Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:42 am Post subject: Spear/yummydog's lies
.
Ok, this should end all the arguments and again I'll
mikwarleo wrote:
use Spear[/yummydog]'s own words against him to demonstrate who’s genuine in this case.
Normally I would have better things to do with my time. I already felt my first post http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=2472&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 probably took more time and energy than this issue was worth. I also thought it honestly and convincingly showed my case. However people clearly still doubt me and Spear/yummydog in his misguided quest to discredit me has gone so far as to blatantly and repeatedly lie.
Now I've pretty much delivered my whole case in my original post, I don't intend to rehash things I've already covered. Because the forum doesn't allow posts over 256k I didn't put the save file in the first post (couldn't be bothered sorting out hosting for the file). However, seeing how things have gone I've now taken the trouble to expose Spear's lies and show again what’s really going on. So the save file of our GC is attached as proof of everything I'm about to demonstrate and everything contained in my initial reply to Spear/yummydog's allegations.
In short: Spear/yummydog has been lying. I indicated this in my initial post without directly accusing him, since things have gone the way they have I'm proving it here.
In light of Spear's ever growing allegations I checked the save file thoroughly. I had a pretty good idea of what happened in the GC but having played over such a long period of time I couldn't be absolutely sure so I wanted proof for myself and to show everyone here. I played mock battles against the computer and retreated to the maps in question to inspect every map that can be reached by Naval Exploit (there's probably an easier way to do it but this was all I knew at the time). Looking at ground craters you can see that the following maps have suffered Naval strikes (note that craters do not disappear over time, they are always on the map; you can see this for yourself by seeing that craters on the beach maps from the first day of battle are still there):
The following is a complete table of Naval Activity on maps that can be reached with the Naval exploit:
2nd row maps:
Pegasus - 2 or 3 strikes
Bous D Bavaent - 1 or 2 strikes
Now this shows there was a maximum of 5 illegal naval strikes contained only on maps Pegasus and BD. I'll get to this in a moment. First consider Spear's lies.... What follows is an incomplete listing, an example of some of Spear/yummydog's more blatant/obvious lies, most of which he's repeated several times through his various posts on this matter:
yummydog wrote:
[mikwarleo] use naval strike at 3rd [row] of map
as you can see, no naval craters / activity on any 3rd row maps
yummydog wrote:
his naval strike able to reach Pegasus Bridge, even Ranville
zero naval activity at Ranville.
yummydog wrote:
on day2-3 , Mikwarleo's unit reach Bayeux, this is the first time he launch a naval strike on 3rd roll map, on the battle his BG's supply line had cutted, but he use naval strike to break my defence, once he break that point, he rush to other vl, and i also lost some when try to replace the killed units. finally my bg "disbanded. That is the first time ask him,"i never know naval able to hit this map", he reply somthing like "hehe".
See the save file... again zero naval activity at Bayeux. Spear is lying. I talk about this highlight victory in my initial post, I was proud of this victory because it was such a strong, important and much needed victory. It allowed me a lot of freedom to advance inland. That he is saying I 'cheated' on this map is particularly irritating and, again, a total lie.
yummydog wrote:
be honest [mikwarleo]! i ask him so many time before found that he use long range, but i just say "never know naval able to hit this map" in game, then he reply someting like"hehe".
'Be honest'? ... anyone else see the irony in Spear calling for honesty? I put this quote next to his last one to show that the conversations he's talking about and my alleged "hehe" reply never happened (so yes, more lies). As proven above, no illegal long range naval was used at Bayeux (so clearly I wasn’t saying “hehe” because what he’s describing never happened). Again, there was no nav used on any 3rd row map, or at any point before I had secured an unbreakable victory (see my initial post). So how could he be asking me about things that never happened?
yummydog wrote:
the other map he use [naval] is on Thoan, there is a meeting engament, no need to say he boom me at the begin, i lost so many unit as running to take house. result "disbanded"
Again a total lie... see the save file, no Naval activity at Thoan.
He goes on to complain that as a result of the use of Naval at Bayeux, Thoan and on every 3rd row map:
yummydog wrote:
since i have 2 denfence bg disband,i have no enough bg to set a defence line on big map, so his bg able to full speed go west.
