EVE Search - C-J6MT Siege News, day 1.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

C-J6MT Siege News, day 1.

» 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] 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
YZAAR Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:58:00 - [211] Edited by: YZAAR on 07/08/2006 11:59:12 Originally by: Pastora Will GMs reimburse our POSes/ships, because you are actively using addressbook exploit?
Hardin Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2006.08.07 12:10:00 - [212] It's Stalingrad in space! ------------------------------ Hardin's Blog (BACK UP!)
LTD THOR Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.07 12:16:00 - [213] Originally by: Hardin It's Stalingrad in space! m8.. you suck RLY! My 1st video : =RED WARS-The Beginning= ;)
Gunship Amarr FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 13:02:00 - [214] Fact: One battle does not loss or win the war. I think defending a POS is easier than attacking one. I think lag does make it harder to get the force you need in order to do the job. I think if downtime was move to 18:00 eve, or did not exist it would move the ballance. I think it's a game for me and work for others. I think we should all have a beer and chill So you want to join us?
Hardin Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2006.08.07 13:10:00 - [215] Originally by: LTD THOR Originally by: Hardin It's Stalingrad in space! m8.. you suck RLY! Thank you for that constructive and witty reply. I am not quite sure why my lighthearted comment seem to have upset you so - as it was merely intended as a non-critical observation. If it has caused you offence for some inexplicable unknowable reason then I apologise wholeheartedly as I do not go out of my way to deliberately upset anyone except terrorist Minmatars and pirates. ------------------------------ Hardin's Blog (BACK UP!)
Obivan Efa The Machines	Posted - 2006.08.07 13:46:00 - [216] Originally by: Gunship I think if downtime was move to 18:00 eve, or did not exist it would move the ballance. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!1111 U rocks dude!! DT is a russian exploit for sure - the only thing prevents Coalition's victory... Lol ____________________________ Die, but perish! - viking's war-cry
Rover Vitesse Gallente Crisis Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:07:00 - [217] Originally by: Obivan Efa Originally by: Gunship I think if downtime was move to 18:00 eve, or did not exist it would move the ballance. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!1111 U rocks dude!! DT is a russian exploit for sure - the only thing prevents Coalition's victory... Lol You are such an RA fanboi I would be embarressed if I were in RA. Cheerleaders should be left on the sidelines. However, here is my personal opinion, delivered in a grown-up, thought out, concise manner. Right then, what's happening with C-J6MT? Lets look at a few facts. In order to take down these "Death-Star" POS that RA have placed requires a MASSIVE amount of Capital Ships. To protect these ships, you need a fairly large support fleet. Add into this that RA want to defend these POS (and get a few Capital Kills at the same time), and that means one thing. LOTS of people in one system. There is no way around this simple fact. Now, we all know that the server simply can't cope with the amount of hardware and pilots we are trying to cram in. There is no point in saying "take less ships", because the job just wouldn't get done. We cannot simply blockade the system and starve the POS out; jump drives have taken that option away from us. RA are smart. They know what they are doing and how best to achieve their aims. Therefore, the tools are simply not in the game for us to remove RA from C-J6MT, and all we are succeeding in doing is losing more capital ships for no net gain. Until either POS are changed in some way, to make it easier to remove them with less ships, or a random hardened state, or just something that enables the attackers to use less ships (and therefore less lag), things aren't going to change. I guess what I am trying to say is that C-J6MT is at a stalemate. The Coalition have the willing but not the tools to finish the job. RA have the willing and the defenders advantage on their side. Facts, not rumours, chest-beating or fanboi-ism. Have a nice day. Rovers Chronicles
La Tortura Infinite Style Incorporated Chorus of Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:17:00 - [218] To the all the pilots from so-called "Coalition" who propose some changes to POS'es here. Unfortunatelly you guys suggest and demand to/from CCP all wrong things... well, less lag isn't wrong, but that's all. You ask for "to make it easier to remove them with less ships, or a random hardened state, or just something that enables the attackers to use less ships (and therefore less lag)" etc etc etc. It wouldn't work. It probably will be worse for yourself, than for RA. What you really should demand from CCP is that these restrictions, like less POS hitpoints or random outofreinforcedstate are to be applied only to RA poses, but not to yours. This way you probably will happily win this war. -- ignorance is bliss
2Shae Finite Horizon	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:17:00 - [219] Right i dont want to cause a flame but, when you've got alliances like LV who are well experianced and genrally have been a very good pvp force in the past combined with complete idiots like KOS, who like to scream for their lives in local chat when they're being killed and get more people killed because of it, its a complete recepie for disaster. Good pvpers especially on this scale come from experiance, LV + RA have that experiance and the losses on those sides are about equal, however this "coalition (omg lets make the overview pretty colours)" style alliance apparently isnt working for them. I'd be willing to bet that if LV went back to the way they attacked FIX when they first formed, they'd do a much better job. Without a doubt there are good alliances and corps in this war but when you combine with nubs its just makes the good guys with the **** friends look bad and the underdogs look great. At the end of the day some of the alliances / corps in the coalition need to learn how to fight on this scale and the tides might start changing, but without that your going to continue to suffer humiliating losses (and i dont care whether it was the pos or not, you died, nuff said.) Hopefully soon things will start changing, i want to see some real fights between LV / -V- and RA and less of this clay pigeon shooting that RA have been fed.
