RVS v RQS

[Espeonage]

I have seen (and have instigated myself) many more games starting with an RQS as apposed to the site norm of an RVS. I personally like RQS's better as they provide a basis for semi serious cases from the beginning of the game which I deem to be a good thing. I know others disaprove and argue that RQS just leads to time wasting and ends up back where it started, but I am interested to see where others stand on the debate or even if people think that having both is beneficial.

[vollkan]

I have seen (and have instigated myself) many more games starting with an RQS as apposed to the site norm of an RVS. I personally like RQS's better as they provide a basis for semi serious cases from the beginning of the game which I deem to be a good thing. I know others disaprove and argue that RQS just leads to time wasting and ends up back where it started, but I am interested to see where others stand on the debate or even if people think that having both is beneficial.

Both are rarely that useful in terms of leading directly to scumhunting. However, I think RQS has advantages in that it can be used to get useful information that you might not otherwise remember to ask for (time zones, how often people tend to post, etc.). Either way, the level of disapproval that RQS gets from a lot of people doesn't seem justified.

[Hoopla]

RQS is more useful in games with unique mechanics - discussing theory can be a pretty organic way of starting a dialogue, which will inevitably lead to arguments and suspicions. You also get the benefits of possibly crafting a strategy or sharing ideas/information that can boost town's chances.

[Regfan]

Wow. Hoopla, you're the first person who has shared my thoughts on this topic.

RVS or RQS? Neither, I think both detract from real scumhunting and lead the game to be iceboken by useless discussion rather then relevant reasoning. Personally I like to begin the game with a discussion on the setup in particular to work out what the optimal way to play it is.

[shaft.ed]

vote: vollkan

he knows why

[Faraday]

I hate when people ask inane questions in those sort of surveys and tend to ignore them.

[Amrun]

I hate when people ask inane questions in those sort of surveys and tend to ignore them.

This. You don't need to know my fucking hobbies.

[Lord Gurgi]

For a while I did cockamamie things like asking people inane questions and posting predictions for the mafia team on page one. It's not worth the effort.

Calm and patient play wins more than gimmicks ever will.

[DeathRowKitty]

RVS is much much much better than RQS. Once someone starts asking questions, the game derails (this is 117% unavoidable) and becomes almost entirely about people answering questions that are not directly relevant to the game and are therefore (mostly) useless to determining alignment in that game. There are one or two exceptions to that (you might be able to draw alignment-relevant information out of reactions to the questions (unlikely, but possible) or attitude towards the questions (a bit more likely, but a bit more subtle)), but for the most part, I've found that the RQS just encourages extraneous discussion.

The counter-argument to this, I assume, is that the RVS isn't game-relevant either, but I disagree. The problem with a RQS is that people can answer most questions asked by simply working with information they have from outside of the game, which allows people to answer the questions in a mindset detached from their alignment. However, any little change in an RVS or other early lightheartedness from past experiences forces scum to make a decision about what to do. Sure, most of what's said will still be null tells, but you'd be surprised how the smallest thing can get a meaningful reaction.

I typed up a couple paragraphs on when scum are/aren't easy to catch and then deleted it because it got too far off topic. The tl;dr version: the first few pages of a game are AWESOME for scumhunting.

[Yosarian2]

I have yet to see a game where random obligatory questions, of the type where someone is asking questions because they think it's a good idea for some reason, really had much of a positive impact on the game.

[Vi]

I have yet to see a game where random obligatory questions, of the type where someone is asking questions because they think it's a good idea for some reason, really had much of a positive impact on the game.

One. A Miller claim helped out, but the first vote cast in this game was serious and on scum.

I've tried to repeat this, with no success. You NEED a competent and cooperative player list to do this, and those generally don't exist.

Or maybe these weren't the kinds of questions you were thinking of?

[Zachrulez]

RVS is pretty easy to end. RQS not so much... You can make a real effort to get the game seriously going and people will ignore it in favor of answering questions that generally don't get you anywhere.

[Haylen]

RVS, I've used RQS to my advantage resulting in a scum win before. If I can do it and not get caught, anyone can.

[Incognito]

Want a quick, easy way to decrease town morale? Use RQS! It works!

[Zachrulez]

Haylen/Incog scumteam. GG

[The Fonz]

I have yet to see a game where random obligatory questions, of the type where someone is asking questions because they think it's a good idea for some reason, really had much of a positive impact on the game.

One. A Miller claim helped out, but the first vote cast in this game was serious and on scum.

I've tried to repeat this, with no success. You NEED a competent and cooperative player list to do this, and those generally don't exist.

Actually, if there isn't a co-operative player list, then it induces an argument, which gets you where you need to go. The whole point of the random stage is to get into the situation where some of the town are saying 'Doing X is somewhat scummy' and others are saying 'No that's not scummy at all, you're trying to get a wagon for bad reasons.'

I liked RQS when it was new, and people didn't know how to react. Basically the best move is to do something unexpected, but not actually scummy, and see how other players respond.

[Empking]

The thing about the RQS is that (It seems to me) its very predictible and the big problem is that your thoughts and actions in the RQS aren't related to your alignment. Player X will never answer the RQS and player Y will always attack a player for that. With RVS you never have the same thing twice (when done properly rather that 12 unrelated votes) plus scum will base their (bandwagoning) votes off their knowledge of their scumbuddies and similar.

[PokerFace]

I support Random Vidge Stage

Go Night 0 Go!

[Magua]

I liked RQS when it was new, and people didn't know how to react. Basically the best move is to do something unexpected, but not actually scummy, and see how other players respond.

This.

The only way the R?S ever outs scum is when they're unprepared for it; then you can get closer to a "real" reaction. Once something becomes normal or commonplace -- that is, once the scum know what to expect from it -- it loses any scum-outting property.

[Sotty7]

I hate RQS so much. Without fail, someone will always refuse to answer the questions or a certain question and other people find that person scummy for that and will fight for pages over it. Drives me crazy.

That said I will always answer the stupid questions rather than engage in a theory discussion that clogs the game thread about why it is soooo bad.

[Hrezs]

I hate RQS. The only game related ones I ever see are about meta, and people asking about my meta is dumb so I never answer the questions.

[PokerFace]

I liked RQS when it was new, and people didn't know how to react. Basically the best move is to do something unexpected, but not actually scummy, and see how other players respond.

This.

The only way the R?S ever outs scum is when they're unprepared for it; then you can get closer to a "real" reaction. Once something becomes normal or commonplace -- that is, once the scum know what to expect from it -- it loses any scum-outting property.

So what we need is RAS or random action stage if you want something completly unexpected. So I still support Night 0

[A Gaggle of Geese]

That said I will always answer the stupid questions rather than engage in a theory discussion that clogs the about why it is soooo bad.

Softie. I've never found that though, I just refuse to answer, sometimes it's never even mentioned which I suppose tells a lot about the use of the questions in the first place

[ReaperCharlie]

I very much prefer

ADS (Alliance Discussion Stage)

to either RVS or RQS.

It polarizes people on whether an Alliance is good for the town or not, and reveals scum much more efficiently.

And if an Alliance is in fact adopted, it's extremely effective at revealing scum.

[The Fonz]

Only problem is people seem to think faking an investigation or dayvig is an ok thing to do to get discussion started. It isn't; it's likely to result in the target claiming, especially if they're a newer player (and if they're not, the gambit won't work).