I feel like if there is one lesson this forum has learned over and over again it’s that the surest way to get people here to hardclaim is to announce the presence of anti-claim mechanics
lmao I think I counted to the final point.
that is correct but no one uses the definiton that way
I’m just going to say that watching this clown fiesta was one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve had with silently following a FM game, also how comes half of the thread townread Redrover when he was a very obvious agreeable scum, especially with that fake slip on anticlaim mechanic?
Oh right, that, that was pretty cool. Other than the fact its an ANTI-CLAIM MECHANIC not a ANTI-LIE-CLAIM MECHANIC LOL
This game is a meme
I think the town win condition should have mentioned harmful neutrals
Since Wazza prolonged the game if alive, we needed to also defeat him in order to win
I was an anti-claim who just wanted to see if you claimed or not.
You didn’t need to defeat me though.
Yeah we needed more than a mention to akodo idek who that is
I didn’t slip any anti-claim mechanics. Groupscum didn’t even have anti-claim mechanics.
Does that matter how the definition is used?
Anticlaim mechanic can mean a wide variety of things
I could’ve won even when dead, as stated in my classcard.
I mean the game didn’t end as long as you lived and if you won everyone else instantly lost
I think that qualifies as needing to defeat you
so like… anyone who was about to be lynched claiming would have helped you
yeah there’s no way this wasn’t a lock win for you
yes it does unless you are trying to purposfully mislead someone by using literal definition rather than expected one
So anticlaim exists even when he’s dead?
Yes
But at that point everyone knows exactly how it works
Couldn’t scum literally just threaten to claim if they’re going to be lynched and lose so Wazza would get the win?
So basically a third party won D1