EVE Search - [So] What's the shared purpose/goals for the EC-P invaders?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

[So] What's the shared purpose/goals for the EC-P invaders?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Sabine Borgia	Posted - 2006.04.03 19:26:00 - [121] well my 5 cents on this. first i really regard this what .5 f-e ascn and fan bois have done really impresive such a fleet. second what you await Giron to do?? jump in ?? get wacked bevore they even see what killed them?? no way!!! the point here is the "ebil"invaders from south did a think that was never be awaitet by others or even ccp im sure.taking over a sector with a force that cant be fought is 1.brilliatn 2. totaly lame you totaly avoid any kind of looses on your side (cept station defense but you were enough to deal with that) theres nothing the defenders can do gainst this. i say its ccps fault they give them possibilty to do such a thing and outrun all game mechanics "Legal" ccp should act now fair up the conditions give ec a boost of nodes so no lag will be gainst any attacker who comes trough a gate and then im sure there will be an intressting fight. but atm i say its like cheating you use a exploit since lag is never a game mechanic and never will be you jut sit there in extreme numbers with backdoor to empire and lag out evrything what will enter. and yes i was alrdy in fleetbattles like the on in tpar-g (mkay that time ym corp got banned from there cause i poded tornsoul but **** happens)
Nifel	Posted - 2006.04.03 19:29:00 - [122] Originally by: Sabine Borgia well my 5 cents on this. first i really regard this what .5 f-e ascn and fan bois have done really impresive such a fleet. second what you await Giron to do?? jump in ?? get wacked bevore they even see what killed them?? no way!!! the point here is the "ebil"invaders from south did a think that was never be awaitet by others or even ccp im sure.taking over a sector with a force that cant be fought is 1.brilliatn 2. totaly lame you totaly avoid any kind of looses on your side (cept station defense but you were enough to deal with that) theres nothing the defenders can do gainst this. i say its ccps fault they give them possibilty to do such a thing and outrun all game mechanics "Legal" ccp should act now fair up the conditions give ec a boost of nodes so no lag will be gainst any attacker who comes trough a gate and then im sure there will be an intressting fight. but atm i say its like cheating you use a exploit since lag is never a game mechanic and never will be you jut sit there in extreme numbers with backdoor to empire and lag out evrything what will enter. and yes i was alrdy in fleetbattles like the on in tpar-g (mkay that time ym corp got banned from there cause i poded tornsoul but ** happens) If we used drones to lag anyone jumping in you might've had a point. "We wield swords for the sound of laughter that used to be there long ago." RKK Ranking: (MIN13) Jata**
WarGod	Posted - 2006.04.03 20:08:00 - [123] i can remember when i asked a few people y they put a pos in ec.. they said, coz trust have an outpost here and G and IRON will protect the system, if an enemy Cynosural field in local G would be all over them, so it will be safe all the time.. Guess they r in the Sh!t now ey :P ___________ My Killz/Deathz
Zysco	Posted - 2006.04.03 20:46:00 - [124] Originally by: Wizie Originally by: Bombcrater Originally by: Top Hat Is it me, or are all the DAB members totally retarded? Some of us are smart enough to have stayed out of this thread so far, because it's no fun 'debating' something with BoB/5/ASCN, all of whom have forum smack trained to level 10 and egos big enough to have their own gravity. It's like wrestling a dozen pigs - the pigs have all the fun, while you just get muddy and frustrated. To learn smack, just ask your corp member (CEO?) DJNME who uses alts to smack on forums 24/7. If you can't, then stfu about smack... your corp is good at it too. DAB will never live this down, rofl. Its too bad for GIRON that they didnt really help PA/NBSI/FE when the 5 invaded, or maybe they would still be alive and/or allied with the rest of the north. But I guess politics aren't your strong point.