Well that's *kind* of true. Actually I disbanded something more like 7 or 8 of his defending BGs early on ... including his defenders at gold, juno and sword beaches, osties at pegasus (without use of nav - the save file proves this, there was no Nav activity on the ostie side of the river...) and infantry at merville. That is, I disbanded all his beach BGs and several of his second line BGs including his 901 Lehr and later his 1st tiger Lehr! (the one with 2 tiger, I forget the number, check the save, this tiger BG is terribly mauled). Of course all these mauled BGs were returning on his reinforcement rounds and delaying his real reinforcements while allied armour rolled ever onward... I disbanded his early BGs, stormed inland through the holes picking off his BGs, para held caen and pegasus holding off his reinforcements (without use of NAV!), I secured the flanks, then cut supply and annihilated him disbanding BGs over and over again (see first post for further details - on that note I wish someone would fix the disband bug, as it is with the bug out of supply disbanded BGs lose pretty much nothing. If the out of supply disband rule was working properly Spear's army would be in much worse shape than it is already). An allied Blitzkrieg of sorts. And, as you can now see proven by the save file, I did not cheat to do this. He simply can't accept it.
Now there are a BUNCH of smaller lies he tells to both exaggerate things and look like the nice guy, for example:
yummydog wrote:
i don't post his name, and try to pretent i don't know that [mikwarleo is cheating] and continue the game.
hummm that's strange...
yummydog wrote:
i posted his name yesterday, howvere, after further considaration, i removed his name
Interesting contradiction, basically the first post quoted is an outright lie which he repeats several times through his various posts and its contradicted by his other post in which he’s telling the truth. Also, he never tried to continue or pretend that he didn't know, he told me straight away, shortly after his initial post, that I lost the whole GC because I cheated, he admits as much himself here:
yummydog wrote:
you lost the gc, but not defeated by me, you defeated by yourself
For further proof you can see that in our dialogue that he's posted on the forum (that he recorded the conversation and posted it is funny enough in itself) the conversation is dated AFTER the time of his initial post. Clearly I was responding to his allegations on the forum. Since at the time he was using one name to play (Spear) and a different name (yummydog) for posting on the forum the only way I would know the post applied to me was if my name was posted! It was a GC partner of mine who alerted me to the original post and he is also witness to the fact he posted my name in his initial post. So again, more lies from Spear/yummydog.
yummydog wrote:
i am a poor guy, i have nothing but hounor, now he is attacking my most important value!!
I had to finish with this quote because it is so ironic and funny… *honour*, lol ok, I suppose you had your fingers crossed when you told all those lies (so as to keep your much valued honour intact)?
Anyhow, I'm not going to waste any more of my time or yours exposing all the other examples of Spear's lies and his misguided motivations. I'm sure this is clear enough to everyone. So much so that I doubt even Spear can lie his way out of it. While it will be no doubt interesting to read Spear's replies I expect this will be my last post on the matter.
Regarding my use of the Naval exploit. Clearly I did use it 5 times and yes that isn't right. This is what I was trying to communicate to Spear when saying it was a mistake but his poor English and his arrogance were too much of a barrier to get the message through to him. (Besides even if he had understood I think he was too eager to find a way out of the GC rather than play on to certain defeat). Why I did it in the first place at all when it was completely unnecessary I can’t really say, I didn't think about it, I suppose it was basically out of sheer boredom at playing on when I knew I'd won. When I'm bored I do tend to assign Nav (though I rarely use it) through the naval exploit (a habit I won’t be continuing). What can I say, I like Nav, like those big explosions. Though, be clear, I never do this to win, especially not for crucial battles. There is proof enough of this fact in the save file as indicated above if you can't beleive my words.
I was trying to communicate to Spear (to say to him like I've shown here and in my original post) that Nav eploit didn't give me a victory, I wouldn't do it again and hadn't done it to cheat. Why he didn't just say, 'don't do it again' and leave it at that is a mystery to me. All these lies, for what? Anyhow he kept claiming my defeat and flying with the insults and accusations so, knowing in myself that I'd won and seeing it was pointless talking with him, I resolved to leave it at that and blacklist Spear. Actually I was happy to not have to waste my time and play out a GC for weeks and weeks for the sole purpose of humouring him and confirming what I already knew… I'd won.
Even after this argument, his initial lies and insults, after he'd posted my name and subsequently removed it (not before many people had seen it) I still felt no need to go to the forum. I'm only posting this here because he has gone so far in his misguided attempt to discredit me and really he hasn't left me much of a choice. I don't take pleasure in showing him to be a liar. However, with everything Spear has forced me to choose between accepting his very public annoncement that I am a 'cheat' or exposing his lies and clearing my name... I choose the latter.
