EVE Search - Battle Angels Press Release

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Battle Angels Press Release - Northern Patrols

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Dash Ripcock	Posted - 2006.04.05 09:22:00 - [1] PRESS RELEASE Within the next twenty-four hours, Battle Angels will begin to patrol the Tribute and Vale Of The Silent regions of zero-zero space. We shall be operating under a NBSI policy and making use of the current F-E/KAOS/5-friendly list. We ask that those on this list set us to positive in return. If you are neutral to us prepare to be engaged. Any queries regarding standings should be forwarded to myself or Kodos. Let's have some good fights ladies. See you in space. Save The Deimos
Jainy James	Posted - 2006.04.05 09:25:00 - [2] first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC...
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.04.05 09:27:00 - [3] Edited by: Ithildin on 05/04/2006 09:27:47 Neat. More BBQ up north. Good luck! Edit: oh, and in before Seleene! Yay! Arkanor > Gallente missileboat might be cool. KilROCK > Pod yourself till you got no skills.
wierchas noobhunter	Posted - 2006.04.05 09:42:00 - [4] gl
NAFnist	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:05:00 - [5] Cool, good luck
pershphanie	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:07:00 - [6] Edited by: pershphanie on 05/04/2006 10:08:38 Originally by: Jainy James first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... They wont be shooting each other. BA isnt to counter mc. its for the smacktalking riff-riff who like to act hard when they are in p3 and jump out when we send a fleet in.
D1ABOLIST	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:08:00 - [7] Hope you've got Fate. as positive
Jainy James	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:17:00 - [8] Originally by: pershphanie Edited by: pershphanie on 05/04/2006 10:08:38 Originally by: Jainy James first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... They wont be shooting each other. BA isnt to counter mc. its for the smacktalking riff-riff who like to act hard when they are in p3 and jump out when we send a fleet in. true, but if MC decide to venture north (not sure what their contract conditions are) would I be correct in assuming BA would be expected to engage them? not trying to troll, I just remember when BA nearly became a member of the MC :)
KIAEddZ	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:19:00 - [9] Things are warming up nicely. KIA Piccys
Dash Ripcock	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:33:00 - [10] Originally by: Jainy James Originally by: pershphanie Edited by: pershphanie on 05/04/2006 10:08:38 Originally by: Jainy James first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... They wont be shooting each other. BA isnt to counter mc. its for the smacktalking riff-riff who like to act hard when they are in p3 and jump out when we send a fleet in. true, but if MC decide to venture north (not sure what their contract conditions are) would I be correct in assuming BA would be expected to engage them? not trying to troll, I just remember when BA nearly became a member of the MC :) Mercenaries engaging other mercenaries benefits neither client, because within a few weeks they'll both be gone and the clients are back where they started. Save The Deimos

dalman	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:42:00 - [11] Edited by: dalman on 05/04/2006 10:44:02 Originally by: Dash Ripcock Originally by: Jainy James I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... Mercenaries engaging other mercenaries benefits neither client, because within a few weeks they'll both be gone and the clients are back where they started. TBH that's a whole lot of BS. You say: Quote: We shall be operating under a NBSI policy and making use of the current F-E/KAOS/5-friendly list. MC who is attacking your client i obviously not on it's friendly list. And they are inflicting damage on your client by their presence, even if they wouldn't kill ships. Hence you should obviously shoot them, otherwise you really have no integrity as a mercenary corp. The only other way to look at it is that you're saying it's pointless to hire a mercenary corp (the "they'll both be gone" part). So, if that's not what you're saying you're hereby losing any respect you had as mercenaries by not shooting MC. edit just to clarify... Not that you won't go hunting MC. But that you won't shoot if you get the opportunity. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
Jainy James	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:44:00 - [12] Originally by: dalman Originally by: Dash Ripcock Originally by: Jainy James I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... Mercenaries engaging other mercenaries benefits neither client, because within a few weeks they'll both be gone and the clients are back where they started. TBH that's a whole lot of BS. You say: Quote: We shall be operating under a NBSI policy and making use of the current F-E/KAOS/5-friendly list. MC who is attacking your client i obviously not on it's friendly list. And they are inflicting damage on your client by their presence, even if they wouldn't kill ships. Hence you should obviously shoot them, otherwise you really have no integrity as a mercenary corp. The only other way to look at it is that you're saying it's pointless to hire a mercenary corp (the "they'll both be gone" part). So, if that's not what you're saying you're hereby losing any respect you had as mercenaries by not shooting MC. pretty much my thoughts exactly tbh, unless the MC have been contraced to strictly stay in empire in which case this is a null point.
