InuyashaOhki

Enforcing Activity

Recommended Posts

Another point I forgot to make:

It is really easy to feel overwhelmed due to the amazing use of meta gaming. You have spent years playing with each other and that allows you to immediately analyze each other's posts. There have been times when it feels like an entire day or so of play was solely powered by meta gaming.

And I love it, but I still can't contribute much to that. I typically have to trust someone else's opinion on the matter and that leaves me without much real input. Just the typical, "I agree with player x's opinion and let me try to add my own flavor to this reasoning so it looks like I'm contributing," post. 

That leads to me looking like I'm not making an effort to contribute. When in reality, it's because I can't always make good contributions. 

Which leads to more inactivity. 

I know, at this point, meta gaming is just a natural part. And that's fine. Like I said, I love the fact that you guys can analyze based off of past play. It's totally awesome. It's just that I can't do that. Newer players can't do that. 

So we look even more inactive or like we aren't fully contributing. And it makes it easier for us to actually not be active. 

Sometimes there a games that are less-typical setups, that don't require much meta gaming, and I feel like those are easier for newer players to jump into and be more active. My only concern with newer players in those games is that they may not learn how a typical game goes. And you don't always learn other players' play styles. You don't learn the meta if you are playing the abnormal or unique games. Or at least, it's a lot harder to. 

Once again, I've rambled. Apologies. -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't apologize for rambling, Lion. I have a few thoughts for you and for anyone in your position. I was brand-new to SB when Rift launched the reboot a few years back. I didn't know anyone and my feelings were very similar to what you described. It took a couple of people (Nel, mostly - I'm sad he's not around as much anymore) really playing the game with me once or twice and encouraging me to reach out to other players before I overcame that. My life has changed a lot since then, so I haven't been great at paying it forward, but I want you and anyone else in your situation to know that we will buddy up and play the off-thread game with you. Never hesitate to PM someone, even if it's not typical that you work with them.

We, especially the experienced players, sometimes don't think about those beyond our "normal contacts" when messaging out. I will commit right now, and I hope others will too, to attempt to overcome these normal habits. PM-less games were for me harder in those early days because I felt even more isolated from the other players. I think we should take it on ourselves as players to connect more with everyone through PM, not just the one or two people we normally get in touch with.

Obviously, these thoughts aren't focused on the discussion levels in-thread, but I am confident that if people feel more included off-thread they will be more likely to contribute on-thread. This is a major reason I recently requested a standard-with-PMs set-up: to help include a couple new members I've introduced. The spirit of friendship is why most of us are here and what will keep us here game after game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually played a little bit before the forum changed over. I don't necessarily remember it, but I've been around awhile. Personal things sort of stopped me from playing for a period and then I jumped back in. 

A lot of how active a player is, stems from their personality or where they are at in their lives. I've always been someone who could thrive on my own. But that doesn't mean I'm a loner. I actually enjoy being social. And I don't mind having to make the first move in any kind of relationship.

The side of me that is a slave to technicalities or facts, makes me play a certain way. I know that I don't know enough about players here to trust my judgement of them. So, sometimes I don't reach out to people. 

But sometimes, the side of me that knows you have to make leaps, will reach out to players on a whim. 

This is all in game, of course. I think I've maybe only ever interacted twice with another member outside of Sparkbomb. Besides the two that I know irl. 

So maybe it really is a matter of getting to know people off thread. Which can take time. But that may be what we need to strengthen the play of new players. 

Also, maybe we just need to make more of an effort to recruit people. I know I have thought of at least two or 3 people that would really enjoy playing this. But I've never fully invited them. 

I guess I should take the effort. Effort can be so tiresome, though. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lion wiggles said:

So maybe it really is a matter of getting to know people off thread. Which can take time. But that may be what we need to strengthen the play of new players. 

Just wanted to note that this thread has really opened up on getting to know more about others. If people are more willing to chat about things outside the game in a non-gaming way, maybe the game can benefit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the 48 hour days - it doesn't seem to help. I've seen this with all the games I've run: If I start it with a 24 hour day, people are worried that not everyone will show up in time, but generally everyone gets their list and votes in the last 6 hours, and they get their lists in except for unexpected events. If I make it 48 hours, almost everyone waits until the last 6 hours to do everything. Unfortunately, no matter how many times I caution against waiting to the last minute, and even when I incentivise voting and using powers early, people wait to the last minute. As this applies to inactivity, it is one of the multiple sources of it - people who were active the first 42 hours of the first 48 hour day suddenly disappear becomes something comes up offline and they forgot to vote and send in their powers. I remind them and ask them to do so early the next day, they apologize...then wait until the last few hours when something comes up again. And these are veteran and new players alike. In these cases, they are active on the thread, but I've seen others where they did the reverse. Talked to me, sent in lists, but never got around to posting at all (including votes). Unfortunately, I think the problem is a lack of a sense of urgency until the last 6 hours.

