Questions to Terif and to other veterans

[zappsweden]

Why does Terif disappear suddenly without answering questions? I have one question that I have already repeated and no answer.

Terif. You write essays on FAQ, essays in your AAR's, essays on strategy discussion.

Why cannot you answer a straight question here on this topic?

Did you or did you not use the interception flaws to your advantage before the bug was publicly known?

I find that question relevant since you in the AA Bug case say you didn't exploit it but in the interception flaws case you leave no comment.

[ November 27, 2004, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[jon_j_rambo]

"Did you order the Code Red?" --- Lt. Caffey questioning Jack in the classic, A Few Good Men.

[Terif]

@ Zapp:

Sorry, I don´t like smack talk.

And from bad experiences I know what your ´question´ has for a purpose. Last time you asked it, one of your ´nice´ campaigns followed.

I think I made my position concerning AA pretty clear. If it is really not clear for you, then it is your problem, not mine. That you don´t know when to stop is also not my problem any more, since I will certainly not answer such questions from you again, no matter how many times you repeat or rewrite them .

Sorry, not interested in another round of smack talk.

@Desaix:

At the first glance I also thought AA could be limited to "no german AA research". Certainly there are other house rules thinkable and workable than a total banning, but you have to take care of the long-term effects, effects on the strategic possibilities and play balance as a whole. Against most opponents I am also sure it is not necessary to have a rule at all since average players make enough mistakes or are simply using other strategies so AA will not be a real factor in most games.

Nevertheless, if you want to be sure that AA will not be the decissive element in the game or you know your opponent will use it if it is allowed, then a rule is necessary (All scenarios are based on the assumption that the opponent is willing and able to use AA for its fighters. That means also that he knows how to exploit the AA bonus efficiently – when this is not the case, then a rule is not really necessary, but you often don´t know it in advance).

- only no german AA research: then Italy still can research AA. This can even be better for Axis than Germany researching it, cause then Germany can use its 10 chits for something else, Italy can invest up to 5 chits in AA, so it will get some levels for sure. Then Axis only needs to give Vichy or other territories to Italy and german AFs can be placed in at least 3 italian cities to use the italian AA bonus and kill any allied invasion.

- To allow UK AA research while it is forbidden for Axis gives me not a good feeling. Would be also kind of unfair when Axis are not allowed to develope countermessures. In the long-run Allies could also get an undefeatable advantage when developing high AA levels. Same as Axis can do today. OK, they have only London + eventually Manchester to use it, but whith AA 3+ even this can be enough to kill any enemy resistance with the AA bonus. Not to forget they will liberate other cities at the front and then can use the AA bonus from these ressources too.

- To allow Russia AA: Ok, this would be an option. As long as Axis is keeping pressure there, Russia has no chance to build a competitive airpower and is so not able to use an eventual AA bonus. So in this situation it would really be only to improve the ground units defence.

Problem is, when Axis shifts their forces to somewhere else (and many players do this), then Russia can build air again and use the AA bonus to kill Axis. And Russia has enough cities so Axis will have no chance when Russia developes AA 2-3+ and buys enough air. So in the end it would limit Axis strategies at the moment Russia developes AA, cause after this moment Axis can´t allow Russia a breath and have to attack there no matter what other plans they had – also not a good effect.

[Liam]

A bigger question comes into play. The game isn't won with AA alone, that is a definite, IT CAN be a major factor.

The fact is the points Terif was making was to distribute the AA Cities with Italy in the 'game' to a 'fair' defensive bonus and 'offensive one' if the Allies Land. That would give 2-3 possible hitting Fighters MAX...

Meanwhile every try unentrenching a unit in Russia with an AA Bonus? That is heartbreaking.. I have had Riga hold out through 6 Airstrikes and 3 Land hits and a Cruiser smack, 3-4-5-6 Times. Definitely due to a Major AA Bonus<and LT4 during the later hits>... this AA thing is more useful than one thinks. Place a Tank, entrenched fully, and backed by an HQ, that is a dangerous combo to break!

Similarly in the West. I've had my land units survive countless hits...

