Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
578
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 12:59:02 -
[211] - Quote
Did I miss the post where SMA relocated to Egypt? Cuz they all seem to be in da Nile
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
13875
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:01:45 -
[212] - Quote
Jesus, you can almost taste the desperation. The further we advance (and not just militarily, I enjoyed my 1st northern "Mining/Ratting up indexes" op last night, I forgot how much guristas jamming sucks lol) they more delusional 'they' get (well, some of 'they', it seems the smarter "they's are abandoning ship already).
The 1st great war I fought in (when I was in Raiden and we helped destroy to original NC) 6-7 years ago wasn't NEARLY this damn fun. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:03:29 -
[213] - Quote
Poopicus Butts wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:And honestly, if and when we move back to fade, I don't expect you to still be there. Your alliance really is a renamed BNI, and if you weren't blue to groups like NC and TEST, they'd rip you to pieces in seconds. I fully expect to be fighting one of them, not steamrolling you. Are you honestly using the "I...if you weren't b...blue with that big alliance we'd crush y...you!" argument while being in the clusterfuck coalition? Nope, first off the clusterfuck coalition doesn't exist. Secondly, I'm just stating it as it is. It's a well advertised view that following this war MBC are going to stop being blue to each other, at which point they have to realistically be able to hold space against their attackers, which they've shown they would be unable to do.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
13875
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:08:03 -
[214] - Quote
Poopicus Butts wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And honestly, if and when we move back to fade, I don't expect you to still be there. Your alliance really is a renamed BNI, and if you weren't blue to groups like NC and TEST, they'd rip you to pieces in seconds. I fully expect to be fighting one of them, not steamrolling you.
Are you honestly using the "I...if you weren't b...blue with that big alliance we'd crush y...you!" argument while being in the clusterfuck coalition?
lol
I was on an op to coat hanger a CSAA night before last, and watched the intense and unbelievable spectacle of Imperium guys complaining about our blobbing in local.
Imperpium. The biggest blob in the history of EVE....
Complaining about blobbling.
From Imperium.....
......
Oddly, when I was in NC. and Goons (with hired PL help) forcibly ejected us from the exact same north that MBC is attacking now by using superior numbers, I fail to recall many CfC complaints about the dishonorable practice of blobbing.....
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
578
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:15:32 -
[215] - Quote
MBC would reform at the drop of a hat if CFC looked like moving back into the North.
We're not even blue to each other just following not shooting neuts whilst in CFC space (unless they aggress us first *cough* Spectre *cough*).
Also remember that CFC has pissed off pretty much all of these groups individually in their own way and we're not exactly suffering isk losses so even the IWI funding is irrelevant now (although it was definitely a necessary catalyst to get this started).
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Aineko Macx
355
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:15:37 -
[216] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:It's a well advertised view that following this war MBC are going to stop being blue to each other, at which point they have to realistically be able to hold space against their attackers, which they've shown they would be unable to do. A dynamic 0.0 certainly is better than the static and stagnant bloc the CFC is and the blocs before it were.
iveeCore: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:15:58 -
[217] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Did I miss the post where SMA relocated to Egypt? Cuz they all seem to be in da Nile You me because some of us don't conform the propaganda on reddit and don't actually consider SMA dead yet? Alliances can lose quite a lot and not collapse you know. TEST lost basically everything, died on it's ass and yet now is back. If believing SMA is strong enough to survive hard times is considered denial by randoms on the forum, I'm OK with that.
Jenn aSide wrote:I was on an op to coat hanger a CSAA night before last, and watched the intense and unbelievable spectacle of Imperium guys complaining about our blobbing in local.
Imperpium. The biggest blob in the history of EVE....
Complaining about blobbling.
From Imperium..... Aside from his post not actually being representative of what I actually posted, for some reason you don't see the irony in a bunch of people who have complained about blobbing and blue doughnuts for several years using those exact same tactics now CCP have shifted the mechanics in their favour too? Strange that. By strange I of course mean completely predictable.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Trudeaux Margaret
Pandemic Horde Inc.
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:19:09 -
[218] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Poopicus Butts wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:And honestly, if and when we move back to fade, I don't expect you to still be there. Your alliance really is a renamed BNI, and if you weren't blue to groups like NC and TEST, they'd rip you to pieces in seconds. I fully expect to be fighting one of them, not steamrolling you. Are you honestly using the "I...if you weren't b...blue with that big alliance we'd crush y...you!" argument while being in the clusterfuck coalition? Nope, first off the clusterfuck coalition doesn't exist. Secondly, I'm just stating it as it is. It's a well advertised view that following this war MBC are going to stop being blue to each other, at which point they have to realistically be able to hold space against their attackers, which they've shown they would be unable to do.
You appear to be confused. I think you need to face up to what the point of this war is.
For most groups involved, it's not to capture and hold your sov. It's simply to burn you all out of your sov.
Who will take the space in the wake of the war? Not the remnants of SMA, that's for sure, because SMA of all alliances absolutely can't hold sov on their own -- not without Goon intervention. This has been amply demonstrated. 1000 people online; 50 of them turn out for fleets. That's not going to work out for you.
Who will take the space is anyone's guess. It will be interesting to watch.
> anyone willing to give me like a 5 min politics crash course?
> grr goons, lowsec is full of elitist sh*s, all roads lead to the bittervet pl
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
579
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:19:34 -
[219] - Quote
The 'propaganda' on reddit...is leaked logs from your own alliance chat. We don't even need to make gifs anymore.
e: For your edification:
http://pastebin.com/gj9RHP7u < Goons skymarshals discussing their linemembers. http://pastebin.com/cv88r5VL < SMA alliance chat discussing the loss of leadership.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:23:25 -
[220] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:It's a well advertised view that following this war MBC are going to stop being blue to each other, at which point they have to realistically be able to hold space against their attackers, which they've shown they would be unable to do. A dynamic 0.0 certainly is better than the static and stagnant bloc the CFC is and the blocs before it were. I agree, but the current mechanics won't generate that. The biggest groups will always be able to stomp through any smaller groups at will. Literally the only thing allowing smaller alliances to hold space is the lack of desire to stomp all over their space. I'd much rather see a system where lots of small groups held, used and defended space because they actually want to use it rather that a system that's simply so cumbersome to deal with that the only people attacking sov are people who don't want it.
Eli Apol wrote:MBC would reform at the drop of a hat if CFC looked like moving back into the North. I doubt that, but even if it were the case then that still makes you a coalition it just means you have an open PvP policy during peacetime.
Eli Apol wrote:Also remember that CFC has pissed off pretty much all of these groups individually in their own way and we're not exactly suffering isk losses so even the IWI funding is irrelevant now (although it was definitely a necessary catalyst to get this started). You're not suffering ISK losses? Someone let sKB know their killboard is broken.
Eli Apol wrote:I've heard talk that Burn Deklein might become an annual thing because it's so much fun. How can it become an annual thing if you're kicking goons out of Deklein?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Snuffed Out
4539
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:29:42 -
[221] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Imperpium blobbling this is the funniest damn thing to say out loud |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:34:34 -
[222] - Quote
Trudeaux Margaret wrote:Who will take the space in the wake of the war? Not the remnants of SMA, that's for sure, because SMA of all alliances absolutely can't hold sov on their own -- not without Goon intervention. We only can't hold (some of our) sov when a coalition larger than the Imperium is attacking it, so if you aren't blue to each other after the war and such a coalition no longer exists, why do you suddenly think we'd not be able to hold. Bear in mind that most of the timers we won early on against fleets outnumbering us 2:1 were done with very little coalition support.
Trudeaux Margaret wrote:This has been amply demonstrated. 1000 people online; 50 of them turn out for fleets. That's not going to work out for you. If those were really the figures, you'd be absolutely correct, but since they are actually a complete fabrication they don't actually mean anything.
Eli Apol wrote:The 'propaganda' on reddit...is leaked logs from your own alliance chat. We don't even need to make gifs anymore. e: For your edification: http://pastebin.com/gj9RHP7u < Goons skymarshals discussing their linemembers. http://pastebin.com/cv88r5VL < SMA alliance chat discussing the loss of leadership. The propaganda is the part where people assume the loss of the players and the existence of people sad about it to mean the alliance is dead. The issue is the false conclusions you're pulling from the chatlogs rather than their content. I'm not disputing that some leadership have left, neither am I disputing that some people are annoyed at it, I'm not even disputing that Imperium leadership have some issues with that too, but what I am disputing is any notion that them leaving means we're already dead.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
1119
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:34:53 -
[223] - Quote
Poopicus Butts wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: And honestly, if and when we move back to fade, I don't expect you to still be there. Your alliance really is a renamed BNI, and if you weren't blue to groups like NC and TEST, they'd rip you to pieces in seconds. I fully expect to be fighting one of them, not steamrolling you.
Are you honestly using the "I...if you weren't b...blue with that big alliance we'd crush y...you!" argument while being in the clusterfuck coalition? From the "Nerf diplomacy lol" guy, no less.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have come full circle. Or is it 180 degrees? I am confused.
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
582
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:36:10 -
[224] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:You're not suffering ISK losses? Someone let sKB know their killboard is broken. I personally could have SRP'd all of Test alliances losses yesterday - and I'm really really not space rich - but sure, take me literally if you want.
TBH the amount of deadspace goodies on all the dead supers we killed would probably have cancelled out all our losses as well...so yeah isk positive just from PvP.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Trudeaux Margaret
Pandemic Horde Inc.
210
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:41:38 -
[225] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Trudeaux Margaret wrote:This has been amply demonstrated. 1000 people online; 50 of them turn out for fleets. That's not going to work out for you. If those were really the figures, you'd be absolutely correct, but since they are actually a complete fabrication they don't actually mean anything.
It was hyperbole, yes. But not far off. I remember sitting in P-2 while FCs spammed the chat channels in frustration trying to get numbers for fleets. I remember fleets being cancelled for lack of numbers.
Lucas, you are clearly very committed to SMA and for that, I commend you. That is sincere. I hope, for your sake and for others like you, that it survives and that you guys can rebuild into something stronger.
I wish you'd stop demonizing those who left, though. It doesn't reflect well on you.
> anyone willing to give me like a 5 min politics crash course?
> grr goons, lowsec is full of elitist sh*s, all roads lead to the bittervet pl
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:46:06 -
[226] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:I personally could have SRP'd all of Test alliances losses yesterday - and I'm really really not space rich - but sure, take me literally if you want. What were their losses yesterday? So far in April as far as killboards are concerned, TEST have lost more ISK than SMA.
Eli Apol wrote:TBH the amount of deadspace goodies on all the dead supers we killed would probably have cancelled out all our losses as well...so yeah isk positive just from PvP. Yeah us too. We also can't provide anything remotely backing this up, but it's still about as true.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 13:51:22 -
[227] - Quote
Trudeaux Margaret wrote:It was hyperbole, yes. But not far off. I remember sitting in P-2 while FCs spammed the chat channels in frustration trying to get numbers for fleets. I remember fleets being cancelled for lack of numbers.
Lucas, you are clearly very committed to SMA and for that, I commend you. That is sincere. I hope, for your sake and for others like you, that it survives and that you guys can rebuild into something stronger.
I wish you'd stop demonizing those who left, though. It doesn't reflect well on you. Yep, fleets aren't always possible, depending on a number of factors - time, location, fleet composition, enemy fleet size, to name a few.
Thanks, I hope we do too.
I don't demonize them and I wish them all the best, but that won't change my opinion that if you are leaving when a war turns and you suffer losses, that's very much a non-EVE player thing. That's not just leadership, that's literally any player. If you quit because the going gets tough then you really don't get EVE.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
583
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:05:27 -
[228] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:What were their losses yesterday? So far in April as far as killboards are concerned, TEST have lost more ISK than SMA.
Around 10-15b for the one day afaik, closer to 10b. Easily affordable for any long term eve player let alone an alliance wallet. It's pretty much a certainty that we really don't need the IWI income anymore.
The reason we've lost more than SMA this month is probably because we've been undocking and fighting ~ also we have nearly double the number of members of SMA now.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:17:26 -
[229] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Around 10-15b for the one day afaik, closer to 10b. Easily affordable for any long term eve player let alone an alliance wallet. It's pretty much a certainty that we really don't need the IWI income anymore.
The reason we've lost more than SMA this month is probably because we've been undocking and fighting ~ also we have nearly double the number of members of SMA now. You're right, we've totally not been undocking at all... We've totally been losing our ships inside stations which is why our losses aren't zero.
You say it's a certainty that you don't need IWI income, but then you claim that your losses are low because you're fighting unopposed. That leads me to believe you think that for the remainder of this war you will fight unopposed. Good luck with that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
583
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:20:27 -
[230] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Around 10-15b for the one day afaik, closer to 10b. Easily affordable for any long term eve player let alone an alliance wallet. It's pretty much a certainty that we really don't need the IWI income anymore.