(I do still do 48 hour starts most of the time, though, because players worry about it if I don't. One of the things I've learned MC'ing games here is that if people don't think a game will work, they won't do what you ask them to do to make it work. So whenever possible, if the players think a thing needs to be done a certain way, I give the appearance of doing it the way they think it has to be.)

Lion - I'm greatly enjoying your input on this because it's highlighting some things that I don't often think about. That said, I do want to say that what you're describing is fine. "I don't know Bob as well, but Judy's analysis sounds good to me." is just as important as my wall-of-text posts that some people only half-read.

4 hours ago, Celairiel said:

Never hesitate to PM someone, even if it's not typical that you work with them.

^ Very, very important.

I occasionally don't start a PM with anyone in a game. Sometimes I just don't feel like it, sometimes I'm trying new strategies that don't involve bugging everyone, and sometimes I'm just nervous about contacting new people. I've only gotten burned by contacting someone once (the first time I PM"d Starmaker, she tore into me), but I still get nervous contacting those who I don't usually talk with. When I don't initiate contact, I can go a few days without hearing from anyone. Sometimes Cel will say hello, but usually I don't get any sort of contact until someone has dreamed me, or someone desperately needs to get in touch with the innocent network and they think I'm in it. And that's with me being a "high profile" player who gets targeted early on.

Be the one who initiates contact. Except for Starmaker, anyone you contact is probably going to be happy to have the point of contact. Even in games where I'm overwhelmed with almost as many people talking to me as are talking to the MC, I still try to work every one of those contacts. Whether I'm trying to get info from you, trying to get the info I think you need, trying to feed misinformation, or even trying to give the impression that I'm "on to you" and not sharing info, I'm usually very glad of being contacted. Being contacted is a good thing.

Very rarely, I do try to get out of my shell and seek out players I've not talked to much before, but I know myself well enough that I can't honestly make a vow that I'll do that more often. Do not hesitate to contact me, though. I'll be happy to hear from you.

4 hours ago, lion wiggles said:

So maybe it really is a matter of getting to know people off thread.

That would be nice on a personal level. I've talked to NPM a little outside of game-related discussion but always in the middle of game-related discussion. I've talked to Cel a bit about things we're both fans of, I've talked to Zilary and Starmaker about a convention, and I've traded a few old-buddy teasing comments with Franc. Beyond that, I have had no "non-wereweolf" communication with anyone here except my brother, and I've only gotten to play one game with him here before his schedule took him away from it. Getting to know people off thread would be great, I just don't have the personality to pursue that sort of thing on my own.

I think it's really a matter of personality that this analysis comes from. I will do the same meta-analysis on Smiletrue who I've watched play one game and who was in another game I MC'd that I do on Sinical who I've played dozens of games with, watched several others, and MC'd at least 8 games he's been in. I think I'm good at analyzing behavior patterns, so I post analysis based on that. From using that same analysis I do in the game on you here, my guess is that you don't think you're good at doing it. A lot of doing anything is just thinking you're going to do it well. I've spent a lot of years not cooking and not drawing thinking I would do it poorly before I forced myself to find out that I'd do it well.

If you want to do meta-analysis, I suggest you just try it. Look over a bunch of posts by someone, then compare it with what they're doing in the game, and try to guess what it means is going on with them now. That said, if you don't want to, I wouldn't worry about it. You've done well with the way you've played so far, and if you're having fun, there's no reason to change that. Part of the fun in the game is that everyone plays a different way. 

Edited by InuyashaOhki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rexozord said:

No one approaches me unless circumstances within the game make it very, very favorable for them to do so. Of course, this is due to my playstyle and my reputation of not role-trading and focusing on analysis of in-thread information (at least, I assume). I assume that something similar is true for NPM as well, due to her playstyle.

