. ~20 rather than ~40).




About suicide. I don't like it. I mentioned this before. Suicide is fail and shouldn't be used. But strategically it can be very profitable for both factions if the conditions are right.

As of now we still don't have a consensus for dealing with it. Hopefully we won't HAVE to deal with it any more.



On your short notes:

Roles should be randomly assigned. This does lead to some issues with player skill being disproportionate towards one side or the other, but as the community progresses and learns this will be less of an issue.

Role Revealing is not banned. At all. Posting your Role PM, however, is. The main thrust of this rule was to stop mass-claim from ending the game with a town victory. With proper balance this is not an issue, but there should still be a penalty for posting your role pm.

I agree on Co-mods. Fortunately I've been able to hold XVII C down without Ikrit's help, but henceforth all games should have 2 Co-Mods and NO primary mod. Both should work together fully rather than one sub-serving the other.
 
Your questions depends a lot on what the player is actually doing.

First we have to establish what constitutes lurking. I say that if your lack of posting ever crosses the line of diminishing other players' enjoyment of the game, you're lurking. If you're posting enough content to appease the town and get by, you're fine. As long as the town is satisfied with your content and participation, it doesn't matter how many posts you actually have or the frequency in which they come.


When you take someone who isn't posting anything but fluff posts, is diminishing the fun of the game for several players, and you have to constantly ask yourself, "What is this person even doing in the game?" I'd say that's lurking.


I'm actually surprised at how much subjectivity that entails. I wasn't expecting that before typing it all out. There is an important distinction between flying under the radar and lurking that must be made, however. What we have to realize is that this is a game, and the primary objective is that the game should be fun for everyone involved. Things start crossing the line when things stop being fun.

When it is done minimally, lurking can be dealt with internal to the game. Players can poke at a certain offender until satisfied, or even lynch them if their motivations are found suspicious. This is more of a preventative measure so it doesn't get out of hand. But, in extreme cases where the offender just won't cooperate, action must be taken.


A player that [DEL]lurks[/DEL] flies under the radar for 1 Day out of 9, while providing enough content throughout the rest of the game is probably something that is better addressed by the players. Interrogation is warranted, not replacement.

Someone who isn't participating for numerous Days on end, say 4/9, is a bit more extreme. At this point, members of the town have probably pointed out the lurking and the offender still isn't cooperating. This person is beginning to make the game less fun for everyone. Obviously this is an issue that needs to be dealt with.

If the town is pleased with the content you provided 7/9 Days and everyone is still having fun, is there even a problem that needs to be addressed? I'd say not.


Ugh, that's so horribly subjective it's not funny. :frown:


EDIT:

Basically, what it boils down to for me is this: If someone has sour grapes for getting replaced out of a game because they didn't want to post, tough, that's their problem. It's preventable, and we're not being unfair about it. They had plenty of opportunities to participate in the game. It's not fair that you can just sit there and do nothing, all while making the game less enjoyable for everyone else. It's the same deal as replacing out/not signing up when you know you're too busy for the game. It's a simple courtesy to your fellow players.

It's pretty hard to ride the fine line between lurking and not lurking as the game goes on. Trying to come up with a system that isn't too invasive seems unnecessarily difficult. Either make a hard and fast rule that can be enforced objectively, like MafiaScum's prod system, or punish those who make the game less enjoyable for everyone else involved one by one.

Anyone who gets punished for lurking had it coming.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top