Driving force is probably overstating it slightly, but he did initiate it and nudged a time or two for votes there. No explanation was given other than low posting quality/frequency.In post 7076, Deimos27 wrote:Why did gypyx want ratmans?
VP's timeline suggests that he was the driving force of the lim.
No! The scum pt was seperated into two.In post 7075, Galron wrote:The 1st Amendment rights had not yet been repealed so I assume they had it.In post 7073, VP Baltar wrote:I'm asking because the only link would be the scum who could take about both sides in their PT, yes?
Unless the scum PT didn't have daytalk then?
This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
Sure. Cheeky was hardpushing him and he shaded me for saying it didn’t make sense jjh was a strongman kill because he flipped 1 shot bp bg and we know now he actually did flip strongman.In post 7074, VP Baltar wrote:Can you explain this for me? I'd like to be able to sort you permanently and not worry about itIn post 7072, Cheeky Wings wrote:You have access to WB and had you bothered to read that, it’s beyond obvious we’re never SvS with GMo here,
If scum daytalk was closed at the same time of our hydra chat, you’re probably right.In post 7075, Galron wrote:The 1st Amendment rights had not yet been repealed so I assume they had it.In post 7073, VP Baltar wrote:I'm asking because the only link would be the scum who could take about both sides in their PT, yes?
Unless the scum PT didn't have daytalk then?
Kinda crazy that if NK had put all scum in one bloc the other wouldn't have had a night kill and all its members would be automatically cleared? An improbable outcome but wild game-design wise that it would even be possibleIn post 7083, Deimos27 wrote:This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
Wondering if this increases the likelihood of scum!NK as that would be one way mechanically to guarantee that scum would be allocated to both blocs and we wouldn't accidentally have half the game clearedIn post 7086, Deimos27 wrote:Kinda crazy that if NK had put all scum in one bloc the other wouldn't have had a night kill and all its members would be automatically cleared? An improbable outcome but wild game-design wise that it would even be possibleIn post 7083, Deimos27 wrote:This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
Who else was pushing rat, Loft?In post 7055, VP Baltar wrote:Ok reading eastern bloc again, here are the order of things:
-SS claims he was iced immediately at the start of the day.
-Ydrasse doesn't reveal what happened but says she didn't target SS.
-Titus also explains she was iced, but didn't target Ydrasse after Ydrasse asks. Ydrasse expresses confusion and says someone other than her must be icing people as well. (It still has not been revealed in thread that Y's ability was allegedly reflexive that night).
-Gypyx votes ratman and starts calling for votes there.
-Titus says she could get down with ratman or loftwing because they haven't done shit.
-Gypyx again asks for ratman votes.
-SS and ydrasse have a bit of a dance where Ydrasse is trying to get SS to claim and he says he doesn't want to because he was jail kept in ice and his action clearly didn't work, so why would he claim.
-ydrasse claims JOAT with 1 shot each of Reflexive roleblocker,, jail keeper, double voter. Says she is confused how multiple people are being iced each night.
-SS says he won't claim, but will reveal he visited ydrasse that night, hence the icing.
-ratman finally appears and asks if there is any reason not to vote loftwing. Gypyx brings up Miller claim. Sakura votes loftwing.
-Galron says he thinks GMO is scum....which I'm realizing is weird now????
-ydrasse asks for case for why we should yeet rats over loft. Titus says it doesn't matter and votes ratman. Speed yeet ensues. Day over.
Not sure I'm 100% on board with this. Seems like it could be a gambit, but dealing with it isn't a priority right now.In post 7082, Deimos27 wrote:Actually I just remembered gypyx claimed elo IC so that slot doesn't really need touching until then
I didn't pick up on that.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:No! The scum pt was seperated into two.In post 7075, Galron wrote:The 1st Amendment rights had not yet been repealed so I assume they had it.In post 7073, VP Baltar wrote:I'm asking because the only link would be the scum who could take about both sides in their PT, yes?
Unless the scum PT didn't have daytalk then?
Those two sides acted like independent games for that time.
I thought that would be clear.
There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills.
I wouldn't say anyone else was pushing. Gypyx brought it up. Titus said she had no objections, then it happened.In post 7088, Cheeky Wings wrote:Who else was pushing rat, Loft?
