TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Curious if acquisitioner choosing somebody that was going to die in the night from either vigi or wolfkill would either also die (because they're moving to will be dead target) or if their role simply doesn't get used.

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Curious if acquisitioner choosing somebody that was going to die in the night from either vigi or wolfkill would either also die (because they're moving to will be dead target) or if their role simply doesn't get used.

It doesn't get used

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

How do you know Starbucks?

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

How do you know Starbucks?

It says in the OP

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Starbucks is tunneling me being the Aquisitioner. While the evidence is against me, I am no such thing. If anything the Aquisitioner is playing off there being a replacement and my low post count to turn suspicion onto me.

Wait what the fuck was that about a replacement???

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

It says in the OP

Can you quote where in it for me please? All I'm seeing is that the acquisitioner can choose to not use their role

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Can you quote where in it for me please? All I'm seeing is that the acquisitioner can choose to not use their role

from the spoiler'd bit:

Roleblocker
Nerfed Medic
Cop
Acquisitioner Medic
Acquisitioner
Wolf Kill

Ex 1: If both the Acquisitioner and the wolves target the same player, the acquisition will fail.

Ex 2: If both the Acquisitioner and the wolves target the same player WHILE there is a medic save, the acquisition will succeed.

Ex 3: If both the Acquisitioner and the Blocker target the same player, the acquisition will succeed.

Ex 4: If both the Acquisitioner and the Medic target the same player, the acquisition will succeed.

Ex 5: If both the Acquisitioner and the Vigilante target the same player, the acquisition will fail.

Ex 6: If the blocker targets the Acquisitioner, the acquisition will fail.

[Marlboro]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Wait what the fuck was that about a replacement???

If you look at the OP, you can see that three replacements have happened.

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

alright, oops missed spoiler

[Marlboro]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

I know I might be overthinking it a bit, but the replacements can come off as differently as another player would if acquired.

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

So Marlboro could be the acquisitioner, but there not being a an acquisitioner flip last night doesn't prove anything

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

I don't know if I'm allowed to say this but if original Marlboro got replaced after D0, I am going to be absolutely fucking livid at this game

There have been three replacements this game, and we have no fucking idea which accounts the replacements go to

It is fucking impossible to determine who the acquisitioner is, because the only thing we can look at is posting history, and if there is the possibility that posting history is affected by replacements, and we don't know HOW or WHEN replacements happened, it's a random fucking crapshoot

I am going to say that anonymous replacements and the acquisitioner role are fundamentally incompatible in this game format

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

let's not talk about replacements beyond that

I'm just kind of mad atm

fwiw I don't think the acq. would pick China Mobile, MAAAAYbe Amazon but ppl were scumreading him too iirc

[Google]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Thinking that it could be seen that we've been lynching based solely on inactivity (though that was really only UPS, my Verizon vote was legit). And Marlboro has been one of the most inactive. I don't see an acquisitioner moving to somebody that based off of previous lynches would immediately be in danger

[Starbucks]

Re: TWG CLXVIII: Capitalism [Game Thread]

Thinking that it could be seen that we've been lynching based solely on inactivity (though that was really only UPS, my Verizon vote was legit). And Marlboro has been one of the most inactive. I don't see an acquisitioner moving to somebody that based off of previous lynches would immediately be in danger

Hypothetically, only UPS would have died when Wal-Mart switched, so Marlboro would have been a safe bet at that point

furthermore, Marlboro would have been safe because it would have been the easiest to "fit in" to the old Marlboro since there were fewer tics to replicate --- Marlboro did jack shit D0, so he was a tabula rasa so to speak

but I'm afraid I just publicly humiliated myself in TWG again because there is just so much in the air at this point -- this role is so useless

the "good" news is that the acq. has to maintain their facade for one more day phase at least, so it should be easier to find them for the night phase if it's not Marlboro