Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Calisto Lockhart
Minmatar Stormriders Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 12:10:00 -
[91]
like other people have said, while your doing your own very unbalanced counting of costs, all those mercs costs added in plzkthxbai
Stormriders |
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 12:21:00 -
[92]
Regardless of who did what, I think it's in the interest of ISS to stop this war asap. They have shown that trying to take one of their outposts wouldn't be a walk in the park, and they should try to keep it as that and use diplomacy for the rest.
ISS's model is based on the assumption that ISS is a neutral entity, that won't help non-neutral alliance and that has no enemies besides pirates. But this conflict is putting a lot of strain on that model. They got help from a fair number of alliances, including some that travelled a fair distance to do it (Fix), they sent mercs not only against IAC but also against all the entities that might help them. Said entities aren't likely to still consider ISS as a neutral power, and given how easy it is to infiltrate ISS with alts to harm an alliance playing host to ISS, they will be persona non grata for a lot of people. Already been by Bob and others, and it will happen again.
If ISS continue like that, soon or late no alliance will permit it to enter their territories, which will put them in the position of a territory-owning alliance around their outposts, wether they want it or not, with all the risks that it implies...
This is my views, not the one of my alliance, rabble rabble... ------------------------------------------ Every ship has a base 60-70% resist against the primary damage type of the race that is the least able to vary it's damage types. |
Crozon
Crozon Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 12:29:00 -
[93]
Originally by: n sx If you could guarantee a 1v1 IAC vs ISS, we would have our wish
Originally by: n sx ISS is a business ideal, not a PVP alliance.
Hmmm....it all becomes clear. Someone was looking for some easy ganks against a "business ideal".
|
Admiral Fridge
The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 12:31:00 -
[94]
Isn't a Moros a mining barge!? I'd better start training for a titan then, the ultimate mining vessel.
*lights his sigar and starts reading again*
_______________
|
Silvestri
FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:14:00 -
[95]
Is ISS's POS in JBY in reinforced?? When and if we really add costs of pos's and stuff....don't forget to add all the pos's in f4 and the one in jby your gonna lose. I think an alliance like ISS belongs up north....it's just to shooty shooty down here....
|
Cicilus Hadrican
Caldari Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:27:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Shadowsword Regardless of who did what, I think it's in the interest of ISS to stop this war asap. They have shown that trying to take one of their outposts wouldn't be a walk in the park, and they should try to keep it as that and use diplomacy for the rest.
ISS's model is based on the assumption that ISS is a neutral entity, that won't help non-neutral alliance and that has no enemies besides pirates. But this conflict is putting a lot of strain on that model. They got help from a fair number of alliances, including some that travelled a fair distance to do it (Fix), they sent mercs not only against IAC but also against all the entities that might help them. Said entities aren't likely to still consider ISS as a neutral power, and given how easy it is to infiltrate ISS with alts to harm an alliance playing host to ISS, they will be persona non grata for a lot of people. Already been by Bob and others, and it will happen again.
If ISS continue like that, soon or late no alliance will permit it to enter their territories, which will put them in the position of a territory-owning alliance around their outposts, wether they want it or not, with all the risks that it implies...
This is my views, not the one of my alliance, rabble rabble...
ISS stated in like two different threads that they are no longer neutral, they only serve their shareholders (as it should be) and they are in no way influenced by the political atmosphere. I remember being corrected by ISS that they are still neutral until later others stated otherwise to the contradiction.
Both sides can only spin a story so far before someone or others contradict something.
I'm sorta confused in this.
Hell in one post Butter Dog states that they own nothing and see what the "share-holders" do when you seriously threaten their outposts.
Well ok Butter. Isn't it ISS'es duty to protect said assets? I mean if I was a shareholder I would be dishing alittle money out to help said defense cause.
To simply say that ISS doesnt care (which I sorta get that from that post) would shake my belief as a shareholder in ISS competence in the Business handling of my paid for assets.
Everyone knows (or knew) that investments into ISS projects were a sure bet money maker. Its also known that ISS makes excellent money on said projects as well. Now if it comes down to me pitching money in every week or so in defending my paid for assets, or even spending a bil here or there for mercs, I would start questioning my belief in my future projects. Hell I may even look into selling my shares and possibly cut my loses before they do become losses. Isn't it ISS'es job to protect the assets by any means necessary. Can I get a link to the new ISS Chater so I can re-educate myself?
