So basically, abolish beginner mafias and instead let some beginners into regular games on the understanding that they'll be trained there? That seems like a reasonable idea, I feel like the inevitable flaking in BMs turns people off the game.
No, that's a different suggestion, and that's not what I intended to suggest above.
I rather suspect that functionally the BM is mostly a way of screening off players insufficiently reliable to play games on the subforum. Most games played have players with a mix of experience (you only need to play in one game to play in others). I think BMs don't need more ICs: they need to be more fun and entice more players into sticking around. I think the Sprint BM is the way forward.
I agree with there being multiple purposes for there being BMs, and I agree that 'screening/making sure players have certain minimum understandings' is an acceptable reason for them to exist.
I have read the OP for the Sprint BM; the first time I did (as a totally new player) I didn't really understand how that game was going to be different from the other, except 'faster' for reasons I didn't quite understand. Possibly faster to the point of being rushed. It also didn't tempt me very much -
Tired of the plodding pace of normal games? Just not interested in spending more than a month reading and arguing? Never manage to finish a game?
My answer to all of those questions, personally, before my first Mafia game were 'No idea', 'No, that might be interesting but probably not fun. Sounds weird, not like any sort of game' and 'No.... I finished games when I want to... why ask me this?'
My answer to them now that I've got -some- Mafia experience is: 'No.' 'No.' and '.... you're specifically talking about -Mafia- games, right? I've just not had a chance to finish any of those yet. Need more time - but it's not something I fail at, no'.
Before I'd actually played a game, eliminating the 'pause' for nights didn't mean anything to me - now I'm neutral about it. Nights are both 'boring' and a chance to take a break. I'm eager for night to end, and somewhat dread it.
And I laugh a little at the idea of everyone coordinating so well. It's hard for me to -believe- that style will flow like it has the potential to. I see that potential and I agree the dream is worth reaching for. I think Sprint BM is a great experiment and I intend to watch it as closely as I would if I were signed up to play. I just don't trust that people overall will consistently 'do' the rapid interplay required. Heck, in one of the game's I'm in the Mod even posted a warning, 'send in your night actions within the next 12 hours or lose them'. I don't think people are waiting so long because the night is long - I don't think 'boredom' is the (sole or universal) cause of player slow action and low involvement, so I don't really believe that just 'speeding things up' are going to fix all these issues for all players.
But all players are different and like different things, I think it's ideal that there are things like Sprint BM being tried and I do hope it's a success. I'm not eager to see Sprint BM become the only style of BM - I think there are players who are not that sort of player, even players for whom the 'rapid swish' style promised in the OP may seem somewhat intimidating and not preferred for their very first experience into whatever the heck Mafia is.
As to why to add -more- ICs into a 'beginner's game' - look guys.
Why are the ICs really there? Is this quote a lie?
It still has an instructional aspect, however, and as such two ICs will be present in the game; one to play the game with you, and another to simply act as an advisor to the opposing party - the eponymous Mafia. Their primary purpose is to teach you to play Mafia, and will do everything to further that goal even after death - but keep in mind that the playing IC will still play for keeps.
So this implies that the reason for both ICs -inferrentially for any IC - is to show newer players how to play. Is that true?
But there's NO apparent vetting system. And if the currently present ICs in any BM show absent, weird, problematic, lurky, erratic, or any other flavor of poor play - what exactly is being taught and how?
The answer to that isn't -fewer- ICs, it's more, which gives more chances for at least some of those ICs to be players able to be engaged, able to play with some sort of skill, and able to provide a wider glimpse of what good play is, may be, and isn't.
If there's X chance - if there's any chance! - that any one IC 'isn't a great one', the more ICs you have the more chance you have of having at least one that's really there to play and really able to play. And the more chance with different playstyles present that -each- individual flavor of newbie playing might find an example that 'makes sense' and is really useful for understanding what good play is and isn't.
So no, I suggest not abolishing the BM at all. Keep it for all its many reasons why it exists. But yes, make it better, yes experiment. Try 2-4 sprint BMs, even if the first is a complete failure. But try other things too - and one thing I hope gets tried is a close to even mix of ICs-to-newbies, run -as- a BM, with the current (or however needs modification) BM setup.