EVE Search - ASCN/AXIOM piracy in ISS soveriegn space

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

ASCN/AXIOM piracy in ISS soveriegn space

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Divorce	Posted - 2006.05.31 01:58:00 - [31] Are you serious. You are in 0.0 You know you are set to -5.0 to ASCN/AXE You warp your hauler into some AXE You Get ganked/killed/what ever You come on forums and cry about it If I was in your alliance I would feel so ashamed right now.
Murphy	Posted - 2006.05.31 02:01:00 - [32] If ISS doesn't like it maybe they shouldn't have setup an outpost on OUR travel route that we've been using for 2+ years, Or maybe they should have consulted us before they setup an outpost on OUR travel route. Like CYVOK said, we're not going to stop shooting hostiles. It's not our problem, It's ISS's for putting that outpost in our way. And no you're not going to get reimbursed. If you don't like us shooting you then you should talk to your alliance mates that decided to shoot at us when we were still blue to them.
Z0MBlE	Posted - 2006.05.31 03:09:00 - [33] Edited by: Z0MBlE on 31/05/2006 03:09:38 Originally by: CYVOK ASCN & AXE will shoot all players with hostile standings reguardless of ISS local policies. Just because ISS has an outpost in that system dosen't mean your safe in it. Cyvok - Thank you for the clarification from the ACSN side of things. To be honest I would have been dissapointed if it were anything less. I would also greatly appreciate the name of the designer for your standings page if possible. I also have the ISS point of view and so the clarification is complete. Even if both sides don't agree. Thank you all for your time and in-put. Those of you who thought this was about a T1 hauler full of ammo really might want to spend a little more time in 0.0
Rick Hunter	Posted - 2006.05.31 03:29:00 - [34] Edited by: Rick Hunter on 31/05/2006 03:29:45
CYVOK	Posted - 2006.05.31 03:30:00 - [35] Originally by: Afrodite Etnellag Originally by: CYVOK ASCN & AXE will shoot all players with hostile standings reguardless of ISS local policies. Just because ISS has an outpost in that system dosen't mean your safe in it. Huh? so you demand your blues that travel your space not to shoot their enemys, ( they are allowed to shoot your enemys only ) But hey you have docking rights, lets see how you 'll feel when you docking rights go I am a shareholder of ISS and i will demand the rules to apply on all Tata 1) I bet my left Arm ASCN owns more shares in ISS then anyone in EvE. 2) If they deny us docking rights and become hostile to ASCN I have a universal key to permenantly solve that issue.
CYVOK	Posted - 2006.05.31 03:31:00 - [36] Originally by: Z0MBlE Edited by: Z0MBlE on 31/05/2006 03:22:24 Edited by: Z0MBlE on 31/05/2006 03:09:38 Originally by: CYVOK ASCN & AXE will shoot all players with hostile standings reguardless of ISS local policies. Just because ISS has an outpost in that system dosen't mean your safe in it. Cyvok - Thank you for the clarification from the ACSN side of things. To be honest I would have been dissapointed if it were anything less. I would also greatly appreciate the name of the designer for your standings page if possible. I also have the ISS point of view and so the clarification is complete. Even if both sides don't agree. The bottom line being that NBSI policy will always control movements in 0.0 regardless of attempts to civilize a zone. I'm not saying the ISS utopian idea to colonize 0.0 isn't a high ideal to have. Just that it only works until a force with apathy to your cause comes along and enforces its own NBSI policy anyway. As its not enforceable you should repeal the ISS law and allow us to shoot whomever our standings dictate in these space zones. Thank you all for your time and in-put. Those of you who thought this was about a T1 hauler full of ammo really might want to spend a little more time in 0.0 NP. The Author is Microsoft Excel, myself and a couple other ASCN memebrs keep it updated.
Myranda Phoenix	Posted - 2006.05.31 03:55:00 - [37] Quote: 1) I bet my left Arm ASCN owns more shares in ISS then anyone in EvE. Then you above all should respect ISS sovreignty and charter rules to ensure maximum business profits for ASCN. But then again this also puts any claim of ISS neutrality in the toilet.
Steel Rat	Posted - 2006.05.31 04:26:00 - [38] Yes I had a conversation with an ISS representative complaining about AXE shooting people in their systems. 2 things came mind during this: 1. Why is luna lookin at nakid pictures of me? Cyvok's the cute 1 :P 2. Did I ask for this outpost in the middle of my travel route without even a reach around? So suddenly because ISS is a "neutral party", they feel they can put an outpost where ever they want and screw the rest of us? Let alone, I do not see them with a "concord" style navy that sits in these systems 24/7 to make sure my people don't get shot. 0.0 is hostile. Deal with it. Want some namby pamby NPCs to protect your butt, go back to empire. AXE has no beef with ISS with regards to their ships moving about but AXE pilots will shoot hostiles pilots in whatever system they please.
Tuijabird	Posted - 2006.05.31 04:49:00 - [39] Well I would say man up ISS. It's right there in your rules and regulations. So envoke your penalties on to Axe. Maybe this is just another side of ISS being so neutral? So neutral that they allow their rules to be broken and stepped on by certain alliances? Also a thought, I was traveling through Ec- a few days ago and came back through today. I noticed the same band of pirates camping the gate killing everything. So if they can't handle 5-6 gate camp pirates in Ec- then how can anyone feel safe with these guys? Sounds overall like ISS has some work to do on their image. Either that or just bend over and take it like a champ from now on. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: A rolling stone gathers no moss
Darth Maule	Posted - 2006.05.31 04:49:00 - [40] Intresting there hasnt been any response from ISS.Any one who goes against their policies in their controled systems should have docking rights removed .
Malken	Posted - 2006.05.31 04:55:00 - [41] /me thinks that the day that ISS denies ASCN/AXE docking/travel rights is the day that ASCN/AXE gets a new outpost. dont tickle the big sleeping bear to much, it might wake up and be really **ed. Quote:** [05:17:46] Obiareus > freindlies dock or safespot [05:17:51] Obiareus > YOU CANNOT WIN
Bluehaze joe	Posted - 2006.05.31 05:41:00 - [42] Now, if there is an outpost on the path between The Shire and Empire, directly on the path, then it is the Hobbits right to protect themselfs. If they run a convoy with pipe-weed, or hunt down renegade orc's, then anything showing up not blue or green, whould have a hard time. ISS have no way of forceing ASCN to do anything. The stations are 2 jumps from the Shire, and the POS's whould find itself in reinforced in a mather of hours, and we are then talking, all, of them. ISS know this, and ASCN know this. I can not understand why LV, ASCN and AXE allow that ISS base to sit there in the middle of theire highway in any way shape or form. I guess it is because it is just a few jumps from CURSE, and people can stock up for an attack from there just as easy as from ISS station. However. The minute that ISS's neighbours, no longer have any 'use' for ISS as neighbours, then ISS will be gone from that neighbourhood. Small enteties like RAT. and S.A.S or BE, ISS have no problem putting on the **list. Doing so with half of your neighbourhood, and you find that the **list have 2 sides. ISS should have no problem with this.
CYVOK	Posted - 2006.05.31 07:09:00 - [43] Far be it for me to dictate regional policy to ISS, but if I were them I would enfore standards on a regional basis. In the north the major power is D2, I would haev no problem with ISS doing what they need to do to keep D2 "happy". In the South we have ASCN, HF & LV and ISS needs to reconize where they stand with us. In 0.0 their really is no such thing as total neutrality. If your going to live next to someone one's back yeard you best keep the dog off their lawn. I personally like the concept behind ISS and I think most other Alliance do also. We all want more stations in 0.0. All ISS really needs to do is maintain their outposts, friend, foe or pirate they will get their buisness as long as they respect regional politics. -CYVOK-
Seleene	Posted - 2006.05.31 07:17:00 - [44] While I agree with Cyvok's post (you should be kind to thy neighbors with 40+ dreads), can you imagine the standings confusion within ISSN? You'd almost have to set up "Regional" Rules of Engagement based upon where they were operating from. "Okay, today we're shooting ASCN because it will make D2 happy." "Okay, today we're shooting D2 because it will make ASCN happy." - History of the MC movie!
