I think a part of this discussion that has been ignored is that we don't know the scum wincon. If it is the standard "all townies must die", then humans are really much more important because so long as a human is still alive, we can bring back the Hosts. If it is "scum controls 50% of town", then it's more problematic as we might be endgamed when we could still bring back hosts. If it mirrors the town wincon and reads "all town hosts must be dead", then umm well the argument that Hosts are more important seems very reasonable.
I was thinking 3
3's really awkward because hosts can revive. So the game can end in a situation where town could win if the game hadn't, well, ended.
This seems to beg the question that we were musing on earlier...how many hosts and humans are there. One or the other has to be a limited resource, right? Whichever is more precious should be of the greatest value to us.
OK here is the thing about the value though..
there are 9 alive.
Some amount of those are hosts and some amount of those are humans.
Just gonna act under the assumption that there is at most 3 skum.
so either way 2 max of one and 1 of the other (assuming they all are not the same) that doesn't really matter
point is that all of this talk is of course leading to the potential of some sort of claim.
I think the host/human claim is bad.
We do not know what the skum win con is, and the town win con is public. So, as human vs host value is being weighted against what the unknown wincon potentially is... we should probably just kind of drive the conversation elsewhere. for now at least.