Thread:Orecreeper/@comment-27398195-20180723195224/@comment-34403911-20180728004529

HAWAIIANpikachu wrote: Hey wait a second. So you're asking me to play maybe a survivor just like a maf role,

No, I'm telling you to play like any non-town role.

this is what i mean by maf.

except your INVEST RESULTS BASICALLY CLAIM WHAT YOU ARE,

'''That's a problem for you? You want to win, if an investigator checks you they can just say you're a survivor.'''

and that you don't have an actual night ability?

Nor does medium, ret, amne… if you think about it some roles don't have a night ability.

their day abilities usually make up for it.

Like isn't that just a less-fun sk without killing,

Isn't that basically a vigilante?

So you're saying a vig doesn't kill?

by your standards and how you play the game?

Of course, faking to be a killing role is interesting, that's the thrill of the game.

You're not going to believe what's about to come next..........

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(fun is subjective)

I don't want to change my gamestyle to make it fun. I want to win and while at it, have fun. Those aren't mutually exclusive, you know.

Then either suck it up and be boring and win, or play interesting and risk losing, like how survivor is either way.

"Those aren't mutually exclusive, you know. "

or they aren't supposed to be if the game's made right.

'''So maybe they could make it so that you can't make it boring and win. Why are you defending this? I'm literally encouraging your play style. The fact that being boring and winning is bad because it's an option. Can it be better so it's being fun and also risk losing?'''

And yes this whole point was a bait for this.

Waiting on your response to my refutation, that will be the point here. No offense but how ironic that you bring up a point for your argument that you yourself have refuted.

I refuted your point, if you can't see that then you need to check again.

'''What I meant by that is how I used your point against you again, so when you reply to that point I'll just use it against you again. '''

Yes, but Protection roles can Protect the TIs and the TKs, thus the name (mind=blown) Same with Support (well maybe not trans). And wait a second... Are you saying roles like medium are supposed to be TIs?

Protection roles are easily exploitable, they're most likely on the jailor due to the D1 meta and due to the fact jailor is broken as hell.

'''Which means you 're saying they're good? didn't you just say how they should be removed? I'm confused.'''

No no no no no. Ore is saying that either you have to get rid of that point or your original point. It, using 100% hard and basic logic, cannot possibly both be true.

I don't see your point, vampires and survivors can exist in the same game mode, survivors win with anyone so vampires won't bite them, so town has to kill vampires and not survivors.

Ok i can see that

You have said this statement.

It's not difficult to defend your claim as town, once you are confirmed you are good for the rest of the game (Unless vampires exist)

And also, you have admitted that this point is true:

Vampires usually exist when survs exist.

If we represent (It's not difficult to defend your claim as town, once you are confirmed you are good for the rest of the game) as point A, and (Vampires exist) as point B, your point can be expressed like this.

If not point B, then point A.

But we also have

Point B is usually true.

Therefore:

Point A is usually false.

​​​​​​​Therefore your point is usually false, so you have to concede it or refute the fact that vamps usually do not exist in games with surv.​​​