EVE Search - Who will NAP BoB first?

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Who will NAP BoB first?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cippalippus Primus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 20:58:00 - [121] Edited by: Cippalippus Primus on 18/02/2008 20:58:28 Originally by: Semkhet It is a logistical nightmare in the sense that while the number of static targets BoB offers are constantly decreasing, the number of possible targets you expose are increasing proportionally. You don't seem to comprehend that roaming hordes enjoy the privilege of the initiative, and it is not the kind of warfare which can be preempted. It's exactly like the struggle between intelligence services and terrorist cells. The former must cover constantly all bases while the latter only needs to exploit vulnerabilities which always pop out, soon or later. It's not really like that. POS warfare and stront timers mean that you have an estimation on where, and when, you'll find your enemies. Besides, BoB hasn't won every single engagement and certainly isn't employing guerrilla tactics far behind the lines to disrupt our operations. Ganking lone travellers doesn't put a stop to operations, it just means that you need to travel in groups to reach the zone of operations. The real conflict in NOL and Delve more in general is less "idealistic" than you make it out to be -clp
Whitney Novak Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:00:00 - [122] Originally by: Semkhet Edited by: Semkhet on 18/02/2008 20:53:05 Originally by: Cippalippus It's not really a logistical nightmare, Delve is nicely close to empire; much more than Omist or Paragon Soul, regions that fell before. It is a logistical nightmare in the sense that while the number of static targets BoB offers are constantly decreasing, the number of possible targets you expose are increasing proportionally. You don't seem to comprehend that roaming hordes enjoy the privilege of the initiative, and it is not the kind of warfare which can be preempted. It's exactly like the struggle between intelligence services and terrorist cells. The former must cover constantly all bases while the latter only needs to exploit vulnerabilities which always pop out, soon or later. A valid point, but misses the crunch, BOB cannot hold terriority (sp?) against the numbers ranged against it in a mass attack, yes sure, they can exploit vunerable areas but as has been shown the coalition can provide the numbers to throw at them to wear them down. BOB can exploit vunerable areas but cannot hold them, that is the problem that BOB will face if they wish at some point to rebuild in 0.0.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:03:00 - [123] Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:06:37 Originally by: toto moor In a chat with a few "influential" people in the coalition the idea was mooted that the existing blues reset standings, go back to the NBSI state of affairs, but have a pact that If BOB attempts to attack one of the coalition then all would temporary ally to keep BOB out of 0.0.(this as far as I know hasnt been agreed by all yet) Once the NOL and F-T areas fall there will be a major standing reset by all the coalition forces, some will agree to NBSI but no POS, soveriegn warfare, others will try to make inroads on previously freindly space, but all will agree I believe to ceasefire if BOB becomes a threat to any ones space. Maybe not under the ticker "BOB" but considering how easy it is to buy and sell chars they could be in another part of 0.0 as we speak under another alliance name. Its quite a tribute to the power they commanded and fear they still generate that so many alliances are willing to agree to drop whatever wars they are fighting and blob up to stop BOB from gaining any 0.0 space again. Considering the quality of the alliances in the coalition i doubt we will see an alliance of BOBS standard for a long time if ever in eve again. HEY LISTEN for ruler of eve.
toto moor Eve Corporate Enterprise	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:17:00 - [124] Edited by: toto moor on 18/02/2008 21:18:42 Originally by: marakor Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:07:49[/edit Maybe not under the ticker "BOB" but considering how easy it is to buy and sell chars they could be in another part of 0.0 as we speak under another alliance name. Its quite a tribute to the power they commanded and fear they still generate that so many alliances are willing to agree to drop whatever wars they are fighting and blob up to stop BOB from gaining any 0.0 space again. Considering the quality of the alliances in the coalition i doubt we will see an alliance of BOBS standard for a long time if ever in eve again. It is a tribute, there is no doubt this war has been the biggest thing in EVE since it began, and a lot of that is due to BOB and who they are (some also has to be said is due to their arrogance, Had to get a kick in somewhere ) BOB have the talent, expertise and skill to dominate EVE, but their tactical brilliance was and is let down by their strategic mistakes. Winning a battle is fine and dandy, dismissing and losing your allies in a war that revolves around numbers and timezones is a recipe for disaster. The coalition in this war had one major ally against BOB, BOB itself.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:19:00 - [125] Originally by: marakor Its quite a tribute to the power they commanded and fear they still generate that so many alliances are willing to agree to drop whatever wars they are fighting and blob up to stop BOB from gaining any 0.0 space again. Another perspective is that if a group of some 5000 people + change spend 6 months, a year, however long this has been going on motivated solely by kicking someone out of 0.0, odds are they're going to be motivated to keep them kicked out in the future. The motivation is to keep your victorious results victorious. Spending a year evicting an alliance just to let them move back in a month later would certainly feel a tad hollow. Its that or fear. ------ Originally by: Dark Shikari The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
Mangus Thermopyle Divine Retribution Divine 0rder	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:21:00 - [126] Originally by: thoth foc Not to burst you little bubble, but ATUK/.5. left a territorial war to live in NPC stations and did rather well out of it.. took more regions again later when we wanted them.. and finally reformed into DICE out of respect for our departing leader.. Hehe, I remember that. At the end you forced us (F-E) to nap you cause you had 8 dreads in our main system, and we had like 5 dreads in the whole alliance, and 4 of then where offline. Its a little different now
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:23:00 - [127] I think it's more intense dislike than anything else.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:25:00 - [128] Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:26:00 Originally by: toto moor Originally by: marakor Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:07:49[/edit Maybe not under the ticker "BOB" but considering how easy it is to buy and sell chars they could be in another part of 0.0 as we speak under another alliance name. Its quite a tribute to the power they commanded and fear they still generate that so many alliances are willing to agree to drop whatever wars they are fighting and blob up to stop BOB from gaining any 0.0 space again. Considering the quality of the alliances in the coalition i doubt we will see an alliance of BOBS standard for a long time if ever in eve again. It is a tribute, there is no doubt this war has been the biggest thing in EVE since it began, and a lot of that is due to BOB and who they are (some also has to be said is due to their arrogance, Had to get a kick in somewhere) BOB have the talent, expertise and skill to dominate EVE, but their tactical brilliance was and is let down by their strategic mistakes. Winning a battle is fine and dandy, dismissing and losing your allies in a war that revolves around numbers and timezones is a recipe for disaster. The coalition in this war had one major ally against BOB, BOB itself. I agree that bob successes are the reason that they have such a huge force against them but the fact remains that their is somthing wrong with the mechanics of a combat game when you can win 95% of the battles and still lose the war. The prenerf titan was a good eaqualizer as it was useless against capital ships and so forced space holding and taking alliances to improve their fleets and gather capital fleets together. But after the nerf all it takes is enough conventional ships and a willingnesss to lemming them over and over into the systems you want. And personaly that is not the way things should work imho. HEY LISTEN for ruler of eve.
Kaaii Caldari PixelJuice Design Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:31:00 - [129] Originally by: Tilta Originally by: Cippalippus Primus You are downsizing the coalition's achievements in politics. Turning former allies and pets against their own master is machiavelism. What you're talking about isn't machiavelism, it's deception and intrigue- equally interesting, but a whole different thing. Nonsense, BoB either abandoned or alienated through arrogance every ally they had, all by themselves. With leadership like that, who need enemy subterfuge? Abandoned and alienated ally, signing in....is there where I call nonsense on this nonsense? I think so According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there. kieron Director of Community Relations,
Brobuck GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:31:00 - [130] Originally by: toto moor I speak as someone who is publicaly anti-BOB I know and speak to quite a few BOB members I know also from coalition members ...unless you are going to camp in BOB members into 0.0 npc stations for months and months there is little chance of breaking BOB as an alliance. No-one I have spoken too has said they think their members would want to spend their on-line time doing that to BOB once their stations are all gone. Went from a little malodorous to downright fishy fast. Originally by: toto moor In a chat with a few "influential" people in the coalition Can you introduce me to a few of these influential people? I like meeting important people in the internet community. Originally by: toto moor all will agree I believe to ceasefire if BOB becomes a threat to any ones space. I'm pretty sure somebody suggested that already in this forum. When you say "chat with 'influential' people" do you mean read these forums? Originally by: toto moor BOB cannot and will not be killed by the coalition, but they can and probably will ensure to paraphrase someone famous, "Never be allowed to build up in 0.0 again" So, they've won?
Whitney Novak Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:33:00 - [131] Quote: agree that bob successes are the reason that they have such a huge force against them but the fact remains that their is somthing wrong with the mechanics of a combat game when you can win 95% of the battles and still lose the war. Sorry but your wrong, war is about killing your enemy forces quicker than they can kill you, if they have many many more people then you either have to kill them lots and lots more or lose, there are plenty of historical records where troops have been thrown in to die time and time again and in the end the force of numbers takes the field. Why should Eve be any different?
toto moor Eve Corporate Enterprise	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:39:00 - [132] Originally by: Brobuck Blah Blah Blah So, they've won? Not by the definition of either BOB or those who are realistic about what can be achieved. And yes , by virtue of being a alt I can say that I have spoken and been part of various conversations some more enlightening than others...
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:39:00 - [133] Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:46:46 Edited by: marakor on 18/02/2008 21:44:43 Originally by: Whitney Novak Quote: agree that bob successes are the reason that they have such a huge force against them but the fact remains that their is somthing wrong with the mechanics of a combat game when you can win 95% of the battles and still lose the war. Sorry but your wrong, war is about killing your enemy forces quicker than they can kill you, if they have many many more people then you either have to kill them lots and lots more or lose, there are plenty of historical records where troops have been thrown in to die time and time again and in the end the force of numbers takes the field. Why should Eve be any different? RL analogies are a waste of time as your examples rely totaly on very old historical battles and have no reality what so ever in modern warfare. I do agree that holding and taking space in eve now involves politics and endless naps to do, but i also think that the ability to do that is nothing to be proud of and hardly worthy of praise or the chest thumping that ppl wish to do over it. Space holding and taking is a matter of numbers and naps so if you into political games its all good but i pay my fee to fly space ships see the screen actualy move and be able to activate modules. HEY LISTEN for ruler of eve.
toto moor Eve Corporate Enterprise	Posted - 2008.02.18 21:47:00 - [134] Quote: RL analogies are a waste of time as your examples rely totaly on very old historical battles and have no reality what so ever in modern warfare. But it is relevant in Eve, as BOB are killing more of their enemy than they are dying but still losing their space, the analogy works because it is true, if I have more troops than you have bullets I will hold the field in the end, I may lose more people than you, but I will gain the ground.
Tripden SGL	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:00:00 - [135] Originally by: toto moor But it is relevant in Eve, as BOB are killing more of their enemy than they are dying but still losing their space, the analogy works because it is true, if I have more troops than you have bullets I will hold the field in the end, I may lose more people than you, but I will gain the ground. In RL a dead soldier is a dead soldier. In Eve every Goon is just a clone away from a ship. SO your analogy fails on every lvl.
Tevlent GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:08:00 - [136] Edited by: Tevlent on 18/02/2008 22:10:08 Edited by: Tevlent on 18/02/2008 22:09:45 Originally by: Patch86 Another perspective is that if a group of some 5000 people + change spend 6 months, a year, however long this has been going on motivated solely by kicking someone out of 0.0, odds are they're going to be motivated to keep them kicked out in the future. The motivation is to keep your victorious results victorious. ....evicting an alliance just to let them move back in a month later would certainly feel a tad hollow. This sounds familiar...where have I heard this happening before? Hmm....something about someone playing someones game and never living in 0.0 space again.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:10:00 - [137] Originally by: toto moor Quote: RL analogies are a waste of time as your examples rely totaly on very old historical battles and have no reality what so ever in modern warfare. But it is relevant in Eve, as BOB are killing more of their enemy than they are dying but still losing their space, the analogy works because it is true, if I have more troops than you have bullets I will hold the field in the end, I may lose more people than you, but I will gain the ground. If China were to have 40% conscription, thats 400million soldiers. If they were sent to charge the world with pichforks, sure a defending army with less than 400 million bullets may not seem effective. But you also assume that each of the 400 million soldiers enjoys charging into the meatgrinder armed with pichforks. You also assume that the 400 million soldiers will not "lag" due to sheer numbers climing over themselves and their fallen. You see, I dont know anyone we fight that enjoys the absolute ass kickings we give them. Therefore less people turn up to the meatgrinder, and those that do tend to downgrade a shiptype or two. This can quite clearly be seen in pilots bringing noobships and shuttles to battle insted of ships that can actually win a fight. The numbers of deserters on the Coalation front is steadaly increasing, as you do not factor in moral in your calcuations. -- Billion Isk Mission
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:15:00 - [138] Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: toto moor Quote: RL analogies are a waste of time as your examples rely totaly on very old historical battles and have no reality what so ever in modern warfare. But it is relevant in Eve, as BOB are killing more of their enemy than they are dying but still losing their space, the analogy works because it is true, if I have more troops than you have bullets I will hold the field in the end, I may lose more people than you, but I will gain the ground. If China were to have 40% conscription, thats 400million soldiers. If they were sent to charge the world with pichforks, sure a defending army with less than 400 million bullets may not seem effective. But you also assume that each of the 400 million soldiers enjoys charging into the meatgrinder armed with pichforks. You also assume that the 400 million soldiers will not "lag" due to sheer numbers climing over themselves and their fallen. You see, I dont know anyone we fight that enjoys the absolute ass kickings we give them. Therefore less people turn up to the meatgrinder, and those that do tend to downgrade a shiptype or two. This can quite clearly be seen in pilots bringing noobships and shuttles to battle insted of ships that can actually win a fight. The numbers of deserters on the Coalation front is steadaly increasing, as you do not factor in moral in your calcuations. Plus you are talking bullets and not bombs or in the titans case a nuke as that is what it must be considered. The fact is that no nuke capable power should be able to be over run by a non nuke holding power it is just not a valid premise. HEY LISTEN for ruler of eve.
Tripden SGL	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:20:00 - [139] Originally by: Lord WarATron If China were to have 40% conscription, thats 400million soldiers. If they were sent to charge the world with pichforks, sure a defending army with less than 400 million bullets may not seem effective. But you also assume that each of the 400 million soldiers enjoys charging into the meatgrinder armed with pichforks. You also assume that the 400 million soldiers will not "lag" due to sheer numbers climing over themselves and their fallen. You see, I dont know anyone we fight that enjoys the absolute ass kickings we give them. Therefore less people turn up to the meatgrinder, and those that do tend to downgrade a shiptype or two. This can quite clearly be seen in pilots bringing noobships and shuttles to battle insted of ships that can actually win a fight. The numbers of deserters on the Coalation front is steadaly increasing, as you do not factor in moral in your calcuations. You had to ruin their propaganda run m8? :( But yeah i'm noticig the same thing... really not hard to see it if you just follow the killboards... and goons can twist their propaganda as much as they want... i still doubt anybody plays/pays this game to loose ships the whole time...
Brobuck GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:35:00 - [140] Originally by: Lord WarATron You see, I dont know anyone we fight that enjoys the absolute ass kickings we give them. It has been a while since you guys really did that. Most of your membership is now remnants of failed alliances. The hard-core, high sp, dedicated pvp pilot isn't really around in BoB that much. Say what you want, I see a lot more T1 fitted ships, and a lot more frigs and cruisers. Didn't Molle go a little ballistic about you guys showing up in those? Didn't he threaten the red pen for pilots bringing those ships to battles? I know if you kept beating the RSF in fleet battles, I would've lost my appetite for it long ago, yet here I am, dining in NOL. Who is this propaganda for, anymore, anyway? The RSF knows the truth, we've lived it. The majority of the non-involved EVE public knows it isn't true, since even BoB membership is talking about how they can make money in 0.0 and be a real threat when they've broken the shackles of owning space. I can only assume, then, that you're trying to convince yourself, and your membership, that the reality playing out in front of them, the evidence of their senses, isn't as bad as it seems. Check the BoB killboard, look at the killmails and lossmails, and see how many frigs and shuttles show up, it isn't hard to verify. Then come to the fight, it is in NOL, in your home system of Delve. I'll be using the station services there soon, how about you?
thoth foc Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:39:00 - [141] Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle Originally by: thoth foc Not to burst you little bubble, but ATUK/.5. left a territorial war to live in NPC stations and did rather well out of it.. took more regions again later when we wanted them.. and finally reformed into DICE out of respect for our departing leader.. Hehe, I remember that. At the end you forced us (F-E) to nap you cause you had 8 dreads in our main system, and we had like 5 dreads in the whole alliance, and 4 of then where offline. Its a little different now hehe.. hi Mangus :-) The mechanics are different.. but the game never changes _________________________ xMenta (DSMA) xBOS (CA) ATUK (.5.) DICE (BOB) xElcyion Lacar
toto moor Eve Corporate Enterprise	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:39:00 - [142] You would have a valid point, if the guys who go back and get into noobships and shuttles were doing that, but, look over your shoulder, in NOL there are caps, super caps, T2 fitted ships flown by guys you have killed over and over again. Goons & friends have the numbers to rotate their troops to allow them to recuperate and then throw them back into the fray.not just today or tomorrow but time and time again. that is what will win this war, that and the fact you and me dont like losing expensive ships while those strange goons find it hilarious
Tripden SGL	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:43:00 - [143] Originally by: toto moor You would have a valid point, if the guys who go back and get into noobships and shuttles were doing that, but, look over your shoulder, in NOL there are caps, super caps, T2 fitted ships flown by guys you have killed over and over again. Goons & friends have the numbers to rotate their troops to allow them to recuperate and then throw them back into the fray.not just today or tomorrow but time and time again. that is what will win this war, that and the fact you and me dont like losing expensive ships while those strange goons find it hilarious Really doubt anyone finds loosing ships/watching the log screen/not loading grid/not being able to lock fun. But hey I may be wrong...
thoth foc Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:53:00 - [144] Originally by: Tripden Originally by: toto moor You would have a valid point, if the guys who go back and get into noobships and shuttles were doing that, but, look over your shoulder, in NOL there are caps, super caps, T2 fitted ships flown by guys you have killed over and over again. Goons & friends have the numbers to rotate their troops to allow them to recuperate and then throw them back into the fray.not just today or tomorrow but time and time again. that is what will win this war, that and the fact you and me dont like losing expensive ships while those strange goons find it hilarious Really doubt anyone finds loosing ships/watching the log screen/not loading grid/not being able to lock fun. But hey I may be wrong... Enjoy prolly not, but it isnt that hard to motivate ppl into doing.. just tell them they are gaining strategic victories etc.. not that many really put much fore thought into the validity of the claims _________________________ xMenta (DSMA) xBOS (CA) ATUK (.5.) DICE (BOB) xElcyion Lacar
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.02.18 22:59:00 - [145] Originally by: thoth foc Originally by: Tripden Originally by: toto moor You would have a valid point, if the guys who go back and get into noobships and shuttles were doing that, but, look over your shoulder, in NOL there are caps, super caps, T2 fitted ships flown by guys you have killed over and over again. Goons & friends have the numbers to rotate their troops to allow them to recuperate and then throw them back into the fray.not just today or tomorrow but time and time again. that is what will win this war, that and the fact you and me dont like losing expensive ships while those strange goons find it hilarious Really doubt anyone finds loosing ships/watching the log screen/not loading grid/not being able to lock fun. But hey I may be wrong... Enjoy prolly not, but it isnt that hard to motivate ppl into doing.. just tell them they are gaining strategic victories etc.. not that many really put much fore thought into the validity of the claims Haha, are you really denying that the Coalition is getting strategic victories? They don't have to be told they are gaining strategic victories. The long list of fallen stationsystems from 66- onwards up to QY6 is proving it.
Zastrow GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.18 23:05:00 - [146] Originally by: Semkhet Edited by: Semkhet on 18/02/2008 20:53:05 Originally by: Cippalippus It's not really a logistical nightmare, Delve is nicely close to empire; much more than Omist or Paragon Soul, regions that fell before. It is a logistical nightmare in the sense that while the number of static targets BoB offers are constantly decreasing, the number of possible targets you expose are increasing proportionally. You don't seem to comprehend that roaming hordes enjoy the privilege of the initiative, and it is not the kind of warfare which can be preempted. It's exactly like the struggle between intelligence services and terrorist cells. The former must cover constantly all bases while the latter only needs to exploit vulnerabilities which always pop out, soon or later. This is wrong because eve has ******** game mechanics. Stront timing allows the defender to choose the time of the battle. It's WAY easier to be a defender in EVE. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
thoth foc Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2008.02.18 23:05:00 - [147] Originally by: Malachon Draco Haha, are you really denying that the Coalition is getting strategic victories? They don't have to be told they are gaining strategic victories. The long list of fallen stationsystems from 66- onwards up to QY6 is proving it. yes.. because a strategy of taking stations in an NPC region is pointless... it's really not that difficult to understand is it? _________________________ xMenta (DSMA) xBOS (CA) ATUK (.5.) DICE (BOB) xElcyion Lacar
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.02.18 23:13:00 - [148] Originally by: thoth foc Originally by: Malachon Draco Haha, are you really denying that the Coalition is getting strategic victories? They don't have to be told they are gaining strategic victories. The long list of fallen stationsystems from 66- onwards up to QY6 is proving it. yes.. because a strategy of taking stations in an NPC region is pointless... it's really not that difficult to understand is it? BoB has no Sov 3/4 systems left? And there is no value to having sov 3/4 systems? For, well, I don't know, building some more supercaps? You're grasping at straws if you claim that because the NPC stations in Delve won't be taken (obviously) that BoB can't suffer a very real defeat.
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2008.02.18 23:14:00 - [149] Originally by: Malachon Draco Haha, are you really denying that the Coalition is getting strategic victories? They don't have to be told they are gaining strategic victories. The long list of fallen stationsystems from 66- onwards up to QY6 is proving it. The only strategic victory in eve is one of morale and anybody who thinks its ships or space or stations has no idea how this game works. If you destroy a alliances morale you destroy the alliance everything else can be replaced or ignored as unimportant by the alliance holding it. If goons or the coalition think that they are gaining anything but space by taking stations off BOB they are kidding themselves and should be focusing on killing BOB's morale instead as this is the only thing that matters if they want BOB to be truly destroyed. HEY LISTEN for ruler of eve.
thoth foc Arcane Technologies The Five	Posted - 2008.02.18 23:18:00 - [150] Originally by: Malachon Draco BoB has no Sov 3/4 systems left? And there is no value to having sov 3/4 systems? For, well, I don't know, building some more supercaps? You're grasping at straws if you claim that because the NPC stations in Delve won't be taken (obviously) that BoB can't suffer a very real defeat. cool.. so what's your point? that we cant buy supercaps? or that we cant build them in alt corps? Bob can certain suffer real defeats.. but really... trying to convince me that i need to own a station to shoot ppl, really isnt going to work.. try harder.. _________________________ xMenta (DSMA) xBOS (CA) ATUK (.5.) DICE (BOB) xElcyion Lacar

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.