WW33 - Walking Dead [GAME THREAD]

[Catwalk]

Jabbz, Qg is a proven villager. If there is no SK then Mattimeo will block Qg while zak kills a townie (or other way around). Noone but you can be a SK. Nothing else is possible. zakalwe, I suppose it's objectively true because nowhere in your post did you deny being a bandit

[Qgqqqqq]

I know who I'm shooting. I've known all day. This is just me wishing I could take the honorable way out.

Still, I suppose no matter how I've screwed the res of it up, I have claimed the only wolf pelt thus far. Its not been all bad!

[Jabbz]

That's why I've got your back Qg, though it's easier on my conscience now that I know you're actually a MSV instead of a SK.

[Qgqqqqq]

Also to the town/SK: the scum are winning this right now. Please focus on working together. And it's almost certainly best not to discuss this further - the scum know exactly who we all are and they don't need any hints as to what way we are going to jump.

Although I am half tempted to demand that the SK step forward...and watch the bandits fall over themselves trying to make sure I don't shoot at them tonight.

[Catwalk]

Even if there is a SK, town loses. This is how it plays out:
1) Scum blocks one shot, other goes through and takes out a bandit
2) Bandits shoot Qg
3) Me, bandit (zak or Matt) and Jabbz is left alive
4) I decide who wins, and I'm actually having a hard time deciding

The only way for this to go differently is if the bandits shoot the SK instead. Zak and Matt, feel like doing that? Else I'm feeling very tempted to letting the new guy win

Your call for cooperation is admirable Qg, but it's half a day too late

[Jabbz]

Actually cat a number of us have been cooperating already, but that's beside the point. Going to bed, should be up in time to watch this play out.

[Qgqqqqq]

Even if there is a SK, town loses. This is how it plays out:
1) Scum blocks one shot, other goes through and takes out a bandit
2) Bandits shoot Qg
3) Me, bandit (zak or Matt) and Jabbz is left alive
4) I decide who wins, and I'm actually having a hard time deciding

The only way for this to go differently is if the bandits shoot the SK instead. Zak and Matt, feel like doing that? Else I'm feeling very tempted to letting the new guy win

Your call for cooperation is admirable Qg, but it's half a day too late

Hmm...I seem to remember...oh where was it again?

Okay so the following are FACTS. If anyone disagrees, please post why or else accept them as such.

• I am a confirmed Multi-shot town vigilante. The reasoning for this has been explained a few times thus far but it seems to be the only possibility.
  
• We are at LyLo. If we lynch anything but a scum today, then both the town and the SK will lose the game. (Reasoning: because of this rule [In case of an even split (ie. 3 town, 3 mafia at the start of a day), mafia wins.] the mafia only need an even split. If we lynch a town then the setup is 2/1/2 or 3/2 and the scum will roleblock/kill me and whoever they think is the SK [probably roleblock SK because he could be kill immune] and then win off having an even split on the next day. If we kill a scum, then the SK will remain in the game, and have a chance of victory.
  
• As a result of the above two, every non-scum must vote with me (as a confirmed villager), no matter what. If even a single one votes differently then the scum will be able to use that to kill a non-scum. (This is the case even if it looks like a candidate is winning by a lot - remember scum can coordinate votes in a way we cannot.

Is this understood?

unvote

Oh that's right.

[zakalwe]

Well, I can only plea once more that you don't shoot me, Q. Everything else is out of my hands, anyway.

I'm not claiming town cred on the basis that I attacked Goreripper early on. I'm claiming town cred for the way he reacted to that attack, which was essentially to panic and immediately change his tune to get on my good side. If we were both scum, we would just continue to exchange some jabs, knowing that we could always decide to become "convinced" by the other's arguments, and find another target.

Which reminds me... what is the default panic reaction for a scum, if you think you're in trouble? It's to vote for one of your buddies. And Goreripper voted for Mattimeo at that point.

I think this is my strongest argument for why I'm not a bandit, and incidentally, it also shows how the pieces fit together with Mattimeo as a bandit.

[zakalwe]

Mattimeo also made a good point earlier. Why would he and I make mutually exclusive claims, if we're both bandits? Particularly with the command that he has of this setup. (And I'm no dumbass either, but I haven't got as much experience with this as he has.) The answer is that we wouldn't. He's a bandit, and I'm not.

[Mattimeo]

You're saying I coached Catwalk into claiming seer, knowing that it was going to be basically impossible to disprove?

...shit, that actually is something I'd do. And it would be damn glorious.
Almost as glorious as you doing exactly the same thing, master of 'outlandish' claims that you are. Traffic warden? That one actually won you the game, iirc?
You push for fake claims almost every game you're scum and they look even remotely necessary. You're just branching out a bit here, getting your buddy to claim the risky, possibly (though unlikely) disputable power role while you claim vanilla.

Or, we can dispense with the "try to influence Q so you can win tonight, rather than your buddy be outnumbered 2-1 tomorrow" bullshit and just let Q make his choice? This desperate scrabbling is rather unbecoming.