| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Nez Perces
   |
Posted - 2005.11.14 11:58:00 -
[301]
 Originally by: Doltish
The blue standings were set to avoid incidents in SA regions.
Why would you need to avoid incidents in SA regions?
Call it what you will but blue on blue = NAP
A southern enity NAP¦d with a northern entity.... WHY?
|
Rhodry Amarrian
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:02:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Nez Perces
Originally by: Doltish
The blue standings were set to avoid incidents in SA regions.
Why would you need to avoid incidents in SA regions?
Call it what you will but blue on blue = NAP
A southern enity NAP¦d with a northern entity.... WHY?
Because G/IRON wanted to have a war with SA. SA wanted to have a war with G/IRON.
ASCN's presence/involvement was neither required nor wanted by either party.
ASCN had/has other more pressing matters to take care of and another war with G/IRON was not wanted by either ASCN or G/IRON.
Both parties had recently been there/done that and wanted to move onto other matters.
|
Doltish
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:04:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Nez Perces
Originally by: Doltish
The blue standings were set to avoid incidents in SA regions.
Why would you need to avoid incidents in SA regions?
Call it what you will but blue on blue = NAP
A southern enity NAP¦d with a northern entity.... WHY?
Why? So we wouldn't get drawn into another battle royale like we just had. We wanted SA, not ASCN. ASCN didn't seem to mind that. So we NAP'd (or whatever you want to call it) so that we didn't wayward ASCN folks getting popped in Stain/Esoteria for being neutral, hence restarting the conflict we just concluded.
As for the comment about north vs. south - I believe they did it because it was in both parties' best interests. And I believe it was violeted when one party felt the other had already violated it. Who violated first is what this whold discussion is about: IRON/G feel it was violated by ASCN by implied aggression. ASCN feel it was violated by G/IRON who led a sneak-attack against them with no prior warning or reason.
|
Trooper B99
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:05:00 -
[304]
Originally by: Goberth Ludwig
The bit you pasted about G Iron as next target in pvp rotation was not a post in the alliance forum, it was just in the DDC corp fleet motd ingame for half a day and all we did was returning to impass and standing by for orders.
Okay, so it was posted, but only as a MOTD to all DDC members and didn't appear on the ASCN forums?
As a point, who had the authority to change to MOTD (and I imagine Fleet orders that brought all of DDC back south) to "prepare to assault G/Iron/Razor in SA asap."
Wirykomi Team Racer - COLOSSUS Championships Year 106
|
Eleese
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:06:00 -
[305]
Originally by: Doltish
Originally by: Nez Perces
Originally by: Doltish
The blue standings were set to avoid incidents in SA regions.
Why would you need to avoid incidents in SA regions?
Call it what you will but blue on blue = NAP
A southern enity NAP¦d with a northern entity.... WHY?
Why? So we wouldn't get drawn into another battle royale like we just had. We wanted SA, not ASCN. ASCN didn't seem to mind that. So we NAP'd (or whatever you want to call it) so that we didn't wayward ASCN folks getting popped in Stain/Esoteria for being neutral, hence restarting the conflict we just concluded.
As for the comment about north vs. south - I believe they did it because it was in both parties' best interests. And I believe it was violeted when one party felt the other had already violated it. Who violated first is what this whold discussion is about: IRON/G feel it was violated by ASCN by implied aggression. ASCN feel it was violated by G/IRON who led a sneak-attack against them with no prior warning or reason.
ASCN wanted to go have fun with nbsi.. which gets put on hold yet again grr.
|
Nez Perces
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:07:00 -
[306]
Edited by: Nez Perces on 14/11/2005 12:09:10
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
ASCN's presence/involvement was neither required nor wanted by either party.
ASCN had/has other more pressing matters to take care of and another war with G/IRON was not wanted by either ASCN or G/IRON.
Are you trying to tell us that SA explicitly told ASCN that they wanted you to have G/IRON set to blue standings to avoid ASCN and G/IRON shooting eachother?
If this was the case then why on earth would FIX get requests from SA for assistance of the day of the first G/IRON incursion ?(a request which was overturned by a MASS director, hence we didnt mobilise on day one)
Sorry, your argument makes no sense.. try again.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:12:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Eleese
Not at all pulling back forces JUST IN CASE, is totally different than going in to invade.. not being funny but having what 100-150 g/iron next door about to leave isnt something you want to just leave your space empty/sitting in empire while it happens. Not to mention when G/iron leave we'd have to go in and take the station as it was gonna be babysat by ascn you dont do that with 5 guys.
