| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
   |
Posted - 2009.05.04 19:19:00 -
[1]
0.0 is about to become a very boring and lonely place.
With these massive power blocks NAPing each other and smashing KenZoku into nothingness, who will be left to hate?
In roughly a year, I wouldn't be surprised to see one alliance controlling all of 0.0. Doesn't this alarm anyone?
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 19:24:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Teki Caldrum on 04/05/2009 19:25:13
 Originally by: Terror Rising
Didn't Ken / Bob try and do this once and fail anyway?
No, they made a campaign called "MAX" which wasn't about gaining SOV. It was simply about doing MAXimum Damage.
BoB humbly accepted Delve as their home. They had the means to take down more regions, I'm sure.
However, unlike GoonSwarm, they liked to keep enemies. Which, in my opinion, is in good sportsmanship. What is the point of NAPing everyone and gaining complete control.
There will be minimal conflicts. Major power blocks will dictate if you're even *ABLE* to live in 0.0. It's unfair monopolization.
IMHO, it's going to ruin this aspect of the game.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 19:31:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Hey You
No one will control all of 0.0 evva. Because game mechanics don't allow it without a effort such is like 2 years of shooting poses and everyone gets tired of that way sooner.
So doesn't matter what coalition you have nor size of said coalition.
It might have been possible in the past and we all know who came closest to actually do it.
Sure it does. Through diplomacy. Sure they may not all carry the same name but it will be one giant coalition.
No one will have the balls to leave this coalition and attempt to initiate another conflict. They will be too afraid of the massive NAPfest annihilating them.
So, I fear that New Eden is about to go through its "Pax Romanus" era.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 19:46:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar
Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 04/05/2009 19:39:16
Posting in a "sky is falling" thread
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
With these massive power blocks NAPing each other and smashing KenZoku into nothingness,
I don't think Kenny will agree with that statement.
I wouldn't agree with that statement if I were them, either.
It would destroy morale. Only a fool would maintain a defeatist attitude.
However, from the outside looking in, KenZoku cannot win a war of attrition.
This isn't a conflict of skill.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 19:59:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Teki Caldrum on 04/05/2009 19:59:31
Originally by: Helen
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
This isn't a conflict of skill.
where has there been a conflict of skill in eve?
That's actually quite funny. Considering you're a goonie.
There haven't been many conflicts your alliance has engaged in which were skill based.
Your alliance relies entirely on one tactic, well as of late, two.
1.) Attrition.
2.) Espionage/Manipulation.
Why did GoonSwarm need to force BoB to disband before taking Delve? I'm sure none of it had anything to do with skill? 
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 20:02:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar
Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 04/05/2009 20:01:13
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
2.) Espionage/Manipulation.
You do realise that there is far more skill involved in that than waiting a few days to train a skill, then press F1
Are you trying to say that skill in EVE-Online is denoted by how much SP you have?
lol.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 20:19:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Teki Caldrum on 04/05/2009 20:19:43
Originally by: Snowden Vel
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
1.) Attrition.
Please take a moment and explain how attrition is not a part of every war.
Well, lets first look at what Attrition Warfare is.
Attrition Warfare is: Attrition Warfare is a tactic in which one party in a conflict attempts to wear down the other through use of superior forces in NUMBER. Meaning Quantity.
This will also help you understand:
Most military theorists[who?] and strategics like Sun Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided. In the sense that attrition warfare represents an attempt to grind down an opponent through superior numbers, it represents the opposite of the usual principles of war, where one attempts to achieve decisive victories through manoeuvre, concentration of force, surprise, and the like. On the other hand, a side which perceives itself to be at a marked disadvantage in manoeuvre warfare or unit tactics may deliberately seek out attrition warfare to neutralize its opponent's advantages.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 20:29:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar
Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 04/05/2009 20:25:07
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
Most military theorists[who?] and strategics like Sun Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided.