Should an AA strategy be allowed, how about a modification. How about this, only 2s Chit a game for Germany. 3 Chits for UK, 3 for the USA, and 2 for the USSR... Limit the Chits, then it is really luck... Even lower that by -1 for each for a 'real luck draw'?

Then again another question arises if you beat Russia the game is over. If you truly beat them living crap out of them, that's it. Doesn't matter if you penetrate them. They're done after a certian point and we all sense this... That is the end of the game. The hope is that the West can do you in before then. Though you can halt the West and with AA much more effectively if you have beaten Russia. Though what AA can do is divert chits and resources to Fighters and allow players to use Russia more effectively if the German is weak on MPPs. However if he isn't, game is over ? or strategy is too poor you pick

[zappsweden]

Please Terif, how hard can it be to read this text?

Did you or did you not use the interception flaws to your advantage before the bug was publicly known?

You instead talk about AA Bug, who are you trying to fool (not me obviously)?

you know the difference between the interception flaw (trenches+terrain bonuses used by the attacked) before 1.07 came out. You know I asked about the former "interception flaw" not the AA Bug.

It is sneaky IMO.

[zappsweden]

Comments why I do not think Terif wants to answer:

If you answer "Yes" ppl will know you were a highly bug exploiter. If you answer "No" some ppl remembering the past gameplay of SC will know you are lying.

Yes Terif, I can "understand" why you do not answer.

Is that the way you discuss Terif? Saying what you had to say and then when you get questioned for what you just said you run away and "end of discussion"? No matter what my purpose with the question was. If you had a good answer to it then you would have nothing to hide and someone who writes hundreds of essays on SC issues can surely write some letter like "yes" or "no" pretty fast.

"Run to the hills, run for your life" - Iron Maiden

[ November 28, 2004, 05:44 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Good thing Zapp & Terif don't work together on a United States Nuke Submarine, such as the Alabama, in the classic, Crismon Tide. Go Bama! Go Tide!

"We have rules, they are not open for intrepetation. Now shut up! I'm the Captain of this ship!" --- Gene Hackman as Captain Ramsey in the classic movie, Crimson Tide.

"You're way out of your league Hunter. You're not ready to make decisions yet!" --- Captain Ramsey.

"I assume command of this ship, Cobb arrest the Captain according to the rules of the U.S. Navy. I have relieved Captain Ramsey. Anybody disagree what I've done? Feel free to relieve yourself. Anybody? All right, all stations go" --- Denzel Washington as Hunter in the Crimson Tide in the powerplay with Ramsey.

[ November 28, 2004, 01:47 AM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Terif]

Zapp, in the last years I had the „pleasure“ to get you - and your behaviour towards me - know very well. I know this is not a serious question you ask to „discuss“ something, but you only ask to get new amunition for a new flamefest against me.

Little history lesson (only a few people still remember how it started..):

- our dispute started officially in September 2003. We played 50 games and it really got boring for me to play Zapp everyday where he used exactly the same strategy every time, hoping for the perfect rolls and surrendering and restarting whenever something didn´t go the way he wants. When I tried new strategies like the Spain gambit, then he surrendered immediately and wanted to restart. Additionally at that time my schedule changed (and I told him about it and that I don´t want to play everyday...), but I offered him to play again in 12 ! days since I had no time to play during the next time anyway.

- 40 minutes later Zapp (at that time responsible for the Z-League) changed the league rules and challenged me. If I would not play him within the next 7 days and finish the game within this time, then I would loose my rank and he would be number 1.

- I requested him to remove it. Here I probably reacted wrong and used the wrong words. If I would have known what would follow, I would have certainly reacted different – but I was angry and disappointed of him at that moment. The next week there was a public discussion about the new rule and also other members of the league demanded to change it. There was even a small voting about it until Zapp simply declared he doesn´t care about votes (since nearly everyone was against his rule change...), it is his league and he does with it what he wants.

- That was the point where I voted with my feets and left the league – and other members did the same, so finally Z-League died.