According to your own people you fought in empire all the time and then suddenly you need to go back just in case? According to your pvp forces they fought in empire against NBSI and were not at home. Some returned to empire to fight NBSI before ASCN got attacked by G/IRON but then they complain about the lag in the initial engagement with G/IRON.
I find the answers from ASCN very confusing, one time they prepare to attack G/IRON just in case, another they only hunt NBSI in empire, orders are issued just in case and ASCN will help SA when they collapse but not by attacking G/IRON but in some other nebulous way.
So, did you get ordered to return and prepare for a strike against G/IRON? You cannot find the posts but you seem to know about the order itself without denying or confirming anything.
And what about the "we knew that G/IRON would backstab us posts" by ASCN members in this thread? You assemble a 100 ships sniper fleet just in case?
Confused, really. It all looks like a big mess and a lot of different ASCN pilots posting contradicting stuff does not make this easier.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:14:00 -
[308]
Originally by: Goberth Ludwig
The bit you pasted about G Iron as next target in pvp rotation was not a post in the alliance forum, it was just in the DDC corp fleet motd ingame for half a day and all we did was returning to impass and standing by for orders.
Is DDC the main pvp force of ASCN as stated by one of your members earlier?
|
Eleese
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:16:00 -
[309]
Edited by: Eleese on 14/11/2005 12:16:46
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Eleese
Not at all pulling back forces JUST IN CASE, is totally different than going in to invade.. not being funny but having what 100-150 g/iron next door about to leave isnt something you want to just leave your space empty/sitting in empire while it happens. Not to mention when G/iron leave we'd have to go in and take the station as it was gonna be babysat by ascn you dont do that with 5 guys.
According to your own people you fought in empire all the time and then suddenly you need to go back just in case? According to your pvp forces they fought in empire against NBSI and were not at home. Some returned to empire to fight NBSI before ASCN got attacked by G/IRON but then they complain about the lag in the initial engagement with G/IRON.
I find the answers from ASCN very confusing, one time they prepare to attack G/IRON just in case, another they only hunt NBSI in empire, orders are issued just in case and ASCN will help SA when they collapse but not by attacking G/IRON but in some other nebulous way.
So, did you get ordered to return and prepare for a strike against G/IRON? You cannot find the posts but you seem to know about the order itself without denying or confirming anything.
And what about the "we knew that G/IRON would backstab us posts" by ASCN members in this thread? You assemble a 100 ships sniper fleet just in case?
Confused, really. It all looks like a big mess and a lot of different ASCN pilots posting contradicting stuff does not make this easier.
I said i couldnt find the post, well seems thats because it didnt exist, if you read up a ddc members has explain for you.
/edit seem you found it while i posted.
|
Rhodry Amarrian
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:16:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Nez Perces
Edited by: Nez Perces on 14/11/2005 12:09:10
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
ASCN's presence/involvement was neither required nor wanted by either party.
ASCN had/has other more pressing matters to take care of and another war with G/IRON was not wanted by either ASCN or G/IRON.
Are you trying to tell us that SA explicitly told ASCN that they wanted you to have G/IRON set to blue standings to avoid ASCN and G/IRON shooting eachother?
If this was the case then why on earth would FIX get requests from SA for assistance of the day of the first G/IRON incursion ?(a request which was overturned by a MASS director, hence we didnt mobilise on day one)
Sorry, your argument makes no sense.. try again.
Please see the above reponse a couple of posts up from IRON. Does that answer your question?
As to why you got a call for assistance and ASCN didnt? Well, maybe because, lots of people in MASS dont really like ASCN and so did not want to ask them for help? I don't know, ask someone in SA.
|
|
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:18:00 -
[311]
Originally by: Eleese
Not to mention when G/iron leave we'd have to go in and take the station as it was gonna be babysat by ascn you dont do that with 5 guys.
You need to read up on sovereignity and taking stations. If G/IRON removed their POSes, a fleet would avail you nothing for a day or more. One would think that the decision makers of ASCN should know this fact and not post a sniper fleet (stations are not taken by snipers, it is not very efficient, go close range gank for more damage) nearby.
|
Aquiesse Erus
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:24:00 -
[312]
We all know exactly what was planned by ASCN.