Yep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, InuyashaOhki said:

I think it's really a matter of personality that this analysis comes from. I will do the same meta-analysis on Smiletrue who I've watched play one game and who was in another game I MC'd that I do on Sinical who I've played dozens of games with, watched several others, and MC'd at least 8 games he's been in. I think I'm good at analyzing behavior patterns, so I post analysis based on that. From using that same analysis I do in the game on you here, my guess is that you don't think you're good at doing it. A lot of doing anything is just thinking you're going to do it well. I've spent a lot of years not cooking and not drawing thinking I would do it poorly before I forced myself to find out that I'd do it well.

If you want to do meta-analysis, I suggest you just try it. Look over a bunch of posts by someone, then compare it with what they're doing in the game, and try to guess what it means is going on with them now. 

Yeah, promoting non-werewolf stuff can't be enforced or helped. I mean, look at the other topics, it's a desert. 

From what I can tell, the struggle is how disadvantageous it is to be a newcomer, assuming the newcomer is not a werewolf enthusiast like Inu. Naturaully, playing with people you've been playing with for a while is more inviting than playing with strangers. I'm not sure actively reaching out to new players during the game would be something people would be interested in. It might mean breaking up your play-style, but it would definitely help activity, based on what I've read... If there was some way to make Sparkbomb more friendly, or the game more friendly.

I would say being part of a baddie team is a good experience in getting to know people. I think I got to know Inu in one game we were baddies. I learned Inu is a traitor and did me in when things got tough for me. Just kidding... but really.

Given that experience, maybe it can be reproduced with similar mechanics. For example, one mechanic would be that the MC can give two players an item. And the two players have to decide through PM what to do with the item like choosing what kind of power to use from it, what to do with it next, etc. It could also be goal oriented rather than executing a power. Maybe you have to convince another person to vote the same way as you to invoke a certain power. Generally, the mechanic is privately joining players to execute shared action(s), regardless of alignment (not inheritance), after initial roles are given out. I patent these mechanics as "Bed's mechanics". Gasp09.png

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bed said:

Should we be expecting new and inexperience players to perform meta-analysis by comparing existing outside-game posts to what is inside the game? I don't think I've ever done that, or would be surprise that someone would go to such lengths. That said, I'm surprised that Inu went through that. 

I only analyze game posts, because it shows how someone behaves under relevant pressures, but I do analyze them. I used Smiletrue as an example because she's the newest player. I have already analyzed her posts in both games she's been in, but one I was MC'ing so I had to read them anyway, and the other was the most recent game that I was watching as best I could during my surgery recovery.

4 hours ago, Bed said:

I learned Inu is a traitor and did me in when things got tough for me. Just kidding... but really.

Me? Sink a teammate when they start to take on water? You betcha. :) I don't believe in protecting your teammates as a villain, as people here take the "wine in front of me" perspective on villain defense every time. Sinical managed to get sentiment against him the first day a few dozen games back, and he was quite upset with me that I turned on him. 

4 hours ago, Bed said:

Given that experience, maybe it can be reproduced with similar mechanics. For example, one mechanic would be that the MC can give two players an item. And the two players have to decide through PM what to do with the item like choosing what kind of power to use from it, what to do with it next, etc. It could also be goal oriented rather than executing a power. Maybe you have to convince another person to vote the same way as you to invoke a certain power. Generally, the mechanic is privately joining players to execute shared action(s), regardless of alignment (not inheritance), after initial roles are given out. I patent these mechanics as "Bed's mechanics". Gasp09.png

A thought along those lines - for a no-PM game, set it up from the start where every player is paired off with a PM with the MC, You have no idea if your partner is good or bad, but that is the only person you can communicate with during the game. The villain team would have their group message and individually each be paired off with an innocent. That might force some people to talk to someone they hadn't talked with before.

I have used codes that players have to exchange privately to enable certain powers or trigger certain game events (like the peace treaty). That might be another variation on "Bed's mechanics". In a game I ran on Twitter, players had codes for powers that they had limitations on. For example, they might have a role that got 5 codes a night but could only use 3 of them. Someone else might get 3 codes and yet be able to use 5 of them. They had to privately figure out who to entrust the codes to. The neutral player got only 1 code, but could use infinite codes, so if they hadn't killed him off, he could have been valuable to whichever faction worked with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, lion wiggles said:

You have spent years playing with each other and that allows you to immediately analyze each other's posts.

But how often are we right about our analysis? ;) I've been pretty shoddy with mine, and while MCing I notice a lot of people saying they "knew all along" after the fact. Sinical is the only person that has been consistent enough with his reads to be recognized for it.

10 hours ago, lion wiggles said:

Also, maybe we just need to make more of an effort to recruit people. I know I have thought of at least two or 3 people that would really enjoy playing this. But I've never fully invited them. 