Fargas Minmatar RUS Academy Red Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:20:00 - [220] actually, in that specific situation coalition had all chances to win. But for some strange reason their commander didnt used our mistakes. Lucky day. klik, .... davno pora

Obivan Efa The Machines	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:24:00 - [221] Originally by: Rover Vitesse You are such an RA fanboi I would be embarressed if I were in RA. Cheerleaders should be left on the sidelines. Actually I'm playing EVE for a long time but have never feel any special love to RA... quite the contrary.. because of different motives.. But RA vs. Coalition activities are making me RA's true fan And those Coalition member comments always make me laugh... We need to do a selection of such comments for our scions. ____________________________ Die, but perish! - viking's war-cry
Rover Vitesse Gallente Crisis Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:27:00 - [222] Originally by: La Tortura To the all the pilots from so-called "Coalition" who propose some changes to POS'es here. Unfortunatelly you guys suggest and demand to/from CCP all wrong things... well, less lag isn't wrong, but that's all. You ask for "to make it easier to remove them with less ships, or a random hardened state, or just something that enables the attackers to use less ships (and therefore less lag)" etc etc etc. It wouldn't work. It probably will be worse for yourself, than for RA. What you really should demand from CCP is that these restrictions, like less POS hitpoints or random outofreinforcedstate are to be applied only to RA poses, but not to yours. This way you probably will happily win this war. Way to misquote and pull everything out of context. I was offering solutions to enable the tides of war to turn both ways. If there is simply NO WAY to remove an entrenched defender note: I said NO WAY, not VERY HARD, then don't you agree that something is wrong? I made a well structured and intelligent post; if you can not or will not reply in like manner, then you may as well not bother replying at all. Remember, THINK !, TYPE!, READ AGAIN! and then hit the POST REPLY! button. Rovers Chronicles
La Tortura Infinite Style Incorporated Chorus of Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:41:00 - [223] Originally by: Rover Vitesse Way to misquote and pull everything out of context. Nothing was misquoted, nothing was pulled out of context as well. Quote: I was offering solutions to enable the tides of war to turn both ways. Nope, you tried to find a way to make things easier for you, to be able to take CJ. You don't care about, say, XZH, H-W or latest Catch conflict, as you don't want to look on to these examples of succesfull for atackers POS wars. Yes, indeed, it is hard to beat out a strong enemy from his last system, but don't you think that it is supposed to be so? So that dedicated group of players have to be able to defend the last system against superior forces for some time? Quote: If there is simply NO WAY to remove an entrenched defender note: I said NO WAY, not VERY HARD, then don't you agree that something is wrong? Of course there are ways to do it, you just don't aware of them. If you don't know something it doesn't mean that the "something" does not exist. If you never saw say an elefant, go to a zoo and take look on it. Quote: I made a well structured and intelligent post; if you can not or will not reply in like manner, then you may as well not bother replying at all. Remember, THINK !, TYPE!, READ AGAIN! and then hit the POST REPLY! button. Don't be so nervous, man. Easy. And think yourself before you post. You looks too bitter in spite of all your tries to not to make your posts "well structured". I would strongly suggest you look around, out of RA-LV conflict and "think" about it. -- ignorance is bliss