1- G/IRON attack SA
2- G/IRON pretty much anihalate SA
3- ASCN contact G/IRON to enter negotiations about having former SA space as a protectorate
At this point i think ASCN saw the potential for a very large amount of good publicity... 'the alliance that kicked G/IRON out of the south' and so on... so here is what happened.
There was a meeting of the ASCN CEO's to discuss tactics while the G/IRON fleets mobilised to leave the south. Freighter operations were planned to move all G/IRON items out of former-stain-space and return to the north.
After most of G/IRON had left, im under the impression that ASCN would have declared G+IRON KOS and started shooting them. Killing one or two G/IRON pilots in the process and claiming 'victory' over them... when ofcorse, they had allready left the south.
ASCN BACKFIRING PLANS 4TW!!!
|
Omatje
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:24:00 -
[313]
It's so much better shooting at eachother for more reasons then only fun
Thanks for giving them...
happy hobbit from the sunny south |
Doltish
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:25:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
The plan was to help remove G/IRON POS' if required, not introduce ASCN ones.
Is that some kind of joke? Do you honestly think we'd believe you gathered a massive BS fleet just in case we wanted you to help us take down G's hard-earned POS's?
If that was the case, where were the Badger II's? And if your intent was to provide security, where was the notice?
You guys are like the prize-fighter who is trying to dance around his opponent but is facing the wrong direction. We're not idiots, pleae don't treat us like it.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:26:00 -
[315]
Originally by: Goberth Ludwig
Also you state theres a contradiction between ppl stating wer in empire fighting NBSI and ppl sayign we gathered a fleet ro attack G:
- the fleet to attack G was at least 3 days before G attacked us, and it was called off
- AFTER that, most of the ppl who wanted targets to fight travelled to empire to meet NBSI
OK, so it is clear that the posted fleet orders were older and only showed a possible attack by ASCN. Still, maybe G/IRON took exception to you assembling a force to attack them. Just a guess.
|
Aquiesse Erus
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:27:00 -
[316]
They will be claiming they formed a fleet to attack BE next...
|
Nez Perces
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:28:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Doltish
Why? So we wouldn't get drawn into another battle royale like we just had. We wanted SA, not ASCN. ASCN didn't seem to mind that. So we NAP'd (or whatever you want to call it) so that we didn't wayward ASCN folks getting popped in Stain/Esoteria for being neutral, hence restarting the conflict we just concluded.
Errm.. no this answers nothing.... I am asking why did a northern entity and a southern entity feel that they should not shoot eachother, when the northern entity was attacking a southern entity, namely SA.
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
As ASCN has a NBSI (catchy name) policy, the only way to aviod incidents and getting ASCN dragged into the conflict would be to have both sides appear as positive standings.
As to why you got a call for assistance and ASCN didnt? Well, maybe because, lots of people in MASS dont really like ASCN and so did not want to ask them for help? I don't know, ask someone in SA.
You didnt read my post did you... FIX got asked for assistance by a senior figure in SA, only to be overturned by a MASS director. We helped SA anyhow as much as they asked for. We nevertheless had G/IRON at -10 and still have them at that.
Are you suggesting that SA arranged a fight where ASCN would be kept out of fighting by a blue on blue NAP.. and then when the fighting started, requested assistance from FIX. So in fact this is all SA¦s doing?
Seems like they arranged the whole thing.. and you guys just complied and gave G/IRON the blue on blue NAP to make SA happy.
Ofc it was also your duty to standby and administer Esoteria and Paragon Soul, should things go pete tong for SA. And ofc it was also your duty to kick IRON/G out should they become *too* troublesome...
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:30:00 -
[318]
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
 Does this then not prove that ASCN was not interested in holding any stations or other assets in Stain space?
The plan was to help remove G/IRON POS' if required, not introduce ASCN ones.
No, this shows that ASCN fleetcommand is either incompetent or that the statement that the fleet only was there to shoot a station are not true.
How does a 100 ship sniper fleet help someone in packing up POSes? G/IRON would certainly not shoot their own ones, now would they?
|
Aquiesse Erus
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:33:00 -
[319]
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
Does this then not prove that ASCN was not interested in holding any stations or other assets in Stain space?
