Pie E7- (Open 129): Game Over before 762

[zwetschenwasser]

Unvote; Vote: dejkha

WTF? You just blew a fuse there as if you were a nervous wreck about something! Defensive much?

[dejkha]

Looks like someone wants to get on my bandwagon first to avoid suspicion of bandwagoning.

[zwetschenwasser]

I just love it how any case I make against you you dismiss as worthless and stupid...

[dejkha]

1. That's hardly a "case"
2. Your cases are worthless and stupid. Especially when I didn't blow up, but just used logic on how it meant nothing. But you wouldn't know anything of that, would you?

[hasdgfas]

Unvote; Vote: dejkha

WTF? You just blew a fuse there as if you were a nervous wreck about something!

Defensive much?

Defending yourself is a scumtell now?

[hewitt]

I would expect every townie to defend themselves so they can stay in the game and help the rest of the town.

[zwetschenwasser]

Overdefensiveness is a scumtell.

[dejkha]

It wasn't over defensive, though it may have looked that way if you think I used so many big words...

[zwetschenwasser]

Are you really telling a guy with a username like mine that overdefensiveness can be mistaken for using big words?

[dejkha]

Copy and paste, my friend. Copy and paste. Your user name means nothing.

[zwetschenwasser]

It wasn't over defensive, though it may have looked that way if you think I used so many big words...

Then why are you being condescending?

[alexhans]

dejkha sugested the scum.metagaming search...
zwetschenwasser says he plays better being scum... if he is town he will play like a crazed baboon apparently...

So I assume that means you don't like helping town then, correct?

Actually, no. It means that I find this game fun, and I like poking fun at people and making jokes more than sitting down and trying to act logical. But I do like to help town.

I don't like this at all. I have fun but being ilogical won't help town... And if you're way too funny and poke too much and avoid questions with smileys you'll probably be lynched.

Regarding the setup... I've seen on the wiki that it isn't pro-scum... apparently:

Pie E7 is an Open Setup game which features a Day Start and consists of the following roles:

1 Mafia Goon
1 Mafia Roleblocker (for balance reasons, the Roleblocker should also be able to nightkill even if the Goon is dead; see this thread for arguments on the matter)
1 Sane Cop
1 Doctor
3 Townies
This setup was used for a time as a Newbie Setup as a replacement for the somewhat unbalanced C9, but turned out to be somewhat unbalanced toward the Town.
Note: The "E7" portion of the name is a bit of a misnomer, since unlike "C9" which it is based on, the game involves no variability of roles.

That's why we have a doc and cop. Hopefully they'll make good use of their night actions before being killed.

I also find it interesting the dejkha assumes the PRs will be killed. Why do you assume that?

Because I'm scum and I know who the cop and doc are!!!!! Sorry guys, but you can't pin that one on me. Neither scum, nor town, have any idea who doc or cop is until they claim or are killed. So don't go trying to say I know who they are. I also say they would be killed because we have a 2/5 chance of one of them being killed. Hewitt, this isn't a perfect game and most aren't, so it's silly to assume the perfect scenario will play out.

I'll keep in mind how you tried to use that against me without reasoning though, Hasd. There's no way I could know who cop or doc are unless I am one. Which means, scum doesn't even know who cop or doc is. So trying to use that against me is quite the a stretch.

I must say I was a bit surprised by this post... Like he totally overreacted to a question that was probably meant to spark some discussion. He said he found it interesting and dej started going on about how he was implying that he knew roles... dont pin it on him... etc.
Then he attacked hasd (really... what crappy nicknames you have... we'll have to find a way to abrev. them and make them understandable.) saying the supposed argument was flawed because scum didn't know who their roles were. So why all the fuss? If you had just stated that it wasn't probable to have a perfect game it would've sufficed... If there's no real argument there's no need to defend so strongly...

Empking voted for dej... for being defensive...

regarding the claims... The only role that can safely claim is the cop. Because he will be protected that night by the doc. But he will probably be blocked. So it will not be useful at all. If the doc claims... we're screwed. They kill him the next night and no one can do anything about it.

So... I'm not a fan of claiming in this game... you'd better use your wit to defend yourselves.


then some random fighting happened.
then zwets voted dej.

WTF? You just blew a fuse there as if you were a nervous wreck about something! Defensive much?

1. That's hardly a "case"

I have to agree with this. you vote in a one-line-one-subjective-argument post... that's not much. I'm not gonna speak about 2. because disrespecting others is not nice. not even in-game.

Overdefensiveness is a scumtell.

I disagree. If I'm about to get lynched I'll defend myself in every way possible. It's a null tell. Overreacting to a question is another thing.

Unvote

I think we need a vote count since things have changed a bit around here.

[dejkha]

The thing with how I responded to Hasd about how he thought it was "interesting that

assume that the PRs will be killed" is that the word "interesting", when used like that, really does imply that he finds it suspicious in a way. And I don't see how it's "interesting" that I think they would die. It's no more interesting than someone thinking they won't die. There were better words to use to describe what he thought of it, that is, if he had to have that statement. All that was needed was asking me why I thought they would die out of curiosity.

While I'm on the subject, Hasd, why did you find it particularly "interesting"?

[fuzzylightning]

Vote Count #2

Empking: 2 (hasdgfas, dejkha)
dejkha: 2 (Empking, zwetschenwasser)

Hewitt: 1 (Wall-E)

Not Voting: (hewitt, alexhans)

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

[hewitt]

Little bit pessimistic there dejkha. Obviously I'm not saying it's unlikely one of our power roles will get lynched I'm just saying that would be really bad if it did.

[Empking]

Overdefensiveness is a scumtell.

I disagree. If I'm about to get lynched I'll defend myself in every way possible. It's a null tell. Overreacting to a question is another thing.

Unvote

I think we need a vote count since things have changed a bit around here.

No it isn't. That's why they call it "Over", also you can't be over-defensive when you're very close to lynch so your ancedote doesn't mean anything.

[zwetschenwasser]

See? When alexhans tells dejkha the exact same thing I told him was scummy, dejkha listens. When I tell him, he dismisses it as stupid.

[alexhans]

Overdefensiveness is a scumtell.

I disagree. If I'm about to get lynched I'll defend myself in every way possible. It's a null tell. Overreacting to a question is another thing.

Unvote

I think we need a vote count since things have changed a bit around here.

No it isn't. That's why they call it "Over", also you can't be over-defensive when you're very close to lynch so your ancedote doesn't mean anything.

Yeah... But you should look at the context... It's not how much pages you write to defend yourself but the way in wich you do it... If you jump on random vote stage calling the one's who voted for you scum for instance.

[dejkha]

See? When alexhans tells dejkha the exact same thing I told him was scummy, dejkha listens. When I tell him, he dismisses it as stupid.

Where did I imply that I agree with him? I restated what I said earlier, only I elaborated on it. I still don't think it was scummy for that reason.

[dejkha]

Is Wall-E playing or should I just considering him lurking? He's posting elsewhere.

[Empking]

It does look like lurking.

[fuzzylightning]

Wall-E has been prodded

[Wall-E]

The "case" against dejka is utter garbage.

[Empking]

The "case" against dejka is utter garbage.

What is the case? In your own words.

[zwetschenwasser]

See? When alexhans tells dejkha the exact same thing I told him was scummy, dejkha listens. When I tell him, he dismisses it as stupid.

Where did I imply that I agree with him? I restated what I said earlier, only I elaborated on it. I still don't think it was scummy for that reason.

Where did I say you had to agree with him? The point is that you actually took the time to respond logically to him for the same case that I made that you dismissed as stupid.