Dash Ripcock	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:49:00 - [13] Originally by: dalman Edited by: dalman on 05/04/2006 10:44:02 Originally by: Dash Ripcock Originally by: Jainy James I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... Mercenaries engaging other mercenaries benefits neither client, because within a few weeks they'll both be gone and the clients are back where they started. TBH that's a whole lot of BS. You say: Quote: We shall be operating under a NBSI policy and making use of the current F-E/KAOS/5-friendly list. MC who is attacking your client i obviously not on it's friendly list. And they are inflicting damage on your client by their presence, even if they wouldn't kill ships. Hence you should obviously shoot them, otherwise you really have no integrity as a mercenary corp. The only other way to look at it is that you're saying it's pointless to hire a mercenary corp (the "they'll both be gone" part). So, if that's not what you're saying you're hereby losing any respect you had as mercenaries by not shooting MC. edit just to clarify... Not that you won't go hunting MC. But that you won't shoot if you get the opportunity. Mercenaries are a tool wielded by the client. They are used for short periods of time to achieve an objective, in this case patrolling the Northern regions for those not on the Friendly list. Originally by: pershphanie Edited by: pershphanie on 05/04/2006 10:08:38 Originally by: Jainy James first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... They wont be shooting each other. BA isnt to counter mc. its for the smacktalking riff-riff who like to act hard when they are in p3 and jump out when we send a fleet in. In this example engaging the MC isn't required, and since doing so would benefit neither client in the long run due to the nature of mercenary contracts, there will be no hostilities between the two mercenary outfits. Save The Deimos
Jainy James	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:54:00 - [14] Originally by: Dash Ripcock In this example engaging the MC isn't required, and since doing so would benefit neither client in the long run due to the nature of mercenary contracts, there will be no hostilities between the two mercenary outfits. funny, engaging the biggest mercanary alliance that is currently contracted to kill your client as much as possible seems like a very good benefit to me. Of course, the people who hired the MC would be rather annoyed, but your job is to make FE happy, not them. oh well, each to their own. At the end of the day it's the client to sets the terms, not the merc corp.
Hyllekjeks	Posted - 2006.04.05 10:59:00 - [15] Just what eve needed. More corps that licks the back of bob, 5 and those. Lets join the blob train. Must be boring to be so weak. ---------------------------------------------- If your not part of the solution, your part of x13
Jainy James	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:00:00 - [16] Originally by: Hyllekjeks Just what eve needed. More corps that licks the back of bob, 5 and those. Lets join the blob train. Must be boring to be so weak. I believe merc corps generally "lick the back" of the person who is currently paying them loads of money to shoot stuff.