Sun Tzu was well known for playing spaceship video games. You just need to throw in a reference to a well known european fascist dictator, and you can achieve Godwins law on the first page.
Edit: too slow, second page already, you could probably make up for it with some space Bushido quotes, and e-honour
While EVE-online is a spaceship video game. Many IRL naval tactics can still be used within it.
While this is digital make-believe warfare. So are the flight simulators that aviators utilize.
So are the video games four and five star generals use to understand tactics better.
So are games like America's Army that US Soldiers use to understand warfare better.
Digital simulation, while make believe, is an effective way to understand warfare.
Man created war. Man created games that employ war.
It's all the same.
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 20:33:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Snowden Vel
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
Edited by: Teki Caldrum on 04/05/2009 20:19:43
Originally by: Snowden Vel
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
1.) Attrition.
Please take a moment and explain how attrition is not a part of every war.
Well, lets first look at what Attrition Warfare is.
Attrition Warfare is: Attrition Warfare is a tactic in which one party in a conflict attempts to wear down the other through use of superior forces in NUMBER. Meaning Quantity.
This will also help you understand:
Most military theorists[who?] and strategics like Sun Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided. In the sense that attrition warfare represents an attempt to grind down an opponent through superior numbers, it represents the opposite of the usual principles of war, where one attempts to achieve decisive victories through manoeuvre, concentration of force, surprise, and the like. On the other hand, a side which perceives itself to be at a marked disadvantage in manoeuvre warfare or unit tactics may deliberately seek out attrition warfare to neutralize its opponent's advantages.
at⋅tri⋅tion
/əˈtrɪʃən/ Pronunciation [uh-trish-uhn]
ûnoun
1. a reduction or decrease in numbers, size, or strength
Ah, Snowden Vel. Your time in goonswarm has diminished your intelligence.
Remember, the word "attrition" is only ONE part of the tactical designation known as "ATTRITION WARFARE". Congratulations, you have been educated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attrition_warfare
|
Teki Caldrum
Caldari
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 21:45:00 -
[10]
Originally by: triman247
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar
Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 04/05/2009 20:25:07
Originally by: Teki Caldrum
Most military theorists[who?] and strategics like Sun Tzu have viewed attrition warfare as something to be avoided.
Sun Tzu was well known for playing spaceship video games. You just need to throw in a reference to a well known european fascist dictator, and you can achieve Godwins law on the first page.
Edit: too slow, second page already, you could probably make up for it with some space Bushido quotes, and e-honour
While EVE-online is a spaceship video game. Many IRL naval tactics can still be used within it.
While this is digital make-believe warfare. So are the flight simulators that aviators utilize.
So are the video games four and five star generals use to understand tactics better.
So are games like America's Army that US Soldiers use to understand warfare better.
Digital simulation, while make believe, is an effective way to understand warfare.
Man created war. Man created games that employ war.
It's all the same.
Yeah Flinx you gay.
In eve when the FC calls: "GIVE 'EM A BROADSIDE" you can do that just like in RL.
Also in RL the FC can call siege green and shoot RL POSes with RL Dreads except Battleships are the ones you siege in RL because they are bigger buy whatev.
Double clicking in space is like exactly like flying in RL.
Americas army, you get to do like pretend medical work which is the exact same as RL medical work.
Its all EXACTLY THE SAME YOU TARD. EVE IS REAL!@!1111
You're very simple.
First of all, modern day Navies don't utilize battleships anymore, they don't "broadside" anyone.
However, for some odd reason, they still utilize the same principles as they did when wooden ships existed with cannons.
Maneuvering all falls back to its basic roots. Logistics all fall back to their basic roots.
Tactical awareness, stressed decision making, espionage, all of these factors come from the real world.
After all, it is real people behind the computer screens.
IRL we don't have scouts, I guess.
IRL we don't have naval logistics, I suppose.
Hell, we don't even refit our war planes, ships, or land craft for specific purposes, do we?
What I was getting at is the basic tactics still apply to war in any degree.
|
| |
|