- Obviously Zapp was not able to get over this and also not about loosing nearly 50 games against me. So in the following months:

- First he accused me of different things how I would have won my games against him (using bugs, flaws or simply things he didn´t know and that I didn´t explain to him before the game...etc.). There he also used the current carrier interception question – That´s one of his most loved methods: asking questions and then using the answer against the other one. If the answer doesn´t fit him, then he turns around the words in the mouth or simply ignore the parts he doesn´t like – so it finally fits as ammunition.

- As this didn´t work and I also still had my saves to prove the truth if necessary, he changed to his new tactic of simply fabricating lies and other stories about me to damage my reputation. Somewhere between point 1 and 2 I promised not to play him ever again....

- The last step are his current one liners, little jokes and indirect peaks against me.

During these process he got creative (something he should have been instead in playing the game...). One really effective method was to start and post simultaneously in different threads so nobody that didn´t read everything was able to follow our argument any more after a while. First he started a new fighting in one thread, continued it in another and finished it in the next one – so he was able to say he only asked an ´innocent´ question, he didn´t attack me and why I would not answer...He also proved his stalker qualities by following me in my threads where I was answering questions and also in my AARs at Panzerliga. He couldn´t read them since they were in german, but that didn´t hinder him to post his crap there too...

As summary I can only say: I hope I will never meet such a possessed and lunatic person in real life. Via internet it is worse enough...

And for Zapp:

There is one thing you obviously forgot about SC and this forum: SC is a game we play in our spare time to have fun and we are players, not professionals.

So I have neither the duty, nor the time to explain every player every little detail of the game. I love the game and I also like to explain other players the basics, write strategy threads, help threads.. etc – I have learned all the things I know by simply playing, learning from my faults, my opponents and by testing the things that made me curious.

You are a player too and you are even playing SC longer than I do (just look when we both registered...). You had the same chances to learn and to develope strategies than I had. So if you loose, then don´t blame me for knowing/using things you didn´t know (so you call them „bugs“ or „gameys“). At that time everyone was learning how SC works (including russian readiness...), testing and developing different strategies...- it was simply a race who is ahead in knowledge and this made a lot of fun too, to discover all the little things in SC .

[zappsweden]

You are slippery as an Eel Terif. You write another essay but do not answer a simple Yes/no question. Go for Politics.

Stick to the issue instead of talking about Z-league or 50 victories or other side tracks. This topic was about BUGS and since you were the most frequent user of Super Carriers back then I asked a question. Your carrier strategy (using the bug) was as perfectly optimized as your Russian DOW+attack (which I do not complain about just comparing) for crying out loud.

I confess I was one of those using the AA Bug to my advantage (but only after officially telling everyone on forum about it so everyone was on equal terms). Contrary, you will never confess using the old interception strategies to your advantage, pathetic.

FOR THE LAST TIME, I was talking about the pre-1.07 interception flaws not the AA Bug.

[ November 28, 2004, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

You are right Terif. I did have the same chances to develop strategies using powerful bugs to give me advantage. But that is not the way I and several other ppl play. You do remember when Rambo agreed to scrap a game he had against you because he thought it was unfair using the Rambo Rome invasion. THAT'S sportmanship, learn to spell that word

Did you or did you not use the interception flaws to your advantage before the bug was publicly known?

(the old interception flaw prior to 1.07 using trenches and terrain bonus)

[zappsweden]

You talk alot of smack Terif so I would have the right to defend myself. In the AAR's you wrote I used outdated strategies, that my game was exact copy of the games 1 year ago (which was not the truth) and it was so obvious you just wrote it to ridicule and downevaluate. It was pretty clear you ,made every effort making up early excuses and take away my honour in case I had won a game (you then could blame bad luck if you had lost) and also to give me no credit whatsoever of making a good attempt (like in Game #3). I am quite pleased now. By playing you I found out you still are beatable now and you were beatable then. I see no reason to continue playing such a smug like you. That is what i learnt from our latest games. What a coincidence you lost a game just after our games, I wore you out that much?

In this topic you paint the picture of a noble Yoda who does not like to get unfair advantages using bugs while you say other players develop strategies using it?

That is just Bull****.

