Thread:RubikJohn/@comment-37421692-20190123020345/@comment-36963837-20190125084046

Now this is coming from a HelpMeI’mStuckInSilver player’s interpretation:

A skilled player and/or extreme try-hard is likely to use the against the ’s  or  roles, potentially including the. In a Ranked setting, the following roles are available to edit:







Both and  are difficult to alter. For example, instead of the finding John Hathorne (a fellow ) to be suspicious, the  can divert the attention towards Betty Parris (similar with John Hathorne being a, , or  into Betty Parris). Albeit this sensitive information is of course to be unknown unless proclaimed immediately after the night of discovery— thus altering an or ’s results is improbable unless the  has somehow observed the s’ will beforehand. They may be able to do this, however, in the rare occurrences:


 * Gaining the player’s trust, and receiving their will confidentially.


 * There’s a peering into whispers revealing wills later.


 * You’re playing with blind that can not comprehend the level of intellect that is the Chat Log (if the will were to be revealed in chat earlier).

In the scenario, you can rewrite the entire will. This would require knowing who the is and that they have yet to reveal their will to anyone else. This goes the same — and should be noticeably easier — for the ’s will.

Albeit any of the above practices require extremely fast typing and formatting in less than 40 seconds.

For the, however, is more troublesome and requires attention to past events— and slight chance. Yet it can have an equal effect against the as the  and.

The is useless to change, as their results are religiously posted everyday (and if they are not used similarly in higher ranked gameplay idk what kind of silent mlg strats you have).

It is useless to change a or  results, unless you feel a  should have shot Betty Parris and claimed that they are immune.

, (unless dealing with a ),, and  are nearly impossible to successfully change and properly shift the ’s thought into believing that Thomas Danforth was transported even though they never claimed such a thing, and two other folks claimed transported upon that day.

The only available shift is, and this is somewhat useful if you accompany the presence of a (however, with all the aforementioned roles, of course people should immediately share information in the day after the night of discovery, preventing the chance of you writing that John Hathorne claimed to be the  after they were cleaned, yet in reality they had claimed  in the dead chat). It is implied that this role’s gathered information is shared and collected similar to that of the, , and (etc.).

All aforementioned roles are difficult to change and should require that the rest of the is blind should you choose to alter the information of their will that they had just posted aloud a day ago. Therefore, it is recommended that you redact the writings entirely and for some reason say “forged lol”, rather than struggle to type up a full will in 20 seconds with information that makes perfect sense.

This then brings Vert the into play.

It can be argued that, by complying with the above statements, that is 50% of a ; it has three uses, removes a will, but also removes the identity of the. And this is false, as the has the advantage of changing that will for the benefit of the.

But I would like proof to when that has ever successfully occurred.

For I cannot remember a single game that has a well-forged will (albeit I downgrade myself by repeating that I am a lower-Ranked player).

However for the, this may be more effective. As long as one is able to know who was jailed and on which night, they can voice the claims of the player and the falsely. As the is a powerful and usually controlling figure in most (ranked) games, the information recorded in their will is found to be most trustworthy (unless there is an obvious deceiver in the ) via their personal access towards the target that cannot be transported, framed, etc.

Now as I drag myself into further sleep deprivation, I must add that by simply changing the ’s claim into, etc. (something more confusing yet able to trick the ), this will gain an extra lynch.

This, however, runs into a similar problem also foreseen with. As the framed target is executed, a higher intellect will see this as forgery oR gAmEThRoWinG YoU nO0b. And a is able to proclaim that the  did indeed notice that their will was written falsely.

Therefore it can be concluded that, for the average player such as myself, the acts like half of a, as it is nearly inhuman to create a will near-instantaneously that recognizes the target’s target’s activity, only to slightly confuse the  in later game when said suspect is questioned.

For the, it is found that this is an Italian Kamikaze that can steal Betty Parris’s designer shoes to appear as a.

There is no way to defend this role at night. (I’m pretty sure) The priority of the ’s act occurs after the ’s interrogation to find them suspicious.

Disguising as a unique role has a [it’s a bit late to do the quick maths but I attempted to average out the chances of receiving unique roles against non-uniques which I believe is about 22% so be quiet Vert] to occur, and increases with a  role (which confuses the  for only about a day when they realize the  does not want revenge from the grave, or the  postmortem dropped their match). You are immediately called out in this scenario, unless the case of the, which can mistakenly execute an awfully critical figure for the.

Disguising as a requires you to reconstruct a purposefully inaccurate will (confusing/accusing the target and potential others to deny your claim).

Disguising as a does not properly contradict your target’s will, unless you managed to grab a  in classic.

Disguising as a contradicts a, and can cause damage when you are hung by forcing the  to believe that the actual  must be a  and is thus roleblocked, shot, executed, etc. (and can alert to block  and , etc.)

Disguising as a is similar to contradicting  results with the, and accusing a  with a.

The main purpose of this role is to accuse, suicide, and watch the world (hopefully) crumble and distort in confusion (it was super effective).

Being lynched (or shot by ) is a Priority that simultaneously -1s the members already in the group; an eventual trade-off (-1 ; +1 execution against accused target) that can be seen as very wasteful (especially in the early stages of the game).

To success is to firstly disguise as a target and know their role, and maybe make a lil’ will. Second, accuse them of being evil (e.g. counterclaim their claim), and thirdly, fail and have yourself lynched first. If you have your target lynched, you will most likely be jailed and executed, or killed in some other way struggling to find another claim for your target’s role to disguise as. [This is my strategy based on my past experiences with .]

In totality, the ’s use is fragile and must be used with caution, as planning this attack early can cause an immediate imbalance in the VS  player count scenario. It also requires attention to player’s roles and inverting wills (purposefully, to kill oneself), similar to that of the. From a certain perspective, one can see the as a suicidal ; they have altered their will into a record that confuses the  further. The only problem is that this alternative is -1  member.

Alternatively again you can choose to be silent the whole time, and act as a gamethrowing -. This is a repetition of the 50%, yet the needs to die.

I must abstain my vote on which role is better at the moment.