EVE Search - caldari militia reinforces RA promethium tower!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

caldari militia reinforces RA promethium tower!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba	Posted - 2008.06.13 11:54:00 - [31] Ahahaha go caldari
Kaishain	Posted - 2008.06.13 11:56:00 - [32] Originally by: Yatta I Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? I see it as RA screwing the business between Gallante and Caldari. By camping gates frequently used by alliance logistics you can say that it was you who interfered with RA bussiness. Unlike in High-sec one doesn not simply trust others not to engage. RA can't trust the 50 FW guys sitting on Tama-Nouv gate not to engage their multi billion haulers. I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players.
Bai ZongTong	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:00:00 - [33] Originally by: Kaishain Originally by: Yatta I Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? I see it as RA screwing the business between Gallante and Caldari. By camping gates frequently used by alliance logistics you can say that it was you who interfered with RA bussiness. Unlike in High-sec one doesn not simply trust others not to engage. RA can't trust the 50 FW guys sitting on Tama-Nouv gate not to engage their multi billion haulers. I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players. ALL of the FC I've seen so far go with the policy of no shooting neuts unless: 1. flashing red 2. the neut are tailing the fleet for unexplained reasons (most likely trying to pick lone kills of slow warppers) 3. being aggroed first. from what I've heard and seen, the RA carriers aggroed on the militias FIRST. either the alliances need to start trusting militias or **** like this will continue to happen. btw, the militias didnt pick the regions to fight in. it was CCP's decision to use these region for FW.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:01:00 - [34] Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? RA started it. They decided to camp one of our main gates with 3 carriers (5 showed up in total). I dont think they expected the kind of responce they got though
Merdaneth PIE Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:01:00 - [35] Originally by: Kaishain I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players. Maybe CCP will, but then they would make it so that wardeccing alliances will be shot down in high-sec space by faction policy just as FW faction players would, effectively barring said alliances from a large part of high-sec.
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:01:00 - [36] Originally by: Kaishain Originally by: Yatta I Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? I see it as RA screwing the business between Gallante and Caldari. By camping gates frequently used by alliance logistics you can say that it was you who interfered with RA bussiness. Unlike in High-sec one doesn not simply trust others not to engage. RA can't trust the 50 FW guys sitting on Tama-Nouv gate not to engage their multi billion haulers. I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players. It's lowsec you know ... it's supposed to be like that ... It was a pool of sharks before, now a whole lot of piranhas were added to the mix ... it's natural there will be parts of shark skin floating around ...
Kaishain	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:04:00 - [37] Originally by: Merdaneth Originally by: Kaishain I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players. Maybe CCP will, but then they would make it so that wardeccing alliances will be shot down in high-sec space by faction policy just as FW faction players would, effectively barring said alliances from a large part of high-sec. Why should militia pilots have that luxury in high sec when the appearantly can interfere with others business just like anyone else? When the militias decides to attack assets of outsider corps they should NOT have any protection from NPCs or gamemechanics. They should play on an even field.
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:06:00 - [38] Where is said tower? I would like to come and watch the show.
Steve Celeste	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:07:00 - [39] Originally by: Pan Crastus The Caldari Militia is the new BoB! Must be because we planned all this at a BBQ.
Jakke Logan F Off And Die	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:07:00 - [40] This is why it was stupid for CCP to exclude alliances from factional warfare. They will be involved, but not in any constructive way. Also, never **** off the Bear. And I hope they hotdrop caps all over the place and make faction warfare unplayable. Something like this HAS to happen to force CCP to either pull or fix faction warfare.
Kaishain	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:08:00 - [41] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? RA started it. They decided to camp one of our main gates with 3 carriers (5 showed up in total). I dont think they expected the kind of responce they got though Maybe it was you who started it when the militia decided to camp one of the RA's logistical highways? That would be seen as a hostile act in any other case. RA most certainly tried to secure the gate for logistics, got attacked and then had a few POSs reinforced. WHY sholdn't they be able to retaliate on the militias like any other corp? You are getting involved in classic eve-politics and you should face retaliation by classic means, not under the protection of gamemechanics and faction NPCs.
Murrukan	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:10:00 - [42] Edited by: Murrukan on 13/06/2008 12:09:50 BOB alts are commanding Factional Warfare fleets! *Puts on tinfoil hat
baltec1 Antares Shipyards	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:10:00 - [43] Originally by: Kaishain Originally by: Merdaneth Originally by: Kaishain I think CCP should let alliances wardec militias OR disable militias from attacking "normal" players. Maybe CCP will, but then they would make it so that wardeccing alliances will be shot down in high-sec space by faction policy just as FW faction players would, effectively barring said alliances from a large part of high-sec. Why should militia pilots have that luxury in high sec when the appearantly can interfere with others business just like anyone else? When the militias decides to attack assets of outsider corps they should NOT have any protection from NPCs or gamemechanics. They should play on an even field. Why should alliences who have no place in FW camp the main stargate used by the caladri militia with carriers?
Bai ZongTong	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:10:00 - [44] Originally by: Jakke Logan This is why it was stupid for CCP to exclude alliances from factional warfare. They will be involved, but not in any constructive way. Also, never **** off the Bear. And I hope they hotdrop caps all over the place and make faction warfare unplayable. Something like this HAS to happen to force CCP to either pull or fix faction warfare. I totally agree with you. RA seriously needs to cut this crap. I have a funny feeling that BOB pilots are laughing their ass off seeing RA in this situation. The next thing we might see is RA escalating the war against militias with BS and cap fleets, then BOB coming to support the caldaris. or worse... a multi-way chaos between two alliances (BOB, RA) and two faction militias (Caldari, Gallante)
Scavok GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:13:00 - [45] More likely BoB don't care and neither does RA
Chrysalis D'lilth	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:13:00 - [46] Funny, I don't see any RA whining about it here, maybe because they will just deal with it in game rather than crying about it on forums. Its good to see a faction fleet bringing it to RA, i'm sure the red army will give as good as it gets in future battles.
Kaishain	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:15:00 - [47] Originally by: baltec1 Why should alliences who have no place in FW camp the main stargate used by the caladri militia with carriers? Because it is a part of NORMAL EVE GAMEPLAY. One does camp a gate if it is deemed necessary for logistics. If attacked one SHOULD be able to retaliate by normal means. RA has been in Tama way before factional warfare hit. They've hauled stuff back and forth for a very long time before you guys started to camp the gates. Now, when they want to secure the gate to be able to continue with their business they get attacked by an entity protected by gamemechanics and NPCs. You engaged in a normal eve conflict and should therefore risk the consecuences of normal eve conflicts.
Cuthbert Drake	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:16:00 - [48] Originally by: Kaishain RA most certainly tried to secure the gate for logistics, got attacked and then had a few POSs reinforced. WHY sholdn't they be able to retaliate on the militias like any other corp? You are getting involved in classic eve-politics and you should face retaliation by classic means, not under the protection of gamemechanics and faction NPCs. Sorry, what? Is that why three carriers went all red flashy, flashy against our fleet, and the fourth one didn't? The one that we didn't agress because he wasn't flashing? And you're saying we attacked them? Why did carrier number 4 get away then, if we attack everything indiscriminately, tell me that?
albert camus Corp 1 Allstars Insurgency	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:18:00 - [49] Dont ** with the russians, end of. Ccp need to fix mechs so Ra can retaliate without cons. You really are sealing your fate by **ing off the hardest working alliance in the game
Mirana Niranne Noob Mercs	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:18:00 - [50] Originally by: Jakke Logan This is why it was stupid for CCP to exclude alliances from factional warfare. They will be involved, but not in any constructive way. Also, never **** off the Bear. And I hope they hotdrop caps all over the place and make faction warfare unplayable. Something like this HAS to happen to force CCP to either pull or fix faction warfare. If RA did that, what would it do to their core system defenses out in 0.0? Though I'm sure if RA REALLY wanted a piece of lowsec, there would be some other alliances in 0.0 who would be willing to take over management of a few systems.
Verite Rendition F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:18:00 - [51] Edited by: Verite Rendition on 13/06/2008 12:20:52 Originally by: Yatta I Edited by: Yatta I on 13/06/2008 11:49:54 I have lost respect for RA due to the course of events over the past few days. first, some RA gang showed up in caldari lowsec (different lowsec, not the current FW region), and started picking random pub targets. i dont know if this is a regular OP or what, but what is different doing this compared to a random pirate corp conducting lowsec gatecamp? then, RA dropped 4 of their carriers in tama for unexplained reason, but the outcome is clear: they interfered with FW and lost 3 carriers. now, they set up a POS in FW region for again, unexplained reason. whatever they are doing, they are interfering with FW, something that CCP has continuously stated in devblog that they want to keep clear with alliances. I think RA should just take the recent course of event as a series of accident before general publicity starts working against them. Uhh, there's really nothing to explain. RA likes Dysprosium and Promethium moons. If you had some 10/10 complexes, they'd probably take those too. Anyhow, best of luck to the Caldari Militia, I don't think anyone would mind RA not having a few low-sec moons for once.
Kaishain	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:19:00 - [52] Originally by: Cuthbert Drake Sorry, what? Is that why three carriers went all red flashy, flashy against our fleet, and the fourth one didn't? The one that we didn't agress because he wasn't flashing? And you're saying we attacked them? Why did carrier number 4 get away then, if we attack everything indiscriminately, tell me that? The siege of a known logistical highway executed by an organisated group IS a hostile act. You attacked RA first, even tho it may never have been you intention.
Yuri Tsukimoto	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:21:00 - [53] Why should militia pilots have that luxury in high sec when the appearantly can interfere with others business just like anyone else? When the militias decides to attack assets of outsider corps they should NOT have any protection from NPCs or gamemechanics. They should play on an even field. Because we are an armed branch of the State. And Governamental violence is Legal. Ahem. =) Jokes aside, what¦s the huge difference from the previous mechanics ? - The fights happen in low-sec/null-sec (Where the bold players that decided to abandon the carebear safety of empire go) - There is no attack on alliance proprety in high-sec. - All alliances can join and have their politics to halt/attack Militia spread in their area of operations. - And no, the npcs are not going to help us in low-sec. What¦s next ? A request for concord help in low-sec for the victims of milita exploit ? It¦s not different from before. Except that the ones that ran to empire from pirates, decided to gather and go hunting
Jakke Logan F Off And Die	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:22:00 - [54] Edited by: Jakke Logan on 13/06/2008 12:23:44 Originally by: Mirana Niranne Originally by: Jakke Logan This is why it was stupid for CCP to exclude alliances from factional warfare. They will be involved, but not in any constructive way. Also, never **** off the Bear. And I hope they hotdrop caps all over the place and make faction warfare unplayable. Something like this HAS to happen to force CCP to either pull or fix faction warfare. If RA did that, what would it do to their core system defenses out in 0.0? Though I'm sure if RA REALLY wanted a piece of lowsec, there would be some other alliances in 0.0 who would be willing to take over management of a few systems. You think RA doesn't have enough of a fleet to dispatch a T1 frigate/cruiser blob without leaving their home systems unprotected? The best way to deal with RA is to leave them alone. Poke them in the eye, and watch the fun begin. I'm looking forward to this. I don't see RA leaving cap losses unavenged. The Russians are awesome to have as allies, terrifying as enemies. Since this serves my goal of destroying faction warfare in order to force CCP to save it, I'm looking forward to it.
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:24:00 - [55] Originally by: Jakke Logan You think RA doesn't have enough of a fleet to dispatch a T1 frigate/cruiser blob without leaving their home systems unprotected? Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Yuri Tsukimoto	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:27:00 - [56] Originally by: Kaishain Originally by: Cuthbert Drake Sorry, what? Is that why three carriers went all red flashy, flashy against our fleet, and the fourth one didn't? The one that we didn't agress because he wasn't flashing? And you're saying we attacked them? Why did carrier number 4 get away then, if we attack everything indiscriminately, tell me that? The siege of a known logistical highway executed by an organisated group IS a hostile act. You attacked RA first, even tho it may never have been you intention. Hostile act ? 0_0 Oh, excuse me [Insert alliance here], we are at war with the Gallente, and we have outposts to capture on [insert system here]. Do you let us play in your uncontested, owned, totally yours property withuos considering this an act of agression, and if by any chance you do attack us first, and flash red to us, do you want us to stay quiet and docile in our own empire playground, for after all, we are a bunch of people with previously delimited space of action. ¼¼
Drenan State War Academy	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:27:00 - [57] Does anyone know what the 40 odd strong Morsus Mihi fleet was up to in the Tama area last night? They jumped to Tama from the Nourv gate about an hour after the RA caps were killed.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:27:00 - [58] Originally by: Kaishain Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Kaishain So the militia is engaging in normal conflicts but have the luxury of not being able to get wardecced? How can non-FW corps and alliances retaliate when militias decides to screw with their business? RA started it. They decided to camp one of our main gates with 3 carriers (5 showed up in total). I dont think they expected the kind of responce they got though Maybe it was you who started it when the militia decided to camp one of the RA's logistical highways? That would be seen as a hostile act in any other case. RA most certainly tried to secure the gate for logistics, got attacked and then had a few POSs reinforced. WHY sholdn't they be able to retaliate on the militias like any other corp? You are getting involved in classic eve-politics and you should face retaliation by classic means, not under the protection of gamemechanics and faction NPCs. 1. RA attacked US first, with it being our main line of reinforcements it has a very good defencive force. 2. Up untill that point I have seen no RA or in fact any other corp/allience haulers being attacked on that gate. 3. RA dont own that system 4. One of the RA carriers left unharmed because it did not open fire, only the ships that attacked us were considered targets. 5. I have run into lots of RA gangs taking on FW pilots in the contested systems and INSIDE capture zones. Is it any wonder that we consider them a hostile target?
Declan Intaki	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:31:00 - [59] Edited by: Declan Intaki on 13/06/2008 12:32:42 MESSAGE TO ANYONE IN RA! Please please please make sure someone in your fleet FRAPS's when you decide to DD the Caldari fleet
Gimpb	Posted - 2008.06.13 12:32:00 - [60] What's all the crying about? People are enjoying their pew pew, who cares what the sides are. There aren't any rules about who you can shoot in eve, you just have to be prepared for the consequences (where applicable).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: 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.