Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, Taupe Gecko said: Alright what the frick this plot is thickening too quickly THIS IS YOUR LAST STRAW UCE????? NOT THE 42069 NONSENSE CLAIMS WE HAVE UNTIL THIS POINT, THIS?????????
Oxblood Beagle Posted January 12 Posted January 12 26 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: I just... don't super feel like Ocho's play is very E!CS? IDK man I just feel like they've not been very keen to try to pocket the Lurchers or reach out to them. I feel like my PM asking Ocho to consided PMing DF or Axl just had Ocho shrugging and going "well I hope they protect me" without having ever said they reached out to DF/Axl. You could say they distrusted me but I think it's harder for Elims to remember to fake that kind of paranoia when they're trying to pocket. At the same time I struggle to understand a CS so scared of being exed (proving themselves etc) go "yo if the Elims kill me they kill me ig." I can kinda see a world where the elims left are just Octo and Rhino. And that the reason why they were against Octo being exe'd was not because they were planning to steal a v!Coinshot, but to protect their own Coinshot. It's not something I believe in atm, but it is a possibility
Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Edit: If Lion claims CS or Lurcher I'm just done here.
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 5 minutes ago, Opal Lion said: [A new message appears in your inbox, likely sent to you by accident] NOTICE TO USER: 1. Apologies for the delay in replying. I have compiled my thoughts below while reading through the reports as you (are going to) request(ed). 2. Please note I did this at a detriment to my own sanity. 3. I did not read in much detail. You cannot just send me this many pages and expect me to read!! If you have specific inquiries, please attach the relevant information in your next message. PS. Have you read through that 216-page paper I sent you? I'd like to discuss it soon with someone competent enough to understand what it means. There's no one smart enough on this ship, ugh. I look forward to your next correspondence. [You find an attached file that appears to be a set of handwritten notes] [You squint and can barely make out words through the messy writing] TRANSCRIPT OF THOUGHTS: 1. As I do not need to make inferences in real time, I skipped ahead to the page flagged as IMPORTANT to discover that deceased figures "Sage Kangaroo", "Saffron Iguana", and "Mauve Crocodile" were Saboteurs, and designation "Sapphire Elephant" was a Loyalist. 2. As noted from the first vote total attached, new figure designated "Violet Axolotl" may be unaligned from the Saboteurs, as this person caught heat from a known deceased Saboteur on the first day, "Mauve Crocodile". Without reading, I cannot make this conclusion more solid. *** Note: Read more in detail later 3.. Also important to the first vote total is "Sage Kangaroo" and designation "Indigo Weasel" voting each other. As figure "Sage Kangaroo" chose to make this vote very late, I am not sure this means anything for the loyalty of "Indigo Weasel." 4. However, it confuses me as to why "Sage Kangaroo" chooses to vote "Indigo Weasel" over "Violet Axolotl" here, given that a Loyalist "Violet Axolotl" vote would have allowed the Saboteur to live to see another day, no? 5. [This line starts with several crossed out misspellings of taupe] "Taupe Gecko" had good energy at the end of the first day, and a good vote switch (especially if "Violet Axolotl" is revealed as a Loyalist). I like this person. 6. "Oxblood Beagle" looks good from end of day activities for similar reasoning. [A crossed out scribble in the margins reads:] Sorry to break from professionalism, but this is SO BORING to read through. Surely I have better things to do than study this, right? Ugh, I'm not going to discover anything from sifting through paragraphs of junk. [The transcript continues] 7. From the second "day" of reports, I definitely approve of "Oxblood Beagle" for focus on known Saboteur "Saffron Iguana". 8. I skipped ahead to the second attached vote count. At a glance, I like those who voted for the Saboteur (duh), but specifically "Mint Heron", who caught my attention earlier for seemingly genuine uncertainty regarding votes at the end of the first day. 9. At most, I believe it is likely that only one of the six voters are Saboteurs. For no reason other than I believe that is how one would approach this situation, without much context on how anyone was approaching the situation in the first place. [A half erased note that can be barely deciphered] [???] hard to keep track of everyth[???] SOO BORINGG... why did I become a scholar just to [unreadable writing] could [???] nt my time reading the latest edition of [???]'s new textbook on [the text is too small to read] [The transcript continues] 10. At this point, I changed my approach from "read nothing" to "attempt to read through what the Saboteurs said". Sigh. Hours of my life wasted... 11. From the perspective of "Sage Kangaroo", I feel I gained nothing. Perhaps they took an awkward approach to "Scarlet Octopus" regarding liking the aforementioned person's work. I draw no conclusion on this, as I could see it as a Saboteur trying to gain reputation with a Loyalist. A bit pointed for it to be a Saboteur defending another Saboteur, but my estimation of "Sage Kangaroo" is that they may have been new to this line of work. 12. I believe designation "Ivory Dragonfly" may be unaligned (and therefore a Loyalist) due to the opinion of "Sage Kangaroo" on the aforementioned. 13. There is a noteworthy so-called "poke vote" interaction between "Saffron Iguana" and "Sage Kangaroo", both deceased Saboteurs. It is seen again between "Sage Kangaroo" and "Mauve Crocodile". *** Keep an eye out for similar details between others. [A break in the message. You scroll to the next page to find more] 14. From the perspective of "Mauve Crocodile", I noticed that this figure chose to defend designation "Ivory Dragonfly". Since they chose to push in the direction of new figure "Salmon Meerkat", I believe this increases the odds of "Salmon Meerkat" being a Loyalist. 15. I would note I am unsure what this means for "Ivory Dragonfly", as I before had leaned towards them being unaligned with the Saboteurs. 16. Note that later on, "Mauve Crocodile" throws "Ivory Dragonfly" in a pool of people they call "cleared". 17. The odds increase as "Salmon Meerkat" votes for "Sage Kangaroo" in response. 18. From the perspective of "Saffron Iguana", it seems their last plays largely may not be helpful to analyze since their hand was likely forced. 19. "Saffron Iguana" has awkward play around "Scarlet Octopus". This is the second time I have noticed such play around designation "Scarlet Octopus". 20. Much of the treatment "Saffron Iguana" gave "Scarlet Octopus" revolves around defending the latter, yet later says that they would prefer "Scarlet Octopus" dies over figure "Mint Heron". 21. This makes me wonder if "Saffron Iguana" knew "Scarlet Octopus" was a Loyalist and so had a weird treatment of not wanting to vote "Scarlet Octopus" while also preferring the aforementioned person would die (burden of TMI, they call it, perhaps?). 22. In past texts, I have seen instances where this is reminiscent of the way two Saboteurs treat each other (not wanting to defend too much and look like allies, but not wanting the other to die). I am increasingly uncertain on my opinion of "Scarlet Octopus". 23. I later noticed that designation "Scarlet Octopus" claimed a role of "village coinshot" earlier. 24. I read both the mentioned designation's reasons for shooting "Mauve Crocodile" (not very conclusive; reasoning was lacking but not necessarily indicative of a lie) and claiming the shot (was fine I suppose, I don't mind it). 25. I do find it a little weird to have claimed there immediately. Is Loyalist firepower not important to keep quiet about so that you will not be targeted by the Saboteurs? Unless they were only given a single shot. The immediate claim is what I find most suspicious for "Scarlet Octopus", along with awkward treatment from two known Saboteurs. 26. The deceased Saboteur "Saffron Iguana" spoke out against "Salmon Meerkat", which continues to lead me to believe that "Salmon Meerkat" is likely a Loyalist. 27. Who is this DF person who keeps being mentioned?? CONCLUSION: [A chart has been scribbled across the bottom of the page] + Salmon Meerkat, Oxblood Beagle, Taupe Gecko +~ Ivory Dragonfly (?????), Mint Heron Person of interest: Scarlet Octopus - [this area is blank] 1. If I had to guess, someone with claimed firepower is lying about being a Loyalist from the distro information I keep seeing. I am not sure who has claimed such a thing. In fact, I'm not aware of most claims. Please send me a list of this info at the earliest convenient time. 2. Please inform me if you would like a claim from me. I would be happy to oblige. 3. I should be in contact for several hours should you wish to follow up with me immediately. [A note at the bottom in small text reads:] honestly this took me so long to write and I got nothing out of what I read so just give me directions for what to read at this point please *stands up and claps* DF is Dragonfly btw Welcome to the club 4 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: THIS IS YOUR LAST STRAW UCE????? NOT THE 42069 NONSENSE CLAIMS WE HAVE UNTIL THIS POINT, THIS????????? 3 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: Edit: If Lion claims CS or Lurcher I'm just done here. Rare aesthetic: watching Heron lose his mind I frickin love this game
Oxblood Beagle Posted January 12 Posted January 12 I'll wait for what Toucan says for what they did N1, but for the moment, I'm fine with sticking to resolving Zebra, then we can just have Flamingo be protected tonight while they Seek Octo (though I guess a worry is that if there is an e!Smoker, which would just muddle that information)
Violet Axolotl Posted January 12 Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: Edit: If Lion claims CS or Lurcher I'm just done here. Oh oop forgot to mention I'm also CS, Tineye, and kandra. Spoiler Jk I have to go now, so I'm just gonna throw a vote out there because I won't be here for rollover, zebra
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, Oxblood Beagle said: I'll wait for what Toucan says for what they did N1, but for the moment, I'm fine with sticking to resolving Zebra, then we can just have Flamingo be protected tonight while they Seek Octo (though I guess a worry is that if there is an e!Smoker, which would just muddle that information) Like that plan cause no matter what Zebra is acting weird here Are we expecting Smokers in this game? Also @A Jo in the Bush if the game ends which could happen at literally any point from now on how are we gonna reveal our true identities? Like should we just claim in the Aftermath or are we gonna do a guessing thing or…
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Scarlet Octopus said: I don't see why we're trying to deflect to me again, I thought we already went through this once. Yes, I belive you that Toucan is a loyalist coinshot bc they roleclaimed to me too, and that would be a hard thing to lie about unless E/E, which is don't think is likely. But if this is true, then why would Toucan have not claimed sooner? Because I killed Croc and Elephant, I'm not lying about that, there would be no point, the other person would counterclaim and I'd get exed, which if I'm an Elim, is the worst thing I could do, but if you're so sure exing me is going to solve everything, which it might because my identity wont be ambiguous anymore. Then sure, go ahead, let's exe me, Octo, im busy this next week anyways. Well. I didn't get targeted so it must've worked. Well, I think Toucan thought you were fishing for a counter-claim, and then was eventually convinced. 10 minutes ago, Opal Lion said: [A new message appears in your inbox, likely sent to you by accident] NOTICE TO USER: 1. Apologies for the delay in replying. I have compiled my thoughts below while reading through the reports as you (are going to) request(ed). 2. Please note I did this at a detriment to my own sanity. 3. I did not read in much detail. You cannot just send me this many pages and expect me to read!! If you have specific inquiries, please attach the relevant information in your next message. PS. Have you read through that 216-page paper I sent you? I'd like to discuss it soon with someone competent enough to understand what it means. There's no one smart enough on this ship, ugh. I look forward to your next correspondence. [You find an attached file that appears to be a set of handwritten notes] [You squint and can barely make out words through the messy writing] TRANSCRIPT OF THOUGHTS: 1. As I do not need to make inferences in real time, I skipped ahead to the page flagged as IMPORTANT to discover that deceased figures "Sage Kangaroo", "Saffron Iguana", and "Mauve Crocodile" were Saboteurs, and designation "Sapphire Elephant" was a Loyalist. 2. As noted from the first vote total attached, new figure designated "Violet Axolotl" may be unaligned from the Saboteurs, as this person caught heat from a known deceased Saboteur on the first day, "Mauve Crocodile". Without reading, I cannot make this conclusion more solid. *** Note: Read more in detail later 3.. Also important to the first vote total is "Sage Kangaroo" and designation "Indigo Weasel" voting each other. As figure "Sage Kangaroo" chose to make this vote very late, I am not sure this means anything for the loyalty of "Indigo Weasel." 4. However, it confuses me as to why "Sage Kangaroo" chooses to vote "Indigo Weasel" over "Violet Axolotl" here, given that a Loyalist "Violet Axolotl" vote would have allowed the Saboteur to live to see another day, no? 5. [This line starts with several crossed out misspellings of taupe] "Taupe Gecko" had good energy at the end of the first day, and a good vote switch (especially if "Violet Axolotl" is revealed as a Loyalist). I like this person. 6. "Oxblood Beagle" looks good from end of day activities for similar reasoning. [A crossed out scribble in the margins reads:] Sorry to break from professionalism, but this is SO BORING to read through. Surely I have better things to do than study this, right? Ugh, I'm not going to discover anything from sifting through paragraphs of junk. [The transcript continues] 7. From the second "day" of reports, I definitely approve of "Oxblood Beagle" for focus on known Saboteur "Saffron Iguana". 