The plan was to help remove G/IRON POS' if required, not introduce ASCN ones.
No, this shows that ASCN fleetcommand is either incompetent or that the statement that the fleet only was there to shoot a station are not true.
How does a 100 ship sniper fleet help someone in packing up POSes? G/IRON would certainly not shoot their own ones, now would they?
We have been known to be a bit crazy you know...
|
Echo147
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:33:00 -
[320]
Meh, who cares about first blood.
Lets get down with the killing.
|
|
|
Doltish
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:34:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Nez Perces
Originally by: Doltish
Why? So we wouldn't get drawn into another battle royale like we just had. We wanted SA, not ASCN. ASCN didn't seem to mind that. So we NAP'd (or whatever you want to call it) so that we didn't wayward ASCN folks getting popped in Stain/Esoteria for being neutral, hence restarting the conflict we just concluded.
Errm.. no this answers nothing.... I am asking why did a northern entity and a southern entity feel that they should not shoot eachother, when the northern entity was attacking a southern entity, namely SA.
OMG - did you not read the second half of my post? I will re-post here since you can't seem to muster the strength:
"As for the comment about north vs. south - I believe they did it because it was in both parties' best interests. And I believe it was violeted when one party felt the other had already violated it. Who violated first is what this whold discussion is about: IRON/G feel it was violated by ASCN by implied aggression. ASCN feel it was violated by G/IRON who led a sneak-attack against them with no prior warning or reason."
Those best interests namely being a) ASCN doesn't get re-pounded and b) IRON/G get to focus on the task at hand.
I haven't been around for very long - but why would a norther alliance and southern alliance fight "just 'cause"? I understand there has been some rift between the two halves of the galaxy - but the fact that it does not make sense to you that 2 parties could get together and AVOID a conflict because they have bigger (or better) fish to fry BECAUSE of their geographical and geopolitical origin is astounding.
|
Roxanne
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:34:00 -
[322]
Originally by: Goberth Ludwig
next I know is G suddently declares us KOS after deploying an entire battleship fleet in our space, without any warning at all.
This is something I will never forgive them, especially after the good trend of respect that was running between each other.
Yes, attacking without warning and not informing people who have you on blue is bad and I feel that ASCN is enraged for the right reasons. Whatever G/IRON's reason for attacking, they should have informed ASCN of their decision beforehand.
|
Rhodry Amarrian
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:35:00 -
[323]
Originally by: Roxanne
Originally by: Rhodry Amarrian
Does this then not prove that ASCN was not interested in holding any stations or other assets in Stain space?
The plan was to help remove G/IRON POS' if required, not introduce ASCN ones.
No, this shows that ASCN fleetcommand is either incompetent or that the statement that the fleet only was there to shoot a station are not true.
How does a 100 ship sniper fleet help someone in packing up POSes? G/IRON would certainly not shoot their own ones, now would they?
The fleet was there to encourage G/IRON to leave after it appeared that they would not. If necessary it could be used to take down the G/IRON POS.
What is there here that is so hard to understand?
Also, it was then agreed between ASCN and G/IRON that they would leave so the fleet was stood down.
There was something like 3 DAYS between that fleet being formed and the attack by G/IRON - now I am not sure what threat G/IRON felt from a fleet disbanded days ago but I cant imagine ti was a huge amount!
|
Elenia Kheynes
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:36:00 -
[324]
*shrugs*
ASCN backstabbed ? That would be too ironic to be true 
Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?
|
Gyro DuAquin1
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:38:00 -
[325]
Fist of all, good Thread some nice points, I never thought that would come up. But to give this whole thing a bit of a new direction.
1. Who has gained more ppl/Corps in his Alliance since SA is falling appart?
2. So u dont have any wishes about new Terretory? So y care about Esoteria? TBH its looks more like gaining more space without fighting for it. Cause obvisouly there is no one around to claim it.
3. Naping us, the Barbarians from the north, lets see, maybe we would do some work for u by killing SA. Or hurt them at least a bit. U told the E-O world it was about respect and I tell the E-O it has been out of an advantage for ASCN, cause we kill ur PPL in ur Fortress ASCN and ur ppl looked not realy good while we did. And if someone comes up, and tells me 10 BS losses a day and some haulers/barges/whatever, dont bother u u should donate some money to the nearest DCM Member around.