You used tricks to your advantage (Super Carrier strategies due to existing and secret flaws) and still bitch others about their gameplay, complain that others exploit bugs, complain that they use air strategies or R.A.C.K, dictate terms, preach others what is ok to use and what is not ok (complain to ppl who takes chances) or complain that a system is not good because you can lose #1 spot if you lose a championship game.

You even bitched about bad tech in our games (though from Rambo information you invest in tech very late as Axis and should be behind in tech) and wondered where my MPP's came from (accusation?) in our AAR's. A person that good at SC and still crying like a kid when something goes against him? All these things put together means more than just one isolated example.

I did not think it was worth discussing over it in the AAR's so I kept silent. in this topic however you cross the line and act like the smug you are. You still think AA Bug is a nice feature? You say that others exloit it but cannot remember being an exploiter yourself (in fact ducks a direct "yes/no" question that i have mentioned NINE times on this topic already (so you must have read it). It takes very long time before I say something like this but you are a LIAR.

Why is it that you can complain about others and that ppl use the AA Bug but no one ever can complain about ppl using the interception flaws prior to 1.07? The simple answer is, because you were the highest exploiter back then.

[ November 28, 2004, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Dragonheart]

Eh Zapp to much sparetime? Stop this there will be no reasonable outcome of this discussion.

Come on move your ass and let´s continue our game let me show my bugs i use

Edit: I´m online talk with me

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Dragonheart:

Eh Zapp to much sparetime? Stop this there will be no reasonable outcome of this discussion.

Come on move your ass and let´s continue our game let me show my bugs i use

Edit: I´m online talk with me

Get off Terifs boots, Dragonheart.

- Somebody, clean the Dragondirt of Terif's boots.

- We Can't, it's stuck!

- Oh, ok...

[ November 28, 2004, 04:42 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Codename Condor]

Zapp, terif has stated very well the happenings those first days of yer quarrel. U were way too boring, same moves, u wanted to play him everyday even tho u surrendered in the first turns, i know because i suffered it 2. you changed the rules to get to play terif, that was so childish. All this fight againt terif was because he didint want to play u anymore, and i dont blame him...Now he gives u a Xmas present and all u do is fight with 3 similar games and fast surrenders...Just like the old days. U needed 50 of those Early Air game and lots of luck to win terif and u knew u only had 3 chances!!!!!!

In those days, u and rambo were good enuff to play a game without waiting for the perfect rolls and if not...surrender.

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

"Did you order the Code Red?" --- Lt. Caffey questioning Jack in the classic, A Few Good Men.

- Your intentions are bad, I refuse to answer that question

- Please answer Yes or No to the question

- That's it, I am outta here

[Dragonheart]

Originally posted by zappsweden:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dragonheart:

Eh Zapp to much sparetime? Stop this there will be no reasonable outcome of this discussion.

Come on move your ass and let´s continue our game let me show my bugs i use

Edit: I´m online talk with me

Get off Terifs boots, Dragonheart.

- Somebody, clean the Dragondirt of Terif's boots.

- We Can't, it's stuck!

- Oh, ok... </font>

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Codename Condor:

Zapp, terif has stated very well the happenings those first days of yer quarrel. U were way too boring, same moves, u wanted to play him everyday even tho u surrendered in the first turns, i know because i suffered it 2. you changed the rules to get to play terif, that was so childish. All this fight againt terif was because he didint want to play u anymore, and i dont blame him...Now he gives u a Xmas present and all u do is fight with 3 similar games and fast surrenders...Just like the old days. U needed 50 of those Early Air game and lots of luck to win terif and u knew u only had 3 chances!!!!!!

In those days, u and rambo were good enuff to play a game without waiting for the perfect rolls and if not...surrender.

That's not the issue.

[ November 28, 2004, 05:56 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Dragonheart]

Dont concentrate to much on discussing as it caused you two losses this afternoon

Work on your strategy!!!

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Dragonheart:

Dont concentrate to much on discussing as it caused you two losses this afternoon

Work on your strategy!!!

I made one silly counter this game too. I must stop doing these 50-50 chance counters.

How does that army+tank+air+air thing work in LC?

You used it in our 2 latest games. You say you have a bullet proof way of taking LC with 2 air while we others sometimes struggle using 3 air.

