Schani Kratnorr
Amarr
x13
IT Alliance
   |
Posted - 2010.03.30 13:29:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Entaran
Edited by: Entaran on 30/03/2010 09:21:26
Why anyone believes that steamrolling the NC will change anything is a tad confusing.
Key points:
NC is a giant napfest.
SC is a giant napfest and if not blue, full of unofficial non-invasion pacts.
I do not think there is any real difference. What is happening now, is a result of two groups of corporations and alliances making deals. Using "full of..." does not change reality. Objectively, both blocks are a mix of non invasion and non-aggression pacts, and can be thought of as 'huge.'
Originally by: Entaran
Destroying the NC means what exactly? New alliances fill the space that are... blue to the SC? Blue to eachother?
Hopefully invading or attacking will result in members on both sides having fun. If one or more entities collapse in the process, I am sure their members will find new homes. No one really dies in EVE - with a few exceptions
Originally by: Entaran
Who's paid IT billions already to put down deposits on regions they are supposed to conquer under contract?
To my knowledge, no one has paid iT alliance to attack. If any such deal exist I am perfectly fine with it and so should you be.
Originally by: Entaran
Does someone down there really think if you manage to boot RAWR/RZR + friends out of their home space they'll just disband and all the players will filter off into other alliances?
We needed a less collapse-prone opponent. A fair few of us were adamant we should attempt to find targets with a larger EU TZ component.
Originally by: Entaran
Well done, I wish you guys were strategising for me. I would pay 1 isk for sure.
You are guessing what the opponent 'is thinking,' and using the result to project ridicule - highly speculative.
Originally by: Entaran
Does anyone here honestly believe deep down that any new alliances that fill the hole (assuming NC dies) will act in any manner other than the existing powerhouses down in the south?
No. We are not liberating anything though. We are not installing a benevolent fairy entity that will make the place smell like flowers.
Originally by: Entaran
Tried and tested works, being neutral/red to your neighbours and fighting constant wars with them is not good business sense... and to be quite honest it's all about the isk. If all you cared about was the pew you'd play eve like burn eden does.
Arguing the benefits of non-aggression pacts and extrapolating a 'true meaning of EVE' from it is wrong. If it is all about the ISK, I could argue that we should invade in order to take moons. Your personal preference may be Burn Eden, but I fail to see exactly why you picked them as an example.
Originally by: Entaran
I hear multiple statements of it not being about sov or moons or anything, but the first things to get hit will be tech and r64 moons and reaction chains. Nobody is coming to have subcap wars, people just need to pay their sov bills.
The voices - do not listen to them. Prophetic guesses is still just guesses 
Originally by: Entaran
Frankly I could care less which side wins or loses, at the end of the day the pvpers are bored and want something to do. That's all this really boils down to.
But you DO care. You made a post. Your outlook could be less negative though.
Originally by: Entaran
Oh and 6 months? Lol. 6 weeks maybe before everyone gets bored and goes home again.
Six weeks is a bit too long. I would guess four weeks. I am hoping for a longer conflict, and a chance to see two super-cap-blobs trash each other.
Originally by: Entaran
PS. Feeding the trolls.
PPS. Flame away. Expecting at least one "u mad", one "bitter" or variant and one "c u on teh battlefield" with a pirate smiley.
Why would you ask for flames. We in iT are not the trolling types. We are well-behaved, polite and always friendly. I have spoken to a fair few of our new members in x13, and their first impression is positive. "This is the best corporation I have ever been part of," is the word.
|