Helmut 314	Posted - 2006.05.31 07:35:00 - [45] This is quite interesting actually. I can buy ISS shares in a large quantity and then ignore the rules set up by ISS in their sovereign systems without consequences ? Is that official ISS policy ? In that case, has that been approved by ALL your shareholders ? JHENR is recruiting. __________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson
Coahim Madden	Posted - 2006.05.31 08:06:00 - [46] Originally by: Seleene While I agree with Cyvok's post (you should be kind to thy neighbors with 40+ dreads), can you imagine the standings confusion within ISSN? You'd almost have to set up "Regional" Rules of Engagement based upon where they were operating from. "Okay, today we're shooting ASCN because it will make D2 happy." "Okay, today we're shooting D2 because it will make ASCN happy." They have done this already.. ascn never could dock in the northern ISS outposts. ------- Theres 2 kinds of people in the world. 1. Those that need closure
Malachon Draco	Posted - 2006.05.31 08:11:00 - [47] Originally by: Helmut 314 This is quite interesting actually. I can buy ISS shares in a large quantity and then ignore the rules set up by ISS in their sovereign systems without consequences ? Is that official ISS policy ? In that case, has that been approved by ALL your shareholders ? First of all, how shares generally work is that you don't need every shareholder to agree. If I have a single share, I don't get veto-power. All ISS has to do is keep a majority of its shareholders happy. Secondly, you should read the other responses more carefully. Its not about 'right' or 'wrong'. ASCN reserves itself the right to enforce its policies within a certain distance of ASCN territory. And unless ISS is strong enough to go against that, that ASCN policy can and apparently will be enforced even in ISS systems close to ASCN space. If you don't like it, you can try to get ISS shareholders to vote on it, and if a majority supports you, I guess ISS will try to do something about it. And if you want to enforce your own standings in ISS space, just like ASCN, all you have to do is get a big enough force so that ISS will respect your decisions. As Seleene pointed out, being able to deploy 40+ dreads with corresponding support should be enough. Good luck with that.
Helmut 314	Posted - 2006.05.31 08:29:00 - [48] Edited by: Helmut 314 on 31/05/2006 08:29:23 Oh I fully appreciate the "might makes right" argument. Perfectly logical. Its just interesting to see how much of a cuckold ISS really is. ISS has a quite arrogant attitude on the forums in many issues, but when it comes to policing their own space they bow and step aside if the right people frowns... JHENR is recruiting. __________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson
Malachon Draco	Posted - 2006.05.31 08:59:00 - [49] Originally by: Helmut 314 Edited by: Helmut 314 on 31/05/2006 08:29:23 Oh I fully appreciate the "might makes right" argument. Perfectly logical. Its just interesting to see how much of a cuckold ISS really is. ISS has a quite arrogant attitude on the forums in many issues, but when it comes to policing their own space they bow and step aside if the right people frowns... Actually, that makes perfect sense if you consider ISS a company, which it certainly claims to be. War can be very profitable, unless you're a target. They are looking out for the interests of their shareholders by avoiding becoming a target. If you are a ISS shareholder, you should be thankful for them for being pragmatic enough to think about when it is smart to enforce their own rules, and when its better to look the other way.
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2006.05.31 09:37:00 - [50] I'd like to remind all of you of the actual wording of the Rules of Engagement for our outposts systems (I realise it differs from the perception most people have): 16. Who won't be able to dock at the station? To begin with, all pilots and corporations can dock at the outpost. Pilots, corporations or alliances will be set to -ve standings and incur either penalty surcharges or denied docking privileges for the following: - Committing acts of piracy regularly in the outpost system and neighbouring systems resulting in a major disruption of trade - Committing acts of aggression towards the ISS including: - Declaring war on the ISS - Accepting or Initiating Mercenary contracts against the ISS - Setting -ve standings towards the ISS - Declaring ISS alliance pilots KOS (Kill on Sight) As you can see there are no contradictions or problems re. ASCN and the current situation. Everyone are entitled to their own private opinions on ASCN, but as far as we are concerned they have never been pirates, nor have they been cause of recurrent disruptions of trade around Marginis (like our friends in RAT for example ). This being said, ISS operate in a very volatile environment and we have to respect the sensibilities of our largest neighbours (and clients). We knew this before we built the first outpost. For example: Months ago, I told Cyvok that ASCN would not be allowed to dock in Borealis because G-Alliance (D2) objected. Borealis opened a new flank into D2 which they were concerned about considering their ongoing wars with the southern alliances. Cyvok gracefully accepted that: D2 is our largest potential client up there and Cyvok understood D2 would have security concerns about ASCN etc. We are grateful for the inherent support of ISS that this attitude conveys and if similar situations crop up in the future we hope others will be as forward thinking as ASCN. So, the answer is that no, we are not going to deny ASCN or any other southern alliance not openly hostile to ISS docking rights in the southern outposts. As for the shareholders point of view, cutting off ASCN from the outpost would remove 70% of the customers. I'm sure they wouldn't want that regardless. ISS is not out to save the world. We like to promote development of 0.0 but we cannot prevent wars from happening. We can, however, try to help out traders coming to our public outpost systems, do our best to limit random pirating but we cannot guarantee peoples safety 24/7 and that goes for all the outposts. To IAC and CC: I know you both operate under a slightly different interpretation of the ROE in Marginis than is stated above. Contact me if you would like to discuss it. Chairman, ISS
dralid	Posted - 2006.05.31 09:50:00 - [51] Edited by: dralid on 31/05/2006 09:50:40 Let me get this straight ... so if CC is shooting a hauler in ISS space, they are OMGWTFBBQPWNED, but its all ok if ASCN does it? And, if I shoot on an enemy in ASCN space, I am violating their rules, but how can I accept their rules if they themselves don't accept local rules? I think its a double standard here (and don't get me wrong, any good CC hauler is a dead CC hauler) and undermines the credibility of standings and local rules as such. -- All lies!
Tuijabird	Posted - 2006.05.31 10:11:00 - [52] Originally by: Count TaSessine I'd like to remind all of you of the actual wording of the Rules of Engagement for our outposts systems (I realise it differs from the perception most people have): 16. Who won't be able to dock at the station? To begin with, all pilots and corporations can dock at the outpost. Pilots, corporations or alliances will be set to -ve standings and incur either penalty surcharges or denied docking privileges for the following: - Committing acts of piracy regularly in the outpost system and neighbouring systems resulting in a major disruption of trade - Committing acts of aggression towards the ISS including: - Declaring war on the ISS - Accepting or Initiating Mercenary contracts against the ISS - Setting -ve standings towards the ISS - Declaring ISS alliance pilots KOS (Kill on Sight) As you can see there are no contradictions or problems re. ASCN and the current situation. Everyone are entitled to their own private opinions on ASCN, but as far as we are concerned they have never been pirates, nor have they been cause of recurrent disruptions of trade around Marginis (like our friends in RAT for example ). This being said, ISS operate in a very volatile environment and we have to respect the sensibilities of our largest neighbours (and clients). We knew this before we built the first outpost. For example: Months ago, I told Cyvok that ASCN would not be allowed to dock in Borealis because G-Alliance (D2) objected. Borealis opened a new flank into D2 which they were concerned about considering their ongoing wars with the southern alliances. Cyvok gracefully accepted that: D2 is our largest potential client up there and Cyvok understood D2 would have security concerns about ASCN etc. We are grateful for the inherent support of ISS that this attitude conveys and if similar situations crop up in the future we hope others will be as forward thinking as ASCN. So, the answer is that no, we are not going to deny ASCN or any other southern alliance not openly hostile to ISS docking rights in the southern outposts. As for the shareholders point of view, cutting off ASCN from the outpost would remove 70% of the customers. I'm sure they wouldn't want that regardless. ISS is not out to save the world. We like to promote development of 0.0 but we cannot prevent wars from happening. We can, however, try to help out traders coming to our public outpost systems, do our best to limit random pirating but we cannot guarantee peoples safety 24/7 and that goes for all the outposts. To IAC and CC: I know you both operate under a slightly different interpretation of the ROE in Marginis than is stated above. Contact me if you would like to discuss it. lol thanks for pointing that you are not neutral and that you are now bent over handing lube back. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: A rolling stone gathers no moss
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2006.05.31 10:14:00 - [53] Originally by: dralid Edited by: dralid on 31/05/2006 09:50:40 Let me get this straight ... so if CC is shooting a hauler in ISS space, they are OMGWTFBBQPWNED, but its all ok if ASCN does it? Please read my post. Chairman, ISS
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.05.31 10:38:00 - [54] Edited by: Goberth Ludwig on 31/05/2006 10:38:49 Originally by: dralid Edited by: dralid on 31/05/2006 09:50:40 And, if I shoot on an enemy in ASCN space, I am violating their rules, but how can I accept their rules if they themselves don't accept local rules? this is how: Originally by: standings page The members of these Alliances have TRAVEL RIGHTS ONLY in ASCN Territory. Abuse of this privilege will result in their loss. - Gob [IXC] Admiral Goberius
Pride NL	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:02:00 - [55] Originally by: Seleene While I agree with Cyvok's post (you should be kind to thy neighbors with 40+ dreads), can you imagine the standings confusion within ISSN? You'd almost have to set up "Regional" Rules of Engagement based upon where they were operating from. "Okay, today we're shooting ASCN because it will make D2 happy." "Okay, today we're shooting D2 because it will make ASCN happy." Its hard to be in ISSN, as you are caught in rules, pride, charter and politics.
Pride NL	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:05:00 - [56] Originally by: DTee Edited by: DTee on 31/05/2006 01:08:51 Originally by: Pride NL Originally by: Z0MBlE I would like a clarification and ruling on a recent event. While undocking and subsequent run to ZXIC gate I was attacked and podded by an AXIOM force in KDF. I had announced my presence in local as an ISS law abiding friend and pilot. As I left from a market (Badger II) run at ISS Marginis (KDF) where I sell merchandise I spotted a small gate camp of Axiom at the ZXIC gate. I had previously checked the ASCN standing board. AWSOME board Celestial Horizon has put together there by the by. Anyway the board showed them ISS friendly. Per ASCN standings post as a -5 target I am subject to being hunted. Per ISS law attacks upon NAP'd haulers in they're sovereign space is considered piracy and those of us considering ourselves friends are NOT expected to initiate hostilities there. 1.Does ASCN/AXIOM wish to ammend the posted standings change rules? Was this an unmarked warzone and do ASCN/AXIOM recognize ISS rules for friendlies in they're space? 2.Will ISS ammend they're rules and allow NAP'd alliances to pursue personal standings in ISSN protected space? Can we then prosecute targets freely in KDF/ZXIC? Will the ISSN take a position on this small event with ASCN/AXIOM and get me reimbursement for my ship and cargo? I must admit I find the whole situation rather amusing. All those of you who profess non-NBSI policies lets hear how this would work? I just sell ammo to NPC hunters so the hauler and contents are of little total value. However the political possibilities of this event are most interesting. To my knowledge, all systems with ISS stations in it are DMZ for everyone, including blues. And also, ISS should react on these events, according to their charter anyhow. This is offtopic but nice try on ripping off the dice sigs funny thats smiliar to a sample i saw. You do need more practise though. The original looks awesome I think you should just go buy that. p.s. Its not cool to get someone to make you a sample and then go rip it off :( The ship renders are owned by CCP and noone else, so hush now crybaby. The one that created this signature told me i could use it. And dont just whine, give it some support by evidence, i bet you cant find it as its originally created by a Shinra member And use evemail, posting offtopic makes us both look bad. kthnxbye.
Uther Doull	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:11:00 - [57] i'll just add that these signatures are made by an shinra member from scratch, except for the ships obviously. and i'll also add that it's pretty hard to make a 3d sig with ship models in it that doesn't resemble the dice sigs (wich are awsome :P)
Ku'Gras	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:42:00 - [58] Interesting discussion, at least for someone who have not been following ISS closely. Seems how ISS conducts their business one step more transparent. "Might > Policy" but as "Isk > Neutrality" it's in the interest of the significant parties involved to keep it this way. People having any objection against this would be people saying "principles > increased business" or "the minority > the mayority". The losing team would of course be the less powerful part of the minority who depends on this ISS outpost. No big surprise here and I hope the thread starter is not surprised by this either but initiated his actions to receive confirmation. Seems like ISS do a difficult balancing pretty good.
Butter Dog	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:48:00 - [59] Edited by: Butter Dog on 31/05/2006 11:51:25 Originally by: Troye Originally by: Z0MBlE I must admit I find the whole situation rather amusing. All those of you who profess non-NBSI policies lets hear how this would work? I just sell ammo to NPC hunters so the hauler and contents are of little total value. However the political possibilities of this event are most interesting. A hauler gets shot down by a PvP gang with -5 standings and this has political implications? It does, because ISS systems are a DMZ, and regardless of standings you should not engage anyone else in ISS Outpost systems. This is the simple fact, Axoim were in the wrong here. If you want the benefits of a free trade outpost, shooting whatever ISS customers you please isnt the best way of going about it. ------------------ I'm a 'liberated PvPer'
Raznarok	Posted - 2006.05.31 11:55:00 - [60] Originally by: Steel Rat 1. Why is luna lookin at nakid pictures of me? Cyvok's the cute 1 :P I dont know bout that handsome...

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