8. I skipped ahead to the second attached vote count. At a glance, I like those who voted for the Saboteur (duh), but specifically "Mint Heron", who caught my attention earlier for seemingly genuine uncertainty regarding votes at the end of the first day. 9. At most, I believe it is likely that only one of the six voters are Saboteurs. For no reason other than I believe that is how one would approach this situation, without much context on how anyone was approaching the situation in the first place. [A half erased note that can be barely deciphered] [???] hard to keep track of everyth[???] SOO BORINGG... why did I become a scholar just to [unreadable writing] could [???] nt my time reading the latest edition of [???]'s new textbook on [the text is too small to read] [The transcript continues] 10. At this point, I changed my approach from "read nothing" to "attempt to read through what the Saboteurs said". Sigh. Hours of my life wasted... 11. From the perspective of "Sage Kangaroo", I feel I gained nothing. Perhaps they took an awkward approach to "Scarlet Octopus" regarding liking the aforementioned person's work. I draw no conclusion on this, as I could see it as a Saboteur trying to gain reputation with a Loyalist. A bit pointed for it to be a Saboteur defending another Saboteur, but my estimation of "Sage Kangaroo" is that they may have been new to this line of work. 12. I believe designation "Ivory Dragonfly" may be unaligned (and therefore a Loyalist) due to the opinion of "Sage Kangaroo" on the aforementioned. 13. There is a noteworthy so-called "poke vote" interaction between "Saffron Iguana" and "Sage Kangaroo", both deceased Saboteurs. It is seen again between "Sage Kangaroo" and "Mauve Crocodile". *** Keep an eye out for similar details between others. [A break in the message. You scroll to the next page to find more] 14. From the perspective of "Mauve Crocodile", I noticed that this figure chose to defend designation "Ivory Dragonfly". Since they chose to push in the direction of new figure "Salmon Meerkat", I believe this increases the odds of "Salmon Meerkat" being a Loyalist. 15. I would note I am unsure what this means for "Ivory Dragonfly", as I before had leaned towards them being unaligned with the Saboteurs. 16. Note that later on, "Mauve Crocodile" throws "Ivory Dragonfly" in a pool of people they call "cleared". 17. The odds increase as "Salmon Meerkat" votes for "Sage Kangaroo" in response. 18. From the perspective of "Saffron Iguana", it seems their last plays largely may not be helpful to analyze since their hand was likely forced. 19. "Saffron Iguana" has awkward play around "Scarlet Octopus". This is the second time I have noticed such play around designation "Scarlet Octopus". 20. Much of the treatment "Saffron Iguana" gave "Scarlet Octopus" revolves around defending the latter, yet later says that they would prefer "Scarlet Octopus" dies over figure "Mint Heron". 21. This makes me wonder if "Saffron Iguana" knew "Scarlet Octopus" was a Loyalist and so had a weird treatment of not wanting to vote "Scarlet Octopus" while also preferring the aforementioned person would die (burden of TMI, they call it, perhaps?). 22. In past texts, I have seen instances where this is reminiscent of the way two Saboteurs treat each other (not wanting to defend too much and look like allies, but not wanting the other to die). I am increasingly uncertain on my opinion of "Scarlet Octopus". 23. I later noticed that designation "Scarlet Octopus" claimed a role of "village coinshot" earlier. 24. I read both the mentioned designation's reasons for shooting "Mauve Crocodile" (not very conclusive; reasoning was lacking but not necessarily indicative of a lie) and claiming the shot (was fine I suppose, I don't mind it). 25. I do find it a little weird to have claimed there immediately. Is Loyalist firepower not important to keep quiet about so that you will not be targeted by the Saboteurs? Unless they were only given a single shot. The immediate claim is what I find most suspicious for "Scarlet Octopus", along with awkward treatment from two known Saboteurs. 26. The deceased Saboteur "Saffron Iguana" spoke out against "Salmon Meerkat", which continues to lead me to believe that "Salmon Meerkat" is likely a Loyalist. 27. Who is this DF person who keeps being mentioned?? CONCLUSION: [A chart has been scribbled across the bottom of the page] + Salmon Meerkat, Oxblood Beagle, Taupe Gecko +~ Ivory Dragonfly (?????), Mint Heron Person of interest: Scarlet Octopus - [this area is blank] 1. If I had to guess, someone with claimed firepower is lying about being a Loyalist from the distro information I keep seeing. I am not sure who has claimed such a thing. In fact, I'm not aware of most claims. Please send me a list of this info at the earliest convenient time. 2. Please inform me if you would like a claim from me. I would be happy to oblige. 