Game Elden Ring Mafia

[Emil]

XF 2.1 - Maximum mention alerts?

What exactly controls this setting? My users tell me that not all @TaggedUsers are mentioned. For example, if a user taggs 10 other users in a post, maybe 3-4 of those 10 people will receive a notification. But all users have activated all notifications. Thanks!

xenforo.com

It's usergroup controlled, mostly to reduce notification spam (spambots can easily abuse mentions). We may eventually have to make a separate user group for Mafia just to avoid this limitation, but for the time being, we can increase the mentions limit to a decent amount or you can double post if needed. Maybe in the future we can have an advanced feature that allows you to mention all users that have replied to a thread, for Mafia only ofc, or just have it where you can fill out who the host is and the participants invovled in the game.

increase it to 20 or 30 for mafia wud be nice. i want this in NF for years lol

 

[Dalton]

am i not allowed to think out loud and see what reactions might come from it?

You are allowed to do that.

I'm allowed to say that it looks like unnecessary busywork on your part.

 

[Emil]

But he didn't clearly suggest that at all lol, unless if choose to completely ignore half his post :swaggyp:

its ratchet, he has to be picky about something. it itches him to not do so

 

[Dalton]

Imagine if he was a jester! Good heavens!

shit role, doubt odo likes them either lol

 

[Dr. Watson]

don't paneeeeeeeek

or maybe do

ah, you guys are trying to stir the pot
that's your play, gotcha

any hint of aggression is deemed as "overreacting", any reaction that doesn't get swept under the rug is "more likely to be scum", or anyone defending their reasonings is "overly defensive"

snore

yall havent seen me legit riled, and some in here can attest to that very thing
it's up to you guys if you want to poke the bear or not
and no, i won't be threatening with actions or lynches or "lel ur scum", you'll just make posting in this game very unfun to play
it's a convenient way to gauge reactions and scumhunt
and a boring one at that

and a tactic like this is far more effective with players like flower (or an equivalent to her) when pressured to spot scum

 

[Ratchet]

that there was some suss around you, then CP talked about retro, then you brought attention back to yourself.

may be unfortunate timing tbf but w/e

...I'll take that as a no.

CP asked "so who wants to vote Ratchet?"

Me, noting that he hadn't voted for me, said "so why don't you start?".

He replied by saying the wanted to keep his vote where it was, to which I followed up with pointing out that he did has some support (in reference to his original question), and that if he aims to go anywhere with this, he should probably do so soon. It's not a "please vote for me", it's a "you are seeking approval too much for this to go anywhere currently", so I wanted to see what he had to say. He mentioned Retro after this, so I suspect you're reading some of this in reverse.

 

[Dr. Watson]

unfun to play for me, not yall

 

[Emil]

But this is weird and makes no sense. He wouldn’t be getting wagoned if we thought he was town so there’s no arbitrary line here lol. If I think someone is scum and they refuse to claim then why would I not lynch them?
like if it’s someone that IS known for claiming and they refuse then perhaps you can take that into account and explore why they would do that. If it’s just somebody that refuses to claim then what does it tell you? Absolutely nothing, so you default to your scum read. Claiming is for his benefit not mine, if he doesn’t wanna help himself that’s his problem

the problem isnt whether u get the claim or not, its whether u give fang a second chance to defend himself and scum hunt without claims or not. u seem to super confident that he is scum. in that case, a claim shudnt rly matter

anyway move on. 20 other players. whose next scum?

 

[Dalton]

ah, you guys are trying to stir the pot
that's your play, gotcha

any hint of aggression is deemed as "overreacting", any reaction that doesn't get swept under the rug is "more likely to be scum", or anyone defending their reasonings is "overly defensive"

snore

yall havent seen me legit riled, and some in here can attest to that very thing
it's up to you guys if you want to poke the bear or not
and no, i won't be threatening with actions or lynches or "lel ur scum", you'll just make posting in this game very unfun to play
it's a convenient way to gauge reactions and scumhunt
and a boring one at that

and a tactic like this is far more effective with players like flower (or an equivalent to her) when pressured to spot scum

it was just a joke, we can still be friends <3

 

[Emil]

no its not

"because some players don't know you guys, meta reads should either not be used or kept to a minimum"
is still saying
meta reading should not be used or kept to a min (for the sake of players new to others)
it's just the paranthesis that add nuance

keep it to minimum or define it like how we defined fang's meta to them

 

[Dalton]

...I'll take that as a no.

CP asked "so who wants to vote Ratchet?"