I don't get it.

[ November 28, 2004, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Dragonheart]

Its simple i use Rundstet in LC giving a +1 chance on all ground attacks. Van Bock sucks and sometimes you fail even with tank+army+3 AF´s!!!

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Terif:

We played 50 games and it really got boring for me to play Zapp everyday

Twisting the truth. Prior to the Spain Gambit, you were asking me for games very often too.

If I would not play him within the next 7 days and finish the game within this time, then I would loose my rank and he would be number 1.

Twisting the truth. I changed the challenge systems to 24 days, but there was no technical way in Myleague system of terminating challenges that were already there. I also said I would try the system and see if it worked, but I got no chance to do that because of your sudden ultimatums and threats (you even threatened to contact the Myleague administrators and say I misused a league. YOU do not take SC seriously but play for fun? Yeah, right). Challenges is a DEFAULT option in Myleague and myleague claims to be a ladder style league.

The next week there was a public discussion about the new rule and also other members of the league demanded to change it. There was even a small voting about it until Zapp simply declared he doesn´t care about votes (since nearly everyone was against his rule change...), it is his league and he does with it what he wants.

You created a voting by casting a first vote despite that my topic was just information to Z-League players not a voting topic.

- That was the point where I voted with my feets and left the league – and other members did the same, so finally Z-League died.

A pure lie and a great example of how sneaky you are. People did not quit Z-league (because of that rule). SC had already lost alot of players prior to that discussion and some players were on very high idle times. I shut down the league shortly after since this was blown out of proportions and I did not want to have a tainted crown at all cost. In fact, i was critisised for shutting down the league but I had no choice. I did not want to give the pleasure of green pointing fingers saying I now was champ in my own league and that I shut him out of the league.

(using bugs, flaws or simply things he didn´t know and that I didn´t explain to him before the game...etc.).

You write guides for newbies and guides for intermediate players to boost you Ego but did not want to reveal a winning strategy based on flaws. You did not win every game because of it, but you surely would have been beatable already back then if the missuse was known and could be counted for.

There he also used the current carrier interception question – That´s one of his most loved methods: asking questions and then using the answer against the other one.

Either

1) You had a carrier strategy that was very powerful many months ago and used the interception flaws to make it strong (that strategy disappeared after 1.07 patch...)

or

2) You did not

in simple word: "Yes" or "No". No answer means??? Must be really sensitive issue then?

He also proved his stalker qualities by following me in my threads where I was answering questions and also in my AARs at Panzerliga. He couldn´t read them since they were in german, but that didn´t hinder him to post his crap there too...

Twisting the truth. I have functions in my browser that enables me to translate into English. You were posting crap about Z-League in German in Panzerliga (that u later erased) making a mockery out of (so many smilies in that post) that Leopard was ranked #2 having just a 5-14 record. You were right in one sense. People quitting a league leaves holes in the rankings which are filled with lesser ranked players so ironicly you contributed yourself. You are right in that I called you out and said I would beat you a few times in the past.

So I have neither the duty, nor the time to explain every player every little detail of the game.

You only answers what suits you and run away when it doesn't. A "Yes/No" question is not that hard for a person that has written 10.000+ lines about strategies and rules in SC.

[ November 28, 2004, 02:19 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

Kuniworth, Rambo and even Codename Condor have said you used the carrier flaws (more correctly the interception flaws prior to 1.07) in your strategy Terif.

This is the moment where you are supposed to say

"You damn right I did" - Colonel Yessep (Jack Nicholson) in A Few Good Men

[ November 28, 2004, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Codename Condor]

I didnt say that. i hardly remember those old games.

[Codename Condor]

Old Colonel Nathan is a classic in this forum.

[Codename Condor]

Originally posted by Dragonheart:

Its simple i use Rundstet in LC giving a +1 chance on all ground attacks. Van Bock sucks and sometimes you fail even with tank+army+3 AF´s!!!

Ive been using Rundstead in LC almost from the begining. With 3 AFs+army+corps u get the same odds than with tank+army+AFs with Bock. And at the same time u avoid the tank getting killed by the french.