In post 7086, Deimos27 wrote:Kinda crazy that if NK had put all scum in one bloc the other wouldn't have had a night kill and all its members would be automatically cleared? An improbable outcome but wild game-design wise that it would even be possibleIn post 7083, Deimos27 wrote:This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
The thing is that there’s no way of verifying if scum pt is actually closed or not but we do know our hydra pt is and GLB claimed they can’t chat in discord.In post 7087, Deimos27 wrote:Wondering if this increases the likelihood of scum!NK as that would be one way mechanically to guarantee that scum would be allocated to both blocs and we wouldn't accidentally have half the game clearedIn post 7086, Deimos27 wrote:Kinda crazy that if NK had put all scum in one bloc the other wouldn't have had a night kill and all its members would be automatically cleared? An improbable outcome but wild game-design wise that it would even be possibleIn post 7083, Deimos27 wrote:This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
Well if true, then my theory has to be correct about at least one more scum in WB then but if the split is true, obviously both.In post 7090, Galron wrote:I didn't pick up on that.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:No! The scum pt was seperated into two.In post 7075, Galron wrote:The 1st Amendment rights had not yet been repealed so I assume they had it.In post 7073, VP Baltar wrote:I'm asking because the only link would be the scum who could take about both sides in their PT, yes?
Unless the scum PT didn't have daytalk then?
Those two sides acted like independent games for that time.
I thought that would be clear.
There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills.
Your logic is faulty. Nightkills indicate scum presence. The lack of a nightkill could result from a lack of scum presence but also from a nokill.In post 7087, Deimos27 wrote:Wondering if this increases the likelihood of scum!NK as that would be one way mechanically to guarantee that scum would be allocated to both blocs and we wouldn't accidentally have half the game clearedIn post 7086, Deimos27 wrote:Kinda crazy that if NK had put all scum in one bloc the other wouldn't have had a night kill and all its members would be automatically cleared? An improbable outcome but wild game-design wise that it would even be possibleIn post 7083, Deimos27 wrote:This I did not realise. So Mo was definitely not the only scum in WB.In post 7081, Not Known 15 wrote:There is a minimum of one scum in each of {NATO, UDSSR},due to two different nightkills
They are either conftown or confscum at elo so the slot solves itself at that pointIn post 7089, VP Baltar wrote:Not sure I'm 100% on board with this. Seems like it could be a gambit, but dealing with it isn't a priority right now.In post 7082, Deimos27 wrote:Actually I just remembered gypyx claimed elo IC so that slot doesn't really need touching until then
@VPIn post 6734, Cheeky Wings wrote:This is from the other thread.
Here's a scummary of the day so far:
+GMo gets pushed by me and threatens to claim under pressure.
+Claims 1s neighbourizer with special abilities plus food vendor.
+GMo says he hooded Vic D1 and didn't tell jjh he was in a hood to protect his special strong ability. 1v1'd with jjh for two day phases instead.
+GMo Claims he's in a new hood, because when his neighbour dies he gets his shot back. Also claims that if the hood occupants claim who is in the hood they both die.
+GMo Claims food vendor is also a doctor protect and he protected my slot N2, GLB N1.
+GMo says his neighbour spoke to him at a time when D3 had started. NK confirms with mod that all hoods are closed. Taly confirmed earlier in the day that his hood was also closed.
+GMo Claims his hood is open and T3 is his neighbour.
+T3 hard claims not in a hood with GMo, after claiming GMo was bleeding town earlier in the day.
Everything else was just noise so yeah. Order might be a bit wonky but those are the main events.
I added two words for ego purposes.
~C
i don't have to answer any of ur questions. Fuck off
Fuck off!!!
So the hoods were closed but the scum PT was split on Day 3. Near the beginning of Day 4 all PTs are closed. So Night 3 there are 2 scum PTs that decide 2 NKs. Presumably scum had their PT restored until all the PTs were closed earlier on Day 4.In post 7100, Cheeky Wings wrote:+GMo says his neighbour spoke to him at a time when D3 had started. NK confirms with mod that all hoods are closed. Taly confirmed earlier in the day that his hood was also closed.