- Messages
- 16,798
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Everyone stop what you're doing! It's happening! GW's own Alu is having a baby!! Come and congratulate him here: Need some help identifying this picture.
We're so happy for you, Alu!Yeah, I fully expect some push-back on that oneWell yeah but most cat people don't have my insane dog brain that considers like every possible alligator scenario.
I think it's a fine capybara line that's a bit of a GODDAMN SNAKE WTF loophole and I can see it being controversial post-game.
This is why everybody kills you so quickly. You see through people's loopholes.Well yeah but most people don't have my insane brain that considers like every possible scenario.
I think it's a fine line that's a bit of a loophole and I can see it being controversial post-game.
Oh! Brilliant what you did. I didn't think about that!Yeah, I fully expect some push-back on that one
As long as you're prepared for it.Yeah, I fully expect some push-back on that one
The hilarious thing is though that most people think I just come across as crazy.This is why everybody kills you so quickly. You see through people's loopholes.
Did you notice that Vash edited that quote?As long as you're prepared for it.
The hilarious thing is though that most people think I just come across as crazy.
I may be a little.
Of course.Did you notice that Vash edited that quote?
straight up name that could appear in Google as an animalDoes it have to be the name of the animal or... attributes of the animal?
sorry you got blowed up
They're planning on maybe using one animal name that I was tempted to veto but its TECHNICALLY correct, and we all know what technically correct is...
canadaguy has mentioned animals twice both days.I don't think Zell has an animal tell. If he had to post twice for his tell, then his idea about getting everyone shushed would get him killed. I think somebody else was just more subtle.
Zoos has to post an animal twice a day. Does not say it has to be 2 separate posts I believe.I don't think Zell has an animal tell. If he had to post twice for his tell, then his idea about getting everyone shushed would get him killed. I think somebody else was just more subtle.
Do we get to know Benzine's tell now? Or at least confirmation if our guesses are on the right track?
omg is my Tubby is the bomber theory correct!?
This is by design.I'd say this game is swayed to the bad guys...
Oh, I see. Local Hero posted the clue as "That clue was: one tell is you have to make two posts that include an animal name." Did he reword it poorly? It looks copied and pasted to me.Zoos has to post an animal twice a day. Does not say it has to be 2 separate posts I believe.
100% thisI had him pegged first and Vash teased me
He backtracked shortly thereafter when he name dropped Jimmy ZoosOh, I see. Local Hero posted the clue as "That clue was: one tell is you have to make two posts that include an animal name." Did he reword it poorly? It looks copied and pasted to me.
I think I might need an example to rule on in this case but it would have to be something that follows my aforementioned Google rule.@VashTheStampede
Do they have to say the full animal name and not just part of it?
Ahh, gotcha. I'm sure lots of people have mentioned two animals if quotes and obscure animal names both count.He backtracked shortly thereafter when he name dropped Jimmy Zoos
Horrible no good rotten luckIs everyone receiving the same clue intentional or bad luck? Will they keep getting that clue until they kill the person with that tell?
I wouldn't say "clearly winnable" for the good guys at this point but I agree with your asymmetrical stance.This is by design.
The whole reason I decided to make this game stemmed from a discussion I had with Cole after one of the first wolf games that ran after this site went up. He felt the game should be balanced 50/50. My opinion is that asymmetrical games should have asymmetrical balance tilted towards the group with fewer numbers.
I wanted a game where the bad guys have the upper hand, but is still clearly winnable for the good guys.
Would I have to say "Blue Tit" or is "Tit" good enough?I think I might need an example to rule on in this case but it would have to be something that follows my aforementioned Google rule.
Just because they throw away the win doesn't mean it wasn't winnable.I wouldn't say "clearly winnable" for the good guys at this point but I agree with your asymmetrical stance.
When I Google "Tit", the definition points straight to titmouse so I'd allow it.Would I have to say "Blue Tit" or is "Tit" good enough?
Yes this is the example I'm choosing.
Winnable yes, but it's the "clearly winnable" distinction.Just because they throw away the win doesn't mean it wasn't winnable.
At one point yesterday I didn't see a way for the mob to win.
...ooph.When I Google "Tit", the definition points straight to titmouse so I'd allow it.
Google apparently does not understand my interests.
Based on game structure I had it as roughly 75% chance mob wins, 20% chance town wins, 5% chance bomber wins.Well by "clearly winnable" I meant that it's not a very daunting task. Not too tilted to the Mob
This is a tough call. If the mad bomber goes after mobsters, then yeah, it's good to keep him around. And the Don can't be killed by the bomber, right? So as long as they're still out there, the city is safe from a mad bomber win. Still, solo killers have a history of being pretty unpredictable, so he could just as easily whittle down citizens instead.City needs to realize the numbers game and that defeating the Mad Bomber at this point might give the game to the mob