The Expendawolves GAME THREAD

Conor WW

Phil should be the vote the vote tonight, pure and simple!

Derry WW

Gertrude WW wrote: »

My ffa currently is Brendo and Connor. Votes been in on Brendan most of the day though.

Derry, I’ve got you on my goodies list, so I’m not sure why you feel under pressure. Take a breath.

Barbara WW

Derry WW wrote: »

Have a hug.

Clodagh WW

So, from what I can gleam with a quick read through is

Eva and Orla were wolves
Dessie found this out so we can assume he’s not a wolf?
The SK then blew Eva up?
Babs shot a bullet into Phil but it mightn’t go off until the day after tomorrow?

@Dessie - who are you lynching?

I’m waiting on a call to go back to work, I’ll have to drop everything when it comes so I’ll vote while I’m here for whoever Dessie is voting, at worst he’s SK but still after wolves

Conor WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

I'll join ya on Conor

Care to justify Babs? You followed me on Phil apparently and I was on Orla hard and early. Either that or I'm the Sk is what your insinuating

Gertrude WW

Conor WW wrote: »

Care to explain my inclusion? I've been around all day responding, investigating and chatting, not once have you asked me a question or to explain something, at least that I recall.

Phil, no surprise really your voting for me, I wouldn't expect anything less tbh

A lot of it was the manner in which you were posting post Isla dying. I did say this morning, I personally didn’t feel her role was obvious, and popping in after a vote to decry the result and paint yourself as all knowing is a move I’ve traditionally whipped out when I’ve been bad. Also.

Conor WW wrote: »

Phil should be the vote the vote tonight, pure and simple!

The only reason to kill Phil is if you don’t believe Barbara has a gun. Otherwise, it’s a waste of a kill.this actually makes me worry bout you more.

Conor WW

Gertrude WW wrote: »

A lot of it was the manner in which you were posting post Isla dying. I did say this morning, I personally didn’t feel her role was obvious, and popping in after a vote to decry the result and paint yourself as all knowing is a move I’ve traditionally whipped out when I’ve been bad. Also.



The only reason to kill Phil is if you don’t believe Barbara has a gun. Otherwise, it’s a waste of a kill.this actually makes me worry bout you more.

Ok point 1, and I've quoted it directly, 24 hours before Isla died I pointed out (kinda foolishly) she was the executioner

Point 2, I didn't say I dont believe Babs has a gun, I disbelieve it's going to take a day or two for it to fire. Which is a stretch. I also posted a couple of issues with this. How does the make you worry more? A gun, with a day or two delay, not specified is little use tbh

Phil WW

Liam WW wrote: »

You get that's what Eva said about him too, right?

Im not Eva.

Liam WW

Vote in on wini

Gertrude WW

Conor WW wrote: »

Ok point 1, and I've quoted it directly, 24 hours before Isla died I pointed out (kinda foolishly) she was the executioner

Point 2, I didn't say I dont believe Babs has a gun, I disbelieve it's going to take a day or two for it to fire. Which is a stretch. I also posted a couple of issues with this. How does the make you worry more? A gun, with a day or two delay, not specified is little use tbh

If Babs has a gun, and has chosen Phil, then putting our lynch on Phil feels like a waste to me. Its basically throwing away the lynch.

Of course, that's IF Babs has a gun. If she doesn't, and Phil isn't dead within 24 hours, then it looks like she was either lying or misinformed. If Phil is good, and Babs shot him without consulting the village, it also gives us stuff to work with. Killing Phil without letting that gunshot go off would just give Babs an out IF its a play.

But either way, that feels like something that would be self-fulfilling tomorrow, one way or the other. I feel there's more data points to be gained from seeing if the gun goes off than there is lynching Phil (who I don't get wolfie vibes from either, anyway).

Conor WW

Gertrude WW wrote: »

If Babs has a gun, and has chosen Phil, then putting our lynch on Phil feels like a waste to me. Its basically throwing away the lynch.

Of course, that's IF Babs has a gun. If she doesn't, and Phil isn't dead within 24 hours, then it looks like she was either lying or misinformed. If Phil is good, and Babs shot him without consulting the village, it also gives us stuff to work with. Killing Phil without letting that gunshot go off would just give Babs an out IF its a play.

But either way, that feels like something that would be self-fulfilling tomorrow, one way or the other. I feel there's more data points to be gained from seeing if the gun goes off than there is lynching Phil (who I don't get wolfie vibes from either, anyway).

Cool and what are the numbers like in that scenario, let's say two wolves, it's a delay tactic and one of the power wolves blocks a lynch/kill. This is lunacy!

Phil WW

I cant understand why Babs has marked me for death yet will follow me on Conor?

Odd.

Conor WW

Phil WW wrote: »

I cant understand why Babs has marked me for death yet will follow me on Conor?

Odd.

Very odd

Clodagh WW

Why are people talking about lynching Phil? Is he not mortally wounded?

Gertrude WW

Phil WW wrote: »

I cant understand why Babs has marked me for death yet will follow me on Conor?

Odd.

Yeah, no, I've clue about that one.

Barbara WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

Why are people talking about lynching Phil? Is he not mortally wounded?

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

Barbara WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

Someone being??? I told a mod a name.....that's my flavour

Phil WW

Clodagh WW wrote: »

Why are people talking about lynching Phil? Is he not mortally wounded?

Ive no clue whats happening.

I believe Babs. So thats me done.

Nothing more I can do about it

Liam WW

Barbara WW wrote:

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

Barbara WW wrote:

Someone being??? I told a mod a name.....that's my flavour

What

Phil WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

But Im the target yeah?

Gertrude WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

Barbara WW wrote: »

Someone being??? I told a mod a name.....that's my flavour

Are....are you asking yourself?

Barbara WW

Liam WW wrote: »

What

I realised if I left "someone"as is then I'd get a million questions about who that someone is.

So I clarified. Using someone was flavour, description. I just gave a mod a name. Phil

Liam WW

So you didn't shoot Phil, you armed him.

Conor WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

Yes but I only got the bullet. I've given the bullet to someone with a gun and no indication on when they might shoot

Ok, that's strange, I dont recall the gun going to someone else, I thought you said you gave a name and the mods said it'll be delayed a while

Phil WW

Babs, im not doubting you.


But youre gonna have to spell out whats happening to me.

Gertrude WW

Barbara WW

I don't think we should vote for Phil tonight.

But understand those who say they will.

Phil WW

Liam WW wrote: »

So you didn't shoot Phil, you armed him.

I can confirm im unarmed

Conor WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

I realised if I left "someone"as is then I'd get a million questions about who that someone is.

So I clarified. Using someone was flavour, description. I just gave a mod a name. Phil

A name for what? Above you said it's a name to give someone a bullet, wording would be fairly important here Babs

Conor WW

Barbara WW wrote: »

I don't think we should vote for Phil tonight.

But understand those who say they will.

Explain why you would shoot Phil, but wouldn't lynch him. Simple question, simple answer