3. I should be in contact for several hours should you wish to follow up with me immediately. [A note at the bottom in small text reads:] honestly this took me so long to write and I got nothing out of what I read so just give me directions for what to read at this point please Well, I would recomend you read this page and the last, specifically Spoiler TL;DR found here: More reasoning for my theory: Octo reply: Yeah thats it 4 minutes ago, Taupe Gecko said: *stands up and claps* DF is Dragonfly btw Welcome to the club Rare aesthetic: watching Heron lose his mind I frickin love this game I KNOW THIS IS THE FUNNEST ONE I'VE PLAYED SO FAR 3 minutes ago, Oxblood Beagle said: I'll wait for what Toucan says for what they did N1, but for the moment, I'm fine with sticking to resolving Zebra, then we can just have Flamingo be protected tonight while they Seek Octo (though I guess a worry is that if there is an e!Smoker, which would just muddle that information) Oh god I haven't thought about an e!Smoker. Let's all hope so so incredibly hard Rhino didn't role Smoker. Edited January 12 by Onyx Flamingo
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Violet Axolotl said: Oh oop forgot to mention I'm also CS, Tineye, and kandra. Hide contents Jk I have to go now, so I'm just gonna throw a vote out there because I won't be here for rollover, zebra NO NO NO DON’T YOU STORMING DARE GO WHO DUD YOU PROTECT AXLLLLLLLLLLLL 1 minute ago, Onyx Flamingo said: Oh god I haven't thought about an e!Smoker. Let's all hope so so incredibly hard Rhino didn't role Smoker. I’m still not either y’all on the e!Rhino thing but idk man I just kinda wanna go with the flow at this point SE flow state reached Of maybe that’s just my brain begging for sleep
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, Taupe Gecko said: NO NO NO DON’T YOU STORMING DARE GO WHO DUD YOU PROTECT AXLLLLLLLLLLLL I’m still not either y’all on the e!Rhino thing but idk man I just kinda wanna go with the flow at this point SE flow state reached Of maybe that’s just my brain begging for sleep lol so real edit: also excited to see some fun Opal lion action here!
Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 EDIT 2: 1 minute ago, Oxblood Beagle said: I can kinda see a world where the elims left are just Octo and Rhino. And that the reason why they were against Octo being exe'd was not because they were planning to steal a v!Coinshot, but to protect their own Coinshot. It's not something I believe in atm, but it is a possibility Yeah, I've considered it. Ultimately I struggle to make sense of the 4L + 2CS picture. I can't see the Elim team atm being balanced with it. Risky for Flam to claim without being cced so I believe Flam has the template. It is technically possible Flam is a second E!kandra into E!seeker who hellbussed Ig for v!cred. But IDK the odds. I'd note Ocho claimed the shot last night. If @Sunburst Toucan does as well, ... no. Technically multiple attacks are declared by the GM but: @A Jo in the Bush / @The Unknown Medallion confirm pls? My other thought is that Ocho cannot be a lone Elim because Ocho would have just claimed a no kill I think? Because actions economy. It's possible Ocho saw the attack and decided to just claim it ig?
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, Mint Heron said: EDIT 2: Yeah, I've considered it. Ultimately I struggle to make sense of the 4L + 2CS picture. I can't see the Elim team atm being balanced with it. Risky for Flam to claim without being cced so I believe Flam has the template. It is technically possible Flam is a second E!kandra into E!seeker who hellbussed Ig for v!cred. But IDK the odds. I'd note Ocho claimed the shot last night. If @Sunburst Toucan does as well, ... no. Technically multiple attacks are declared by the GM but: @A Jo in the Bush / @The Unknown Medallion confirm pls? My other thought is that Ocho cannot be a lone Elim because Ocho would have just claimed a no kill I think? Because actions economy. It's possible Ocho saw the attack and decided to just claim it ig? Again, my theory does mostly rely on assumptions made about toucan, and cannot be confirmed without their help.
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Mint Heron said: Risky for Flam to claim without being cced What? 2 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: My other thought is that Ocho cannot be a lone Elim because Ocho would have just claimed a no kill I think? Because actions economy What? Also what do you mean Edit 2
Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 EDIT F KNOWS HOW MANY: 4 minutes ago, Taupe Gecko said: NO NO NO DON’T YOU STORMING DARE GO WHO DUD YOU PROTECT AXLLLLLLLLLLLL READ U FOOL HE CLAIMED THE PROTECT ON ME 7 minutes ago, Oxblood Beagle said: I'm fine with sticking to resolving Zebra, then we can just have Flamingo be protected tonight while they Seek Octo (though I guess a worry is that if there is an e!Smoker, which would just muddle that information) An E!CS double kill punches through a Lurch. If we're worried about it, I think there's a pragmatic argument for flipping Ocho and it's the main reason I considered it.
