| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Scorpyn
   |
Posted - 2004.12.17 08:39:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Scorpyn on 17/12/2004 08:44:36
 Originally by: Aleyna
there was not a single time since this stupid war (kudos to the retards who started it less than a week before Exodus release.. really kudos... you must be rewarded with the Most-retarded-timeline-of-things-to-do-award) when those who did not attend a fight went uncriticized. I cant count the number of times someone in alliance fight whined over the lack of attendance in the gang.
1. We did not start the war, the enemy did
2. I feel that whining about having 5 ppl in gang trying to defend from a "fleet" of less than 20 enemies, when we have more than 100 ppl in the alliance chat, IS a valid reason for whining for lack of participation.
When less than 20 enemies can take the stations without any problems, then something is wrong. When most ppl don't want to even try to defend the space they claim, then there is no point in trying to claim that space.
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.17 08:39:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Scorpyn on 17/12/2004 08:44:36
Originally by: Aleyna
there was not a single time since this stupid war (kudos to the retards who started it less than a week before Exodus release.. really kudos... you must be rewarded with the Most-retarded-timeline-of-things-to-do-award) when those who did not attend a fight went uncriticized. I cant count the number of times someone in alliance fight whined over the lack of attendance in the gang.
1. We did not start the war, the enemy did
2. I feel that whining about having 5 ppl in gang trying to defend from a "fleet" of less than 20 enemies, when we have more than 100 ppl in the alliance chat, IS a valid reason for whining for lack of participation.
When less than 20 enemies can take the stations without any problems, then something is wrong. When most ppl don't want to even try to defend the space they claim, then there is no point in trying to claim that space.
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 09:39:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Elisium Dammar
I love the way it some people form the opinion that Fade Union was to blame for itÆs own demise. It had nothing to do with the likes of superior forces/tactics/pilots and organisation tearing it apart in a matter of a week.
We all sat in our hanger while FU killed its selfàà
Fade Union was split due to internal problems. The question is if all those problems had still been problems without ppl attacking us all the time.
If we didn't have enemies, my guess is that Fade Union would have collapsed even sooner. A pvp:er will leave an alliance if he doesn't get any pvp, and most NAFA ppl were pvp:ers.
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 09:39:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Elisium Dammar
I love the way it some people form the opinion that Fade Union was to blame for itÆs own demise. It had nothing to do with the likes of superior forces/tactics/pilots and organisation tearing it apart in a matter of a week.
We all sat in our hanger while FU killed its selfàà
Fade Union was split due to internal problems. The question is if all those problems had still been problems without ppl attacking us all the time.
If we didn't have enemies, my guess is that Fade Union would have collapsed even sooner. A pvp:er will leave an alliance if he doesn't get any pvp, and most NAFA ppl were pvp:ers.
|
| |
|