But this war is still early, and I honestly dont know what a single share in ISS outpost in Catch fetches before and after the war. But I garentee there is probably a couple of shareholders ****ed right now on how things are looking. Then again I been wrong before...
|
Smagd
Encina Technologies Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:43:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Calisto Lockhart like other people have said, while your doing your own very unbalanced counting of costs, all those mercs costs added in plzkthxbai
Oh come on, next someone will add Merc damage done / received. Let's please not go there. Stats are all as fake as you need them to be anyway. --
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:44:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 29/12/2006 13:56:39
Originally by: Silvestri Is ISS's POS in JBY in reinforced?? When and if we really add costs of pos's and stuff....don't forget to add all the pos's in f4 and the one in jby your gonna lose. I think an alliance like ISS belongs up north....it's just to shooty shooty down here....
1) ISS don't even have a POS in JBY 2) Knocking POS out would require you to move your dreads outside dock range and commit them to large deathstars... something many people are very keen on seeing you do
I wonder how many of your dreads can tank 200 fighters for longer than about 30 seconds?
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:46:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Maria Ravenwind Why haven't we recieved an answer from Butters about the isk spent of mercs?
Huh???
We only hired MC and Veto.
We got F4 in return.
Pretty good return on investment, I'd say.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:51:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Cicilus Hadrican
ISS stated in like two different threads that they are no longer neutral, they only serve their shareholders (as it should be) and they are in no way influenced by the political atmosphere. I remember being corrected by ISS that they are still neutral until later others stated otherwise to the contradiction.
Both sides can only spin a story so far before someone or others contradict something.
Actually that was more because ISS was getting bored with the 'OMG NOT NEUTRAL' ranting every time ISS did something that someone else didn't like. Most especially those with something to gain by attacking ISS, and calling a counter move 'not neutral'. Typically this would be pirates getting miffed at ISS ships breaking up their gate camps.
|
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 13:55:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Cicilus Hadrican
ISS stated in like two different threads that they are no longer neutral, they only serve their shareholders (as it should be) and they are in no way influenced by the political atmosphere. I remember being corrected by ISS that they are still neutral until later others stated otherwise to the contradiction.
Both sides can only spin a story so far before someone or others contradict something.
I'm sorta confused in this.
Hell in one post Butter Dog states that they own nothing and see what the "share-holders" do when you seriously threaten their outposts.
Well ok Butter. Isn't it ISS'es duty to protect said assets? I mean if I was a shareholder I would be dishing alittle money out to help said defense cause.
To simply say that ISS doesnt care (which I sorta get that from that post) would shake my belief as a shareholder in ISS competence in the Business handling of my paid for assets.
Everyone knows (or knew) that investments into ISS projects were a sure bet money maker. Its also known that ISS makes excellent money on said projects as well. Now if it comes down to me pitching money in every week or so in defending my paid for assets, or even spending a bil here or there for mercs, I would start questioning my belief in my future projects. Hell I may even look into selling my shares and possibly cut my loses before they do become losses. Isn't it ISS'es job to protect the assets by any means necessary. Can I get a link to the new ISS Chater so I can re-educate myself?
But this war is still early, and I honestly dont know what a single share in ISS outpost in Catch fetches before and after the war. But I garentee there is probably a couple of shareholders ****ed right now on how things are looking. Then again I been wrong before...
Well, lets see.
1) IAC declare ISS -10 on the back of some very strange reasons (market pvp, lol) 2) IAC refuse to rule out taking ISS outposts 3) IAC lose the F4 outpost in response 4) The fight is now over the F4 outpost, not shareholder-funded outposts
So I'd say that ISS have done a pretty good job of pro-actively protecting shareholder assets.
And of course, if shareholder assets are directly threatened ISS would actively protect them. Just don't be suprised if the shareholder alliances turn up too.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
n sx
The Tidemark Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:01:00 -
[102]
Edited by: n sx on 29/12/2006 14:00:47
Originally by: Butter Dog
1) ISS don't even have a POS in JBY
1 Large Minmatar Tower, owned by The Flying Daggers <ISS>
I suppose that's the POS you forgot about when you sieged every IAC POS in system, with your dreadfleet. Oh .... and you weren't taking that station right?