I guess I should take the effort. Effort can be so tiresome, though. ;)

But so so worth it. Figure out which one you think would be most interested and invite him/her to join in.

5 hours ago, Bed said:

Yeah, promoting non-werewolf stuff can't be enforced or helped. I mean, look at the other topics, it's a desert. 

I'm not sure where the cross-section in our community is anymore. We're a decade past being active on Neopets. Role playing was always hit and miss. The DnD group was active for a while primarily off-site. The art community was only particularly active when Nebiros was pushing it. Random shenanigans are always possible. I think the last one was the train phase we went through. (And the political and debate discussions are ages dead, despite the fact that now would be a time to bring up political discussion.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Shattered Rift said:

(And the political and debate discussions are ages dead, despite the fact that now would be a time to bring up political discussion.)

I figured it was like hesitance to summoning a monster at first, but now given the situation it's more like putting salt on an open wound. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to think the key isn't really to know players. It's to understand why people are doing what they are doing.

Someone can make a completely coherent, logical post for why X is evil. But then the real question is: why do they want us to think X is evil?

So don't worry too much about the logic of arguments people make and focus more on the logic of why. Why that vote? Why that argument or post?

And the more you do it, the more often you will be right, through practice.  The problem then becomes: when do you admit you were wrong and how do you get everyone to believe that you are right? Getting everyone on the same page becomes the hardest task. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shattered Rift said:

But how often are we right about our analysis? ;) I've been pretty shoddy with mine, and while MCing I notice a lot of people saying they "knew all along" after the fact. Sinical is the only person that has been consistent enough with his reads to be recognized for it.

It's important to remember that it's a tool for a specific set of uses. You only execute on a read if you don't have other info to work off of (or if it's one of the rare absolute reads, such as Liz and Traj in the 2015 All-Stars). A read can also help you narrow down who to use info powers on or who to disable. Sinical made near-absolute reads into something of an art form for a while, and I've gotten into a "zone" with it for a while, but reading is mostly an in-between tool for finding threads to investigate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without going too far off topic, reads are somewhat luck based and hard to improve on.

Any evidence at all can be misleading. A tracking result that shows somebody targeting somebody that died looks evil as hell, but there can be an explanation for it which makes the person innocent. Just like sometimes my reads strike me as somebody being obviously evil, when in fact they were innocent and had reason for behaving that way.

This is made worse by the fact that your reads are always subjective. Sometimes you're just absolutely wrong but you can't easily tell it apart from times when you got unlucky unless you have a ton of experience playing. If you can't work out when you made bad mistakes and when you got unlukcy, it really becomes hard to identify mistakes and correct them.

To take this one step further, peoples lack of success with reads early on is what makes them even stop attempting them. I mean, people will still have some suspicions but they won't vocalise them or act upon them short of investigating them if their role permits.

(Okay I'll shut up now. Back to the main topic.)

 

Oh and as for roletrading. I also pretty much don't contact anybody until the game requires me to do so. Sometimes there are exceptions, and in those exceptions I go full out (I think I was in contact with about 20 people at one time in NPMs all star game..) but 95% of the games I just let things go on as they will and only get more involved if I'm alive later in the game when things need to be really narrowed down.

Edited by Sinical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that Gunslingers' mechanics aren't forgotten, and since they're pertinent to this subject...

Despite running a game that required a certain level of activity to use abilities and maximize one's personal position (within a game where more than half of the players had individual motivation: I'm counting the baddies in that along with the goal-neutrals), we still saw low activity among baddies and sub-optimal activity among most others. Speaking personally, some of my posts were certainly suboptimal or wouldn't have been made at all under different circumstances.

I think this is also the first time where activity has been necessary for power use rather than simply providing a bonus (as usually found in Shop-based games, and I think we've had a game or two where post count buffed a person's shield).

While this is only one case, it does suggest that even direct encouragement has middling effects.

There was also the decidedly negative problem that more active players were more powerful and thus "better" considerations for execution. Whether that's true or not is probably less debatable than I think it is, but it was definitely antithetical to the goal of activity. (And it's once again a reminder that, while there's an overarching ideal, individual games are played in the interest of the here and now.) This didn't end up impacting the game, but it's possible that that's because execution wasn't as immediately necessary and recurring as in other games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shattered Rift said:

There was also the decidedly negative problem that more active players were more powerful and thus "better" considerations for execution. Whether that's true or not is probably less debatable than I think it is, but it was definitely antithetical to the goal of activity. (And it's once again a reminder that, while there's an overarching ideal, individual games are played in the interest of the here and now.) This didn't end up impacting the game, but it's possible that that's because execution wasn't as immediately necessary and recurring as in other games.

