The Walking Dead 2: Game Thread

Doris WW

Morning all. I'm in favor of sending individuals. Happy to go if people want me to

Brendan WW

Abi, while you may know better, can you at leasy see where Im coming from?

If your good and keeping secrets, thats fine, just dont expect me to blindly follow you considering

Brendan WW

Doris WW wrote: »

Morning all. I'm in favor of sending individuals. Happy to go if people want me to

I couldn't care if I go or not. Im around

Barbara WW

Nigel WW wrote: »

Also never a fan of people saying thank the post you want to follow as it just makes me think of a potential task in terms of getting x number of thanks on a post. So I'd prefer just discuss the options, hence me not thanking my prefered option

Well I'm not on a task, just trying to get things organised, and I took option 1 from you!

The issue with sending individuals is how do we decide who goes. It seems the person doesnt actually need to be here. For instance I could go

Nigel to the barracks

And off Nigel would be going to the barracks. Which is why I'd like a plan before we get the options. So someone doesnt go on a solo run. If possible I'd suggest having that in place before 10

I am willing to go also

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara

Barbara WW

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara
Brendan
Abbi
Doris

Gertrude WW

Morning all. I’m happy to go if needed

Barbara WW

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara
Brendan
Abbi
Doris
Gerti

Clodagh WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara
Brendan
Abbi
Doris
Gerti

I’ll go wherever you want to send me folks, but can we agree the plan? I still think paid is the way to go - medium risk, medium reward.


After that can we spend some time hunting wolves. Getting the (hopefully only) original walker pre conversions would be good also

Abigail WW

Brendan WW wrote: »

I couldn't care if I go or not. Im around

Desmond WW

Morning all, so why are we taking volunteers? We should be sending the 3 most likely baddies, going on the previous scavenger hunts, 1 should find something and 1 should be killed? if the player who finds something doesn't say what it is, we lynch them?

No point in villager risking getting killed. There is 1 con to this, the player who finds something might be a lynch immunity and could be baddie. However I think this strategy is best, any objections?

Clodagh WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

I’ll go wherever you want to send me folks, but can we agree the plan? I still think paid is the way to go - medium risk, medium reward.


After that can we spend some time hunting wolves. Getting the (hopefully only) original walker pre conversions would be good also

That’s pairs not paid


(Though I’m obviously open to remuneration )

Barbara WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

I’ll go wherever you want to send me folks, but can we agree the plan? I still think paid is the way to go - medium risk, medium reward.


After that can we spend some time hunting wolves. Getting the (hopefully only) original walker pre conversions would be good also

Paid?

Clodagh WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

Morning all, so why are we taking volunteers? We should be sending the 3 most likely baddies, going on the previous scavenger hunts, 1 should find something and 1 should be killed? if the player who finds something doesn't say what it is, we lynch them?

No point in villager risking getting killed. There is 1 con to this, the player who finds something might be a lynch immunity and could be baddie. However I think this strategy is best, any objections?

Why send baddies to possibly find bullets?

Clodagh WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Paid?

See above

Abigail WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

However I think this strategy is best, any objections?

Yes. Sound like a bad plan.

Barbara WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

Morning all, so why are we taking volunteers? We should be sending the 3 most likely baddies, going on the previous scavenger hunts, 1 should find something and 1 should be killed? if the player who finds something doesn't say what it is, we lynch them?

No point in villager risking getting killed. There is 1 con to this, the player who finds something might be a lynch immunity and could be baddie. However I think this strategy is best, any objections?

Agreeing to who goes is the issue


Part of the reason I like sending everybody is that there is a degree of randomness to it. Like you say, a baddie could get Abbi's prize or Mary & Doris's prize

The only downside is if someone doesnt claim the prize but at least then we know we have a baddy in a certain group

My vote would be for groups to go

Barbara WW

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara
Brendan
Abbi
Doris
Gerti
Clodagh

Barbara WW

Also baddies probably have a lot more to lose by being killed

Be interesting to see if our vig is every nite or every second, or has a set number of bullets

Desmond WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

Why send baddies to possibly find bullets?

As I said, if they don't tell us what they found, we know they are bad. Nobody should use a bullet without the rest of us picking a target, including the vig, and the vig doesn't have to reveal themselves. If a bullet is used, we know the player who found something used it and we know they are bad.

Again, any more objections?

Emily WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

Why send baddies to possibly find bullets?

if they dont go with village consensus we lynch them

Emily WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

As I said, if they don't tell us what they found, we know they are bad. Nobody should use a bullet without the rest of us picking a target, including the vig, and the vig doesn't have to reveal themselves. If a bullet is used, we know the player who found something used it and we know they are bad.

Again, any more objections?

none from me. i think it's the best course of action right now

Abigail WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Current volunteers

Nigel
Barbara
Brendan
Abbi
Doris
Gerti
Clodagh

I think we should give preference to anyone who hasn't gone out before.

Barbara WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

As I said, if they don't tell us what they found, we know they are bad. Nobody should use a bullet without the rest of us picking a target, including the vig, and the vig doesn't have to reveal themselves. If a bullet is used, we know the player who found something used it and we know they are bad.

Again, any more objections?

Like I said, how do we decide who is a baddie?

Also what if they get a peek? Much more useful to a villager

I don't like the plan either

Emily WW

i'll go but wont be around much at lunch (meeting at 12, dont know how long it'll go on) or 5- 6pm

Abigail WW

Emily WW wrote: »

if they dont go with village consensus we lynch them

Barbara WW

Emily WW wrote: »

i'll go but wont be around much at lunch (meeting at 12, dont know how long it'll go on) or 5- 6pm

You don't need to be here to go, we just nominate someone and off they go

WerewolfGM

Winifred WW

Morning all.

I’d be up for individuals going(or at a push two). It seems like we aren’t going to find out what they get from the announcements so the other scavengers won’t know either.

In that case if it is a baddy who goes then they be talking rubbish about their prize(potentially like abi).

I’m good to go if people want

Nigel WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Agreeing to who goes is the issue


Part of the reason I like sending everybody is that there is a degree of randomness to it. Like you say, a baddie could get Abbi's prize or Mary & Doris's prize

The only downside is if someone doesnt claim the prize but at least then we know we have a baddy in a certain group

My vote would be for groups to go

Sending everyone could only add to the confusion imo and only the baddies gain by added confusion.

If you sent big groups to 3 locals and going by the past as suggested above (1 finds nothing, 1 finds an item, 1 potentially dies / is converted) we could have 2 different scenarios where someone has an item or is converted and we don't know who it is because they are keeping quiet.

Send individuals and you know who has an item / is converted / is whatever every time.

I can't see why we wouldn't send individuals. Whether those are people you trust or not could be up for debate but tbh if I was to guess I doubt everyone has 3 names they really don't trust atm and even if they did would you want someone you don't trust potentially lying to you about what item they picked up?

Barbara WW

Emily WW wrote: »

if they dont go with village consensus we lynch them

But we won't know if they got a bullet. Aldo they might get something that is useless if they reveal, or that they're not allowed reveal

Like say, I dont know, the Abbi case, if she had revealed that then we might not have caught Henry. We also now have some good wagonomics on the last walker because of it

Its not always as simple as "well tell us your prize or we kill you"