War on terrorism Dakky lynched: Nato & Russia win

by **dakky21** on Fri May 06, 2016 7:40 pm

LOL @ mitch @ double post.... you're not acting normal town mate, I tell you this meta isn't normal town. On my notes, you got most pluses for lynch. Too bad no one believes me that you are not posting as you ordinary post.

by **dakky21** on Fri May 06, 2016 7:42 pm

EBWOP when I re-readed my post I found out ... it doesn't make sense... so I say... mitch's double post doesn't sound like town and that is meta. Remaining of the post is ok.

by **jbfloyd** on Fri May 06, 2016 8:03 pm

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:So BG? Is D2 too much of a crapshoot for you to manage to post?

He did post a couple of times. I'm not sure if you still complaining about D1 or saying that he isn't posting now that it's D2. Either way...

RIght now this is just gut feelings from me, but of the people who are active, the people who pinged my radar to keep an eye on are Ragian, WCG, and I guess mitch, but his participation doesn't amount to much for me.

Of less active players, TWR and HotShot seem like they might be just trying to stay under the radar.

I know it's all "might"s and gut feel, but I'm not so sad a person that I will spend a Friday night rereading the game, trying to put a case together. I plan to give things a closer look at some point this weekend and come up with something more substantive. But it's been 2 days since D2 started and I haven't posted. Doesn't mean I haven't been watching. Wondering if my gut jives with anyone else's line of thinking in the meantime.

by **dakky21** on Fri May 06, 2016 9:01 pm

Actually thinking about the setup, as BG did... so if we have NATO sided countries/villagers and ISIS + recruiters and town vigs... then each day someone will get lynched and every night someone killed plus someone recruited, so that really means 3 per day... D3 everyone either dead or ISIS. Pretty much unbalanced if you ask me, but then again, it was said it will be unbalanced. (unless town vig finds the ISIS, but if they can recruit, then the kill isn't important as they will always have the numbers)

by **Talapus** on Fri May 06, 2016 9:08 pm

Well, I was able to read and get caught up but my flight is about to board in Istanbul so you will probably not get anything from me until I land back in the states and sleep a day so maybe Sunday. I will say I have no idea why some of you are so worried about how unbalanced the game may be...there isn't enough info to know exactly what's going on but LSU wouldn't create a game where town is completely screwed from the get go...

by **Tobikera** on Fri May 06, 2016 9:11 pm

dakky21 wrote:Actually thinking about the setup, as BG did... so if we have NATO sided countries/villagers and ISIS + recruiters and town vigs... then each day someone will get lynched and every night someone killed plus someone recruited, so that really means 3 per day... D3 everyone either dead or ISIS. Pretty much unbalanced if you ask me, but then again, it was said it will be unbalanced. (unless town vig finds the ISIS, but if they can recruit, then the kill isn't important as they will always have the numbers)

AS IF, I didn't lay that all out already...check my posts. All BG did was suggest that there were NATO countries and NATO-sided villagers, which might or might not be true. And, I've already suggested a town vig., but had my hand slapped on that. Get some new material dakky, or at least give credit to who said it first. And, I've already given some proof that IB might be ISIS, he certainly hasn't defended himself, and to my mind his contributions have been scummy, but no one else seems to think so. Also, the good ol' boy mod is very lacksidasical about running this show to boot. I fear I've lost interest in this contest.......do as you will.

by **dakky21** on Fri May 06, 2016 10:19 pm

@Tobikera ... instead of cutted quote... You have IB in mind for a (almost) same reason I got mitch... I guess it's IB or mitch this day. What others think?

by **BuJaber** on Sat May 07, 2016 1:54 am

dakky21 wrote:@Tobikera ... instead of cutted quote... You have IB in mind for a (almost) same reason I got mitch... I guess it's IB or mitch this day. What others think?