KIAEddZ	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:01:00 - [17] The simple fact is. For KIA to run the same contract as BA would cost an amount of isk, lets call that amount x. For KIA to run the same contract and take on a fellow Merc corp like MC, would cost x + z, where z = an added amount, probably if I am honest far in excess of x. So Persh spends x and gets the job he wants done, and deals with MC himself, or spends x+z and probably gets only half the actual job (clearence of Celeste and co etc from the pipe) he wanted done, at a much larger cost. Why you ask would KIA charge a significantly higher rate to hit MC over the "riff raff" (pershes words not mine). Simply MC pose a far larger threat then said riff raff, and hitting a brother, costs. Gl all involved. KIA Piccys
pershphanie	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:03:00 - [18] Originally by: Jainy James Originally by: pershphanie Edited by: pershphanie on 05/04/2006 10:08:38 Originally by: Jainy James first! I wonder what's gonna happen when BA meet the MC... They wont be shooting each other. BA isnt to counter mc. its for the smacktalking riff-riff who like to act hard when they are in p3 and jump out when we send a fleet in. true, but if MC decide to venture north (not sure what their contract conditions are) would I be correct in assuming BA would be expected to engage them? not trying to troll, I just remember when BA nearly became a member of the MC :) no. we asked BA not to engage MC. MC are our problem. BA are there to put all the jokers who like to jump in/out from p3 to obe back in their cages.
dalman	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:06:00 - [19] Originally by: Dash Ripcock Mercenaries are a tool wielded by the client. They are used for short periods of time to achieve an objective, in this case patrolling the Northern regions for those not on the Friendly list. In this example engaging the MC isn't required, and since doing so would benefit neither client in the long run due to the nature of mercenary contracts, there will be no hostilities between the two mercenary outfits. You're not making any sence. Your first part here obviously says that you should shoot MC whenever you stumble upon them. Your second part is just rabble that just doesn't make any sence at all. To take an example: Industrial corp A hires mercenaries to protect the outpost they're building. Industrial corp B hires mercs to destroy the outpost egg. You telling me that these 2 mercs shouldn't fight eachother cause it doesn't benefit the clients? - Yes, this was an 'extreme' example, but the same applies to 'all' situations. Of course it benefits the client that you shoot other mercs when you stumble upon them. To say anything else is just complete rubbish. In your specific situation here I guess you told the client in the negotiations that you wouldn't take the contract if you couldn't have MC blue. But why don't you state that in your release from the start? And you could as well officially state that you won't take any contracts against MC. That too kinda questions whether you can be seen as 'true' mercenaries but is at least a more fair and respectable position... Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
KIAEddZ	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:10:00 - [20] Edited by: KIAEddZ on 05/04/2006 11:15:40 As i stated previously, I expect they gave 1 price for contract NOT including mC, and 1 price for contract including MC. From Pershes pov, he wants a particular job done, and that job wouldnt get done if MC were a further distraction/complication. You see BAs ability to negotiate a No Fire Policy with MC as a negative, Persh and any potential employer sees it as a positive. Try to think a little outside the box Dalman. Merc Corps work differently, MAss do things their way, and probably in this situation wouldnt be the ideal Mercenary Outfit to hire, BA do things thier way, and in this situation have the ability to discount MC fom the planning, and Persh sees the opportunity to get the job he needs done.... done. KIA Piccys

TIO 101	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:11:00 - [21] Edited by: TIO 101 on 05/04/2006 11:14:09 cough
LoxyRider	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:18:00 - [22] So whats up with the banner you guys uploaded to eve-files? -----
Seleene	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:22:00 - [23] Originally by: LoxyRider So whats up with the banner you guys uploaded to eve-files? Dash... did you steal Hugh? This could get ugly... - Who is the MC? Watch!
pershphanie	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:23:00 - [24] Originally by: KIAEddZ Edited by: KIAEddZ on 05/04/2006 11:11:17 As i stated previously, I expect they gave 1 price for contract NOT including mC, and 1 price for contract including MC. Actually it wasnt really discussed. Mercs are hired for several reasons not necessarily just as a 'help me im being attacked' panic button. We could hire every merc in eve and it still wouldnt change the fact that MC are attacking us. There are just certain things that merc corps like BA or KIA are much better and can do more efficently than large alliances. I mean I guess we could send FE fleets and dedicate them 24/7 to camping our choke points and chasing down solo intercepters. However it was thought over and decided that it was a better use of our resources to outsource that job so we can put our resources to other projects.
pershphanie	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:24:00 - [25] Originally by: TIO 101 Edited by: TIO 101 on 05/04/2006 11:14:09 cough anyone else see the irony in an alt posting a picture of a chicken?
