| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
   |
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:00:00 -
[1]
The truth is that with the direction the game has taken towards sovereignty maintenance and the need for Capital ships galore to retain or affect sovereignty claims, there is nothing MC can do.
To be a true mercenary entity with a replenishable capital ship fleet is nearly impossible in EVE's environment.
To have a replenishable capital fleet you need real estate, and when you aquire real estate you nail your feet to the ground.
The only possible way to achieve some degree of indpendence for a mercenary entity would be to adopt a 'locust' type existance.
This would entail moving to a region taking over existing outposts make isk for capital fleets and then take a contract.. rinse and repeat but always relinquishing the real estate when taking a contract.
Anything other than a 'locust' type setup and the mercenary entity is effectively a private army for its host.. whether they wish it or not.
MC even without wanting it... became an extenstion of BoB's military muscle... if only because they were never used against them.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 14:23:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Kespii
Edited by: Kespii on 28/02/2007 13:48:18
You should all stop making the broad assumption that just because MC lives in BoB space, they have to do their bidding for a number of weeks. You all state the assumption that BoB wouldnt let a neutral pvp entity live in its space, but that is just an assumption. Let me guess, you guys also believe in the assumption of intellegent design too? Some people believe in it regardless of evidence and proof. If you do, then it's no wonder you believe in this tin foil crap.
Off-topic.. but I just find it amusing to see a lone FIX voice defending MC in a sea of pretty damning posts. It seems these days FIX is slightly off pace with the general consensus across the boards and not really on-message as far as the pro-BoB contingent is concerned.
Both BoB and MC have now recieved their gagging orders. I think its safe to say that they have withdrawn from the forums... as anything they say will be thrown right back at them.
Tbh it would probably be wise for FIX to follow suit, you guys are cutting such solitary figures defending BoB and MC that its funny... in a pathetic sort of way.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:17:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Yodaron Ballsithor
And you, my friend, Nez, are simply trolling for fish.
.. and one could argue that I found one... my learned friend. 
The important conclusion to draw after the Seleene announcement and this thread is the obvious one.
The Mercenary Coalition has closed its doors for business... indefinitely.
The most high profile mercenary entity in the game is now KIA. Kia Eddz must be laughing all the way to the bank... he's gonna be booked up till next christmas.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 21:44:00 -
[4]
Originally by: fugazii
if they have enough isk to build 4 outposts 100ish bil + pos's, and still continualy expand thier capitol fleet there is no reason they needed the outposts in the first place, especially since most of the time theyre not even being used. keep in mind also mc have a large t2 bpo cache also, constantly feeding isk into the alliance pocket(yes i know it is said the items form the bpo's go to members but mc doesnt lose all that many ships, numbers jst dont add up).
Yup that is a very good point...
100 bil + pos and fuel buys you a pretty decent size capital fleet... but ofc they didn't build the outposts all in one go, they were built over a period of time on the back of safe access to quality 0.0. The first outpost would have been the initial investment and the other 3 would pay for themselves and a replenishable capital fleet. I think its naive to believe that you can build capital fleets without quality 0.0 mining on tap.
In alliance leadership discussions some time ago (when I was part of an alliance), somebody suggested that outposts are like "implants for industry". I guess thats what MC's outposts really are.
There is the possiblilty as well that MC leadership had to make compromises with their membership and offer them the *other* aspects of the game that a home provides (npcing, hulk mining for private gain, quality complex access, etc..). Maybe "only" being a merc gets old fast if thats all you do day in day out, without some "R&R" in a safe zone.
If you take all factors into account... it seems MC had to pay a price to remain competitive with the big boys and to keep its membership happy inbetween contracts.
MC leadership are not stupid. However, I do believe that at the end of the day some hard choices had to be made and they probably compromised their mercenary ideals once too often. Now MC is widely viewed as an extension of BoB's military. (no point denying it, only the blind will see otherwise) I'm quite sure thats not what Seleene wanted.
The Mercenary Coalition are a quality outfit, skilled, talented honourable etc... but mercenaries.... that shoe doesn't fit anymore. MC is another alliance no different from the rest.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 00:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Julien Derida
Eddz has stated several times that he would never accept a contract against the Goons. In fact, Eddz has always maintained that friendship>ISK for them. That is probably the main difference between them and us.
I was not aware of this agreement between KIA and Goons. It would be interesting to hear their take on your statement.
If this is true then yes there would be no real difference between MC and KIA, except that KIA aren't widely percieved as intrinsically tied to the Goons where as the BoB/MC connection is now part of EVE-wide consciousness.
It would be interesting to know if KIA use Goon territories to make money inbetween contracts.
Tbh if a mercenary outfit refuses to engage a certain entity or puts such a high price on doing so that it becomes academic, then the mercenary entity starts to become a political appendage of said entity. This is true if for no other reason than because the mercs are then one less thing to worry about.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 19:31:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Nez Perces on 01/03/2007 19:31:25
Originally by: Gaven Lok'ri
Instead the coalition people made it utterly clear that because MC weren't anti-BoB without a contract they would be considered allies of BoB and would most definitely lose their stations if BoB lost the war.
That AAA invasion and the responses on this forum were quite the godsend for BoB I would say.
Lets pretend for a moment that MC would have been available for a contract against BoB or BoB allies and that "The Coalition" missed a golden opportunity.
Thing is.. was it so golden?
Could it be that the MC just isn't worth the isk that you would have to pay them to fight BoB? The truth is that if this war hinges on what MC will or won't do, The Coalition is screwed.
With the numbers that The Coalition have if you take into account Northern and Southern contingent, BoB should get steamrollered MC or no MC.
Good as MC are, this war will hinge on one thing and one thing only...
Can the coalition keep their focus and not waver in their resolve?
Cause if they can, the numbers will simply overrun any foe with multiple fronts getting opened.
Keeping this in mind... suddenly the question of how much MC costs to hire against BoB becomes inconsequential. Although the topic is still interesting as it is a tale of caution for future mercenary outfits.... become too close to any one party and your image of independent mercenaries will be lost, possibly for ever.
With the complexity and number of alliances involved in the anti-BoB movement, giving a whole lot of thought to what MC do is a waste of time, strategically thinking. Its far easier and convenient to colour them BoB and be done with it.
Coalition leadership will know that their worst enemy will actually be themselves, not BoB or MC or FIX or anybody else, their job will be to keep the train on the rails.
|
Nez Perces
Amarr
Black Spot.
|
Posted - 2007.03.02 20:03:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Adam Weishaupt
great couple of posts
Thanks for writing that I enjoyed reading it. I expect thats as close to the mark as we are gonna get on these forums without actually being inside Selenee's head.
Cheers.
|
| |
|