My TWR case isn't gaining traction.. I'll switch to IB if it remains as quiet as this tomorrow.

by **Ragian** on Sat May 07, 2016 4:37 am

Has been bank holidays in Denmark. I'll sober up tomorrow...ish. My shit skimming through hasn't moved anything, though.

vote mitch

Too many odd moves to ignore. Hopefully, I'll reach the same conclusion when I reread this tomorrow.

Also, HUGE HUGS to jb. I like pinging his radar :-*

by **WingCmdr Ginkapo** on Sat May 07, 2016 5:15 am

BuJaber wrote:
dakky21 wrote:@Tobikera ... instead of cutted quote... You have IB in mind for a (almost) same reason I got mitch... I guess it's IB or mitch this day. What others think?

My TWR case isn't gaining traction.. I'll switch to IB if it remains as quiet as this tomorrow.

Remember there are a lot of players who really only care about their own survival. You need to actually motivate.

by **LSU Tiger Josh** on Sat May 07, 2016 5:32 am

BG asked to be replaced. I sent a request to number 2 on the replacement list to see if he would do it. As far as if I lost interest or not, I have not. Some of us have jobs that do not let us be on cc constantly. vote count coming up a little later when I get another break at work.

by **madmitch** on Sat May 07, 2016 6:38 am

I guess BG didn't like being ISIS :lol:

by **LSU Tiger Josh** on Sat May 07, 2016 8:07 am

Vote Count: 13 alive 7 to lynch

2 Mitch: Dakky, Ragian
1 IB: Tobikera
1 TWR: Bujaber

by **HotShot53** on Sat May 07, 2016 8:58 am

Well, after that night scene, maybe it is just a recruiter as ISIS after all... I could see a 2 person ISIS team to start so that the game wouldn't end too quickly. As others have said, looks like NATO could be the 3 main countries with all the survivor villages temporarily on their side. And probably other random true third parties thrown in for good measure.

I disagree with dakky about mitch, when scum mitch often posts a lot more thematically with very little substance, and he seems to be trying to figure out the game this time. I'll give ragian a FOS for trying to start the mitch wagon, throwing his vote on there just saying mitch's posts have been "weird"

by **Iron Butterfly** on Sat May 07, 2016 9:45 am

Tobikera wrote:
Iron Butterfly wrote:[
Interesting.
We have 2 dead survivors. One lynched and one night killed. Why would you say that the one recruited last night was a survivor as well? It is obvious there is NATO.We know there is ISIS. We also know there are Villager Survivors. Survivors can win with anyone so their deaths are not a loss.

I DO NOT think there are any significant numbers of NATO players, in fact, I think there are none. There are NATO-sided survivor villagers (NSSV), each from a different country. Mandy and Epi were two (see page 1). I am a third. However, I am withholding my country for the present in case someone else tries to falsely claim it. So we have NSSVs shooting themselves in the foot by killing each other, we have recruiting ISIS mafia scum, and perhaps we have a NATO-sided vigilante or 3rd party vigilante survivor who killed EPI.

I don't think there is evidence for any other roles at present. Once again, Iron Butterfly tried to hammer dakky, but hotshot had unvoted right before him. His posts are unrevealing of himself, and mainly pose questions that give him the appearance of being above the rest of us, and sow seeds of doubt about the loyalty of whomever his subject is. My vote stays on him. Y'all killed Mandy with much less evidence.

Ok Sunshine. First on day one we joke vote. I placed a joke vote on you, you placed one on me and joked back yet you make your vote sound like retribution because I dared to vote you.Your reasoning being it was retaliation for my initial vote. Now you use my vote on you on day one as part of your argument.

There is also no evidence of other roles because because other roles have may not have been revealed. Just because there seems to be a ton of NATO Villager survivors does not mean there are not other roles. The survivors are akin to having a game filled with VT though the roles are different.

Second no one asked you to claim. Stupid move on your part.... or is it?

by **the white rose** on Sat May 07, 2016 11:31 am

Before i can even try to work out whose lynch to support today, have to try work out the mechanics of the game.

