MrakeDarshall

Members
  • Content count

    2,381
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

MrakeDarshall last won the day on February 28 2018

MrakeDarshall had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,292 Radiant Squire

4 Followers

About MrakeDarshall

  • Rank
    Gibletish
  • Birthday 09/03/1998

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://isitchristmas.com
  • Skype
    trevor.kirkby1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Undoubtedly Somewhere

Recent Profile Visitors

3,748 profile views
  1. With a protective role, the only evidence for it you can see is people surviving attacks. Statistically, the more attacks are survived, the higher the probability that there is more than one protector. We have a sample size of three attacks, and 2/3 of them were blocked. A priori, my prediction would be a single lurcher, because of role distribution. This information from this cycle somewhat increases the probability of two lurchers. It's hard to say definitively which is less unlikely, there being a single lurcher who guessed right twice or there being multiple lurchers.
  2. Interesting. I'm not shocked to be the target of an attack. I generally hope for the elims trying to get me lynched instead of attacking me, but the D1 state of affairs may have prevented that. Other news, the lurcher seems to be doing very well, and I am considering the possibility of multiple lurchers in this game. Given that a villager mistborn has already flipped, I am inclined to assume that xinoehp was the kandra's kill. Before I cast a vote, I will be reading all of xinoehp's interactions. But as of right now my suspicions pretty much are the same from yesterday.
  3. I guess one long post responding to everyone doesn't really count as two. Well, this does. While I'm posting: I might as well ask what it is about Straw you find suspicious, because right now I haven't been able to get a read on Straw.
  4. Not really. I'm prepared to defend you with the same force I defended Furamirionind. Not really. It will only make us look good if and when Devotary flips evil. 1. Yes and no. I agree that the human tendency to gravitate towards only 2 options for decision-making is pretty unhelpful. But it also inspires people to take sides, which in this particular context is actually useful. 2. If you had given me this last cycle when I initially asked for it, I would have seriously considered backing off on my suspicion of you. Not really. Aside from not wanting to lynch Fura, I suspected Devotary for specific things she did, such as distancing from the D1 lynch, and specific things she did not do, such as giving evidence for going out of her way to solve the game. That can only be called playstyle insofar as anything somebody does in-game could be chalked up to playstyle. Playstyle can be a mitigating factor (for example I didn't know Fura's playstyle as well in the last game we played together and I tried to lynch her, but now I would like to think I have a better sense of what is normal for her and what isn't), but never a reason to suspect somebody. Not really. I can't remember an SE game where defending somebody like this has made anyone more trusted, and that goes doubly for a lynch between two innocents. I don't think my defending Bard in a similar fashion in the last game scored me any points. I am expecting to net suspicion from defending Furamirionind, I just don't care. You can lynch me if and when Devotary flips village, because I don't think she will. This sounds a tad disingenuous to me. I don't remember you expressing that degree of certainty last cycle. Good catch. Me neither. I guess I'm less cleared than I thought. I wonder why this occurred to you, though. It's a little off the beaten path. Were you looking for a reason to lynch me? Regardless, a thug!drake probably wouldn't want to burn his extra life for no reason, and you might be overestimating my intelligence if you think I could stage a tie to become trusted on the first day. Especially considering how one of the big topics D1 was literally how we would re-lynch thugs, and I even agreed myself that village thugs should let themselves die, meaning that if I was lynched but survived I would still be a guaranteed eliminator to anyone who had their eyes open.
  5. I still think the elims have a hazekiller, and I believe that Fura is a hazekiller, I just don't think Fura is the elim hazekiller. I concede that suspecting Fura for being a hazekiller may be valid, although I personally do not due to the other reasons I gave.
  6. I was interested in Aman’s shift of focus as well, but as you can see Aman is no longer credibly distancing Fura. I am defending Fura, but I am also less likely than most to be an elim after D1, not to mention putting myself out there to defend people is something I am kind of beginning to make a habit of. Given the spread of villagers and elims, I believe it’s much more logical to insist that somebody is village than it is to do the opposite. I can’t speak for Ventyl or Sart, aside from that I have no particular cause to suspect them, and that their votes happened early enough into the cycle that I find it less likely to be a reaction to Fura recieving votes. For what it’s worth, I respect that you are willing to risk it. Me too. I doubt it’ll actually happen, but I’d put myself up for the lynch if I am wrong about Fura. I probably wouldn’t at this stage in the game stake my life on Devotary being evil, unless I was only risking my life and not also staking Devotary’s by lynching them. I doubt you will change your mind, any more than I will change mine. But, maybe think about it? You said you’re in a tunnel and I bet a fresh perspective