Guest Player

ZCageMaster
ZCageMasterJanuary 30, 2019 23:07

THE CAGE 8 - DAY 4


Numbers are starting to dwindle.
The promise of power impacts decisions.
A new Inhabitant takes control.
IT’S TIME FOR THE CAGE!


Yesterday, The Cage claimed its first victim and the pressure of The Cage began to make itself known. As the Inhabitants experienced the first banishment of the season, the question quickly became: who would be next? Earlier, Joss became the next victim of The Cage and he bestowed another Elemental Orb to a lucky Inhabitant. In time, more Inhabitants found themselves facing Banishment and a new Supreme takes control. Who is on the chopping block today, and who has secure their safety? Let’s find out…



@chesskid – 0 – Nominated for failing to vote to banish
@ujmlkio – 17 – Nominated by Supreme
@bestkwarteng – 15 – Nominated
@kongowongo – 8 – Nominated
@RussellvsRob2019 – 8 – Nominated
@TJP1122 – 7
@Allen - 5

@PacoP , congratulations on being crowned Supreme. You have earned 25 additional chips to your prize pool, immunity from the next round of nominations, and the ability to single-handedly nominate one of your fellow Inhabitants for Banishment. Additionally, you have earned Talks Page privileges for the day. You may make up to three posts and may comment as much as you wish.

@bestkwarteng, @chesskid , @kongowongo , @RussellvsRob2019, and @ujmlkio , the five of you have been nominated for Banishment. You each will be able to make a single post to the Talks Page as a plea. No editing, no commenting. Choose your words carefully, as they are all you have right now.

Members of Zwooper, it is now time for you to vote to Banish one of these Inhabitants. Please put the name of the Inhabitant you want to banish in the title of a message sent to this account. This saves me from having to open them up individually. Additionally, you do not need to be friends with me to message, so there is no reason not to vote! All members of the public that vote will be entered into a random drawing to receive 50 chips. You have until 22:00 Zwooper Time tomorrow to vote.

~CM
#TheCage8

PICK TO WIN
@Allen : @DannyT | @johnnyscott1127
@bestkwarteng : @dcg786 | @Jace
@chesskid : @Clash | @Peyton
@cupcake : @Vlatemier | @Connor
@kongowongo : @Bye | @joeyc
@mepole : @McKenna | @RobJok
@Nates_great : @Nickg24689 | @CDogBro
@PacoP : @jfite9 | @Violet
@RussellvsRob2019 : @eduardo245 | @charlie33222
@TJP1122 : @jellyjam | @Sammy
@ujmlkio : @Aaron1121 | @Wadz13
@wwxcrunner1 : @JonJ | @PeterCampbell
--
13th: @Joss : @boojess | @Chilltown56
14th: @MKtyler23 : @Joseph_040 | @survivorfan1904

on January 31, 2019 10:17
Bye
Bye
I maintain you're just dictating what gameplay should be based on your own opinion. My entire point here is that the best move for a person can come in different ways so to come for it especially so early in the game I think is a little harsh. It could very well be an easy way out pending the circumstance, but it can also be the best move for them in that point of the game whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Imagine if this particular nomination takes out one of the biggest names in the game? And again, you're speaking very generally. It would in fact make every vote count because with nominations like this it would be very rare to have identical noms for both the majority and minority votes. If anything it would make those who do avoid the block that much more impressive because they did just that little bit more to keep themselves safe.

My main point is a move for the sake of a move won't always help your game and that is fact. So to judge a persons decision in such a black and white fashion when you don't know all aspects of the game is crazy to me. Sometimes approaching things from a different angle than other those who have played the game before should be given a chance before being shut down.
on January 31, 2019 05:53
Connor
Connor
I never said it had to be flashy, it just has to be yours. Hell when I won the first supreme I put up someone who was not interacting with people, told everyone about it, thus removing an easy option for them and then got to observe how the sides took shape.