For now, I am going with PT, that there are 3 nato countries of which he is one. I believe that most of the rest are villagers whose initial wc is to survive. These are the ones that can be recruited by ISIS. There are not enough players i think to have a separate mafia team, so i am assuming isis is the mafia and town's objective is to lynch isis.

As assumed above, isis can recruit survivor villagers whether nato sided or not. Do they have the ability to kill also? Well there was only 1 death last night, killed by whom? isis or vig or something else? If isis i think the game would be too far unbalanced towards isis. I am not sure that a vig would be in keeping with flavour of this game, who else could kill?

How about NATO, that is PT and his 2 allies? Maybe there wc is to eliminate isis, perfectly reasonable and in keeping with the flavour of the game. That would leave NATO as the killers who need to kill all isis members, isis would increase by one every night so long as they did not try to recruit PT and his allies. That I think would give a reasonably balanced and interesting game.

Of course, I may be completely wrong, but i cannot think of any other scenario that makes sense, if anyone disagrees, do please suggest your alternative scenario.

Given that, we should be looking to lynch isis. If I were isis, who would i look to have recruited last night? Someone experienced in the game for sure. maybe wing or ib.

Using that logic i will vote ib

Open to be convinced otherwise.

by **Ragian** on Mon May 09, 2016 3:13 am

HotShot53 wrote:Well, after that night scene, maybe it is just a recruiter as ISIS after all... I could see a 2 person ISIS team to start so that the game wouldn't end too quickly. As others have said, looks like NATO could be the 3 main countries with all the survivor villages temporarily on their side. And probably other random true third parties thrown in for good measure.

I disagree with dakky about mitch, when scum mitch often posts a lot more thematically with very little substance, and he seems to be trying to figure out the game this time. I'll give ragian a FOS for trying to start the mitch wagon, throwing his vote on there just saying mitch's posts have been "weird"

You know perfectly well that that's not the only reason. Have you forgotten his attempt at hammering D1?

the white rose wrote:As assumed above, isis can recruit survivor villagers whether nato sided or not. Do they have the ability to kill also? Well there was only 1 death last night, killed by whom? isis or vig or something else? If isis i think the game would be too far unbalanced towards isis. I am not sure that a vig would be in keeping with flavour of this game, who else could kill?

I don't get his line of questioning. Surely, the killing was done by NATO. It was done by airplane and it resulted in someone joining ISIS. That's how I read the scene at least.

Now, your thoughts behind your vote make sense. However, it does end up in WIFOM, as I see it. Clever ISIS would probably know that they shouldn't target experienced players, so perhaps they have avoided that. OR! They anticipated such level of scrutiny, so they actually went for someone experienced. OR! They anticipated that we'd anticipate their anticipation...

Anyway, I don't think voting IB (or Wing for that matter) can be justified with your logic. I am curious to hear why you'd choose him over Wing, however.

I'm staying on mitch. I don't care if some people think that I'm trying to get a bandwagon going (and bandwagon, I must say, that is a hell of a time materialising). I think mitch is the best bet as of now. 1) dakky posted some meta stuff, 2) he tried hammering but failed.

I can't see what IB has done that is so scummy.

by **Ragian** on Mon May 09, 2016 3:14 am

*this line of inquiring. Not his. Sorry. Makes me sound more douchy than I intend to sound.

by **Talapus** on Mon May 09, 2016 9:03 am

Well I made it back and will try to get back into game mode here. I find it interested that BG couldn't care less about the game all game so far except for possibly one post and now he wants to be replaced....makes it hard to read where his allegiance may be, but now guess we will have to wait and hear from his replacement.

by **madmitch** on Mon May 09, 2016 1:57 pm

What's all the hating against Qatar ? Are you guys jealous about our long Persian shoreline of dunes and beaches, or our futuristic skylines . We also have the 3rd natural gas reserves in the world so we fund all lot of rebels fighting ISIS , we are also going hold the 2022 FIFA Worldcup so we do not want to have anything to do with terrorists. So right now I am also waiting to see who replaces BG and see how they react to their role.

by **WingCmdr Ginkapo** on Mon May 09, 2016 2:18 pm

Is this what happens when I dont force the game? Nothing.