The reason we've lost more than SMA this month is probably because we've been undocking and fighting ~ also we have nearly double the number of members of SMA now. You're right, we've totally not been undocking at all... We've totally been losing our ships inside stations which is why our losses aren't zero. You say it's a certainty that you don't need IWI income, but then you claim that your losses are low because you're fighting unopposed. That leads me to believe you think that for the remainder of this war you will fight unopposed. Good luck with that.
http://i.imgur.com/G2D8dsh.png
Can't wait for April's figures.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:38:39 -
[231] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:http://i.imgur.com/G2D8dsh.png
Can't wait for April's figures. Not really sure where those figures are from. I mean let's for simplicity just take the highball figure of 40b from Tribute as caused by Imperium and pretend all Imperium damage bars are the same height so I'm massively overstating the Imperium damage done for a moment. So across 10 regions their massively inflated march damage would be 400b. The coalition against the Imperium is pretty much "the rest of EVE". So since zkillboard shows most kills and things that on an alliance level Goonswarm alone did 3.36t damage in march, where and against whom did Goonswarm do the other 2.96t of damage? I imagine that these stats aren't so much March figures as "part of March" figures, and they were likely sourced by someone within MBC. Though if it's accurate it amuses me that I personally made more than we lost in fade in March.
TBH though, I won't even dispute the idea that we've lost more than we've killed, it would surprise me at this point if that weren't the case, but I find it funny that you think nothing will change or that it means anything in itself. MoA have spent the past 2 years chirping on about how isk positive they are too.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Aineko Macx
356
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:40:47 -
[232] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Aineko Macx wrote:A dynamic 0.0 certainly is better than the static and stagnant bloc the CFC is and the blocs before it were. I agree, but the current mechanics won't generate that. RIGHT NOW the mechanics are doing just that, providing a dynamic 0.0 with lot's of action, taking space from entities unable to hold it, breaking apart moribund blocs. Eve is still a n+1 game, but I'll reserve judgement over the current mechanics to when the dust settles, say 6 months from now
iveeCore: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
583
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 14:48:25 -
[233] - Quote
Those figures were from CCP's data dump: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6428000
Lots of redditors have made a variety of graphs in this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4dty65/ccp_quant_releases_treasure_trove_of_kill_data/
Some of the others I particularly liked:
http://i.imgur.com/dgxGSod http://imgur.com/xfJdqLW
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 15:00:47 -
[234] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:RIGHT NOW the mechanics are doing just that, providing a dynamic 0.0 with lot's of action, taking space from entities unable to hold it, breaking apart moribund blocs. Eve is still a n+1 game, but I'll reserve judgement over the current mechanics to when the dust settles, say 6 months from now What game are you playing? RIGHT NOW the mechanics are pitting one giant coalition against another giant coalition in exactly the same way that wars have ever gone down. Following this there will still be big groups who get to decide who they let have sov, just now it takes less time and less commitment to boot someone out of their space.
OK, so the graph you posted, what breakdown of those figures are being used and what grouping? Because if that's supposed to be the whole of march, then zkillboard is completely wrong (or more likely the graph is wrong as I believe the Imperium lost significantly more than 400b in March).
Ed: To be honest a lot of those graphs look off so maybe it's the figures. How accurate are the isk estimations in that data?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
583
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 15:11:16 -
[235] - Quote
It's CCP's own data dump. I'd guess pretty accurate.
No idea on the groupings people are using, I just picked the ones that I felt illustrated interesting things - feel free to make your own graphs from it, I'm sure that's why CCP published the data.
I haven't started breaking it down in my own spreadsheets yet, I want to do cumulative losses of MBC vs CFC over time - although from what I've read there's an issue with splitting the CO2 data correctly for that.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Sister MaryElephant
Stellar Conundrum
14
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 15:21:35 -
[236] - Quote
Look at me I'm Mittlukasler:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
707
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 15:25:23 -
[237] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Aineko Macx wrote:RIGHT NOW the mechanics are doing just that, providing a dynamic 0.0 with lot's of action, taking space from entities unable to hold it, breaking apart moribund blocs. Eve is still a n+1 game, but I'll reserve judgement over the current mechanics to when the dust settles, say 6 months from now What game are you playing? RIGHT NOW the mechanics are pitting one giant coalition against another giant coalition in exactly the same way that wars have ever gone down. Following this there will still be big groups who get to decide who they let have sov, just now it takes less time and less commitment to boot someone out of their space. OK, so the graph you posted, what breakdown of those figures are being used and what grouping? Because if that's supposed to be the whole of march, then zkillboard is completely wrong (or more likely the graph is wrong as I believe the Imperium lost significantly more than 400b in March). Ed: To be honest a lot of those graphs look off so maybe it's the figures. How accurate are the isk estimations in that data?
:CCP:
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
Aineko Macx
357
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 16:02:59 -
[238] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Aineko Macx wrote:RIGHT NOW the mechanics are doing just that, providing a dynamic 0.0 with lot's of action, taking space from entities unable to hold it, breaking apart moribund blocs. Eve is still a n+1 game, but I'll reserve judgement over the current mechanics to when the dust settles, say 6 months from now What game are you playing? RIGHT NOW the mechanics are pitting one giant coalition against another giant coalition in exactly the same way that wars have ever gone down. Following this there will still be big groups who get to decide who they let have sov, just now it takes less time and less commitment to boot someone out of their space. Your coalition is an anachronistic relic of game mechanics that do not exist anymore, and you are slowly realizing it. The new sov mechanics together with jump changes means that having lots of allies distributed over large swathes of space is pointless because they won't be able to help you hold your space. N3 realized this, that's why they reset and sold off their renting empire. CFC continued to exist until now simply because no one really put pressure on them after the changes.
The coalition that is dismantling yours formed for that specific purpose. As you mentioned yourself, MBC entities won't remain blue after the war. The spoils of war will of course be divided among the winners, but there won't be another super-bloc afterwards. That prospect looks pretty good to me.
iveeCore: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7451
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 16:17:06 -
[239] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Your coalition is an anachronistic relic of game mechanics that do not exist anymore, and you are slowly realizing it. The new sov mechanics together with jump changes means that having lots of allies distributed over large swathes of space is pointless because they won't be able to help you hold your space. N3 realized this, that's why they reset and sold off their renting empire. CFC continued to exist until now simply because no one really put pressure on them after the changes. Well no, it's simply that when you aren't at war you can protect more space that when you are. With the new mechanics there's no commitment needed to assault each area so players are able to assault huge amounts of space in one go, meaning that when at war a defender needs to shrink. Once the war is over they can grow back out again. Sov is a lot more fluid now, and yes there's certainly a learning process for just how fluid it is, but we'll find the balance.
What N3 realised is they were incapable of defending their renters and had no interest in integrating them. The fact that renting still exists and rusblock are spread to 13 players per system shows that the concept is not gone.
Aineko Macx wrote:The coalition that is dismantling yours formed for that specific purpose. As you mentioned yourself, MBC entities won't remain blue after the war. The spoils of war will of course be divided among the winners, but there won't be another super-bloc afterwards. That prospect looks pretty good to me. You're completely insane if you think no super-bloc will exist afterwards. For starters, even if we do lose the war (which is in no way already decided like some of you seem to believe) the Imperium won't be gone. Even if we end up entirely in lowsec for a bit, the bulk of the Imperium will remain and will push back out eventually, so either BoB will have to remain a loose coalition anyway or the Imperium will reclaim their space. Outside of that there's already other super-blocs and have been others in the past so I'm not really sure why you think that basic human behaviour will change.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
|
Aineko Macx
358
|
Posted - 2016.04.08 16:41:29 -
[240] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:You're completely insane if you think no super-bloc will exist afterwards. For starters, even if we do lose the war (which is in no way already decided like some of you seem to believe) the Imperium won't be gone. Even if we end up entirely in lowsec for a bit, the bulk of the Imperium will remain and will push back out eventually, so either BoB will have to remain a loose coalition anyway or the Imperium will reclaim their space. Outside of that there's already other super-blocs and have been others in the past so I'm not really sure why you think that basic human behaviour will change. You misunderstood. Even if CFC (or what is left of it) win the war, they will never hold as much space again as they did at their peak.
If the CFC lose the war and move to low sec, the CFC also dies, because goons weaker, dependent buffer alliances will crumble without holding space to rat in. In the end probably only Goons and RZR survive to restart anew.
I agree that ad hoc coalitions might continue to form for aggression purposes, but the large static, defensive blocs like the old NC or CFC are a thing of the past because they are ineffective under the new mechanics.
iveeCore: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |