EVE Search - NAP between war parties in some systems

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

NAP between war parties in some systems

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 07:30:00 - [1] Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 07:30:00 - [2] Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Shin Ra	Posted - 2005.10.19 07:53:00 - [3] How about a NAP in ALL empire systems for the course of the war too?
Sarah Ponytails	Posted - 2005.10.19 07:59:00 - [4] Five is trying to get themselves safe systems for five characters to restock and fit
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:01:00 - [5] Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 08:02:55 Originally by: Shin Ra How about a NAP in ALL empire systems for the course of the war too? Thank you for your kind respons...now go back posting killmails and making your ego bigger then it is. This NAP idea between...lets say 19-21 EVE time in 4-6 major empire systems where 200-300 ppl could be found easily in local woldnt make less fights then now...but would cut down laggy impact a bit Originally by: Sarah Ponytails Five is trying to get themselves safe systems for five characters to restock and fit If its so, it could be aplied to all parties included in WAR...but you can flame if you want. As i said...it was just an idea for making fights eaiser for all of us Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Silvitni	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Darcuese Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play Just surrender m8, if you can¦t take the heat
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:06:00 - [7] Originally by: Silvitni Just surrender m8, if you can¦t take the heat Damn...you cant even post idea on this forums without puting yourself in danger of A: being flamed B: thrown out from corp/alliance Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Phoenicia	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:09:00 - [8] Edited by: Phoenicia on 19/10/2005 08:10:49 Edited by: Phoenicia on 19/10/2005 08:09:57 Please note that the Five are the ones thinking about the innocent population in Empire, who will surely lag out at the impending onslaught, and their enemies are the ones who want to abuse this fact as a propaganda attempt towards "cowardice" on the part of the Five. Perhaps because F-E, NBSI and PA know their own members and know they lack the discipline to uphold such a valiant agreement? "There is no peace, there is only BOOBIES!"
pershphanie	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:12:00 - [9] Originally by: Darcuese Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play It is a great idea, however i fear that if we did that both sides would abuse it by useing those systems as a SS. So its not going to happen.
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:15:00 - [10] Jesus...I think this game made lots off ppl ready for psychotherapy. You dont take anything without thinking first "Hmm, whats he hiding behind back?". Its only 2-3 hours NAP...FFS Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Equinox II	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:15:00 - [11] Will never work on a large alliance scale, it's impossible to control everyone when you have 1000 of people in your alliance.. And, I bet a lot of accidents would happen, say you are trying to catch up with someone, and follow him for 2-3 jumps and then you finally get him in one of these "protected" systems, most people would just blast him without noticing the system-name.. Also, systems like this would just be used as safe havens... Bad idea in my book... could maybe work on a small scale, say two small corps having a war just for kicks.. - but then on a small scale, you don't really have the lag problems of 50vs50 fleets..
Phoenicia	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:15:00 - [12] Originally by: pershphanie It is a great idea, however i fear that if we did that both sides would abuse it by useing those systems as a SS. So its not going to happen. Apologies for naming F-E in my last statement. This is actually a sensible reason to say no "There is no peace, there is only BOOBIES!"
Darken Two	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:28:00 - [13] Its a good idea mate, but sooner or later someone would *** up and you know how it is, all the massive egos on both sides would explode and we would all be bathing in flames. The actual forum flaming between both sides, has gone down a lot in the past couple days, lets try keep it that way. Originally by:** Blind Fear Generally, when trying to be a puppetmaster, it is considered good form not to wrap the strings around your neck and choke yourself.
StiZum Hilidii	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:29:00 - [14] Darcuese put the drugs down man STAN FACTA NON VERBA ALTS FTL
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:31:00 - [15] Originally by: StiZum Hilidii Darcuese put the drugs down man Its only salvation I have Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Muthsera	Posted - 2005.10.19 08:32:00 - [16] Just deal whit it mate. Hopefully the lag will be a bit better after the box upgrade. SoonÖ
Drilla	Posted - 2005.10.19 09:40:00 - [17] No, never, no NAP in any empire system. Seek not to bar my way, for I shall win through - no matter the cost!
Pehova Mindtriq	Posted - 2005.10.19 09:47:00 - [18] To many things can go wrong with that sort of NAP. First of the systems that the NAP concerns will be used as safespots which will frustrate the enemy. And lets say on side is in one of these systems and a enemy hauler enters, how likely would it be for 40-50 ppl to let a wartarget pass unharmed? Let ccp sort these problems.
Pastora	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:08:00 - [19] And who cares about the population in those systems anyway? No, that sounds too bad... I'll rather say it's better for them. When we were fighting in empire in those populated systems there were always those scavengers or alts flying around and trying to loot the cans of the enemies we shot down. So, free loot for them. Also, at the time when I was myself a newbie (yeah, those good old beta days ), though I still am, it was nice to come to some gate and watch how the big boys fight it out. As for the lag. As people said, let's hope hardware upgrade makes it a lesser factor. _______________________________________________ If ifs and ands were pots and pans, I would grow mushrooms in my pants.
DjDangle	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:11:00 - [20] Originally by: Darcuese Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play Good idea m8. Some of the fights up in the Northern regions have been a joke over the past few days. especially if youve just jumped through a gate... Honestly speaking though there is no way other alliances would hold up on the nap, mentioning no alliance names that have recently been decced for doing just that, breaking agreements... Ho hum :p ------------ "On My Signal, Unleash Hell" -I speak for my corp. Not our Alliance-
Velios	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:22:00 - [21] Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them.
Mortuus	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:28:00 - [22] While it would make my life easier, I would have to say no so we can lag or crash the empire nodes just to annoy those carebears. Too bad we can't just shoot em all.
Jungle Jim	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:32:00 - [23] Originally by: Velios Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them. I remember last time someone from M.Corp suggested something like this... * Proud First Time Winner of the MLM Muppet Award *
Commisar	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:34:00 - [24] Originally by: Jungle Jim Originally by: Velios Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them. I remember last time someone from M.Corp suggested something like this... I remember the last time F-E wanted a NAP.....and left an alliance.
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:42:00 - [25] Well pll, this thread was a caise of how something can be interpreted wrongly. 1.--..there wasnt concern (bad grammar, I know) about hundreds and hundreds neutral pilots in those BIG systems. 2.--....it wasnt mented to make those systems as safe spots for some. 3.--....primary objective was to make fights less laggy as posible 4.--....not mented to avoid fights. 5--....it was motivated by blood lust. 6.--..NAP intention would be take time for only cupple of ours per day when server is full with over 16000 ppl.-A bit like Switzerland (it did exist in 2.WW) 7--...these few main systems are surrounded by hundreds "smaller" that are more then enough to have masacres. 8--..it was personal opinion but i guess it should have been writen down in first post 9--..it would be writen down even if there would be different parties involved 10-..It was my personal opinion Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Fred0	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:47:00 - [26] Lag happens. Everywhere. Escpecially if your squabble happens to transform into a real blobwar. But there's no reason to go "kiddierules" on the game for that.
Kerosene	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:54:00 - [27] All I can do really is ask gang leaders from NBSI to try to avoid the heavy systems but it's not guaranteed. If there's a 25 man fleet sighted in Jita, that's where we'll be heading. So it's got to be a kind of 'Try to plot around them systems but it's no great shakes if we can't'. Sort of thing. __
Velios	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:54:00 - [28] Check your mail pls Darcuese.
NAFnist	Posted - 2005.10.19 10:58:00 - [29] Originally by: Commisar Originally by: Jungle Jim Originally by: Velios Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them. I remember last time someone from M.Corp suggested something like this... I remember the last time F-E wanted a NAP.....and left an alliance. How can an alliance leave an alliance?
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.10.19 11:07:00 - [30] I would also like to propose a no shooting Chow policy, its highly antisocial.
