Apathy. A weapon for Mafia only?

[OzyWho]

Apathy. The level of a person's or collective's willingness to change the direction of the game. How much they care enough.

(please correct me if I'm wrong since I had a hard time finding the official FM definition)

For the purpose of this discussion, let's assume that's the official definition because it's what I want to hear your opinions about in this topic.

Apathy is a powerful and popular Mafia weapon to use, and it can be disguised in many different ways and forms in plain sight - most of which evolve around the idea of making the thread unreadable with circular arguments and all that.
But what I want to know, can Townies use it as a weapon? What do you think?

In the most recent S-FM game (Instant Mafia) @Stealthbomber16 's Apathy was increased to a maximum by me. It was done so by being toxic, yes, but let's not talk about that atm

It worked in that game because:

1. the nature of the setup
2. MM wasn't there
3. SB16 just happened to be a Mafia
4. if both Mafias were there - they could had easily made a case against me and Kira and say that I decreased SB16's morale and Kira claiming "SB16 has given up" - making us 2 look like a scum team.

If it was a regular setup, I would had been lynched D2 100% if SB16 wasn't Mafia.


So what's the verdict? Is it a viable Town Tactic ever?

[Efekannn02]

Just use it...
I dont know lol but im immune to that

[aamirus]

as a tactic do you mean "trying to make other players become apathetic?". Because that's just toxic...

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I'll put it bluntly : Apathy sucks, it makes games not fun for ANY ALIGNMENT, and should never be used as a strategy. Lurking isn't apathy, it's picking rare moments to appear and direct the flow, defending yourself, pushing at a specific player, etc. (which is definetly a playstyle, and is arguably the best one at times), while apathy is nonparticipation. Apathy is not good, and encouraging apathy is extremely scummy at best, and really toxic and unenjoyable (to the point of it being very close, if not literally, griefing).

The definition you gave is indeed the right one, so it's not a definition issue. If you're being apathetic, that's on you, you might get lynched for it, you might get replaced for it, you might get punished for it, and most importantly, you're wasting everyone's time, effort, and fun, including your own. Encouraging others to be apathetic means making the game not fun. It's the ONLY WAY to make people not want to participate anymore, not caring anymore.


I don't even think this topic should have to be discussed, given the incredible amount of times "game quality" was involved in playstyle judgements and in toxic behavior. If you're making the game not fun, you're not being fun to play with, and you are being intentionally offensive.

In short : Being apathetic yourself sucks and will get you in trouble, and "encouraging" others to be apathetic will simply get you banned from FMs on a long term basis.


Note that I am not saying that this has happened before, but stating that it would be absolutely intolerable to promote apathy sensu stricto.

[Voss]

Mostly ditto-ing MM here.

I'd posit that when people play games, you should be looking for the everyone-is-having-fun-but-I-win win, not the everyone-hates-this-game-because-of-the-way-I-played win. And if you have to play a little bit suboptimally to so that everyone has fun, it's better in the long run. There have been numerous times when I've played deception/deduction type games IRL where I could have been an asshole and ensured my victory, (and sometimes I did), but if/when I did that, it was harder for me to convince people to play again with me.

I don't know if people have picked up on this, but I'll sometimes vote out people that are being uncooperative assholes in the hopes that they are scum.

but also, I think that Ozy had a different idea apathy than MM might have?

[Kenny]

I'll put it bluntly : Apathy sucks, it makes games not fun for ANY ALIGNMENT, and should never be used as a strategy. Lurking isn't apathy, it's picking rare moments to appear and direct the flow, defending yourself, pushing at a specific player, etc. (which is definetly a playstyle, and is arguably the best one at times), while apathy is nonparticipation. Apathy is not good, and encouraging apathy is extremely scummy at best, and really toxic and unenjoyable (to the point of it being very close, if not literally, griefing).

The definition you gave is indeed the right one, so it's not a definition issue. If you're being apathetic, that's on you, you might get lynched for it, you might get replaced for it, you might get punished for it, and most importantly, you're wasting everyone's time, effort, and fun, including your own. Encouraging others to be apathetic means making the game not fun. It's the ONLY WAY to make people not want to participate anymore, not caring anymore.


I don't even think this topic should have to be discussed, given the incredible amount of times "game quality" was involved in playstyle judgements and in toxic behavior. If you're making the game not fun, you're not being fun to play with, and you are being intentionally offensive.

In short : Being apathetic yourself sucks and will get you in trouble, and "encouraging" others to be apathetic will simply get you banned from FMs on a long term basis.