As I said from the start, I don't understand why he's done this and can only suppose his motivation was
mikwarleo wrote:
that Spear was very eager to find a reason for his crushing defeat, one that didn't amount to: you got beaten by a better player.
Finally he's offered a grudge rematch, while I have no desire whatsoever to have anything further to do with this little tard, if Spear wants it and people think it might go further to put this matter to bed, well maybe a grudge match will add a different dimension to the game, could be fun! My terms are these:
Reverse the roles and see how Spear does playing allies! Same campaign, GJS GC1. I will be Germans. Same settings as original game: 15min rounds, no morale, no 2 min warning, no act on initiative. Only this time obviously he will host (as allies) and we play the VL rule (which will benefit him more than me anyhow as he’s attacking, of course in our initial game when I was attacking he wouldn't agree to play VL rule and constantly mounted annoying flanking moves from tiny cut off pockets, we all know the kind). Also I grant him 10 illegal naval barrages to use any time he likes – that is 5 days worth of Nav barrages! ... *double* the maximum number I used (as listed above craters show 3-5 illegal Nav barrages were deployed by me in our previous game) AND it allows him to use them as part of his advance and attempt to secure victory ... when of course I didn't use them until days after I had secured a Major Victory!
I think that's more than fair.
One final thing: even though I've proven his lies here, I think he should admit his lies and accept that he lost our previous GC.
And anyone who likes a bet: I'll bet that come day 11 the allies will not have a major victory... how's that for a grudge match? (In fact I'll be surprised if he even lasts to day 11 and isn't pushed back into the sea long before. So there's my gauntlet well and truly thrown down).
I wont commit to continuing past day 11, we'll see how things pan out, only because I don't want to waste more time on this guy. If come day 11 I know I've won I *might* stop. If it's a challenging game then I'll continue, of course.
P.S. a few other points mainly for Spear (because I can't imagine anyone but him will be interested enough to read through all this)
REGARDLESS of everything, clearly 5 Nav strikes in any position or deployment is not going to make the difference between winning and losing and again, it's definitely not going to drive my armour to the other side of the strat map and secure over 75% of the territory for me. I simply out played him and beat him very convincingly and he should have accepted that a long time ago.
Finally regarding his ridiculous tank-losses argument that he’s still harping on about, in addition to my statement in my initial post notice that the losses were:
Clearly these are excellent losses for Allies *especially* considering I hold about 75% of the map. As we all know attacking is harder than defending... now that I've taken all that ground he can't possibly hope to push me back. Again the allies have 2 times or more the number of tanks the Germans do so a Ratio of 1:1.66 is great for the allies! Clearly, he's not the 'master tank killer' he considers himself to be. And while he wants to insult my ability saying 'mikwarleo plays CC5 like age of empires' ... well again I refer people to the conclusion: Major Victory: Allies: since day 7 and even stronger by Day 11! I think that speaks for itself.
But to answer this properly, the tank loss ratio (and notice in his posts he conveniently forgets to mention that for my 202 tanks he's lost 121 himself...) means Spear has double trouble: 1. comparably not much armour 2. he has lost so much territory that he's almost out of space for new units to be deployed on the map! That means he actually has even LESS tanks to deploy over all since he's boxed in. All I need to do is hold is big cats and push his weak points and flank again. If I can decimate his SS at caen when boxed into a tiny area using only 1 para BG and disband him at Bayeux when out of supply why does he think I'll have a problem holding off his big cats and flanking his positions?! With Caen about to fall and a long front line of allied forces his 4 big cat BGs are clearly not going to be enough to hold the line and certainly not nearly enough to break the line and make an advance...
I'm currently playing a GC with another more challenging player and my losses are german:allies 182:353 tanks and I am clearly winning this GC also. Why Spear thinks the tank losses are so fantastic for him and why he harps on so much about the losses is another mystery of his intellect. Finally, what about his 1:1 infantry losses when allies again have at least 2 times the infantry?! Everyone knows allied infantry is vastly inferior to german infantry, so how did I kill so many german soldiers...? With 5 nav barrages... lol? No, by consistently outplaying him. The game isn't won on tanks alone, his infantry losses are going to cause him big problems as well. Like I've been saying all along, I won this GC a long time ago, he doesn't have a hope of pushing me back from the Victory position I've secured, he might be able to slow me down for a good while with his big cats but ultimately this GC was decided on day 7 when I first secured a major victory... he simply lacks the gear, the infantry and the skill to push me back from victory.