Aquiesse Erus	Posted - 2005.10.19 11:12:00 - [31] Originally by: NAFnist Originally by: Commisar Originally by: Jungle Jim Originally by: Velios Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them. I remember last time someone from M.Corp suggested something like this... I remember the last time F-E wanted a NAP.....and left an alliance. How can an alliance leave an alliance? There is a corp called Forsaken Empire
Vandoras	Posted - 2005.10.19 11:36:00 - [32] Considering the fact that 200 ships+ in a system would make it veeery annoying for neutral players and the parties warring, due to lag, the proporsal from .5 is a good idea. Crashing nod after nod isnt exactly what i call happy gameplay. The comments off the oppurtunity to re-stock, regroup etc etc, will be a mutual benefit for both parties, and hence makes the argument invalid. And keep the smack out! The suggestion is not a sign of weakness, but rather a sign of wanting a better flow of play. Furthermore i suggest that the warring parties contact a 3rd party/person with no influence/contact with those involved, and arbitrate a solution to the matter. Hence it will make the gameplay flow better, and fighting more efficent for all warring parties. (Not to mention new players and other corps operating in the repsectable systems will benfit from it as well) Happy fighting, and may the strong and smart stand victorious. Vandoras---someones alt
Darken Two	Posted - 2005.10.19 11:43:00 - [33] OMG comeon guys stop acting like a bunch of flaming idiots. The guy had an idea to make gameplay better. It might not have been a perfect idea or an idea that others want to accept, but it was only an idea. He wasn't trying to force it on anyone. What is wrong with you people and the bloody need to flame everything however innocent it might be. Originally by: Blind Fear Generally, when trying to be a puppetmaster, it is considered good form not to wrap the strings around your neck and choke yourself.
DjDangle	Posted - 2005.10.19 11:45:00 - [34] Originally by: Aquiesse Erus There is a corp called Forsaken Empire "Was" ------------ "On My Signal, Unleash Hell" -I speak for my corp. Not our Alliance-
General Furyan	Posted - 2005.10.19 12:42:00 - [35] Darcuese - I think you got a nice idea, but like you see, poeple might not be ready to act and play with this kind of NAP. There is to many young childs on both side to work! Honor and respect - General Furyan
Nez Perces	Posted - 2005.10.19 13:05:00 - [36] Originally by: Velios Check your mail pls Darcuese. /emote giggles.... that doesnt sound too good...
Hast	Posted - 2005.10.19 13:07:00 - [37] no quarter will be given.
Treebeard dk	Posted - 2005.10.19 13:29:00 - [38] Edited by: Treebeard dk on 19/10/2005 13:29:22 Originally by: Darcuese Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:45:02 Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 07:44:41 It is just an idea, but....I would like to know your opinions about NAP between war parties among particular empire systems. 50 on 50 is laggy enough...and when you have another 200 pilots next to you it is even more laggy. So maybe we can write down few system that have big population to be forbiden for fights in this war. It is an idea...it doesnt have to be good...but then again it might help us having even more fun then we do now . Well, at least NAP at particular EVE time when majority of population play Darc, I think you forgot to mention that this is your own opinion and does not reflect either corp or alliance views in any way. I certainly do not support it !
Aegis Osiris	Posted - 2005.10.19 13:40:00 - [39] Its a sensible idea from the point of lag, but obvious not possible for any number of reasons. Maybe for bigger battles, if both sides agree to try and avoid the heavily populated systems, it'd be enough. Having a 100 v. 100 battle in Jita, while a hysterical idea, would drive the node into absolute fits
KIATolon	Posted - 2005.10.19 13:42:00 - [40] Quote: Maybe for bigger battles, if both sides agree to try and avoid the heavily populated systems, it'd be enough. Having a 100 v. 100 battle in Jita, while a hysterical idea, would drive the node into absolute fits Gets my vote :)
Anubuss	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:02:00 - [41] Man one person tries to think of something that he thought would help everyone but noooooooo small minded people just cant see that. Whats funny is the opposing alliance (F-E) has posted more positive and at the very least semi supportive responses then his actually alliance much less his own dang corp. There is one that I will respond to in particulary. Treebeard you posted that he forgot to post that this was his own view and opinion and not that of M Corp then very hastly and in my oppinion rudely posted that you dont support it and ended that with a exclamation mark. Well dear sir if you would of read the whole thread you would of seen that he did follow up that this was his own idea and opinion. And call me crazy but I thought corps and alliances were supposed to be supportive of their own members not bash them and ridicule them for actually showing interest in something their alliance and corp's are a part of and maybe even by doing so come up with something to maybe make it run a bit smoother. But all the Five and M Corp has seem to have done here is treat this guy rather poorly for speaking up with a idea. And if you guys want to flame me for this post then go ahead and act all butch and bad.I could care less what you fly and even less about the war between the alliances I do my own thing with the corp I belong to and that is fine for me in the game. Besides the more I see of the peoples conduct on these forums the more inclined I am to just play the felllow members in the corp that I usually do and forget about the rest of this BS. Sinfully Yours, Anubuss Bringing Death and Destruction to a galaxy near you =)
Mindlles	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:05:00 - [42] Uhm uh, is darcuese still 5 and M corp? LOL _________________ http://asuya.eve-killboard.net/
Velios	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:22:00 - [43] LOL, guys, no need to try create a rift between M. and Darcuese. He is here to stay and the fact that he proposed an idea that would lessen lag for some and might be seen by many to be a good idea, does not override the reality that suggestions like this generally go through the corp, then the alliance before being proposed here, if at all. I have spoken to Darcuese about this and he understands, he also knows the value that I place upon him as a cop member too and he wants to stay with M.Corp and the five. So F-E complainers with their equal rights banners... put them down and stop your petty trouble making. There won't be a NAP, but not for the reason that it's not a good idea, but because of the fact that you guys declared this war, and we wish to inflict maximum damage upon you offering you no safe zones. Besides a nap such as this is impossible to enforce and goes against the very nature of the FIVE. You wanted this war now here it is. End of story.
