EVE Search - AAA, D2, Goons, TCF and IAC Gangbang ISS

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

AAA, D2, Goons, TCF and IAC Gangbang ISS

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.05 23:38:00 - [1] What's this? Rumbling whilst I'm at the pub? You should all be ashamed. FRIDAY NIGHT IS PUB NIGHT.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.06 01:03:00 - [2] Originally by: David H'Levi BOB/ASCN/Friends took the outpost, didn't want to hold it, gave it to ISS as a neutral third party, ISS sold shares in it, with a large portion of the dividends going to the original owners. I don't see what they could have done differently, or what about this means that they are in bed with BoB. Basically, that's about the size of it. Lets face it, EC-P8R isn't all that special. (Although I have heard rumours about how hysterically funny BoB found the general reaction to doing so)
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.06 02:07:00 - [3] Originally by: Reknaw A'ru So, we going to get any "official" war reports thusfar? As in a clear commetary of what's locked/lost/taken? Towers go into re-inforced at 25% shield, making them invulnerable for a period of time. So... for the moment, not a lot. This of course, may change at the end of that time period.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.10 00:22:00 - [4] Originally by: n sx Sadly for your shareholders, your leadership's poor management cost them dearly :( .... and this continued ignorance of their concerns and the fact that you're all harping on that losing stations 'won't hurt ISS' is just like a slap in the face for the people that REALLY own them. I'm sorry, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The shareholders of Marginis have been negatively affected by a war of aggression by IAC. I'm somewhat biased, I admit, but I don't count it a failure of _management_ when a next door neighbour decides to start a fight. I'm also a shareholder of Marginis, and I'm not pleased with the turn of events. They're events I've on several occasions tried to prevent or divert, but ... well obviously that's not turned out so well.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.10 00:36:00 - [5] Originally by: Shirei Originally by: James Lyrus Originally by: n sx Sadly for your shareholders, your leadership's poor management cost them dearly :( .... and this continued ignorance of their concerns and the fact that you're all harping on that losing stations 'won't hurt ISS' is just like a slap in the face for the people that REALLY own them. I'm sorry, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The shareholders of Marginis have been negatively affected by a war of aggression by IAC. I'm somewhat biased, I admit, but I don't count it a failure of _management_ when a next door neighbour decides to start a fight. I'm also a shareholder of Marginis, and I'm not pleased with the turn of events. They're events I've on several occasions tried to prevent or divert, but ... well obviously that's not turned out so well. It was ISS's management who decided to escalate the conflict into a POS/station war, which has backfired badly on them now it seems... Actually, it was ISS management who asked IAC to set the scope of the conflict. E.g. whether it would include POSes or not. Now, given that they said 'it might include POSes' what would you consider the responsible action at that point?
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.10 00:57:00 - [6] Edited by: James Lyrus on 10/01/2007 00:54:06 Originally by: Shirei Actually, it was ISS management who asked IAC to set the scope of the conflict. E.g. whether it would include POSes or not. Now, given that they said 'it might include POSes' what would you consider the responsible action at that point? So by escalating the conflict they turned the 'might' into a 'certainly will'. The responsible action would be first trying to get some accurate intel, if IAC were actually preparing for or planning a POS a assault rather than headlong storming into one - apparently without being prepared for fighting one seriously. For all we know that 'maybe' from IAC could just have been IAC's leadership holding their options open depending how events unfold without actually having any particularly concrete plans. You're entirely correct, 'maybe' they didn't intend it to turn into the scale of conflict it did. Then again, 'maybe' it was just hecause there were plans and intentions, but if it didn't work out that way, it'd provide a convenient backpedal. Or are you suggesting that we should be aware of the capital ships that could quite easily be parked in jump range somehow before they undock to make their strike. 'maybe' the inital assault was what cased the dreadnought assault to be delayed until after christmas, which in theory gave time to talk. I know for sure, that within 2 hours of the announcement, 200 pilots were attacking ISS. I know for sure that there was a report of 'possible hostile action' from a friend in another organisation a few days before. I expected at the time, and now know for certain that IAC had agents within ISS. I mean, who starts a war without a good idea of what they're facing? Not exactly nice, but ... well that's the way EVE goes. Hindsight's pretty good, but second guessing 'might have beens' is often fruitless.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.10 08:21:00 - [7] Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk envy AAA and TCF's participation levels Well, that's one I can agree on :).
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.12 18:25:00 - [8] Originally by: Lilan Kahn course its part of the issn mission statement. "you must mock those who lose carriers especialy if its your ceo or alliance leader!" Isn't that fairly standard? Surely we can't be unusual?
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.12 23:41:00 - [9] Edited by: James Lyrus on 12/01/2007 23:38:10 Originally by: Kaylana Syi Originally by: Raste Aww, all reply together now :) Props for having the nads to pwym for once Muru. Kay, I'm sure your ego is fine. The point is that you do talk insane smack when you win due to lag, and go looking for any excuse when you lose. Give it up, your teetering on personal attacks and are a liar. Accusing someone of "Teetering on personal attacks", then calling them a liar? That's pretty ironic, was it intentional?
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.14 23:49:00 - [10] Edited by: James Lyrus on 14/01/2007 23:49:02 I got my Rokh blown up by 2 dreads. I never saw 'em until I was in my pod. Not entirely sure what happened, can only assume I bounced out of the POS (I definitely warped right into the shield) Tonight was good, a bit tense at times, but I think the fighting around ZXIC-7 was ... well definitely interesting. About the only thing I would like to ***** about was the lag. I mean seriously un-fun. Although I have to say, seeing The Priory as the corp anchoring the towers was a surpise.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.15 07:45:00 - [11] Originally by: Itaro Flagg Originally by: DrDevice just imagine all of this lag free, it would have been one of eve's great evenings, full of combat, warping, tactical maneuvering, and general fun and entertainment all round. but alas, my experience of it was more a case of warping in, not seeing any ships on the screen, listening to primary targets, still not seeing anything, waiting.............. then the news that they have warped out, and i still wait there patiently, hoping not to be in a pod, as i still havnt loaded the grid up :( I was thinking the same thing all day today. That, if it wasn't for the lag, this day full of POS fighting would've been one of my favorite times in all of EvE. Sadly, lag ruined the fun of the fleet fights. 15 minutes (literally) to load on the first jump into ZXIC was ridiculous. And then 2+ minutes to lock anything, and then another 2 minutes to activate guns shudder Somehow it feels wrong to be agreeing with The Priory but ... I agree. I'm not even entirely sure if the lack of node crashes was actually a good thing. At least when the node goes splat, you know that someone else isn't lighting you up whilst you're helpless.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.15 07:46:00 - [12] Originally by: solarwinds Originally by: Korbin Dallas Originally by: Crellion Originally by: Manus Ghostface Originally by: Seiver D'amross and this started over what? rex loseing his impock??? or IAC just wanting to attack the blue guys Butterfly effect for the win. Actually we never shot down that Impoc. You can see the US flag waving on the background when we all know there is no air in space. Then it was a simple matter to forge the mails and manipulate DJ Spiral and the other media...thus bringing about the fall of ISS Some genius you are, never heard of solar winds, idiot! No kidding, I'm right here!!! The solar winds are on _OUR_ side. You have no chance to survive, make your time. Or something :)

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.