Hmm, those are impressive casualty ratios for the British, even more impressive is the fact that you are at Carpiquet and getting ready to take Caen on the 11th.
Thanks for you file, Mikwarleo, as i said i run the gc with AI for found that you chat, so the file has gone, but now, evey one able to see the truth, how you mistake assign Naval Stirke on the map you said you never use. and who is lier
If you that good, I already invited you to do it again, but.....i didn't get any reply from you.
[img][/img]
Also, everyone can see how he no need to defence Begnses Brudge and Benouville, as he no need to deploy bg there, because he feel very safe for supporting by Cheat naval strike, and send every things go west, even some of his disbanded unit also go west but none for south Begnses Brudge. as i said before. see?
last, Mikwarleo said my 4 bigcat BG only not enough to stop his attack, thats so funny, this is very easy to find out that can i counter attack from west, does his 22/7 able to stop my 1.6/lehr at Villers Bocage(i remember he lost about 8 tanks in 1 day at there (piece of cake for Panther V to kill his cromwell, 1shoot 1 kill ))? and his 151/50 able to hold my 1Ast101? At Juvigny, his 23/50 only some Stuart left (because he also lost more than 5 tanks on the last battle). use that kind of bg still said attack my 2 bigcat bg. funny boy, Remember there is no chat naval strike support there, and do you remember how long did you stuck there? another side Cean, he wish he can get it, everyone can go inside and and the situation at cean. (my 26/12 is very earlier bg, they still hold Cean and disband some Mikwarleo Bg there)
Quote:
The following is a complete table of Naval Activity on maps that can be reached with the Naval exploit:
2nd row maps:
Pegasus - 2 or 3 strikes
Bous D Bavaent - 1 or 2 strikes
yeah, keep going, try your best to straight it if you like, but please remember some words i mentioned before "respect is given by others, bad reputation is caused by yourself. "
if i put on your shoes, "smart move". this threat will gone after few days or week, if you keep to update it, more people feel laugh.
I already said i lost that compaign, can you just say somthing like... yes i use something i shouldn't use in the game, and i won't use it again. what are big deal? Do you want to win everything, everyone?
Chinese said "endure make life peaceful; Step one back make you more room to move!!"
i believed that you are the one don't know how to face lost (not kidding, some special kind of man may, but don't mean they not good, they are usually very good or too good compare with general public, but not fine tune yet!). please learn it!! thats really really good for you, trust me, mate!!
This is my last post on this matter. Thanks for everyone interest in this matter, and support! Thank you!!
Use navals on this maps is a game bug not a cheat!!!! Game allowed do this..But Mikwalero before strat GC can ask about it..That all in this topic. I play with Mik and he is agresivve player, good in attack,but nothing that I dont see earlier.
Clan 10 Brigade of Panzer Cavalery
Captain
Leader of 10 Dragon Regiment
Klan 10 Brygada kawaleri pancernej(BKP)
Rotmistrz
Dowódca 10 pulku Dragonów
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
including his defenders at gold, juno and sword beaches, osties at pegasus (without use of nav - the save file proves this, there was no Nav activity on the ostie side of the river...) and infantry at merville. That is, I disbanded all his beach BGs and several of his second line BGs including his 901 Lehr and later his 1st tiger Lehr! (the one with 2 tiger, I forget the number, check the save, this tiger BG is terribly mauled). Of course all these mauled BGs were returning on his reinforcement rounds and delaying his real reinforcements while allied armour rolled ever onward... I disbanded his early BGs, stormed inland through the holes picking off his BGs, para held caen and pegasus holding off his reinforcements (without use of NAV!), I secured the flanks, then cut supply and annihilated him disbanding BGs over and over again (see first post for further details - on that note I wish someone would fix the disband bug, as it is with the bug out of supply disbanded BGs lose pretty much nothing. If the out of supply disband rule was working properly Spear's army would be in much worse shape than it is already). An allied Blitzkrieg of sorts. And, as you can now see proven by the save file, I did not cheat to do this. He simply can't accept it.
Though, be clear, I never do this to win, especially not for crucial battles. There is proof enough of this fact in the save file as indicated above if you can't beleive my words.
