These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CFC Declares War on N3.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chopper Rollins
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#181 - 2013-12-16 05:04:26 UTC
"When CCP f***s up and creates yet another imbalanced and indefensible mechanic, there is a certain demographic of player who will immediately seize upon this mechanic and use it to try to destroy Lowtax's Chosen People."

I am so confus, i thought this what what gewns did. All the time.


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.
MestariBation
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#182 - 2013-12-16 05:07:15 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead

Send me isk im poor
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#183 - 2013-12-16 05:09:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
MestariBation wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead


i saw it more like...

node was fine....20 cfc dreadaughts go down...cfc starting to get completely crushed.... guy on cfc livestream is talking about deliberate node crash and blam...

the node crashes.
Honest Blob
Doomheim
#184 - 2013-12-16 05:10:09 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.



Nice try at deflecting the blame there. When we have recorded evidence of dbrb calling for the cfc to crash the node to save the dreads i think that pretty much puts a nail in it. As n3 could ahve crashed the node at any time by cynoing in thier 200man super fleet right on top of those dreads but didnt cus they wanted the kills.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#185 - 2013-12-16 05:10:30 UTC
MestariBation wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead


Funny how that keeps on happening in this war.
MestariBation
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#186 - 2013-12-16 05:10:47 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
MestariBation wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead


i saw it more like...

node was fine....20 cfc dreadaughts go down...cfc starting to get completely crushed.... guy on cfc lifestream is talking about deliberate node crash and blam...

the node crashes.

exactly

Send me isk im poor
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#187 - 2013-12-16 05:14:12 UTC
Honest Blob wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.



Nice try at deflecting the blame there. When we have recorded evidence of dbrb calling for the cfc to crash the node to save the dreads i think that pretty much puts a nail in it. As n3 could ahve crashed the node at any time by cynoing in thier 200man super fleet right on top of those dreads but didnt cus they wanted the kills.


So because DBRB was being DBRB and said something jokingly you think that means that we deliberately crashed the node resulting in our ships becoming trapped and having to log into a likely very hostile bubblecamp with hundreds of carriers and a supercap/titan fleet ready to smack us down as we log in one by one?
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#188 - 2013-12-16 05:17:49 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Honest Blob wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.



Nice try at deflecting the blame there. When we have recorded evidence of dbrb calling for the cfc to crash the node to save the dreads i think that pretty much puts a nail in it. As n3 could ahve crashed the node at any time by cynoing in thier 200man super fleet right on top of those dreads but didnt cus they wanted the kills.


So because DBRB was being DBRB and said something jokingly you think that means that we deliberately crashed the node resulting in our ships becoming trapped and having to log into a likely very hostile bubblecamp with hundreds of carriers and a supercap/titan fleet ready to smack us down as we log in one by one?



Given a choice between that and losing the entire dread fleet, I can totally understand why the node crash would be preferable.

Congrats on finding a "solution" to your situation...Lol
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#189 - 2013-12-16 05:31:34 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Pinky Hops wrote:


Given a choice between that and losing the entire dread fleet, I can totally understand why the node crash would be preferable.

Congrats on finding a "solution" to your situation...Lol


Given that capital losses were even I would say that a node crash was not in anyones interest.

As fun as it is trying to pin blame on one side or the other the simple fact is that the nodes simply cannot handle the fleets being used in this war. A war the likes of which we have not seen since the attempted headshot of VFK.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#190 - 2013-12-16 05:34:43 UTC
Honest Blob wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.



Nice try at deflecting the blame there. When we have recorded evidence of dbrb calling for the cfc to crash the node to save the dreads i think that pretty much puts a nail in it. As n3 could ahve crashed the node at any time by cynoing in thier 200man super fleet right on top of those dreads but didnt cus they wanted the kills.



ok


So what exactly did CFC do to cause this to happen? Nevermind the turbo-nerd with the hat.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#191 - 2013-12-16 05:35:43 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
MestariBation wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead


i saw it more like...

node was fine....20 cfc dreadaughts go down...cfc starting to get completely crushed.... guy on cfc livestream is talking about deliberate node crash and blam...

the node crashes.

Of course it's not a coincidence that people make jokes, comments, etc. about nodes crashing before it happens, but that doesn't imply that we're doing it deliberately.
We've gotten pretty good at telling when it's about to happen, you see.

If we were actually trying to crash the node intentionally, CCP would be able to tell.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
MestariBation
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#192 - 2013-12-16 05:36:40 UTC  |  Edited by: MestariBation
How long will this war last in 10% tidi? 10years?

Some sort of BR

Send me isk im poor
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#193 - 2013-12-16 05:39:23 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
It's ironic though that people are quick to point fingers and say Mittens is crying by stating (the fact that) blobs of 250 slowcats are impervious to subcaps and therefore we're adapting (the opposite of crying) by training alpha nags.
And then these same people turning around and screaming and kicking and making a tantrum about a node crash, which kind of has a tendency to happen when you pile a ****-ton of people in system. And of course a node crash is going to benefit someone. That still doesn't mean anyone did it intentionally.

Between not playing the game and playing the game I'm pretty sure most people would choose to play the game.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#194 - 2013-12-16 05:41:50 UTC
It would seem ghost carriers have made a return.
Leigh Akiga
Kuhri Innovations
#195 - 2013-12-16 05:42:53 UTC
but but guys: this is the age of the capital

ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#196 - 2013-12-16 05:43:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
MestariBation wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Funny how we get blamed for for forcing the node down when there are 300 carriers dumping 10 sentries each and seemingly abandoning them to launch yet more.

Node was fine then suddenly titans and node dead


i saw it more like...

node was fine....20 cfc dreadaughts go down...cfc starting to get completely crushed.... guy on cfc livestream is talking about deliberate node crash and blam...

the node crashes.

Of course it's not a coincidence that people make jokes, comments, etc. about nodes crashing before it happens, but that doesn't imply that we're doing it deliberately.
We've gotten pretty good at telling when it's about to happen, you see.

If we were actually trying to crash the node intentionally, CCP would be able to tell.



Not to mention that everyone thought the node died went that TCU took. I'm amazed that it lasted as long as it did.


Would also like to thank that node crash for de-syncing me like 10 AU off of a very nasty grid. I got to align, have a smoke and sit there slamming D-Scan while every got organized again (I use that term loosely).
Lady Areola Fappington
#197 - 2013-12-16 05:51:24 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's ironic though that people are quick to point fingers and say Mittens is crying by stating (the fact that) blobs of 250 slowcats are impervious to subcaps and therefore we're adapting (the opposite of crying) by training alpha nags.
And then these same people turning around and screaming and kicking and making a tantrum about a node crash, which kind of has a tendency to happen when you pile a ****-ton of people in system. And of course a node crash is going to benefit someone. That still doesn't mean anyone did it intentionally.

Between not playing the game and playing the game I'm pretty sure most people would choose to play the game.


Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but dreads are all insurable, right?

If there were any real basis to the intentional crash idea, I'd figure the group with more risk hanging out there to be the perpetrators. If dreads can be insured...not a whole helluva lot of risk.


Then again, I'm just a simple highsec ganker, unknowing in the ways of ~honorable~ nullsec combats.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#198 - 2013-12-16 05:55:19 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's ironic though that people are quick to point fingers and say Mittens is crying by stating (the fact that) blobs of 250 slowcats are impervious to subcaps and therefore we're adapting (the opposite of crying) by training alpha nags.
And then these same people turning around and screaming and kicking and making a tantrum about a node crash, which kind of has a tendency to happen when you pile a ****-ton of people in system. And of course a node crash is going to benefit someone. That still doesn't mean anyone did it intentionally.

Between not playing the game and playing the game I'm pretty sure most people would choose to play the game.


Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but dreads are all insurable, right?

If there were any real basis to the intentional crash idea, I'd figure the group with more risk hanging out there to be the perpetrators. If dreads can be insured...not a whole helluva lot of risk.


Then again, I'm just a simple highsec ganker, unknowing in the ways of ~honorable~ nullsec combats.

Well the carriers were probably insured too.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#199 - 2013-12-16 05:55:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's ironic though that people are quick to point fingers and say Mittens is crying by stating (the fact that) blobs of 250 slowcats are impervious to subcaps and therefore we're adapting (the opposite of crying) by training alpha nags.
And then these same people turning around and screaming and kicking and making a tantrum about a node crash, which kind of has a tendency to happen when you pile a ****-ton of people in system. And of course a node crash is going to benefit someone. That still doesn't mean anyone did it intentionally.

Between not playing the game and playing the game I'm pretty sure most people would choose to play the game.


Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but dreads are all insurable, right?

If there were any real basis to the intentional crash idea, I'd figure the group with more risk hanging out there to be the perpetrators. If dreads can be insured...not a whole helluva lot of risk.


Then again, I'm just a simple highsec ganker, unknowing in the ways of ~honorable~ nullsec combats.


Dreads and Carriers are insurable yes.

Alavaria Fera wrote:


Well the carriers were probably insured too.


Those Thannys better have been, they went down like a virgin on prom night.

....on that note, WTS large rigged triage thanny......
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#200 - 2013-12-16 05:55:52 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
It's ironic though that people are quick to point fingers and say Mittens is crying by stating (the fact that) blobs of 250 slowcats are impervious to subcaps and therefore we're adapting (the opposite of crying) by training alpha nags.
And then these same people turning around and screaming and kicking and making a tantrum about a node crash, which kind of has a tendency to happen when you pile a ****-ton of people in system. And of course a node crash is going to benefit someone. That still doesn't mean anyone did it intentionally.

Between not playing the game and playing the game I'm pretty sure most people would choose to play the game.


Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but dreads are all insurable, right?

If there were any real basis to the intentional crash idea, I'd figure the group with more risk hanging out there to be the perpetrators. If dreads can be insured...not a whole helluva lot of risk.


Then again, I'm just a simple highsec ganker, unknowing in the ways of ~honorable~ nullsec combats.

Dreads can be insured (and so can carriers). By your theory it would be N3/PL as the more likely party to crash the node intentionally since they dropped supers and titans, but you won't see me accusing them of doing so because I don't believe they did.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)