For those with my role, your best play is thus.

Hunt the ISIS recruiter hard. Two things can happen, firstly you could force a lynch on the isis recruiter, and thus town will let you live to endgame. Or you could get so close that isis recruit you at night and you get to enjoy playing as cult.

Win win.

Playing the, ignore me I am harmless approach will get you lynched sooner or later, and unlike normal roles that is game over.

You cannot afford to be apathetic.

I am going for the wait till town vig dies then enjoy playing as a jester without an actual jester role approach. Its not advised, buy I fancy enjoying myself.

by **BuJaber** on Mon May 09, 2016 6:40 pm

We have dakky against mitch; mitch against dakky.
We had mandy against epitaph and vice versa earlier and they were both telling the truth.

Everyone is being so apprehensive about voting it seems. I don't have time to analyze the game until the weekend, possibly friday. However, I think we should just decide between dakky and mitch right now. I really don't like this approach, especially because it means everyone else gets an easy pass for the day.

I've been thinking about no lynch as an option; because it would mean we only lose one to ISIS and because I don't think Vig will take another shot unless they're very sure, that's just one down. HOWEVER, that means that we're back here the next day with no closer to finding the scum.

I'm gonna Unvote Vote dakky

by **dakky21** on Mon May 09, 2016 6:45 pm

BuJaber wrote:I've been thinking about no lynch as an option; because it would mean we only lose one to ISIS and because I don't think Vig will take another shot unless they're very sure, that's just one down. HOWEVER, that means that we're back here the next day with no closer to finding the scum.

While reading your response, my post may sound as OMGUS vote, but after you said "you've been thinking about no lynch", you removed all my doubts. Anyone who thinks about no lynch but then "changes his mind" is scummy. You can't possibly "think of that" if you're town. "however or not". Meta again.

unvote
VOTE BuJaber

by **jbfloyd** on Mon May 09, 2016 7:37 pm

Looking back at D1 votes, can I see anyone who might have bandwagoned? Maybe IB or Ragian. More likely IB, but maybe he has an excuse.

When I've been mafia, I'm usually careful not to appear to be bandwagoning. HotShot's vote on Epi sticks out to me as accomplishing little while trying to appear participatory, but given what we sort of know about the setup, we can't give too much credence to what happened D1, but still, not sure what else we can do.

I do worry about agressive, seemingly competent players like WCG driving the action. It's more paranoia, but it's a good preemptive way to keep pressure off yourself. But for now my opinion is to wait and watch, because I wouldn't want to loose a good player.

vote HotShot

Other observation: game moving slowly is fine by me as I am busy this week. I probably can't post Wednesday to Saturday as I will be travelling quite a bit for work. I, too, wait to see about BG's replacement.

by **Talapus** on Mon May 09, 2016 10:31 pm

BuJaber wrote:We have dakky against mitch; mitch against dakky.
We had mandy against epitaph and vice versa earlier and they were both telling the truth.

Everyone is being so apprehensive about voting it seems. I don't have time to analyze the game until the weekend, possibly friday. However, I think we should just decide between dakky and mitch right now. I really don't like this approach, especially because it means everyone else gets an easy pass for the day.

I've been thinking about no lynch as an option; because it would mean we only lose one to ISIS and because I don't think Vig will take another shot unless they're very sure, that's just one down. HOWEVER, that means that we're back here the next day with no closer to finding the scum.

I'm gonna Unvote Vote dakky

The fact you are going to go and vote for one of the first few people to claim concerns me. You were the last person to vote for mandy as well before he voted himself and his claim was damn believable as well. So, thanks for making this easy.

Vote: BuJaber

War on terrorism Dakky lynched: Nato & Russia win

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Re: War on terrorism Day 2: Iran airbombed(Epitaph dies)

Who is online