Y Ashanti	Posted - 2006.04.03 20:49:00 - [125] Originally by: Zysco Its too bad for GIRON that they didnt really help PA/NBSI/FE when the 5 invaded, or maybe they would still be alive and/or allied with the rest of the north. But I guess politics aren't your strong point. Did it ever occur to you that G/IRON have consciously chosen not to ally with PA/NBSI/FE... Uber-blobby alliance politics lead to insanely boring game-play.
Coasterbrian	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:02:00 - [126] Originally by: Sabine Borgia well my 5 cents on this. first i really regard this what .5 f-e ascn and fan bois have done really impresive such a fleet. second what you await Giron to do?? jump in ?? get wacked bevore they even see what killed them?? no way!!! the point here is the "ebil"invaders from south did a think that was never be awaitet by others or even ccp im sure.taking over a sector with a force that cant be fought is 1.brilliatn 2. totaly lame you totaly avoid any kind of looses on your side (cept station defense but you were enough to deal with that) theres nothing the defenders can do gainst this. i say its ccps fault they give them possibilty to do such a thing and outrun all game mechanics "Legal" ccp should act now fair up the conditions give ec a boost of nodes so no lag will be gainst any attacker who comes trough a gate and then im sure there will be an intressting fight. but atm i say its like cheating you use a exploit since lag is never a game mechanic and never will be you jut sit there in extreme numbers with backdoor to empire and lag out evrything what will enter. and yes i was alrdy in fleetbattles like the on in tpar-g (mkay that time ym corp got banned from there cause i poded tornsoul but ** happens) You seem to have missed the part where the largest fleet G/IRON/RZR/Whoever have managed to come up with is about 160 pilots (and that was on primetime on a Sunday), plus 20 or 30 G/TRUST in EC. Yeah, they may have jumped in if there was no lag as opposed to turning around and going home, but if they could put ~200 people on grid with no lag, then BoB/5/ASCN could have put 300 to 400 people on grid with no lag. Don't try to claim BoB/5/ASCN try to use the lag monster as an exploit or some form of cheating. The fact is, BoB/5/ASCN have more friends than G/IRON/RZR, which is why such a lockdown could be put in place and maintained with minimal resistance. Don't like it? Get more friends. ;) Just remember: BOTH sides have to deal with the lag, not just one or the other. Now, if one side or the other was deploying drones 150km from the gate (fighters excepted), then it could probably called a lame tactic and using lag on purpose, but until that time, hush. ---------- Originally by:** riker to thebold first post w/ your main. www.eve-files.com/media/0601/CoasterSig.jpg[/img] Soft and Crunchy 4tw! \o/ Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 kbs, ty - Cortes
Zysco	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:03:00 - [127] Originally by: Y Ashanti Originally by: Zysco Its too bad for GIRON that they didnt really help PA/NBSI/FE when the 5 invaded, or maybe they would still be alive and/or allied with the rest of the north. But I guess politics aren't your strong point. Did it ever occur to you that G/IRON have consciously chosen not to ally with PA/NBSI/FE... Uber-blobby alliance politics lead to insanely boring game-play. Right, so then why are they complaining when their enemys have more numbers? They COULD have had tons of numbers themselves, but, as you claim, they chose not to. So why are they blaming BoB/ASCN?
Y Ashanti	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:06:00 - [128] Originally by: Zysco Originally by: Y Ashanti Originally by: Zysco Its too bad for GIRON that they didnt really help PA/NBSI/FE when the 5 invaded, or maybe they would still be alive and/or allied with the rest of the north. But I guess politics aren't your strong point. Did it ever occur to you that G/IRON have consciously chosen not to ally with PA/NBSI/FE... Uber-blobby alliance politics lead to insanely boring game-play. Right, so then why are they complaining when their enemys have more numbers? They COULD have had tons of numbers themselves, but, as you claim, they chose not to. So why are they blaming BoB/ASCN? Because the game-play would be just as boring and pointless if G/IRON had the same number of people - game mechanics do not support it.
