and btw, roleblocking an investigative action doubles as rolecopping a JoaT here because they would only know if they were roleblocked because of the action they took.
so there’s no world in which Eli isn’t either scum or a town JoaT, and you already heard my opinion on that.
My point was showing you that I should be locktown because I notived his claim :P. /s
I mean one one hand valid- on the other hand you can’t choose what you do subconsciously, so you can’t tell me that you completely ignore it :P.
I mean, think about what happened. target Eli with a RB, suddenly he’s conf joat, no? There was no assurance that someone would be protecting Eevee either. Idk. It’s not the way I would play it, and it’s apparently not the way you would play it, but it’s still a way to go about things. Is the 50/50 of protection worth risking a PR?
My point was he had one game of yours that he was comparing this to. (now I know he has 2) and he chose to take the “obv Town” one and compare it against this, and be as confident in it as he was in his other read, which was for completely non-meta reasons. A one-game comparison Meta read should never be as strong as any other read, imo.
lol
sometimes I’m just oblivious to it, or else I just don’t know what to do with it. like if you hand me a crying baby I literally do not know what to do with it so I just stare awkwardly lol.
terrible example but it’s true
is the 50/50 of protection worth wasting a roleblock?
actually he chose the non-obvtown game to compare this to.
also Eevee literally said at least once or twice during D1 that he would likely die during the night, so I really don’t know why there wouldn’t have been a protective on him.
I meant
“is a 50/50 of protection worth wasting a kill”
I have…no idea…why I wrote “risking a PR”
I’d be like “oop haha little freudian slip there :P” but I genuinely have no clue what I was thinking when I wrote that
and as you don’t, I don’t have a definite answer. can’t answer for the Mafia. (hey, anyone wanna answer this? mafia? no? :(. )
If I was joat I wouldn’t have been on him, and Eli wasn’t, apparently. If someone talks like that, I wouldn’t attack them, so I wouldn’t protect them.
Did someone mention the NK needing to happen? as in they can’t choose to just…not?
Sorry. coolio. went up to the rules just now to answer my own question and got distracted and then tabbed out lol
so you don’t get yelled at - I confirm Illwei’s edit was to fix the double post with a broken quote.
yes, sorry. Kinda assumed that if someone was gonna yell at me it would be after they checked to see what the edit was, meaning they would realize that by themselves. anyways-
back on topic…
anyway, I know what you were saying about the 50/50 chance of a successful kill. But the roleblocking in tandem with the failed night kill doesn’t add up (famous last words).
if min, Eevee or Maple believed Eli not to be town, I’m pretty sure they already would have said something when he claimed to be roleblocked. Nobody has counterclaimed being roleblocked, so we won’t know for sure unless nobody gets roleblocked for the next two nights, but we know whoever protected did not get roleblocked.
If Eli is VT and claiming roleblock, it would be utter bullshit and scum would obviously know. If Eli is scum and claiming roleblock, then one of min/Maple was rolecopped, not that it would have been useful, since mafia knows who was attacked and protected, and therefore knows who the JoaT is.
But as I said, none of the JoaTs are pointing at Eli today and saying he’s scum, so I think the chances he’s town are pretty high and the chances he’s scum are pretty low.
That still leads me to wonder why the night kill was unsuccessful and whether the remaining scum are being sloppy or if there really was a slim chance the kill randed onto the protection target. But if it really was Eevee, my guess is that it was a purposeful attack to get Eevee out of the game, and why they didn’t RB a JoaT A claim instead is beyond me.
Why just one of those two?
I mean, I don’t see the problem here.
They attack Eevee because either Eevee is Joat B, or Eevee is dangerous. They RB the other Joat B claim just in case Eevee isn’t Joat B.
To clarify:
If they are targetting Eevee because they think they are Joat B and want to get Joat B out of the game, then it makes more sense to try and RB the other Joat B claim.
If they were to target a claimed joat A with the roleblock, then they might end up not killing a Joat, and the real Joat would still be able to perform their action.
Yo guys I’m back.
Sorry I had to do some very important things but I’m back. Lemme just catch up on these couple of posts
because there’s only one mafia JoaT
Eli can’t have been rolecopped if he claimed roleblocked. He was either really roleblocked or he’s scum, as I said.
Eevee wouldn’t have been rolecopped if he was the kill target because why would you rolecop a kill target? Their flip gives their role.
because JoaT B can’t protect JoaT B, that’s the problem. JoaT B can only be protected by JoaT A. One JoaT A claim seemed to believe Eevee was JoaT B, the other JoaT A claim said they protected the JoaT A counterclaim (which did not make sense, by the way, except to kind of spew Maple as town), and nobody claimed to protect Eli nor did he claim to protect anyone.
But in order to get JoaT B out of the game, they should roleblock JoaT A. They’re like puzzle pieces. Eevee and Eli fit into the same spot; they can’t both be there and they can’t protect each other no matter how much you try to imagine it. They’re in pairs. min/Maple can’t protect each other but they can protect the others. Eevee/Eli can’t protect each other but they can protect the others.
wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I’m going to simplify this. Min and Maple both start with M, and Eevee and Eli both start with E. I’m going to use M and E to refer generically to JoaT A and JoaT B when the actual JoaTs are interchangeable.
Let’s say scum had targeted min with a roleblock. They’re blocking a JoaT A claim, so M might be protected by JoaT B. E is JoaT B, so if min is successfully roleblocked and is real JoaT A, E is guaranteed open kill targets, but M is not, because E could be protecting one of them. Catch my drift?
Likewise, and according to the claims early in the day, scum targeted Eli with a roleblock. Eli is a JoaT B claim. Let’s say min is JoaT A and Eli is JoaT B. Min can protect Eevee, Eli, or Maple. Eevee cannot protect anyone as VT. Maple cannot protect anyone due to being VT. Eli can protect any of the other three and not himself. But he is roleblocked, so his protection is not on any of them. M is an open target, but E is not. In this specific example, Min is not roleblocked, and because they know that Maple counterclaimed them, they will probably not protect Maple because Maple is not a JoaT. They will protect E because either of them would fit with Min’s claim. Min is JoaT A, and E is JoaT B. Min was probably also very unlikely to protect Eli because they were scumreading him through EoD. So that means most likely, Min would protect Eevee because at the very least, Eevee is spewed town.
Why not kill someone who was a JoaT A claim, and bet that the JoaT B claim would be successfully roleblocked? There’s a better chance of [RB Eli + kill Eli’s target] or [RB min + kill min’s target] being successful than there is of [RB Eli + kill min’s target].
I don’t think Illwei’s logic matches up and it’s not making me townread them tbh.
and by this, I mean it feels like they’re either failing to understand what I’m saying, or they’re trying to cover for the nightkill failure because they’re scum.
tl;dr -
JoaT A can protect JoaT B.
JoaT B can protect JoaT A.
If JoaT B is roleblocked, JoaT A is an open kill target.
so why not kill JoaT A??