Me, noting that he hadn't voted for me, said "so why don't you start?".

He replied by saying the wanted to keep his vote where it was, to which I followed up with pointing out that he did has some support (in reference to his original question), and that if he aims to go anywhere with this, he should probably do so soon. It's not a "please vote for me", it's a "you are seeking approval too much for this to go anywhere currently", so I wanted to see what he had to say. He mentioned Retro after this, so I suspect you're reading some of this in reverse.

That was a while back though wasnt it?

Or maybe my time is fucked because I read through most of the thread at once now over hte past hour or two.

 

[Tempest]

That's strange, because apparently you agreed with them earlier. What changed?

I liked the initial vote because you echo'd what I was saying/thinking about Ekko echo'ing people and having read more than he was letting on but the more I thought about it the less paranoid I felt. I also saw that post where you tried to make it out like Ekko making one post telling people to go invisible was his "focus" when it was just one short post among a lot of other more substantive posts. Then another post where you were whinging a bit about "shit" players or something that didn't seem to have anything to do with the game and felt like grandstanding. I'm still sus of your Aurelian defense that felt like TMI too. Overall just not feeling that sus on Ekko anymore and still sus on you.

Dalton is making a compelling case on Retro tho and I do wonder what the point of that one "thinking out loud" post is. Feels a bit like show-and-tell but admittedly I have never played with this individual!

 

[Dr. Watson]

You quoted my post and responded by outlining your actual case on tpein like you thought you'd found a safe wagon to join.
Just a weird jump onto someone not in the limelight - not a good look.

okay ur being civil, that's fair

how can one wagon without voting
do you mean to say suspecting him?

he isn't and wasn't in the limelight, i am

unless i somehow have some immense power over the thread to push tpein into the spotlight i don't understand
but when people started responding to my response, you realize that we are all sharing a part in inadvertently pushing him into the spotlight?
in fact this stopped being about tpein almost right after the initial post of mine being suspected. it started inevitably placing myself into the limelight

 

[Ratchet]

That was a while back though wasnt it?

Or maybe my time is fucked because I read through most of the thread at once now over hte past hour or two.

That discussion I just summarised happened about 15-20 minutes ago.

 

[Dr. Watson]

have never played with this individual!

this is exactly my point throughout anything pertaining to insights on people's characters and play
I think it's a fairly simple concept
Overly verbose explanations, for sure

 

[Emil]

So why are you quoting his posts and calling them over defensive then lol?

wasnt sure if its fang initially. his defensive attitude pointed me towards him being fang even more so i asked if its him in the same post i call it defensive lol

 

[Tempest]

the problem isnt whether u get the claim or not, its whether u give fang a second chance to defend himself and scum hunt without claims or not. u seem to super confident that he is scum. in that case, a claim shudnt rly matter

anyway move on. 20 other players. whose next scum?

I'm fine for him to do either fwiw but he'll have to be really convincing for me to let go (though I may temporarily unvote to pursue someone else) without a claim!

 

[Ratchet]

I liked the initial vote because you echo'd what I was saying/thinking about Ekko echo'ing people and having read more than he was letting on but the more I thought about it the less paranoid I felt. I also saw that post where you tried to make it out like Ekko making one post telling people to go invisible was his "focus" when it was just one short post among a lot of other more substantive posts. Then another post where you were whinging a bit about "shit" players or something that didn't seem to have anything to do with the game and felt like grandstanding. I'm still sus of your Aurelian defense that felt like TMI too. Overall just not feeling that sus on Ekko anymore and still sus on you.

Dalton is making a compelling case on Retro tho and I do wonder what the point of that one "thinking out loud" post is. Feels a bit like show-and-tell but admittedly I have never played with this individual!

I mean, it's one thing to agree and then change your mind. But you claimed it was my points that changed your read - in other words, you scum read Ekko, and then after seeing me try to argue against him, felt that he must be more likely town off of the strength, or lack of, of the case I'm making. That's different to what you describe here.

The "invisible" part was about meta, and I explicitly said it wasn't anything scummy. Just silly.

Dalton's case on Retro has nothing to do with this point, and I'd prefer that you don't conflate them.

 

[Emil]

I’m not sure I’d buy that he’s already read the thread and faking a catch-up if that’s what you mean

it means i just happen agree with alot of wats being said / mind meld with multiple posters!

 

[Tempest]

this is exactly my point throughout anything pertaining to insights on people's characters and play
I think it's a fairly simple concept
Overly verbose explanations, for sure

I don't know what you're saying here