Most people don't get very many opportunities to say "Hey, here's who needs to go for my game right now, here's why, and now they're nominated" . Plus they can't speak whenever they want, so squandering the chance to make your own stamp on the game through a Supreme nom, however big or small, isn't all that exciting, no. It can make for a dynamic where nobody will say much of anything because if you get more than a few nom points (which is very easy when everyone has 5) you're going up. Doesn't matter if your set is the one that goes through or not because if you're in any set, you're up. Yet we praise players who evade the block but still get nom points usually, so it just seems like the easy way out to me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
on January 31, 2019 05:34
Bye
Bye
But you're basically dictating what is best for a persons game based on what you think. Just because a move isn't flashy in terms of the exact target doesn't necessarily mean it isn't the best possible thing for their game at this point in time. Especially at the early stage of the game where the target has a very good chance to stay if they have popularity amongst the public. If the Supremes nominated the person with the most nominations then I actually think it would make the game quite exciting because majority would NEVER fully get their way. Am I wrong in thinking that's actually pretty dynamic?
on January 31, 2019 05:15
Connor
Connor
Sure, and that would be a perfectly valid strategy for a game like ZBB, but it's a tad different with The Cage because of the Supreme aspect. You become a big target no matter what. But what you do with it can build trust with others, albeit you burn one person rather hard.
I don't know....it's just on my seasons the Supreme went out and won the comp b/c they wanted something done, not just for the safety aspect. If you're that concerned with your safety yet don't make any moves when in power that actually help you, then you're not doing much for yourself. Not saying you have to put up the alpha in the house every chance you get, but nominating someone who was already going up doesn't REALLY establish trust with anyone.

(And PS Danny this isn't really about you specifically - I'm just hoping the trend of supremes nominating the house-decided nominee doesn't start)
on January 31, 2019 04:55
Bye
Bye
It's all well and good for you all to be going on about "making big moves" but at the end of the day big threats need big shields. It's crazy to expect threats to come for threats this early, when in reality if they don't stick together at least for now they'll get picked off one by one. An ill timed move just for the sake of making a move is often the kiss of death, so I support the Supremes doing whats best for their game going forward rather than pandering to the public angel
on January 31, 2019 01:31
Connor
Connor
If it was meant to get the 3rd most person up, just...nominate the 3rd person straight-up? I guess I kinda see it if you're trying to get more than 3 people up but the more people you're responsible for putting up, the more likelihood that person(s) will survive....plus supremes only have a killer nomination, not nom points, so yes they might nullify a lot of votes but they don't have a ton of control of how the other votes fall
on January 31, 2019 01:05
JaMarcus_Russell
JaMarcus_Russell
Did i say ballots? Sorry zbb flashbacks
on January 31, 2019 01:04
JaMarcus_Russell
JaMarcus_Russell
Agreed with @CDogBro , Danny mentioned in his post something about wanting more than 3 noms, all killer nominating uj did was completely negated all the points that went his way which was a whole 17, giving him a ton of breathing room to put up other people using very few ballots. Idk could be wrong thats just how i see it
on January 31, 2019 00:58
CDogBro
CDogBro
Oof forgot that this is danny's supreme :[ just replace all the pacos with dannys ig
on January 31, 2019 00:53
CDogBro
CDogBro
@RobJok and @Connor I think its so that all their votes get kind of nulified so the 3rd amount of votes go up. Danny pointed out that he tried to do that with his supreme, so maybe he finally accomplished that with paco's, since paco said he was told a big move would happen.
on January 31, 2019 00:16
RobJok
RobJok
Yikes renoms already.
Also, @Connor really makes a good point. I wonder if some of the bigger targets playing safe may come back to haunt them?
on January 31, 2019 00:01
Patrick71101
Patrick71101
TJ did that c:
on January 30, 2019 23:29
_Rob_
_Rob_
Sorry Chess. I really like you, but I'm not a fan of inactivity. Support going into this round: @ujmlkio , @cupcake , @Allen , @mepole
on January 30, 2019 23:27
Jace
Jace
Zoinks
on January 30, 2019 23:24
Mikey
Mikey
me when chesskid goes off on me even though we were allies for breaking the silence clause yet he forgot to banish? tsk tsk this bitch is going home
on January 30, 2019 23:20
Connor
Connor
A tad confused with why we're using killer noms to nom people who are already going up....maybe I understand the first few times as to avoid getting blood on your hands instantly, but it's starting to get to the point where it looks like scared gameplay....idk maybe the game has evolved but you're already a target when you win a Supreme, why not make a move that's actually going to benefit exclusively you? And even if they stay, at least you have a move to put on your resume. Hard to argue any of these Supreme noms can be used in a good way come the latter stages of the game...
on January 30, 2019 23:19
Clash
Clash
Ugh ujmkio, Kongo and chesskid don’t have me impressed there :/
on January 30, 2019 23:15
Swish
Swish
Really impressed with @Allen seems to of fixed his mistakes from our original season so he has my suppor
on January 30, 2019 23:09
Sammy
Sammy
Failing to vote to banish? Tisk tisk, not a fan at all of inactivity...
on January 30, 2019 23:08
DannyT
DannyT
Lmao Danny did that

This conversation is missing your voice! Please join Zwooper or login.

Sign up or Login