Beyond Horizon Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.07 14:57:00 - [224] Originally by: Rover Vitesse Originally by: La Tortura To the all the pilots from so-called "Coalition" who propose some changes to POS'es here. Unfortunatelly you guys suggest and demand to/from CCP all wrong things... well, less lag isn't wrong, but that's all. You ask for "to make it easier to remove them with less ships, or a random hardened state, or just something that enables the attackers to use less ships (and therefore less lag)" etc etc etc. It wouldn't work. It probably will be worse for yourself, than for RA. What you really should demand from CCP is that these restrictions, like less POS hitpoints or random outofreinforcedstate are to be applied only to RA poses, but not to yours. This way you probably will happily win this war. Way to misquote and pull everything out of context. I was offering solutions to enable the tides of war to turn both ways. If there is simply NO WAY to remove an entrenched defender note: I said NO WAY, not VERY HARD, then don't you agree that something is wrong? I made a well structured and intelligent post; if you can not or will not reply in like manner, then you may as well not bother replying at all. Remember, THINK !, TYPE!, READ AGAIN! and then hit the POST REPLY! button. Mkay, what makes you think you are the ones who should do the "removing" thingie ? We ain't whining when we fail to outblobb you to take a system, now are we? Only your coalition from the whole EVE are DEMANDING some POS changes ... you should think about it for a moment... - BH
Tieger Gallente FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 15:31:00 - [225] Originally by: La Tortura Of course there are ways to do it, you just don't aware of them. If you don't know something it doesn't mean that the "something" does not exist. If you never saw say an elefant, go to a zoo and take look on it. So tell me then, what would YOU do? Taking down those POS whit firepower isn`t a solution even if we can yield the numbers. You cant blockade the system either since fuel can be brought in whit jumpdrives. Should we camp all those (hundreds?) of systems surrounding C-J for 23/7 for weeks in order to intercept that cyno-field the fuel carriers use? I guess it IS possible (in theory anyway). The question is, is this extensive efforts reasonable when compared to the objective; destruction of a couple of large POS in a single system run by a handful of pilots?
Marneous Calgar	Posted - 2006.08.07 15:45:00 - [226] The other problem is that while we may have 10K or whatever of pilots as members of the alliance the only members who are actually doing anything are the PVP'ers others are just mining away in 0.0 or empire. A lack of greater support of the infrastructure within the Coalition is something that is a great hinderence. RA has been winnnowed down to the players who are highly dedicated so they are able to reduce this problem. Once the Coalition can get the infrastructure going, mining corps mining to support the manufacturing corps building ships/mods/ammo and PVP'ers shooting away things might improve. Only problem with that is that people need to give more to their corp or whatever to do all this and thats completely dependant on how the person is.
La Tortura Infinite Style Incorporated Chorus of Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.07 16:25:00 - [227] Originally by: Tieger Originally by: La Tortura Of course there are ways to do it, you just don't aware of them. If you don't know something it doesn't mean that the "something" does not exist. If you never saw say an elefant, go to a zoo and take look on it. So tell me then, what would YOU do? Taking down those POS whit firepower isn`t a solution even if we can yield the numbers. You cant blockade the system either since fuel can be brought in whit jumpdrives. Should we camp all those (hundreds?) of systems surrounding C-J for 23/7 for weeks in order to intercept that cyno-field the fuel carriers use? I guess it IS possible (in theory anyway). The question is, is this extensive efforts reasonable when compared to the objective; destruction of a couple of large POS in a single system run by a handful of pilots? I would suggest you leave LV and join one of more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. -- ignorance is bliss
Obivan Efa The Machines	Posted - 2006.08.07 16:34:00 - [228] Originally by: La Tortura I would suggest you leave LV and join one of more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. Leaving LV and joing RA maybe? ____________________________ Die, but perish! - viking's war-cry
Tieger Gallente FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 17:00:00 - [229] Originally by: La Tortura I would suggest you leave LV and join one of more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. Thats very tempting offer, but no thanks. If you have a working solution for the liberation of heavily fortified C-J, something the coalition hasnt tried or considered yet, just eve mail it to me and i`ll pay you 5 isk. I wont be holding by breath though.