4. During that meeting, Cyvok told me that we never faced his primary, and best PVP`s. And he was beating his chest very hard, and now personaly iam intrested to see who are u primary PVP`s cause we faced, Globerius, Kar, Kez2411, Fraxy and MexicanFX (Sry to those I forgot). Sry guys but u are not ASCN primary PVP`s, but ull be one day.
So the last and most important point here is, F1 F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8
May the zerk come all over us.
|
Rhodry Amarrian
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:41:00 -
[326]
Originally by: Nez Perces
You didnt read my post did you... FIX got asked for assistance by a senior figure in SA, only to be overturned by a MASS director. We helped SA anyhow as much as they asked for. We nevertheless had G/IRON at -10 and still have them at that.
Are you suggesting that SA arranged a fight where ASCN would be kept out of fighting by a blue on blue NAP.. and then when the fighting started, requested assistance from FIX. So in fact this is all SA¦s doing?
Seems like they arranged the whole thing.. and you guys just complied and gave G/IRON the blue on blue NAP to make SA happy.
Ofc it was also your duty to standby and administer Esoteria and Paragon Soul, should things go pete tong for SA. And ofc it was also your duty to kick IRON/G out should they become *too* troublesome...
I did read your post.
ASCN has no long term interest in Esoteria or Paragon Soul other than to go there occasionally to kill Sansha rats. Accept this point then we can move on.
You yourself just stated "your offer to help was "TURNED DOWN" i.e. your assistance was not officially asked for by SA.
Neither was ASCNs.
You decided to attack G/IRON anyway as you had them set at -10 and probably fancied the action. Your choice.
ASCN had just finished a war with G/IRON in which ASCN destroyed (according to their kilboard) hundreds of Northern Alliance ships (lost loads to) so forget this idea that this was some kind of conspiracy.
ASCN wanted to go shoot NBSI and could not do that while G/IRON was in its space unless an understanding was reached that the two parties would not attack each other provided certain understandings were reached about G/IRONs long term goals in the region.
Just because another alliance is from the Northern does not mean you HAVE to attack them all the time.
AFAIK, SA and FIX didnt lift a finger to help ASCN when it had its war with G/IRON - why all of a sudden is ASCN so ebil because it did the same thing?
|
Talos Darkhart
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:41:00 -
[327]
olly or whatever you were called let go of that bitterness or your going to give yourself an ulcer 
|
Elenia Kheynes
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:45:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Talos Darkhart
olly or whatever you were called let go of that bitterness or your going to give yourself an ulcer
I have no bitterness, just 8 keys called F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7 and F8
"The end justifies the means"
But alts don't see what "end" I'm after 
Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?
|
Rhodry Amarrian
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:46:00 -
[329]
Edited by: Rhodry Amarrian on 14/11/2005 12:47:56
Originally by: Gyro DuAquin1
During that meeting, Cyvok told me that we never faced his primary, and best PVP`s. And he was beating his chest very hard, and now personaly iam intrested to see who are u primary PVP`s cause we faced, Globerius, Kar, Kez2411, Fraxy and MexicanFX (Sry to those I forgot). Sry guys but u are not ASCN primary PVP`s, but ull be one day.
When ASCN was on the offensive in the North it killed tons more ships than it lost.
When G/IRON was on the offensive in the South it killed tons more ships than it lost.
All this tells you is it is much easier to attack than defend in EVE atm and the attacker has all the advantages. Why do you think it is that a "pvp" alliance like the 5 gave up its space and went on a rampage? Cos its easier than defending and more fun.
Every alliance has its good pvpers, every alliance has its less observant members flying around solo in BS/haulers.
|
Gyro DuAquin1
|
Posted - 2005.11.14 12:47:00 -
[330]
before i forget,
Hi Mum
and that bob does not fell left out anymore
BL eats little kids
And Bob if hacking the sever to Rat and mine in Jove Space
also Bob is using a new module, that give u 99 Warp Core Stabs, 99 Damage Mod, and warp speed at 0 m/s. and that module is a himelo-Slot Module, u just need to fit it into ur Cargo and ur good to go.and it wont appear on the killmail.
Did i forget anything?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |