|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Lilan Kahn
Amarr
The Littlest Hobos
Betrayal Under Mayhem
   |
Posted - 2007.06.06 18:23:00 -
[1]
i forsee lots of pain.
 Originally by: Eris Discordia
We break after X amount of threads, then we go wild and then we get our medication.
|
Lilan Kahn
Amarr
The Littlest Hobos
Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 19:19:00 -
[2]
Quote:
If anything, I'm EXTREMELY pleased that CVA demonstrated how sovreign warfare is more than a battle of the blobs. Why burn yourself out rebuilding capital fleets when you can run their capital fleets around like a matador working the bullring giving them targets to beat their head against. From a cost standpoint, I'll put money on the table betting that bare bones death stars cost a helluva lot less than a fleet of replacement capital ships.
a deathstar runs at the price of a dread
Originally by: Eris Discordia
We break after X amount of threads, then we go wild and then we get our medication.
|
Lilan Kahn
Amarr
The Littlest Hobos
Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 21:14:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Janu Hull
Edited by: Janu Hull on 06/06/2007 20:58:21
Originally by: Eddie Gordo
Edited by: Eddie Gordo on 06/06/2007 20:45:53
Originally by: Janu Hull
War isn't supposed to be fair. UK as much as showed that when they did an end run on CVA and popped their capital array. Why take out the weakened POS structure when the CVA fleet was protecting the other better prepared tower?
Because it was a capital shipyard and could potentially have held a mothership, or even a titan in it. It was our primary objective, the secondary was to take sov.
I think this has been made clear a number of times from our side.
Note: I'm not criticizing Ushra'Khan for that move. It was a smart move and you should be proud of it. It was ruthless and effective. Maximum damage, minimum casualties.
At the same time, CVA's POS campaign was the same way. Minimal losses, maximum return.
At neither engagement was there any obligation for the two forces to meet in the middle and take turns clubbing each other over the head. You weren't obligated to give CVA a chance to disrupt your fleet at the shipyard, and they weren't obligated to give you a clean shot at stopping them from pushing you out of 9UY.
They are both equally valid moves.
This is not a critique of the forces involved in this war or the decisions they made. I am only responding to the notion of POS warfare as "lame". Lame is cutting off your options because of preconceived notions of "acceptable" behavior. If we went that route, you could make the same arguement about any number of otherwise legitimate actions in conflicts that don't involve fleets bashing into each other.
No one in there right mind whants to pos spam on 70 moons only done once before in eve history that i can recall
Originally by: Eris Discordia
We break after X amount of threads, then we go wild and then we get our medication.
|
Lilan Kahn
Amarr
The Littlest Hobos
Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 18:08:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Janu Hull
Edited by: Janu Hull on 11/06/2007 18:01:35
Originally by: Butter Dog
All that happened in Providence is that the 'unable/unwilling to PvP' alliances sided with whoever they thought would make their ISK-generating lives easier.
He had the point right in the palm of his hand and missed it completely.
Just to help you out, all the ISK that gets generated, where do you think it gets spent?
on ebay?
Originally by: Eris Discordia
We break after X amount of threads, then we go wild and then we get our medication.
|
|
|
| |
|