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Onyx Flamingo said: Again, my theory does mostly rely on assumptions made about toucan, and cannot be confirmed without their help. Brochacho we need Toucan here now
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Taupe Gecko said: Brochacho we need Toucan here now My thoughts exactly.
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Mint Heron said: READ U FOOL HE CLAIMED THE PROTECT ON ME I’M SORRY MASTER 2 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: An E!CS double kill punches through a Lurch. If we're worried about it, I think there's a pragmatic argument for flipping Ocho and it's the main reason I considered it. Huh? What’s your proposal?
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Taupe Gecko said: I’M SORRY MASTER Huh? What’s your proposal? Killing Octo
Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 EDIT X: 1 minute ago, Taupe Gecko said: What? I'm pointing out Flam probably actually is a Seeker. We're kinda assuming V. Like look man this is functionally a puzzle meaning we gotta agree on what the set-up and assumptions are. It's risky for Flam to claim if they weren't actually one. 2 minutes ago, Taupe Gecko said: What? We only get one action. We were speculating E!CS might mean smaller team. If only four Elims and E!CS, Ocho is last Elim standing. They can only use Spiked kill or CS kill. But we saw both.
Oxblood Beagle Posted January 12 Posted January 12 5 minutes ago, Mint Heron said: EDIT F KNOWS HOW MANY: READ U FOOL HE CLAIMED THE PROTECT ON ME An E!CS double kill punches through a Lurch. If we're worried about it, I think there's a pragmatic argument for flipping Ocho and it's the main reason I considered it. What if multiple Lurchers protected Flam?
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Just now, Onyx Flamingo said: Killing Octo Yeah but how? Just now, Mint Heron said: EDIT X: I'm pointing out Flam probably actually is a Seeker. We're kinda assuming V. Like look man this is functionally a puzzle meaning we gotta agree on what the set-up and assumptions are. It's risky for Flam to claim if they weren't actually one. We only get one action. We were speculating E!CS might mean smaller team. If only four Elims and E!CS, Ocho is last Elim standing. They can only use Spiked kill or CS kill. But we saw both. BRO STOP SAYING EDIT I get the Flam thing And ooh you’re right about the other Also guys I just realized AG10 had 77 PAGES
Mint Heron Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Edited Y: Just now, Onyx Flamingo said: Killing Octo Yeah. It's pragmatic but I want input because it's also cold and kinda ruthless. If at least 3 of the Lurchers really are V, taking Ocho out guarantees a soft monopoly on protects. This fails if Flam is an E!Seeker protecting Toucan or if there's a third goddamn CS but otherwise... (Someone correct me if I missed something.) I will say I can 100% believe Zebra WBGed or just claimed the protect btw.
Onyx Flamingo Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Sunburst Toucan (2): Quartz Zebra, Melon Dingo Quartz Zebra (4): Taupe Gecko, Oxblood Beagle, Indigo Weasel, Something Axolotl Plum Rhinoceros (2): Sunburst Toucan, Magenta Albatross Scarlet Octopus (4): Onyx Flamingo, Mint Heron, Scarlet Octopus, Ivory Dragonfly 1 minute ago, Oxblood Beagle said: What if multiple Lurchers protected Flam? I like this idea I also like the killing octo now idea (because i would love to have the maximum people protected)
Taupe Gecko Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Also guys I DON’T KNOW IF THIS IS STRATEGIC BUT IF ANY OF Y’ALL ARE MISTBORNS WHO CARRIED OUT AN ATTEMPTED COINSHOT KILL ON I DON’T REMEMBER WHO KNOW COULD BE A GOOD TIME TO CLAIM
Ivory Dragonfly Posted January 12 Posted January 12 Dragonfly lied to Octopus. Implied in some PMs that I was lurching Heron/Gecko. Feel that Octopus hold up 1 minute ago, Mint Heron said: We were speculating E!CS might mean smaller team. If only four Elims and E!CS, Ocho is last Elim standing. They can only use Spiked kill or CS kill. But we saw both. That's a plain lie. Hold up, f o u r lurchers????
Recommended Posts