Originally by: Coby Descent

---

Wish I'd been around to see that. Glad to hear the conflict continues smack-free

---

Originally by: Ange1

---

Edited by: Ange1 on 08/09/2006 23:18:41

I believe the Dread died to pure firepower, probably would've died lagged or not. Could be wrong though.

---

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 :/

---

Originally by: Butter Dog

---

However, we assigned nearly 100 fighters to that dread

---

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.

---

Originally by: Pylse

---

... give more power to 9UY =P

---

Originally by: Butter Dog

---

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.

---

Originally by: Pylse

---

I bet you had warp in lag aswell, but the difference lies in that we had our lag happening WHILE you were shooting the dreads.

---

Originally by: dalman

---

Edited by: dalman on 08/09/2006 23:12:24

Originally by: Coby Descent

---

Wish I'd been around to see that. Glad to hear the conflict continues smack-free

---

To see what? The node-crash? Cause that was really all ppl saw in the lag.

/me ponders if he should petition the 273 rounds of faction ammo that has magically dissappeared.

load other ammo during warpin fire one round server goes boom find yourself with the old ammo type magically in guns and the one you loaded just gone

Oh, and this server performance really is bad. Hard to call it 'huge'; We had 60-70 pilots, and local was at 160-something (dunno how many of those were active unity/iss/whatever). It's really embarassing that the server can't handle that when it's kind of a 'small' engagement for what's usually 'required' by the stupid POS mechanics

---

Originally by: Verone

---

Oh btw, Hi Rho, my sexeh Amarrian man ♥

---

Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists

---

Dalman
"A sniping BS fleet can almost kill off all your 100 fighters in a minute.
Or down a whole lot of your battleships while you're shooting the dreads, in such a way that the isk loss is 'equal' on both sides."

i doubt that, since u cant call a primary, and pickin the right fighter uder a hundred is kinda impossible.
means u got bs shoot random fighters which tank single bs for quiete a while,
and in that time the enemie force can shoot ur bs`s.

a pretty good strategy iss has there.

---

Originally by: Butter Dog

---

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 :)

---

Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists

---

i doubt that, since u cant call a primary, and pickin the right fighter uder a hundred is kinda impossible.

---

Originally by: Audrea

---

Fair enough, you came up with very good tactic to stop any dread attacks. each carrier has 9 fighters or something, and many more to replace them in its fighter bay.

I doubt CCP thought of this sort of use for carriers when they planned them out, because the way you use them, renders any POS assaults impossible:

All you need is hardened deathstar POS, 9-10 carriers, and the lag will take care of the rest (especially since fighters arent affected by the lag).

---

Originally by: Seleene

---

Originally by: Audrea

---

Fair enough, you came up with very good tactic to stop any dread attacks. each carrier has 9 fighters or something, and many more to replace them in its fighter bay.

I doubt CCP thought of this sort of use for carriers when they planned them out, because the way you use them, renders any POS assaults impossible:

All you need is hardened deathstar POS, 9-10 carriers, and the lag will take care of the rest (especially since fighters arent affected by the lag).

---

Lag? Who gives a **** about lag, m8? Lag or no lag, OF COURSE that's what you're going to use carriers for. It was the entire point of assigning fighters in teh first place.

You're correct - if you attack a POS that I'm defending, prepare to see 8-10 carriers pop up inside of it at some point, many of which will be launching not nine, but more like 13-14 fighters each. Lag or no lag, whatever the carrier FC calls as a target is going to die rather horribly fast.

What ISS is doing isn't just smart - it's common sense.

As to Dalman's 'sniping at fighters' thing, he's not completely wrong, nor is Butter Dog. I think the truth is somewhere in teh middle of their respective arguments. The problem is, obviously, that until the servers can handle the kind of tactics they are describing... we'll probably never know.

---