animorpherv1 wrote:4. stating "X is scum" and giving no real reason why.
take it away, glrok!
Glork wrote:Originally I was going to post something along the lines of "because I said so" to draw this out and further illustrate my point, but I don't really feel like doing that, so I'm just going to explain very bluntly.
A few underlying principles:
1) Players -- especially when scum -- like to be comfortable. Bringing pressure that is difficult to respond to pulls them out of their comfort zones, making them react in a way they normally wouldn't react. This makes it significantly more likely that they will say or do something particularly telling of their alignments.
2) In the long-term, players often reveal the most about themselves when acting on limited information. While this maxim generally applies to the notion that D1 and D2 are the most revealing parts of a mafia game, it also applies when dealing with "unexplained votes."
2a) Let's look at the general case of an unexplained vote from a player of unknown alignment. The motivation for a protown player is to discern the intent of the voter, generally in order to obtain their alignment. The motivation of an anti-town player is to discern the intent of the voter (which sometimes involves seeking alignment) and to best utilize the situation to their advantage. There is an important, if subtle, difference. By cultivating our exploration of these differences, we can find new tools to seek and destroy the scumbaggoes amongst us.
2b) Now consider the case where I am a confirmed protown player making an unexplainded vote. In this case, my motivation is very clear. In some way, I am seeking to find scum. Here, I'm actually going to dip into one of my trade secrets and note that protown players tend to have a broader picture of our voter's intent, whereas scums tend to focus more on themselves (or, sometimes, their allies). If the person I'm voting is more concerened with how everyone else reacts than with deflecting my attack, they are usually more likely to be protown. If they immediately seek to bury someone else in accusations, wildly reject my vote/claims outright, or blame-shift, they're more likely to be scum.
3) Taking an alternate approach to scumhunting allows one to take advantage of "weak points" in other players' gameplay. Most mafia is played in the public arena. Players openly debate and discuss who is scum and why. Thus, most people tend to focus most of their attention on growing and evolving as players in this realm of open banter. A couple years ago, I learned that the vast majority of players didn't know how to react to certain circumstances. One such circumtsance was a completely irrational, yet intensely focused onslaught from an established player. This was a very noticeable chink in the mafia community's collective armor, and while you had your Internet Strangers and your Baby Jesuses (the paragons of this style of play), people who effectively played without explanation were very few and far between. Thus, very few players put the necessary time, thought, and effort into ensuring that they new how to interact with these playstyles. Over time, parts of the community evolve, and playing such playstyles shifts and changes just as the overall game meta does. Not only do they not know how to react, and not only do they give more information about themselves, but their weaknesses are actually exploitable, allowing the attacker as an individual to crack other players' shells and expose their soft, fleshy interiors, thus opening the game up for everybody.
And FYI, Xtoxm is a poor benchmark for erratic behavior. It has to be used in moderation, and is really only useful after one has established oneself as being able to consistently find scum using traditional methods. If I had been wild and erratic immediately after joining Scum in 2005, I don't think I'd be anywhere near where I am today. The biggest issue with seemingly :nothelpful: play is that far too many players have no idea when, where or how frequently to utilize it.... so they really do end up just being :nothelpful:. It's awfully hard to explain... something you more have to see and experience over time.
Keep in mind that like these behaviors are also very case-specific. I will not treat Thok the same way I would treat an Oman or a Vollkan or somebody I've never played with.
Now.
Did you know that unexplained votes are the best things ever?