Note that I am not saying that this has happened before, but stating that it would be absolutely intolerable to promote apathy sensu stricto.

I want no one talking to MM. He's 'confirmed' scum. Don't kill him. It'd also be great for everyone to state that they will not be addressing MM.
Once again, please no one address MM. No quotes, no nothing. He's only contributing to wifom. I'm hoping he gets bored.

[Voss]

I want no one talking to MM. He's 'confirmed' scum. Don't kill him. It'd also be great for everyone to state that they will not be addressing MM.
Once again, please no one address MM. No quotes, no nothing. He's only contributing to wifom. I'm hoping he gets bored.

I think I said that in that one president's game.

Well, I know I didn't say "I hope he gets bored". but everything else, I think I did

[Voss]

Although the behavior is not excusable, I think the scenario is different with confirmed, outed scums that you don't need to work with to win the game.

[Kenny]

I think I said that in that one president's game.

Well, I know I didn't say "I hope he gets bored". but everything else, I think I did

You did say that, it's a quote with only the name replaced lol

[Kenny]

Imo definitely a valid tactic anyway for both sides even if just to discredit someone out of fear.

[Kenny]

Tho the correct way is to shitpost and to encourage shitposting, not to be toxic and drive people away

[Marshmallow Marshall]

Mostly ditto-ing MM here.

I'd posit that when people play games, you should be looking for the everyone-is-having-fun-but-I-win win, not the everyone-hates-this-game-because-of-the-way-I-played win. And if you have to play a little bit suboptimally to so that everyone has fun, it's better in the long run. There have been numerous times when I've played deception/deduction type games IRL where I could have been an asshole and ensured my victory, (and sometimes I did), but if/when I did that, it was harder for me to convince people to play again with me.

I don't know if people have picked up on this, but I'll sometimes vote out people that are being uncooperative assholes in the hopes that they are scum.

but also, I think that Ozy had a different idea apathy than MM might have?

On all but the last line : exactly. Sure, sometimes, the optimal play on the moment is to be an asshole scum and to completely destroy the game's activity with very borderline insults, murder of the active and "zen" players, etc., but it's just not fun, and not really rewarding either. And as Voss said, people won't want to play with you if you do that.

As for the potentially different definitions, I fully disagree. Ozy took the precaution of defining his terms before exposing his views, which is very important and wise. His definition is this : Apathy. The level of a person's or collective's willingness to change the direction of the game. How much they care enough.
I strongly doubt there is a definition misunderstanding here.

And if someone has doubts on my point of view or finds me extremist, feel free to take a look at how other sites handle those players. The most lenient ones will just see the majority of players hate people who have the aforementioned behavior, and the most strict ones will simply have them banned from their games, if not from their site. I'm obviously not going to give examples, though.

TL;DR : If you're being intentionally or at least consciously toxic and severly anti-fun, you're doing something wrong.

[Kenny]

You can also pretend that and be trying to get players desperate, which is arguably one of the best methods of gaining true and telling reactions out of someone.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I want no one talking to MM. He's 'confirmed' scum. Don't kill him. It'd also be great for everyone to state that they will not be addressing MM.
Once again, please no one address MM. No quotes, no nothing. He's only contributing to wifom. I'm hoping he gets bored.

lol

Although the behavior is not excusable, I think the scenario is different with confirmed, outed scums that you don't need to work with to win the game.

I was town in the President game, though... xD

I think you said that to Distorted, though, not to me (he was Theodore Roosevelt). But it wasn't really offensive. You weren't encouraging him to be apathetic for a strategy, you were encouraging others to not listen to the bunch of lies he was saying. That's different.

Imo definitely a valid tactic anyway for both sides even if just to discredit someone out of fear.

Valid? Depends on your definition. Yes, sometimes, it will give you a slight edge compared to other strategies. But it will never be good and fair play, and it will never be fun for anyone outside of yourself in the event you are sadistic.

Tho the correct way is to shitpost and to encourage shitposting, not to be toxic and drive people away

^ this strategy can work just as well as "strategy toxicity", with very similar effects, but without making people sad/hating you and all.


I will go on a very related topic and say that people ought to be careful with their words. Several people that I know of, among different sites, have been hurt by words of players. Not everyone is solid on their ego, self-esteem or similar. Attacking a player, a person instead of their slot is ALWAYS bad and should NEVER be done or be accepted as a correct strategy. Mafia is a social game. A game of lies, of deceit and of backstabbing, yes, but also and mostly a game of fun. If you're being anti-fun, you're not doing things right.
Plus, people tend to listen much less to people they hate or who are being rude to them than to people who are being nice and rational (as a general rule, of course, not an absolute, because only a Sith deals in absolutes ).