Zysco	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:29:00 - [129] Originally by: Y Ashanti Originally by: Zysco Originally by: Y Ashanti Originally by: Zysco Its too bad for GIRON that they didnt really help PA/NBSI/FE when the 5 invaded, or maybe they would still be alive and/or allied with the rest of the north. But I guess politics aren't your strong point. Did it ever occur to you that G/IRON have consciously chosen not to ally with PA/NBSI/FE... Uber-blobby alliance politics lead to insanely boring game-play. Right, so then why are they complaining when their enemys have more numbers? They COULD have had tons of numbers themselves, but, as you claim, they chose not to. So why are they blaming BoB/ASCN? Because the game-play would be just as boring and pointless if G/IRON had the same number of people - game mechanics do not support it. As boring and pointless as not being able to do anything and instead crying on the forums?
Y Ashanti	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:40:00 - [130] Originally by: Zysco As boring and pointless as not being able to do anything and instead crying on the forums? The fact that ASCN/BoB are camping 1 system on the map, which I haven't visited for months before they came, doesn't impair my ability to play the game at all, thank you very much for asking.

Adhamhnon	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:48:00 - [131] Originally by: Y Ashanti Originally by: Zysco As boring and pointless as not being able to do anything and instead crying on the forums? The fact that ASCN/BoB are camping 1 system on the map, which I haven't visited for months before they came, doesn't impair my ability to play the game at all, thank you very much for asking. Cause we don't care about lame ass alts, or any other single person in EVE. We have defined targets and goals, which we are accomplishing. If this doesn't affect you as you say, why do you care?
Y Ashanti	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:54:00 - [132] Originally by: Adhamhnon Cause we don't care about lame ass alts, or any other single person in EVE. We have defined targets and goals, which we are accomplishing. If this doesn't affect you as you say, why do you care? It does affect me insofar as this moves the game yet again further towards the ultimately boring uber blob-wars that don't come with any actual combat. Be happy about causing a few billion of damage to one of the richest neutral entities in EVE, I'm sure their wallet won't be all that hurt in the longer term.
Netto	Posted - 2006.04.03 21:59:00 - [133] If GIRON doesn't want to play the alliance warfare game that CCP has set up, they have options. One of those options is to choose the route that -5- took last year and become a mobile hostile entity with no particular claims. If all you guys want to do is have 30-80 fleet engagements, become mercs or whatever, don't try and hold space. Don't participate in the capital ship game if it's such a huge bore. No one is asking you to. Tired of the POS war? Don't have POS'. Don't like capital ships? Don't have things that require capital ships to blow up. Don't want things that require capital ships to blow up. There are a lot of options! And to those that think that if GIRON+Friends somehow vanish overnight, that there would be no war in eve... rofl. You guys are delusional. War will always be a war brewing somewhere, somehow. It's EVE, eve is war. Netto Celestial Fleet - We care.
Shirei	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:14:00 - [134] Who are you to decide what scale an alliance should have to be allowed to hold space? By your standards, about 90% of the people successfully holding space are incapable of doing so - yet miraculously continue to do so. Yes, if half the map gangs up for a while, they can take over a well-defended outpost without much resistance - big deal. All that means is that the entities doing so are playing the game to show off the numbers they can generate.. People who play the game for a challenge will tend to prefer keeping to smaller numbers and more regional conflicts. Since naturally, too big blobs tend to have a short attention span and dilute after a while - there will be enough space for both ways of playing for the forseeable future though.
Jayne Pendragon	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:39:00 - [135] The DAB guy is either very smart, very dumb, or very high. "Wispy fog on the moors?" ok dude :) pass the cr@ck pipe :)
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:42:00 - [136] Originally by: Netto If GIRON doesn't want to play the alliance warfare game that CCP has set up, they have options. One of those options is to choose the route that -5- took last year and become a mobile hostile entity with no particular claims. If all you guys want to do is have 30-80 fleet engagements, become mercs or whatever, don't try and hold space. Don't participate in the capital ship game if it's such a huge bore. No one is asking you to. Tired of the POS war? Don't have POS'. Don't like capital ships? Don't have things that require capital ships to blow up. Don't want things that require capital ships to blow up. There are a lot of options! And to those that think that if GIRON+Friends somehow vanish overnight, that there would be no war in eve... rofl. You guys are delusional. War will always be a war brewing somewhere, somehow. It's EVE, eve is war. Netto Your last assertion completely depends upon the definition of war which you conceded is nebulous. As it stands now, EVEN IF someone else COULD get 600 people (maybe possible if you pretty much crammed all of the active anti-BoB combat pilots into one system) no actual fighting could take place. So the best case "warfare" scenario that would ensue (with G/IRON in the picture) is that people are completely unable to defend anywhere. While one group of 600 pilots clogs a system and takes its PCS or Outpost another group of 600 pilots will do the same elsewhere and they will just trade stations until they cant be bothered to do it anymore or give up due to shear pointlessness. I think that most people would not consider that warfare so much as an out of control extrapolation upon the POS conflicts ATUK complained so much about. People want to actually shoot at each other and this kind of attack bassically precludes that possibility. At the same time, shooting each other results in very few lasting effects (usually). The ultimate question is how the balance will be struck between what people need to do in order to effect potential long duration changes (like taking stations and outposts) and what people want to do in order to have fun (shoot each other). The Enemy's Gate is Down
Netto	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:47:00 - [137] Originally by: Shirei Who are you to decide what scale an alliance should have to be allowed to hold space? By your standards, about 90% of the people successfully holding space are incapable of doing so - yet miraculously continue to do so. Yes, if half the map gangs up for a while, they can take over a well-defended outpost without much resistance - big deal. All that means is that the entities doing so are playing the game to show off the numbers they can generate.. People who play the game for a challenge will tend to prefer keeping to smaller numbers and more regional conflicts. Since naturally, too big blobs tend to have a short attention span and dilute after a while - there will be enough space for both ways of playing for the forseeable future though. I certainly don't care at what scale an alliance chooses to opperate, let alone assuming I can decide it lol. I'm responding to those who are saying current alliance level conflict is boring, unfair, whatever. All I'm saying is that if you don't have to play that way. The point being, there are options. If you want to have lots of enemies and attempt to hold space, GREAT! Good idea, but be prepared for all those things some people don't like.. pos wars.. camping.. laggy fleet battles, etc. etc. etc.. If you don't want all that crap that goes along with it, well then, there are options. Netto Celestial Fleet - We care.
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:49:00 - [138] Originally by: Netto Originally by: Shirei Who are you to decide what scale an alliance should have to be allowed to hold space? By your standards, about 90% of the people successfully holding space are incapable of doing so - yet miraculously continue to do so. Yes, if half the map gangs up for a while, they can take over a well-defended outpost without much resistance - big deal. All that means is that the entities doing so are playing the game to show off the numbers they can generate.. People who play the game for a challenge will tend to prefer keeping to smaller numbers and more regional conflicts. Since naturally, too big blobs tend to have a short attention span and dilute after a while - there will be enough space for both ways of playing for the forseeable future though. I certainly don't care at what scale an alliance chooses to opperate, let alone assuming I can decide it lol. I'm responding to those who are saying current alliance level conflict is boring, unfair, whatever. All I'm saying is that if you don't have to play that way. The point being, there are options. If you want to have lots of enemies and attempt to hold space, GREAT! Good idea, but be prepared for all those things some people don't like.. pos wars.. camping.. laggy fleet battles, etc. etc. etc.. If you don't want all that crap that goes along with it, well then, there are options. Netto You are really just belaboring the obvious rather than commenting upon it. The question is, generally speaking, whether the current system is actually a good one (presumably irrespective of what particular factions are able to take advantage of it). This is a similiar question to the POS sovereignty issue which was eventually addressed and changed. The Enemy's Gate is Down
King Leonidas	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:53:00 - [139] It's always kinda funny reading Baun's last 15 posts. Do you realise that you talk more about BoB than you do about anyone? King
Shirei	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:53:00 - [140] The game is balanced for medium/large-scale fights and territorial conflicts (including POS wars etc.) for maybe up to 150-200 people on each side during combat. When you start to get significantly above that (300-400+) - it becomes essentially a game of - whoever enters the system first wins - since there is no feasible way for the opposing side to enter the system without losing 50+% of their fleet while they are unable to load the system. So the attacker will essentially always win (since they can choose the time and place of attack freely and secure the system they choose to attack before the defender can react). The logical consequence of that the only really feasible choice of the 'defender' is attacking assets of the 'attacker' elsewhere - leading to an incredibly exciting game of remote station ping-pong.

Netto	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:57:00 - [141] Originally by: Baun Your last assertion completely depends upon the definition of war which you conceded is nebulous. As it stands now, EVEN IF someone else COULD get 600 people (maybe possible if you pretty much crammed all of the active anti-BoB combat pilots into one system) no actual fighting could take place. So the best case "warfare" scenario that would ensue (with G/IRON in the picture) is that people are completely unable to defend anywhere. While one group of 600 pilots clogs a system and takes its PCS or Outpost another group of 600 pilots will do the same elsewhere and they will just trade stations until they cant be bothered to do it anymore or give up due to shear pointlessness. I think that most people would not consider that warfare so much as an out of control extrapolation upon the POS conflicts ATUK complained so much about. People want to actually shoot at each other and this kind of attack bassically precludes that possibility. At the same time, shooting each other results in very few lasting effects (usually). The ultimate question is how the balance will be struck between what people need to do in order to effect potential long duration changes (like taking stations and outposts) and what people want to do in order to have fun (shoot each other). I agree with you for the most part Baun. That hasn't happened since.. well, late 2004? Lol! And I've said it before. The biggest hurdle for eve is the servers/code. It's the number 1 thing threatening EVE in the long run. I think this 600 pilot gang bang is an extreme circumstance and I really don't think we'll see this sort of thing again for awhile. The planets are in alignment, so to speak. I can see larger gangs being more and more common place but the 600 thing is a three headed giraffe, an oddity. My point was that GIRON aren't the last great opponents. There will always be more. That's all I was getting at. Netto Netto Celestial Fleet - We care.
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 22:58:00 - [142] Originally by: King Leonidas It's always kinda funny reading Baun's last 15 posts. Do you realise that you talk more about BoB than you do about anyone? King Do you realize that this is a post about a BoB lead attack and that more threads are created and more posts made about BoB then anyone else? I am mystified that you care more about what thread I post in than WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY. Do you have a comment on what I said or are you just the last in a long line of BoB/ATUK people who randomnly appear whenever I post to point out that I have posted? The Enemy's Gate is Down
Marechal Ney	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:01:00 - [143] Edited by: Marechal Ney on 03/04/2006 23:02:21 Originally by: Kraeze It's a game guys.... you lose some you win some. If they can keep 300-600ppl for fighting they should win, it's that simple. With the current game mechanics and limitations there is nothing we or CCP can change. I mean EC- is such an easy system to keep in control long enough to take a outpost, empire next door. Both parties are good in PVP so only numbers make a difference... if they wanted a fight they would have brought less numbers and less bubbles. But they are not, they want to keep their capitol fleet safe. I don't blame them, if we had those numbers the same thing would happen. It is a boring way of figthing for both sides, so live with it. Not that there is much fighting I can only hope it will get interesting later on...I don't like the whole POS wars thing anyway but it's there.. you hear me whine about it in every post? I've been reading all posts, pretty boring as usual, only this one kept my attention for a while and I'll say, well, if you don't have the numbers then surrender and go to empire, being so weak will only attract more ennemies on your back. Now looking at the map, I always find it funny to see so many carebears in Deklein and Fade while their hopeless 150 men gang shows up in Ewok. You're not commited to defend EC or your own land... you don't deserve to live there. I hope they will unleash the barbarians to further west to take all stations this time.
King Leonidas	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:05:00 - [144] Originally by: Baun Originally by: King Leonidas It's always kinda funny reading Baun's last 15 posts. Do you realise that you talk more about BoB than you do about anyone? King Do you realize that this is a post about a BoB lead attack and that more threads are created and more posts made about BoB then anyone else? I am mystified that you care more about what thread I post in than WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY. Do you have a comment on what I said or are you just the last in a long line of BoB/ATUK people who randomnly appear whenever I post to point out that I have posted? /me shrugs Just wondered if you knew. King
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:06:00 - [145] Originally by: Netto Originally by: Baun Your last assertion completely depends upon the definition of war which you conceded is nebulous. As it stands now, EVEN IF someone else COULD get 600 people (maybe possible if you pretty much crammed all of the active anti-BoB combat pilots into one system) no actual fighting could take place. So the best case "warfare" scenario that would ensue (with G/IRON in the picture) is that people are completely unable to defend anywhere. While one group of 600 pilots clogs a system and takes its PCS or Outpost another group of 600 pilots will do the same elsewhere and they will just trade stations until they cant be bothered to do it anymore or give up due to shear pointlessness. I think that most people would not consider that warfare so much as an out of control extrapolation upon the POS conflicts ATUK complained so much about. People want to actually shoot at each other and this kind of attack bassically precludes that possibility. At the same time, shooting each other results in very few lasting effects (usually). The ultimate question is how the balance will be struck between what people need to do in order to effect potential long duration changes (like taking stations and outposts) and what people want to do in order to have fun (shoot each other). I agree with you for the most part Baun. That hasn't happened since.. well, late 2004? Lol! And I've said it before. The biggest hurdle for eve is the servers/code. It's the number 1 thing threatening EVE in the long run. I think this 600 pilot gang bang is an extreme circumstance and I really don't think we'll see this sort of thing again for awhile. The planets are in alignment, so to speak. I can see larger gangs being more and more common place but the 600 thing is a three headed giraffe, an oddity. My point was that GIRON aren't the last great opponents. There will always be more. That's all I was getting at. Netto Netto I certainly agree that this scale won't be really common. It is, however, important to note (as you have) that the game is trending in that direction. To some extent trends are usually best typified by their extremes or at least are most easily examined through consideration of them. This attack presents us with just such an oppurtunity. I don't think I commented on it in this thread, but G/IRON are the only really large opponent against BoB/5/ASCN/others. Other larger groups might rise to fight along side them but BoB has historically been good at keeping their old enemies broken into smaller groups and closing ranks around one target at a time by forming a network of NAPs. If G/IRON were to go down (kind of funny that we bother considering this question when this is an attack on someone else's system) the only real place for a large opponent to rise from would be within BoB/5/ASCN's own ranks. I think that this is what people have been remarking on largely. The more interesting question though is about progression of game play styles and how this attack is really the first extreme example of the large scale lockdown of its kind. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:08:00 - [146] Originally by: King Leonidas Originally by: Baun Originally by: King Leonidas It's always kinda funny reading Baun's last 15 posts. Do you realise that you talk more about BoB than you do about anyone? King Do you realize that this is a post about a BoB lead attack and that more threads are created and more posts made about BoB then anyone else? I am mystified that you care more about what thread I post in than WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY. Do you have a comment on what I said or are you just the last in a long line of BoB/ATUK people who randomnly appear whenever I post to point out that I have posted? /me shrugs Just wondered if you knew. King Ya I did know that my last 15 posts were on this part of the boards, just like the 15 before that were probably spread between the Ships and Mods forum and the Game development forum and the 15 before that might all have been sales thread postings and bumps. I congratulate you on the ability to disingenously point out the obvious to the person most well acquainted with it. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:11:00 - [147] Originally by: Marechal Ney Edited by: Marechal Ney on 03/04/2006 23:02:21 Originally by: Kraeze It's a game guys.... you lose some you win some. If they can keep 300-600ppl for fighting they should win, it's that simple. With the current game mechanics and limitations there is nothing we or CCP can change. I mean EC- is such an easy system to keep in control long enough to take a outpost, empire next door. Both parties are good in PVP so only numbers make a difference... if they wanted a fight they would have brought less numbers and less bubbles. But they are not, they want to keep their capitol fleet safe. I don't blame them, if we had those numbers the same thing would happen. It is a boring way of figthing for both sides, so live with it. Not that there is much fighting I can only hope it will get interesting later on...I don't like the whole POS wars thing anyway but it's there.. you hear me whine about it in every post? I've been reading all posts, pretty boring as usual, only this one kept my attention for a while and I'll say, well, if you don't have the numbers then surrender and go to empire, being so weak will only attract more ennemies on your back. Now looking at the map, I always find it funny to see so many carebears in Deklein and Fade while their hopeless 150 men gang shows up in Ewok. You're not commited to defend EC or your own land... you don't deserve to live there. I hope they will unleash the barbarians to further west to take all stations this time. I think you have missed the point. No one cares whether G/IRON actually have the people "needed" to defend those systems the problem is that if they did have equal numbers and wanted to get into the system to defend it, it would be mechanically impossible. This problem is what I was examining Re: Netto a few posts above and it can (and should) be considered indepdendent of the circumstances of the current conflict. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Kcel Chim	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:13:00 - [148] Edited by: Kcel Chim on 03/04/2006 23:14:33 lets not mix up things here. On one hand we had a gamemechanic which was broken and not working as intended. The pos system. The system was modified to prevent further abuse and to generate a level playingfield regardless of timezones. On the otherhand we have the base rules of eve where to an extend numbers sooner or later outweighs minor differences in quality. A one time 600 ppl in one system event which might even hold a few days is not day to day business. For eve i guess it has the proportions of a worldchampion ships or an olympiade coming to town. From my pov i agree that "technical problems" like lag should never play a role. However the problem is not really down to the "numbers" one side brings but more down to the fact that at a certain fleetsize (100 guys per side maybe 200 nowadays) the game acts up. Sometimes for both sides and sometimes just for the side which jumps in. Which severly adds a luck or random factor to the side which dares to jump in. However i personally have met only a few enemies who can loudly complain about it because quiet honestly the majority of factions in eve rather try to sit it out and play on their terms. Pretty much why Iron wouldnt have jumped into a 160 or 200 ppl fleet either, nor did PA or FA ever. edit: shoot me for spelling and grammar but its too late and im too tired to fix it :D
Blacklight	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:14:00 - [149] Much as it pains me to say this but Baun's posts are definitely becoming a bit more balanced and genuinely "objective" these days Eve Blacklight Style
Baun	Posted - 2006.04.03 23:19:00 - [150] Right Focht. I am not contending that the POS system was not broken or that the fix employed was not a good one. Rather, I think that this question is the extension of the old problem. Before mechanics allowed very small numbers of people with few military assets to maintain control over areas by spamming lots of small POSs. Now mere logistical concerns such as reaching a certain number of combat pilots can a priore decide whether combat can take place. An attack is assured to be succesful simply due to have enough people to prevent an attack by a force of any size. This is a better situation than it used to be because its far more difficult to organize enough people to do this, but it still represents the problem of logistical concerns deciding the outcome a priore rather than allowing combat to do so. The Enemy's Gate is Down



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.