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:02:00 -
[103]
Originally by: n sx Edited by: n sx on 29/12/2006 14:00:47
Originally by: Butter Dog
1) ISS don't even have a POS in JBY
1 Large Minmatar Tower, owned by The Flying Daggers <ISS>
I suppose that's the POS you forgot about when you sieged every IAC POS in system, with your dreadfleet. Oh .... and you weren't taking that station right?
lol, whats that POS doing there
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
Khermine Baddenash
Sehmy Trading
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:06:00 -
[104]
In spite of all bluster of both sides the IAC is in the predominance in their war against ISS.
a - Easy slaughters. ISSN can suppress activity of the pirate and with the aid of the rest of ISS to create speedbump effective that maintains to an aggressor behind, but to be incapable of the sustained war and the situation until the equipped fleets T2 battleships. This will have been a critical factor in the decision of the IAC to send almost unprovoked attacks.
b - Little dangerous of the revenge. The ISS is mentally, logistically and technician incapable to mount an offensive war succesful - it can use the alliances of the mercenario for that, but the number of the alliances of the mercenaries able to fight effective war of the POS is numbered on the one hand, perhaps a finger. ISSN does not have the numbers or the ability. The ISS as alliance is incapable to handle to the many concerned corporation not pvp players in a cohesiva military unit.
c) Easy victories of the public relations. The ISS are incapable to muzzle their worse soldiers and trolls of the forum, that right resource to alts badly disguised. They could have left IAC to do to idiots of themselves in the forums, with the occasional business as press launching. In place they try in each return to respond with the facts, stats, to bluster, the threats and the promises and end for above becoming even greater idiots.
The ISS had the opportunity to win the war against the IAC, accepting their total defeat in the first week in space, but bringing it in a fleet of the mercenario to take it for the moons. Instead his trolls of the forum created the greatest spectacle of the EVE, alienating to many of the ordinary pilots who supported them, and bringing the AAA inside for the publicity of attacks against the ships of capital of the MC and the LV.
Now that the MC has gone away, the ISS need to fast find to a competent ally. They need to work 23x7 in the integration of its body of the members. Also need to create a office for public relations to censor all posts in this place, and to begin to terminate members, including the fleet commanders, who post here without the authority and on the alts.
Instead IAC are finding the fair weather allys logging on again and coming for the battle. ISS corps having the POS do not understand the warfare of moons and will lose POS and reinforced timer controls over and over again. Kali makes capital ships not so easy to gank at the moons without superiority in the space and in the support. ISS will not have that superiority with two battleships in the twenty of support.
|
maGz
The Priory Shroud Of Darkness
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:08:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Originally by: Cicilus Hadrican
ISS stated in like two different threads that they are no longer neutral, they only serve their shareholders (as it should be) and they are in no way influenced by the political atmosphere. I remember being corrected by ISS that they are still neutral until later others stated otherwise to the contradiction.
Both sides can only spin a story so far before someone or others contradict something.
I'm sorta confused in this.
Hell in one post Butter Dog states that they own nothing and see what the "share-holders" do when you seriously threaten their outposts.
Well ok Butter. Isn't it ISS'es duty to protect said assets? I mean if I was a shareholder I would be dishing alittle money out to help said defense cause.
To simply say that ISS doesnt care (which I sorta get that from that post) would shake my belief as a shareholder in ISS competence in the Business handling of my paid for assets.
Everyone knows (or knew) that investments into ISS projects were a sure bet money maker. Its also known that ISS makes excellent money on said projects as well. Now if it comes down to me pitching money in every week or so in defending my paid for assets, or even spending a bil here or there for mercs, I would start questioning my belief in my future projects. Hell I may even look into selling my shares and possibly cut my loses before they do become losses. Isn't it ISS'es job to protect the assets by any means necessary. Can I get a link to the new ISS Chater so I can re-educate myself?
But this war is still early, and I honestly dont know what a single share in ISS outpost in Catch fetches before and after the war. But I garentee there is probably a couple of shareholders ****ed right now on how things are looking. Then again I been wrong before...
Well, lets see.
1) IAC declare ISS -10 on the back of some very strange reasons (market pvp, lol) 2) IAC refuse to rule out taking ISS outposts 3) IAC lose the F4 outpost in response 4) The fight is now over the F4 outpost, not shareholder-funded outposts
So I'd say that ISS have done a pretty good job of pro-actively protecting shareholder assets.
And of course, if shareholder assets are directly threatened ISS would actively protect them. Just don't be suprised if the shareholder alliances turn up too.
Is it a good job taking a station, effectively exhausting any chances of negotiation? I know you have little faith in IAC, but it can't be good for business having a 1500-man alliance sitting 2 jumps away from your stations. An alliance that would love to pop every single hauler of yours on sight. An alliance that you do not have a chance to fight on your own.
I think you need to put your arms down about taking F4. If you think you can control matters with that in your possesion, you're sorely mistaken... ____________
The Priory Killboard |
DHB FooFighter
FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:21:00 -
[106]
Originally by: KIAEddZ Just for note...
KIA have a bored cap fleet sat around doing nuthin ;)
Interesting conflict for sure.
I dont see a clear winner yet. And I do get the feeling this will end up with some sort of peace and agreeable treaty, but time will tell. If it goes the distance.... its a 60/40 situ at worst
Can we pay you in Spiced Wine and Spirits?
Butter that POS in JBY is a dread trap, just becuase the leadership of ISS and MC didn't trust you enough to tell you their plans doesn't mean they didn't have any. Your just not high enough on the food chain to know much of anything usefull.
We engaged the POS yesterday with 7 dreads, completely on spur of the moment riding the success of our Fleet Victories in F4.
We faced you head on and wiped the floor with you. we are 3-0 in said engagements and it only took us an hour to get ready whereas you had 6 hours and all you could muster was 22 ships and 3 battleships
Count, I know you don't like me, but get your head out of your ass so that you can see you will not win this war.
--------------------------------------------
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:22:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Khermine Baddenash The ISS is mentally, logistically and technician incapable to mount an offensive war succesful
We're in a defensive position.
So your entire post and the logic behind it is flawed.
Our outpost defence doctrine is very strong, we know how to kill dreads and if anyone deploys them against POS in an outpost system, they will lose them.
ISSN is a small-ish corp of 130. Of course it can't hold back an alliance, it was never designed to do so. Mercs are part of ISS's business model - you can't remove them from the equation because if and when they are needed, they WILL be there.
They were there to take F4, and they will be there again if required. ISS is never going to run out of money to pay them. And in this game, ISK talks.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
Sameth
Technology Acquisition Collective Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:22:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Butter Dog
We only hired MC and Veto.
We got F4 in return.
Pretty good return on investment, I'd say.
Really? worth the money? Considering it was LV who actually did all the work and provided most of the capital fleet which actually took out the POS's?
Lots of talk of mercs when in reality the mercs didnt really do much, they just cost you a lot of money for little result. Lucky LV was free huh. Although considering how effective they were initially LV might want to consider moonlighting as mercs. Might be worth hiring now that MC pretty much washed up as a force in space and the others are a bit small to wage full scale POS warfare on an Alliance.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:25:00 -
[109]
Originally by: DHB FooFighter
We faced you head on and wiped the floor with you. we are 3-0 in said engagements and it only took us an hour to get ready whereas you had 6 hours and all you could muster was 22 ships and 3 battleships
There were only two engagements.
In one, you outnumbered the ISS force by 2-1 but they still engaged (in my opinion it was the wrong move but I wasnt FC). We lost about 8 ships.
In the other, a few ships got popped as they left the system, about 3 I think.
Hardly decisive victories. It was a non-event.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
n sx
The Tidemark Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:25:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Sameth
Originally by: Butter Dog
We only hired MC and Veto.
We got F4 in return.
Pretty good return on investment, I'd say.
Really? worth the money? Considering it was LV who actually did all the work and provided most of the capital fleet which actually took out the POS's?
Lots of talk of mercs when in reality the mercs didnt really do much, they just cost you a lot of money for little result. Lucky LV was free huh. Although considering how effective they were initially LV might want to consider moonlighting as mercs. Might be worth hiring now that MC pretty much washed up as a force in space and the others are a bit small to wage full scale POS warfare on an Alliance.
*sigh* ...... what are you talking about? Stay off EVE-O.
MC lead the assaults on IAC POS, they are far from washed up and were the backbone of the entire campaign.
LV tipped absolute battlefield superiority into the favour of the ISS coalition and assisted in the POS assaults with other 'ISS friendlies'.
|
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:26:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Sameth
Really? worth the money? Considering it was LV who actually did all the work and provided most of the capital fleet which actually took out the POS's?
Thats right, worth the money.
Didnt your leadership tell you? LV are there because they want you dead, not because ISS paid them to be there.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
DHB FooFighter
FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:26:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Sameth
Originally by: Butter Dog
We only hired MC and Veto.
We got F4 in return.
Pretty good return on investment, I'd say.
Really? worth the money? Considering it was LV who actually did all the work and provided most of the capital fleet which actually took out the POS's?
Lots of talk of mercs when in reality the mercs didnt really do much, they just cost you a lot of money for little result. Lucky LV was free huh. Although considering how effective they were initially LV might want to consider moonlighting as mercs. Might be worth hiring now that MC pretty much washed up as a force in space and the others are a bit small to wage full scale POS warfare on an Alliance.
What did I tell you all about posting on here
MC where the main dread force shooting the POS when they Came out of reinforced, which is typically the most dangerous time.
LV were only there when local was at 400 and they knew that they would be safe.
--------------------------------------------
|
Cicilus Hadrican
Caldari Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:29:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Butter Dog
Well, lets see.
1) IAC declare ISS -10 on the back of some very strange reasons (market pvp, lol) 2) IAC refuse to rule out taking ISS outposts 3) IAC lose the F4 outpost in response 4) The fight is now over the F4 outpost, not shareholder-funded outposts
So I'd say that ISS have done a pretty good job of pro-actively protecting shareholder assets.
And of course, if shareholder assets are directly threatened ISS would actively protect them. Just don't be suprised if the shareholder alliances turn up too.
As you now blantently point in another direction to my comments and opinion to why things are they way they are. Like the expert politician you are... I was stating on the fact that if IAC takes F4 back, now said shareholders have to look back on the fact we are back to day one, and now ISS outposts are under immediate threat instead of "maybe." Not only that but ISK wasted in hiring mercs and having to do it again.
Not only this, ISS, or the ISS lacky named "Press Officer" a one man corp alt I my add, stated that the Mercs were hired by "private finances." ISS even stated that ISS didnt hire the mercs. Now ISS did hire them? More spinning or does it even matter?
Just remember while you flaunt the fact that you have F4, and then suddenly its ripped from you, and again "shareholder" assets are threatened again. Confidence from said "shareholders" will be shakey. Mark my words.
Maybe when the time comes, ISS, mercs and bedfellows will comeback and rip f4 away again, maybe then they will finish the job and take all our outposts away, and not stop like last time when AAA shows up and claims "Doesnt matter, f4 was all we wanted."
But I think that spin was used before...lets see, history states that MCFIX/Storm Armada came down, sieges G-7, fails and spins with the "Outposts were bonus we were only suppose hurt IAC." Seems like you both hire the same PR speech writers
I think ISS contracted the Mercs the first time. <---but this leads to tinfoil hats with no backing.
Lets see how the next couple weeks play out, and if we succeed in taking f4 back and start looking towards ZXIC, lets see what truely happens.
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:40:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Butter Dog on 29/12/2006 14:40:31
Originally by: Cicilus Hadrican
As you now blantently point in another direction to my comments and opinion to why things are they way they are. Like the expert politician you are... I was stating on the fact that if IAC takes F4 back, now said shareholders have to look back on the fact we are back to day one, and now ISS outposts are under immediate threat instead of "maybe." Not only that but ISK wasted in hiring mercs and having to do it again.
Not only this, ISS, or the ISS lacky named "Press Officer" a one man corp alt I my add, stated that the Mercs were hired by "private finances." ISS even stated that ISS didnt hire the mercs. Now ISS did hire them? More spinning or does it even matter?
Just remember while you flaunt the fact that you have F4, and then suddenly its ripped from you, and again "shareholder" assets are threatened again. Confidence from said "shareholders" will be shakey. Mark my words.
Maybe when the time comes, ISS, mercs and bedfellows will comeback and rip f4 away again, maybe then they will finish the job and take all our outposts away, and not stop like last time when AAA shows up and claims "Doesnt matter, f4 was all we wanted."
But I think that spin was used before...lets see, history states that MCFIX/Storm Armada came down, sieges G-7, fails and spins with the "Outposts were bonus we were only suppose hurt IAC." Seems like you both hire the same PR speech writers
I think ISS contracted the Mercs the first time. <---but this leads to tinfoil hats with no backing.
Lets see how the next couple weeks play out, and if we succeed in taking f4 back and start looking towards ZXIC, lets see what truely happens.
At what point did ISS claim we didnt hire mercs? Its even written in our business plans, available publically, that we have mercs on a retainer.
As for the rest of your post, you are talking about a hypothetical scenario which hasnt happened. So its pointless getting into a discussion about some imaginary future, which by the way is very unlikely.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
Press Officer
Leaked Memo's
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:42:00 -
[115]
Edited by: Press Officer on 29/12/2006 14:42:54
Quote: Lets see how the next couple weeks play out, and if we succeed in taking f4 back and start looking towards ZXIC, lets see what truely happens
Still nice to see the IAC and the Priory "omfgI'vemovedawayfromjumprangegatecampboys" still rattling on about "cough" the IAC started the war but my mom made me do it, aint we the victims.
Facts ...
1) You started the war ... 2) You failed to exclude taking "publically own stations" by force 3) You were given "numerous chances" of coming to a peacefull conclusion but decided to camp KDF/ZX 4) You lost F4
Now lets stop the waffle waffle waffle but as half of your members and leadership have already stated the above your going to look even more pathetic denying it ...
I personally think the ISS + Friends should have gone all the way and removed every system you owned ... remember for the thick and stupid .. you were the aggressor ....
So stop moaning, get round the table or I'm sure you will lose everything next time ......
|
Cicilus Hadrican
Caldari Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:43:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Butter Dog So its pointless getting into a discussion about some imaginary future, which by the way is very unlikely.
Noted. ISS believes we cant take F4 back. Lets see if true then
<man, they need to get internet in my room, missing the fights, damn you Iraq! Damn you to hell!>
|
Butter Dog
ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:44:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Cicilus Hadrican
Originally by: Butter Dog So its pointless getting into a discussion about some imaginary future, which by the way is very unlikely.
Noted. ISS believes we cant take F4 back. Lets see if true then
<man, they need to get internet in my room, missing the fights, damn you Iraq! Damn you to hell!>
lol
You really don't have a clue, do you.
------------- Be a part of EVE history - The 500bn ISS IPO.
|
n sx
The Tidemark Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:47:00 -
[118]
Edited by: n sx on 29/12/2006 14:48:33
Originally by: Press Officer
Facts ...
1) You started the war ... 2) You failed to exclude taking "publically own stations" by force 3) You were given "numerous chances" of coming to a peacefull conclusion but decided to camp KDF/ZX 4) You lost F4
Now lets stop the waffle waffle waffle but as half of your members and leadership have already stated the above your going to look even more pathetic denying it ...
I personally think the ISS + Friends should have gone all the way and removed every system you owned ... remember for the thick and stupid .. you were the aggressor ....
So stop moaning, get round the table or I'm sure you will lose everything next time ......
Fact: You're a spineless alt, who refuses to post on your main?
Speculation: The FRICK mute getting to you Kass?
|
Press Officer
Leaked Memo's
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:48:00 -
[119]
Quote: Fact:
You're a spineless alt, who refuses to post on your main?
Nice to see you agree to the rest .... fact
XXXX
|
maGz
The Priory Shroud Of Darkness
|
Posted - 2006.12.29 14:52:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Press Officer Edited by: Press Officer on 29/12/2006 14:42:54
Quote: Lets see how the next couple weeks play out, and if we succeed in taking f4 back and start looking towards ZXIC, lets see what truely happens
Still nice to see the IAC and the Priory "omfgI'vemovedawayfromjumprangegatecampboys" still rattling on about "cough" the IAC started the war but my mom made me do it, aint we the victims.
Facts ...
1) You started the war ... 2) You failed to exclude taking "publically own stations" by force 3) You were given "numerous chances" of coming to a peacefull conclusion but decided to camp KDF/ZX 4) You lost F4
Now lets stop the waffle waffle waffle but as half of your members and leadership have already stated the above your going to look even more pathetic denying it ...
I personally think the ISS + Friends should have gone all the way and removed every system you owned ... remember for the thick and stupid .. you were the aggressor ....
So stop moaning, get round the table or I'm sure you will lose everything next time ......
Bitter much?
We must have killed you quite a few times to receive so much attention. Too bad it's only from an alt. Get some balls plz.. ____________
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |