| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
   |
Posted - 2006.09.07 22:09:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 07/09/2006 22:11:17
It was certainly interesting.
EST and their allies did not field enough numbers to lock the system down (it has 5 gates after all), which enabled about 50 ISS with several carriers to jump in support of U'K.
At this point the dreads went into hiding, and EST and their allies left their gatecamps. There was a roaming sniper group which would appear from time to time, but as I type no dreads are in action and it would seem that U'K and those who would oppose an outpost in the hands of EST have prevented any large POS from being knocked into reinforced.
No doubt things will get more interesting over the coming days.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.08 09:40:00 -
[2]
To anyone claiming ISS isn't being neutral... get a grip will you.
The entities who are attacking the U'K station are HOSTILE to ISS. They shoot us, and have done for a long time.
ISS is NOT neutral toward people who shoot us, we are HOSTILE toward those who shoot us. But, crucially... we didnt fire first.
If the EST and friends were actually clever about this, and thought ahead, they would not have shot ISS previously. That way, we would not be hostile toward you and would not be assisting U'K.
But don't flame us for 'lack of neutrality' when YOU are the ones who have been shooting at us for as long as I can remember.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.08 13:26:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: DB Preacher
Originally by: zoolkhan
Edited by: zoolkhan on 08/09/2006 13:09:23
We cannot broadcast the tactical details here
You may want to use secured channels.
Surely you could give an honest opinion of the hostile forces arrayed against you and what they are up to without comprimising your own tactical abilities?
dbp
Put it this way... you can't safely deploy dreads (they have 7) against hardened large arty based Deathstars without locking a system down first.
They don't have the numbers to lock a 5 gate system down. If they deployed the dreads again there is a very good chance they would lose at least some of them.
I don't see this going anywhere to be honest, but it's certainly interesting to watch.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.08 16:00:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Audrea
Sure, if ISS was just another alliance like the rest, that wouldnt be exceptional, but they claim to be neutrals.
As I've already told you, ISS are not neutral toward The Establishment, we are hostile toward them.
Repeat after me... 'hostile'
The reason we are hostile is because they choose to 'pew pew' at us. Do you understand now?
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.08 22:15:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Emeline Cabernet
Edited by: Emeline Cabernet on 08/09/2006 19:22:33
noone remembers c.o.c.k. taking over iss's outpost down there a few months ago?
That was our fault really, an internal mess-up led to Sov dropping. C.OCK deployed a dread which we popped.
Today, ISS and U'K have popped another of their dreads, and an Archon.
I'm looking at ISSN losses totalling two frigates from our action so far today. Its been great fun so far, and we sincerly thank our opponents for a smack-free fight.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.08 23:48:00 -
[6]
Originally by: dalman
The argumentation for re-imbursement on that would be;
The unity/iss guys had all activated their stuff on the dread before lag struck. Without lag, our fleet could swiftly have taken out much of the ships/fighters activated on the dread, to a level where it could tank the damage. Now we couldn't lock or do anything.
I'd expect a big 'NO!' stamp on a petition responce though :/
I can confirm that ISS experienced huge lag on warp in to the POS. It personally took me several minutes to load, weapon activations took 30 seconds. All of our gang members experienced this. I only got a few rounds off on the Dread we called primary.
I understand the lag was about equal on both sides. Its a shame.
However, we assigned nearly 100 fighters to that dread. A dread in seige mode CANNOT tank that kind of DPS. Yes, the lag was bad on both sides, but the sheer DPS on that dread ensured it was going down whatever happened.
We were about to pop a second dread before the node crashed. We ran our calculations prior to the assault. We knew we could do it. It worked.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 00:26:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Audrea
Edited by: Audrea on 09/09/2006 00:22:02
Originally by: Butter Dog
However, we assigned nearly 100 fighters to that dread
lol, that must have been largely responsible for the lag hehehe
how many carriers was that? 9-10?
PS: Nevertheless, try to petition it like Dalman said. there is nothing to loose by trying.
About that many. Remember, ISS are in the business of running public outposts. We think a lot about how to kill dreads :)
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 09:45:00 -
[8]
I might remind our foes that the lag and node crash saved their second dread, which was entering structure when the node crashed.
You didn't lose your first dread because of lag. You lost it because you deployed it in a system with 100 ISS and U'K, who were waiting for dreads to be deployed so they could pop them. It was a tactical faux pas.
Now, perhaps we should petition CCP to remove the second dread from the game, seeing as the only thing which saved it was a node crash?
I'm not being serious about that of course, just making a point. Do remember the lag works both ways, and the node crash certainly prevented the loss of a second Revelation 
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 13:30:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 09/09/2006 13:35:05
Your DPS calculations are way off.
You won't get perfect hits all the time, and you have to take native resists into account.
Trust me, I've tried killing fighters with sniping BS many times. Its hard work. 30 seconds? No way. Not unless you get VERY lucky.
Looking at the logs it took us just about 2 minutes to pop the dread. There was *nothing* you could have done to save it, lag or no lag.
Edit: As an example, a templar has well over 8000hp plus native resists. Your hits will be 'mixed' from scratches upward. You're looking at a minute or two, possibly more, per fighter. And how many sniping BS did you have?
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.09.09 17:14:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Audrea
The thing is, through use of 9-10 carriers sitting inside POS shields, with frigs sending off fighters on primary dread, and then either hide inside the shields as well (not sure if this is still possible, but think it is), or just keep warping between 2-3 cans distanced further than 150km.
The problem with this tactic, is that the defenders no longer have slight advantage, but they have total upperhand, making their looses minimal at worst, and none at best.
The balance is tipped now, can you name one possible system, for which it would make sense sacrificing over half dozen dreads at least, for every POS which is taken down?
You could say the same if the defenders were sitting in the shields with 50 neuting nanodomi's. Certain death for the dread they target.
However, the key point here is that, as I mentioned way back in this thread, to seige a system you need to do just that - seige it. This involves locking down all gates, bubbling the station to hell and back, and preventing enemy forces getting in cynofuel/neuting battleships/etc.
All the time you don't have force superiority in a system, its going to be almost impossible to take down large, well armoured POS. That is in effect what they tried to do. They paid the inevitable price.
|
| |
|