wouldn’t go amiss even if you are right. Fura may have lied about her role in PMs (she did that to me too, incidentally), but if anything that feels more like a villager’s attempt at a gambit than an eliminator tactic. I struggle to see what an eliminator might gain from such a ploy, and it would almost inevitably net them suspicion for a lie that they couldn’t substantiate with accurate scans and would likely face a counterclaim in the future. EDIT: I think we can agree though that this doesn’t really feel like a V-V lynch? Not that I am at all unhappy with greater levels of activity and participation, but the jump from D1 levels of participation and side-taking to what we have right now is interesting. You are reading my saying “uncertainty is to be expected in a V-V lynch” to mean “villagers act with uncertainty”. My point there was that everyone would act uncertain. Even eliminators would act uncertain because they know at least as well as the villagers that there aren’t any good options. That said, the statement “villagers act with uncertainty”, while not my original statement, is also sometimes correct. It isn’t always the case, for example I believe Fifth is likely a villager in part because they are so certain in their suspicions. More to the point, I am not suspecting you on account of uncertainty. It would be one thing to give me some soft reads and suspicions, things you aren’t sure enough to act on, but things you’ve noticed. What you did was avoid giving me any suspicions the first two times, and then told me you suspected the person who was probably going to get lynched today the third time. I’m sorry, but I find that suspicous. I asked to know your thought process, see how you were trying to solve the game, and you effectively blocked me out. That doesn’t prove that you are an elim, but it does increase the probability considerably.
  7. Yeah, I’m inconvenient like that. I am more in favor of attempting probably inaccurate D1 lynches than Aman is, but I still really don’t like lynching villagers if I can help it, and I think you’re a villager. Other news, between thread and PM I believe I’ve asked Devotary three times now for reads on other players that would be valuable for catching other elims if Devotary were an elim. If they had answered with a concrete suspicion, I probably would have backed off, since willingness to share that info would be a villager move and because that info would be insurance in case Devotary was an elim. I’m not the best at catching elims in the conventional sense but I’m usually decent at spotting a villager once I’ve put them on the spot. What I’m saying is, I’ve been trying to give Devotary lots of opportunities to convince me otherwise and I’m still reading elim. Doubly so for the concerted push against Fura, where I would usually expect a stronger sentiment of uncertainty on a V-V lynch (off the top of my head, I’d suspect Lumgol of protecting Devotary if Devotary is in fact an elim). Sorry if I’m wrong about this but I definitely think lynching Fura is a mistake (can anybody here, considering everything as a whole, point to any particular thing that really incriminates Fura?) and I do maintain my suspicion of Devotary.
  8. So uh. This is the part where I point out that nobody but me is actually defending Furamirionind, and that you all should probably reconsider lynching Fura.
  9. Also @Sazedezas if you wanted to work together to write Karabiner and Epoch talking before the meeting we can do that (possibly working on it concurrently with the meeting since we'll eventually post all of the stuff in sequence anyway), otherwise I'm going to drop that and focus mainly on moving the meeting forwards. Speaking of the meeting, does anyone have plans for saying something to the question about Doubletake's death? To my knowledge none of our characters actually know what happened to Doubletake but if somebody wanted to say something (or stage an assassination or whatever ) the door is open. Otherwise I'll probably move things along.
  10. I am of the belief that if many people are unhappy with the lynch, then they should change it. But that's besides the point. Thank you for providing this explanation. Do you believe any of those categories might correlate with alignment? For that matter, what category if any would you place yourself in?
  11. Yeah, I don't really agree with lynching Fura. Mostly because I have a PM with Fura, and after asking them to explain their thought process on some things and their reads, I don't really feel like this is the thought process of an elim. There's also the fact that most of the things Fura is doing that they are being suspected for, are things I suspected village!Fura of in the last MR (which we can now talk about, because it finished). So I'm a bit more inclined to suspect Devotary. Reasons: Rath and Devotary are the two people I found when looking for "people who tried to avoid input on the lynch". I would be pretty surprised if none of the elims were exhibiting this behavior pattern in a village-village D1 lynch. However, Rath's response to my initially raising that point kind of points to their being village (thanks for pointing that out, Fura). I also have a better gut read on Rath. The D1 interaction where Devotary needed to clarify that one post was interesting and kind of odd. I'm not sure I can put my finger on what seemed off in that interaction, because I don't even think the post that Devotary needed to clarify was really all that suspicious, but yeah. There's also the fact that so far Devotary has focused mostly on game analysis and not analysis of people, although I concede that this isn't strongly alignment indicative because there isn't as much to analyze with people yet (it's more that the players who are already analyzing other players seem slightly more village to me).