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.07 17:14:00 - [230] Edited by: Plutoinum on 07/08/2006 17:22:49 Originally by: La Tortura I would suggest you leave LV and join one of more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. It depends on the defender. I assume that the defender knows how to defend, how to setup and operate a battle pos for maximum advantage and that he has a competent fleet available for that purpose, operates with carriers in that pos to fight the dreads and their support fleet and so on. If you think that we never took out battle poses, you are blatently wrong. But the pos war has evolved and the defenders get better in it. Although we were able to take out several large battle pos in JLO in 28y (correct me, if I'm wrong) with 6-7 dreads with a rather simple system lock-down, the tactics have improved and it doesn't work anymore. Those times I thought: "Wow, 7 dreads, what a lot of fire power". Well, actually there were already some hardened pos, were 6 dreads had already problems. Then a few months ago in C-J with up to 17 dreads, we shot a bunch of large poses in reinforced mode and destroyed some, but under heavy losses. First day was ok, but slow progress, second day ended in another lag disaster with 4 or 5 dreads lost, 3 in one engagement. Then the problem, when the dread come out of siege mode, get into trouble and server is almost dying. Now in C-J yesterday it was probably the best organized and equipped pos attack that we did so far. If we had had that a few months ago we would just have 'pwned' every RED system with it, because they weren't so experienced in pos tactics, but yesterday it didn't work and we reached a limit. I think we are at the point, where you can't beat an experienced defender with the proper experience. First you kill the node and lose your ships. I don't think that anyone suggests to shoot more than a dozen large towers into reinforcment, when it means that you lose 4 or 5 capitals and a bunch of BS on each single pos and then you have to do it all again, when the pos come out of reinforcement. The effort and the costs are just not reasonable to kill a pos that's maybe defended by maybe 40 people, who know what they are doing. (Don't know how many they actually were.)

Zigadenus M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 17:51:00 - [231] The key limiting factor is the lag. If it were not for the lag, the system would probably be acceptable. But when >75% of significant losses (capital ships) is entirely lag related, then something needs to change. ________________________________________________ Kyle > Why do you have to ask me all these complicated questions? Zerodragon > Dude, IÆm trying to save your setup from complete suckage.
Rover Vitesse Gallente Crisis Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 17:59:00 - [232] Originally by: La Tortura snip! Which just proves your failure to understand the issues we are dealing with here. I'll break it down into little chunks, to make it easier for you to understand. 1)The POS are hardened and defended so much that at least 15 Dreads are required to take them down in a reasonable timescale. FACT. 2)The system has been blockaded for such a long time the only feasible way RA can refuel the towers is by jumping Capital ships in; impossible to blockade against. FACT. 3)When fielding Capital ships, you have to provide cover against the defenders, or you may as well write them off. FACT. 4)When the defenders of the POS attack the Capital fleet, you have to try to defend your Capital ships. This will ALWAYS be at the enemy POS. Lots of capitals+Lots of support+Lots of defenders=LAG. FOR BOTH SIDES. Even the RA guys in this thread have said so. FACT. 5)There comes a point where it is simply not worth it to use your capital ships, because they are simply not going to take down the RA POS. FACT. I have taken part on more POS takedowns than I care to remember. Back in the day it was possible to do it in a reasonable timescale with Battleships. As the science of POS ownership has improved, it has got to the stage where a dedicated team can keep a POS running indefinately, with little risk to themselves apart from a few Battleships when the attacking Capital fleet turns up. Those are the facts, if you don't want to believe me, then nothing I say will make you change your mind. Rovers Chronicles
ching'sta Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.07 18:20:00 - [233] The coalition got more cannonfodder meaning they dont care really. They win and take space anyway. Ra got less players thats why they play more intense and skilled they have to be sharpen when dealing with massive numbers like that and the coalition dont. anyway thats what a noobie like me think.