Seleene	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:25:00 - [26] Dalman, here - try the new M.C. Ham, Pepperoni, and Cheese Sandwich. It will take your mind off of all this nonsense. Move along... nothing to see here. - Who is the MC? Watch!
KIAEddZ	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:25:00 - [27] Edited by: KIAEddZ on 05/04/2006 11:25:23 Originally by: pershphanie Originally by: KIAEddZ Edited by: KIAEddZ on 05/04/2006 11:11:17 As i stated previously, I expect they gave 1 price for contract NOT including mC, and 1 price for contract including MC. Actually it wasnt really discussed. Mercs are hired for several reasons not necessarily just as a 'help me im being attacked' panic button. We could hire every merc in eve and it still wouldnt change the fact that MC are attacking us. There are just certain things that merc corps like BA or KIA are much better and can do more efficently than large alliances. I mean I guess we could send FE fleets and dedicate them 24/7 to camping our choke points and chasing down solo intercepters. However it was thought over and decided that it was a better use of our resources to outsource that job so we can put our resources to other projects. ^^^^ Horses Mouth :) KIA Piccys
Cmd Woodlouse	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:26:00 - [28] Originally by: Seleene Dalman, here - try the new M.C. Ham, Pepperoni, and Cheese Sandwich. It will take your mind off of all this nonsense. Move along... nothing to see here. Thats it! FFS im on a diet -------------------------------- Darkness and humanity.
dalman	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:30:00 - [29] Edited by: dalman on 05/04/2006 11:35:27 Originally by: KIAEddZ As i stated previously, I expect they gave 1 price for contract NOT including mC, and 1 price for contract including MC. From Pershes pov, he wants a particular job done, and that job wouldnt get done if MC were a further distraction/complication. You see BAs ability to negotiate a No Fire Policy with MC as a negative, Persh and any potential employer sees it as a positive. Ok, look here: FE hires BA to deal with Obe gate. BA goes camp that gate with 10 ships. In jumps 3 MC ships on their way up to go kill FE. I think BA killing them would help their client. If that results in MC sending their fleets to hunt BA instead of FE, obviously BA won't get the job there done. But from the client's POV this 'nullify' the contracts - they pay roughly the same ISK to get rid of MC as someone paid to put MC there. And the only one losing at that is the one who hired MC to attack FE. Provided that's not the same same 'riff riff' - which I don't know. And even if it is, one of the clients would win and one lose at having BA and MC fighting each other. So, to say that mercs won't attack other mercs cause it doesn't benefit the client is just a whole lot of bull**. Originally by:** KIAEddZ Try to think a little outside the box Dalman. Merc Corps work differently, MAss do things their way, I would say that BA are very much in the style of MC/KIA in the way they handle their business. Heh, I either don't have to or already do... So, you can consider my posts here as much as a rant vs KIA/MC as BA. Cause that you don't want to fight each other is alot of bogus and really disqualifes you from being pure mercs. Exactly the same way that I have zero respect for 'pirate' corps that don't shoot at others "cause they're 'pirates' as well" - they're supposed to shoot whatever they find when the opportunity comes. Originally by: Seleene Dalman, here - try the new M.C. Ham, Pepperoni, and Cheese Sandwich. It will take your mind off of all this nonsense. Move along... nothing to see here. Hmm, that ended the discussion. I'm going for lunch. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
KIAEddZ	Posted - 2006.04.05 11:33:00 - [30] KIA would engage MC or BA, and I can assure you Vice Versa, if the money was right. But if engaging MC means that the primary role of our contract wouldnt be fulfilled to the standard that is expected, then it would make no sense, and KIA MC and BAs ability to communicate with each other, is a huge benfit. KIA Piccys



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: 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.