  12. Well, that was quick. I guess I'm not too surprised somebody attacked Aman, but I expected it would take another cycle or two. They also survived. Possible explanations: The eliminator team perceived Amanuensis as a threat (which is interesting, because there are also a good few players on the shard that would not react by killing a player they deemed someone to watch out for at the first possible opportunity). A village lurcher (or thug!Aman) protected Aman. The eliminators, including Amanuensis, decided to try a WGG, and presumably had a role to do so with. Moreover, I'm pretty interested in the fact that there was only one attack, not more. I doubt the eliminators failed to make a kill. Possible explanations: The SK does not have a kill and thus couldn't make one. Probably because they have infiltrated the eliminator team and meant to rely on the eliminator kill. They are a kandra, after all. The SK has a kill, but they also had a different action they wanted to do instead. This possibility would support my theory of a kandra mistborn. If a mistborn!Kandra wanted to protect themselves on the first night, that could potentially implicate Aman. The SK was inactive, and forgot to submit a kill order. In this case, they will probably die to the inactivity filter soon. The good thing about this possibility is that we'll know if this is true in at least a few cycles. I'll make a definitive analysis later in the cycle but this is pretty much me processing.
  13. People who are trying to keep their heads down, which is what distancing from the lynch entails, don't do what Aman did. More generally, it's just statistics. If so-and-so person always opposes the D1 lynch or just generally doesn't participate in it, it's not really a useful data point to know that they did it in this game too. It's a lot more interesting if somebody is acting hands-off when sometimes they do get involved, and we can wonder why they chose not to this time.
  14. Whoops. Turns out I wasn't online at rollover. Still, if I was online, I wouldn't have changed my vote. I'm rather attached to my own life, and putting me up for the lynch would force my hand. And even if Ark had claimed mistborn, I probably would have been more likely to lynch them because of that (a village role that can pretty much clear themselves of being an eliminator and then subsequently survive attacks just didn't seem all that likely to me, but apparently I was wrong, which is kind of scary if other factions are balanced against that and we don't have our mistborn anymore). So, while it's a pretty bad outcome, I'm pretty sure that would have happened either way. Ark, in PM: "Drake I'm a village mistborn probably keep me alive" Drake, in-thread: "So I feel like lynching Ark today" Think about what you are suggesting. As chance had it, Ark wasn't online after my vote, otherwise they probably would have claimed and probably used pewter to survive. But how do you propose I could have known Ark would never have been online for a good 24 hours? If Ark had claimed mistborn to me in a PM, all it would have taken is for Ark to be online at some point in the next 24 hours to notice that I'm lynching him after he claimed village mistborn to me, and I would be finished. For what you are suggesting to be possible, either Ark or myself would have had to have made a fairly serious error in judgement: Ark by telling me both that he was a village mistborn and that he absolutely would not be around for the next cycle to stop a lynch on him, or me by not considering the massive risks of pulling something like this without a way of knowing Ark wouldn't have been online. Even if Ark had claimed mistborn to elim!Drake in a PM, I could have night-killed him without exposing myself (I would probably wait a cycle in case he was baiting me). Or if the elim team has vote manips (which I think is most likely the case, given 3-4 elims each with a high probability of having some kind of role) that would have been an even safer and more reliable way to do it. For that matter, the fact that vote manips or other voters didn't break the tie to protect me is a strong hint that I'm a villager. Considering that this was a tied lynch between villagers, I am more inclined to suspect the people who distanced themselves from the lynch, kept their head down and hands off, because they were okay with how things were going. (I would hesitate to call consuming half the thread in D1 lynch discussion "keeping one's head down" so I'm not suspecting Aman on account of that, although I wouldn't say it makes Aman more trustworthy either) In other words, I am looking for people who: Were reasonably active last cycle Didn't vote Didn't cite objection to the idea of a D1 lynch as a reason for not voting Don't have a history (that I know of) of avoiding D1 lynches People who could maybe fit that description: Devotary Rath Fura(?) told me they were receptive to the idea of no D1 lynch in a PM so I'm less inclined to suspect Fura for not participating It might've been dumb to start making suspect lists on D1 when there isn't that much criteria yet (so is N1 too early? ), but I'm a firm proponent in the efficacy of suspect lists. It gives other people a lot of information about your connections to other players, and I think it's a pretty good way to catch eliminator teams. It's a shame because I previously had soft trust reads on both Rath and Devotary. Guess that puts them back into neutral read, maybe slightly elim read. I don't think I have much more to comment on, so peace out. Oh look, I got ninja'd by a bunch of people.