[Kenny]

I just fully disagree here on apathy not being a strong tool to use tbh. I'd feel like that'd be a huge handicap for me if I had to stop with that

[Marshmallow Marshall]

I just fully disagree here on apathy not being a strong tool to use tbh. I'd feel like that'd be a huge handicap for me if I had to stop with that

The issue here lies within a definition of the word apathy, though. Promoting inactivity or useless discussions is different from making people not want to play the game anymore.

If you find yourself disagreeing with my points on a strict meaning basis with the right definitions (the ones I use in my posts are the ones Ozy used when he created the thread, which makes them "right" here), then I guess you might have to re-think your playstyle, unless you are making the point that making people not care about the game anymore because they just don't like it when you turned it in X way is a perfectly legit way to play Mafia and doesn't affect the players in a negative way outside of the precise game you're playing...

...in which case I will say that it's opportunistic in the most negative meaning of the term. You don't do that in games, though, so I think it's just a definition misunderstanding here. Using people's inactivity is perfectly ok, but making them go inactive and most importantly apathetic is not, because it means you're being toxic. I think you're talking about the former, not the latter.

[Kenny]

The issue here lies within a definition of the word apathy, though. Promoting inactivity or useless discussions is different from making people not want to play the game anymore.

If you find yourself disagreeing with my points on a strict meaning basis with the right definitions (the ones I use in my posts are the ones Ozy used when he created the thread, which makes them "right" here), then I guess you might have to re-think your playstyle, unless you are making the point that making people not care about the game anymore because they just don't like it when you turned it in X way is a perfectly legit way to play Mafia and doesn't affect the players in a negative way outside of the precise game you're playing...

...in which case I will say that it's opportunistic in the most negative meaning of the term. You don't do that in games, though, so I think it's just a definition misunderstanding here. Using people's inactivity is perfectly ok, but making them go inactive and most importantly apathetic is not, because it means you're being toxic. I think you're talking about the former, not the latter.

Apathy. The level of a person's or collective's willingness to change the direction of the game. How much they care enough.

I don't think Ozy ever said this would be limited to inactivity

[OzyWho]

@Marshmallow Marshall
tbh, I think you misunderstood how "generating apathy" looks. Because im 99% sure I have seen you and Distorted do it as scum, and I have only seen 1 distorted scum game, 2 you scum games. Distorted by flooding the thread with accusations and scumpainting left and right, you by creating 99999999999 posts in 24 hours.

-engage with a player and meet all their logic with your own logic, and you gum the thread and make it impossible to follow
-see someone who loves to make wallposts and ask them 100 questions
-make random large ISO's of random people for no purpose but to flood the thread and look busy (now tell me you havent done this as Scum?)
-don't let shy townies be in the "driver seat" by being yourself (now tell me you havent dont this as Scum?)
-someone's leading the town? Kill them. Increase town's overall apathy.(now tell me you havent dont this as Scum?)[/I]
-townies policy lynch people who increase apathy, so it's fair game
-some townies gives arguments why he townreads someone else and he is a rational player? completel shutter his reasonins with logic. (now tell me you havent dont this as Scum?)[/I]
-by being in command of town, you can choose to ignore 1 player's posts, so they think noone is hearing them. (this is simply bad play and no town should be able to allow this to happen, so its fair game)
-flood the thread by discussing the same topic 10 different ways. Not in a shitpost kinda way.
-see someone spammy when irritated? irritate them!

-TELL ME YOU HAVEN'T INCREASED APATHY AS SCUM BY MAKING THE THREAD HARD TO READ. I call it BS if you do.

One of the best ways to spread apathy is to simply say the game is drowning in it already, then say you’ll combat it… then push for the status quo in a loud manner. People will often confuse “loud and active and rallying” for “decreasing apathy” when in truth you can actually increase apathy by forcing people to remain on the same path while being sly.

[Kenny]

I think you just increased apathy

[OzyWho]

take a look at how other sites handle those players Apathy.

Well.. you know. I learned that word from a tutorial/guide done by a MafiaUniverse's "Head Moderator", so there's that...
Yeah I'm very sure there's some misunderstanding here. Just not sure from/by whom.

I think you just increased apathy

It's unfortunate that I have a natural talent for it, in every area in my life.

Edit: @Kenny Are you on a Mafia Team with MM? Because you didn't point it out when MM was actively and shamelessly trying to increase Apathy on discussing Apathy in his opening post.