Treebeard dk	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:37:00 - [44] Signed.
Darcuese	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:42:00 - [45] offcourse im staying. As a matter of fact, since this post of mine could had make lots of parties seen 5 and M Corp in "afraid" state of mind...I offered to be disband both from corp and alliance. Even though this is just a game , there are some Role playing rules that i didnt followed to be honest. And i need to play my role in it. But i got backup respons so i will stay...allthough I need to haul fuel in next POS war. Im a soldier and i take full consiquencis of my actions...good or bad...Not only me, but many others in 5. why do you think 5 stand strong on their feets with fists pointed toward enemy?. Discipline. Now...of to get drunk Can someone point me out to Minmatar Vengance? I have ammo i have to get ridd of
Treebeard dk	Posted - 2005.10.19 14:57:00 - [46] Originally by: Darcuese Edited by: Darcuese on 19/10/2005 14:45:58 offcourse im staying. As a matter of fact, since this post of mine could had make lots of parties seen 5 and M Corp in "afraid" state of mind...I offered to be disband both from corp and alliance. Even though this is just a game , there are some Role playing rules that i didnt followed to be honest. And i need to play my role in it. But i got backup respons so i will stay...allthough I need to haul fuel in next POS war. Im a soldier and i take full consiquencis of my actions...good or bad...Not only me, but many others in 5. Why do you think 5 stand strong on their feets so long with fists pointed toward enemy?. Discipline. Now...of to get drunk Group hugs 4tw :) NOW GO WASH MY BS, I WANT IT SHINING SOLDIER !!
Ishana	Posted - 2005.10.19 17:40:00 - [47] I say we wait on the server upgrade and then give it a good test. And by test I mean the excact opposite from your suggestion. We TRY and crash the server by having a 300+ people fleet battle in Jita and see if the new servers can take it! _________________________________________________________
Shayla Sh'inlux	Posted - 2005.10.19 17:46:00 - [48] Idea's not bad, but for various reasons not viable. Would be like agreeing to keep gang sizes under 15 people for the same reason. I'd support that idea by the way as blob warfare = bleh.
Bulletproof Cupid	Posted - 2005.10.19 18:34:00 - [49] Originally by: Nez Perces Originally by: Velios Check your mail pls Darcuese. /emote giggles.... that doesnt sound too good... ROFL, didnt spot that the 1st time i read it -------- Phoenix Alliance
TURBOman	Posted - 2005.10.27 22:51:00 - [50] <3 <3 <3 Darc i lub ya
Roger Dodger	Posted - 2005.10.27 23:06:00 - [51] Originally by: TURBOman <3 <3 <3 Darc i lub ya If you want to be a necromancer go play WoW.
Shittake	Posted - 2005.10.27 23:07:00 - [52] Edited by: **take on 27/10/2005 23:07:25 Originally by: Aquiesse Erus Originally by: NAFnist Originally by: Commisar Originally by: Jungle Jim Originally by: Velios Darcuese, there will be no NAP's and you should think about running these ridiculous ideas past your fellow corp mates before going public with them. I remember last time someone from M.Corp suggested something like this... I remember the last time F-E wanted a NAP.....and left an alliance. How can an alliance leave an alliance? There is a corp called Forsaken Empire I don't claim to a political expert within Eve, but even I know that FE is an alliance and what you talk about was FE the corp, which no longer is in existence really. Get your facts straght.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.