I don't think that was a real problem. Cel wanted to shoot people based on activity because her goal required having the most fame. No one ever actually shot anyone based on visible currency gain levels, or I or Inu/Weee would have been shot during the game (neither of us were).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was there hesitancy to not shoot someone that is low-post? How I read it was that the MC says if you are not posting, you are not playing to win. The players with the lowest posts appears to have won the game. 

I'm thinking when the MC says that low-posters are not a threat, then why would people shoot them or get rid of them? Just wondering if that was taken into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bed said:

Was there hesitancy to not shoot someone that is low-post? How I read it was that the MC says if you are not posting, you are not playing to win. The players with the lowest posts appears to have won the game. 

I'm thinking when the MC says that low-posters are not a threat, then why would people shoot them or get rid of them? Just wondering if that was taken into consideration.

Zilary was shot extensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see, not sure what to think. So... the consensus is... that the majority of ppl didn't shoot others based on the fact that they appear powerful? 

Looking at the stats briefly, the shooting table is not updated or something to reflect the stat HP. Also not sure about the post per day. Are they just posts blac thinks is point worthy? I thought Zil had posted more than that.

Not sure what to think about the mechanic that gives you more chance to win the more you post. Apparently it wasn't too powerful? 

Edited by Bed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only just found this thread (I have a bad habit of never looking outside the WW games subforum), so here are my thoughts all at once without quoting anyone:

- After doing pretty well several games in a row by being in touch with the same people each game, I decided it'd be more fun for (hopefully) everyone if I purposely contacted players I wasn't usually in contact with. I've tried to keep that up, although at this point, I think I've PMed literally every player who's played with me recently in PM-allowed games, so "PM someone new" isn't really the goal anymore.

- When I co-hosted with Sinical, I made extensive use of replacements. I believe most of the replaced players had indeed read their roles and posted at some point, but then stopped posting. I was partly only able to do that because I have a group of friends I talk to on a regular basis who are very willing to try new things - I realize not every MC would have been able to find that many people on such short notice. (I have no sympathy for situations in which people have volunteered to be replacements and the MC chooses not to use them.)

- 48-hour days are even worse for activity than 24-hour days, based on recent games. Inu described the problem really well - no matter how much time you give people, some number of them will insist on waiting until the last 6 hours of the Day to do anything.

- I haven't seen it mentioned here, but do people think inconsistent Night results posting time contributes to people's hesitation to be more active earlier in the Day? This is entirely based on gut feeling, but I think shorter time between cutoff and results encourages people to start talking right after results are posted instead of 12 hours later.

- Some of us are so dedicated to player-led activity initiatives that they'll attack their own teammates! It's okay, Zilary survived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bed said:

I see, not sure what to think. So... the consensus is... that the majority of ppl didn't shoot others based on the fact that they appear powerful? 

Looking at the stats briefly, the shooting table is not updated or something to reflect the stat HP. Also not sure about the post per day. Are they just posts blac thinks is point worthy? I thought Zil had posted more than that.

Not sure what to think about the mechanic that gives you more chance to win the more you post. Apparently it wasn't too powerful? 

I don't think a single shot can be attributed to that.

No, blacjak counted every post that Zilary made.

Most players wouldn't need more than 3 posts per day for maximum effectiveness. I don't think winning was strongly correlated with post counts during the game (partially evidenced by two of the players with the lowest post counts winning).

33 minutes ago, weee5067 said:

- I haven't seen it mentioned here, but do people think inconsistent Night results posting time contributes to people's hesitation to be more active earlier in the Day? This is entirely based on gut feeling, but I think shorter time between cutoff and results encourages people to start talking right after results are posted instead of 12 hours later.

This is a good point. Fast and consistent updates encourages players to stay up for results and post their thoughts immediately afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me about an hour to fully process and release updates once I got home from work each night, assuming I didn't fall asleep. I think I could have definitely been more efficient in doing so however. I suppose preparing the update before the deadline is something that could be done for expedient results, but wasn't exactly an option for me and I needed the fluctuating deadline to even make the game possible at all since my schedule flips 10 hours every 3 days. The more variables there are in a game, including players, the longer it takes to process. I don't think this was an issue of time to update, but rather the time of update. Since most people are not nocturnal, the update came out just before players should have woken up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rift- I've done failure to vote/post being a self disable before, but I think it's the first to require this much activity. I would also say you were perfectly active. Not every post has to be a wall of text.

