i read it at the time
i don’t remember any of it any more
Where have I seen this before. 
It “not working” there is due for some part also to me throwing a hissy fit, so I’d be curious to see how it does now and I wouldn’t put too much stock in that argument personally.
I still think a most improved player (or teamplayer I guess) would be a good way to incorporate this, but let’s see how it goes I suppose. Valuing teamplay over anything else is somewhat of a playstyle force, which I can see how in general it’d be a good incentive, but I dislike that it would force “team good plays” over “good plays in general”.
That’s one benefit, the other and more important benefit, to me, is a simple incentive to actually participate in voting. Strategically voting will be obvious and a bit pathetic typically to be honest. If you think the flash of an award is worth the scorn of a few that know you strategically tried to game this system. That’s up to you. 
This changes it to an opt-out instead of an opt-in. People will be less likely to actively engage in behaviour than passively let things happen and I think the above point applies as well.
Can you give examples of good team play from scum or town that would win this award?
Preferably from the player with not high skill/experience, so it’s clearer what this award is actually for.
true but if you are willing to opt out you are most likely not going to vote who you think did the best even if you dont vote for worst option
not to say it’s gonna pressure ppl who have no opinion or dont know to vote in which case they will probably vote player who they read most or player who they consider to be best outside of that game
@Arete I’d suggest to add a clause that disqualifies players from the system completely if they mention it during the game as well. Players could use their vote in the MVP system as leverage otherwise.
For instance 1 NK against 3 groupscum in some standoff where town decides the victor. 3 groupscum have more votes than the lone NK and could bribe the town in voting their way.
1 Like
person who was never converted gets voted as scum team player as meme for tanking town.
I dont really think this is necessary. yeah some people might just tend to be magnets, but i think that really wont happen often enough to be a problem, (and so when it does happen it would hopefully be deserved), and the part where they can only win 1 award should be fine in preventing it from being a problem.
as for future suggestion: most improved award, not for those who played the best in any particular regard, but for those who’ve improved upon their previous play the most. can either be since previous game, or across their games in general. in a tie both players would receive the award maybe
if not this specifically, i think something like this would still be good, a reward which can more easily go to almost any player, as opposed to a small-ish pool of players which would be a good bit more likely to receive the other award/s in a game by their presence (not to say that they wouldn’t deserve those awards, just that they are more likely to be the ones deserving of the awards if that makes sense).
also this would make it not a participation trophy. it would still be something to work for.
1 Like
Improvement is really open to interpretation in a social deduction game though
1 Like
And the other part is because MVP awards never stood a chance of reducing toxicity. If anything, they’d cause more.
Highlighting and encouraging teamplay is probably more likely to succeed at achieving its desired result (improving the level of play) than crowning MVPs was at reducing toxicity, but I still believe the downsides will outweigh the perceived benefits in the long term and I honestly still can’t see this as a positive change overall.
I feel like I’ve already explained why I feel this way well enough considering I’m not super active in FM atm, and yes, it is revert-able, but I feel like we’ve been here before and I really don’t think you “throwing a fit” had much to do with the outcome (perhaps beside hastening it).
You’re going to have to try harder and be more proactive to improve sitewide play than trying to find a catch all
If there was a catch all that worked, wouldn’t we have found it by now with multitudes upon multitudes of people all trying to find a solution
your problem comes from 3 areas:
- people don’t care to improve for whatever reason
- people aren’t interested in the games they join for whatever reason
- you have unrealistic expectations of how much effort people are going to put into a recreational activity
If I had a solution that actually worked then I would have stated it
I’m saying this because I’ve tried to come up with a solution and have found nothing
We are about to have practical evidence relating the awards
Why are we theorising about it’s potential outcomes
This is against the rules
It falls under Outside of Game Influence, which falls under angleshooting
It wouldn’t hurt to explicitly state it for a new system. You could say a similar thing for guessing who alts are.