Yazoul Samaiel Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.07 20:15:00 - [234] Originally by: Obivan Efa Originally by: Gunship I think if downtime was move to 18:00 eve, or did not exist it would move the ballance. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!1111 U rocks dude!! DT is a russian exploit for sure - the only thing prevents Coalition's victory... Lol "Dont argue with the Idiot sicne he will drag u down to his level and beat you up with experience " Guys it is useless to argue with a fanboi realy ! "What ever that doesn't Kill me just makes me stronger"
Hessi The Forsakened Companions	Posted - 2006.08.07 22:50:00 - [235] Originally by: La Tortura Originally by: Tieger Originally by: La Tortura Of course there are ways to do it, you just don't aware of them. If you don't know something it doesn't mean that the "something" does not exist. If you never saw say an elefant, go to a zoo and take look on it. So tell me then, what would YOU do? Taking down those POS whit firepower isn`t a solution even if we can yield the numbers. You cant blockade the system either since fuel can be brought in whit jumpdrives. Should we camp all those (hundreds?) of systems surrounding C-J for 23/7 for weeks in order to intercept that cyno-field the fuel carriers use? I guess it IS possible (in theory anyway). The question is, is this extensive efforts reasonable when compared to the objective; destruction of a couple of large POS in a single system run by a handful of pilots? I would suggest you leave LV and join one of more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. I seriously hope you are not refering to your "friends" in D2 here, because then this would be the fastest try to rewrite EVE history. D2 was not able to take a single player defended GS POS down during the whole XZH campaign, the best they managed was to put some into reinforced. The only POSses they destroyed before the fighting stopped was a POS that was caught during anchoring and POSses in Fade that were not defended. D2 bought XZH by putting more than 40 Large POS up in a 80 moon system, a definite victory, but don t claim things that just didn t happen please.
Luna Negra FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.08 06:18:00 - [236] Originally by: La Tortura more successfull alliances that had done the similar jobs - had taken out defended enemy POS'es - in the last few weeks. They'll gladly show you how this boring work could be done. I think we will hire you to do the job to back up your claims? Gravity you win again!
La Tortura Infinite Style Incorporated Chorus of Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.08 07:49:00 - [237] Originally by: Luna Negra I think we will hire you to do the job to back up your claims? Man, no offence, I know that nerves on the both sides are still tensed, but you've just shown a perfect case of the functional illiteracy - a case when people are able to read written text but aren't able to understand it's meaning. You shouldn't hire _me_, I'm just a modest casual "afterwork" player. You should hire those who have done the job, and there are the examples of the job being done. Haven't got thru all that other gevalt posted above. Too many lettars. I just want to remind Coalition pilots, remind them one more time, that almost all major siege operations in the EVE had come to the end with the bitter loss of the defending side. One way or another. So even if POS warfare favors the defender - and it should, think you all would agree with me - it seems that it doesn't favor devender hard enough. And that CJ case is an exception from the rule but not the rule itself. The CJ case shows only that Coalition forces are stronger than RA, but still not enough strong to be able to strike a long and successfull offensive operation on the system which has all opponent's resources allocated to it. And looking on the fact that the Coalition has 10:1 against RA total, and 3:1 on the CJ battlefield, the next conclusion should be that the quantity is't plain equal to the "force" in EVE. Also the Coalition didn't want to sacrifice part of their real life for the game, for example take a week off to raise their ranks in RA favour time to kiil POS'es put into reinforced. I perfectly understand the Coalition in it tho, as I wouldn't do it myself as well. But seems like the RA core is willing to trade some of they life for the victory in the game, and that gives them another advantage. Good luck to both sides. Think you'll never be sorry about the time spend in this game. -- ignorance is bliss
Rexthor Hammerfists Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.08 08:05:00 - [238] la turtura, would u say d2 isnt stronger then goonswarm?, because s2 couldnt shoot down their pos`s for pretty similiar reasons. - Purple Conquered The World, We the Universe.
Tieger Gallente FinFleet Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.08 08:20:00 - [239] Originally by: La Tortura stuff Ignorance is a bliss, indeed. Why dont you go over the replies to your claims one more time? Originally by: La Tortura So even if POS warfare favors the defender - and it should, think you all would agree with me - it seems that it doesn't favor defender hard enough. True, bigger fleets should be needed to take em down. I mean theres virtually no lag in POS "battles" as it is. And whats whit the comment that the coalition doesnt have enough dedication to fight RA? p7, anyone? Really, letting something like that out from your mouth just shows how little you know about the situation.
el Bodak Varsity Corsairs	Posted - 2006.08.08 08:29:00 - [240] Originally by: La Tortura You shouldn't hire _me_, I'm just a modest casual "afterwork" player. In one sentence you've succeeded in eroding every last grain of credibility that might have existed in all of the arrogant critique and commentary you've posted so far, and there's no shortage there. Well done! Originally by: La Tortura You should hire those who have done the job, and there are the examples of the job being done. So I guess everyone should start ignoring anything you have to say on the matter as well, since you clearly don't know wtf you're on about.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: 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.