Rex- A lot of why the bottom two in activity won was because resources were being shuffled to cover for them. Zilary took the heat off Lion, and we passed resources to Zilary to keep her alive and shooting when it benefitted us. Had the innocents been more shootey, we would have had no chance of keeping Zil alive, which would have left Lion next on the chopping block. My thievery is a tremendous support role, but not so good at secretive offense.

Bed- By the time people started shooting, there was a neon arrow pointing at Zilary's inactivity correlated to sniper shots. It was coincidence since she wasn't the one shooting and Lion could have shot day 1, but I think it's the driving factor outside of the Rock duel. Activity was incidental rather than relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I have just skimmed through this thread and due to the Gunslingers where activity increased powers, I would like to offer some input.

I want to echo a lot of Lion's sentiments on this thread as a player who isn't as active as we would like to be. I do agree that "lying low" is not necessarily a valid strategy, especially with games with fewer players, but I tend to not want to post as much on thread if there's nothing I feel like I can contribute or has already been said or I haven't receive enough confidence in my night results or get a vibe from someone enough to call them out. Maybe it is me needing to grow in that area and in my playstyle to be more vocal and accusatory of who I am suspicious of upfront, but as of now, I'm not comfortable enough to do that. I am trying to work on it though.

Also, what is consider "too low" of activity? If I am posting at least once every day, is voting every day, and submitting a list every night, I feel like I have contributed and is active, even though may feel like I am meeting the minimum of activity. I agree that positive reinforcements and incentives linked with power use is a way to approach to go beyond that. I agree with giving players a role that they feel like they can contribute more with on thread is helpful too. But sometimes I just do as much in werewolf as I feel my life schedule allows, and I know that's not necessarily a good thing.

When I am on a baddie team, I do not want it to seem like I am riding on the coattails of the most active player on my team to win, and I'm sorry if I have appeared that way in the past. I did feel a little bit of that in the Gunslingers game where Weeenuyasha were the most vocal and active player on my team, but at the same time, I did try my best to contribute and post more on thread, even if it is not to the extent as other more active players were posting. I don't know how it is for other baddie teams, but the ones I have been on, there is usually one person who naturally rises as the leader, and ends up being the consultant/decision-maker as to what the baddie team should do. Should the other baddie players be more vocal, then unanimously reach a decision? That feels a bit more time commitment and trying to schedule than schedules may allow. I'm totally cool and understand if one of the baddie members kills off another due to on-thread suspicions or whatnot. I was ready for the Ruffians to kill me off, if necessary and I thought it was a good move that Weee shot me first thing when she took Inu's role.

As far as PMs go, I don't usually PM in WW games unless I have investigated a person and is confident that person is innocent or if another player PMs me first. The latter does mean I am wary of the player PMing me (which I understand is part of the game, figuring out whether or not to trust the people who PM you out of nowhere) or maybe if they want something from me, swaying my final votes one way or another. I know this is all part of the game, but I guess it didn't occur to me that there are players who PM other players at the start of the game versus towards the end. I just hadn't thought of being more active in PMs upfront, but I will take that into consideration.

I do want to give props for @Blacjak for his game in both incentivizing activity with power use as well as allowing dead players to speak on the main thread (even though it wasn't use as much). It did make me want to post a bit more than I usually would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zilary said:

Also, what is consider "too low" of activity?

Personally, I hold that the most liberal interpretation is the best we can hope to stop for now: Going silent for full days while still being online to read and do things. Failing to submit lists or do other required activities without being absent is also a problem (eg. someone not shooting the first 2 days).

I would like to see the minimum become a couple "non-spam posts" a day, to use Blac's terminology. 5 a day was a good maximum, and 3 a day worked well as a minimum for Blac's game because they worked like "rollover" fame, letting you earn extra early and then coast a little with fewer posts while still being active. I'm also trying something with my current game regarding the failed list submission by requiring a "doing nothing" message rather than letting people ignore that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say not posting for 24 hours (even if the Day length is longer) is "too low". I'm less concerned about list-sending.

I'd also like to say that I don't think getting replaced for inactivity should be considered a 'punishment', because that seems to make people hesitant to use it. It doesn't matter whether you forgot about the game, got horribly ill, or decided that not posting would make you less suspicious than posting - the point is that, for the sake of the game, if you can't contribute on-thread, you should be replaced with someone who can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now