Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Politics...

I think you should all just vote for a galactic dictator (me) to rule in your stead, solve all problems and allocate sectors to those corps that deserve them. I will bring justice to tbe galaxy! Vote for me!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Politics... I think you should all just vote for a galactic dictator (me) to rule in your stead, solve all problems and allocate sectors to those corps that deserve them. I will bring justice to tbe

So NASA has one sector and Arch has two.   Mecron & I have helped Nuke in a defense in the past. THE VERY NEXT day Nuke created some alliance with 3 or 4 corps to spam attack ALL NASA sectors.

I agree with you on this. If there is anything to be had, I'd say there is a very small man with a big Napoleon complex on the other side of this title. From my perspective looking inwards, from as l

@Shotan, in our case at hand, one of the 'sources'had to go on vacation instead )))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems so. My guess is he has a good comprehension on just how manu people are mad at him right now. No fault to his corporation though, he's a powerthirsty individual who knows no better than to run his mouth at wrong turns.

Poor leadership quality and poor show of personality... I certainly won't be making any deals with Arkhos at any stage as long as Nuke is running their show. Besides, none of this is even my battle, so I'm even offended he would try and drag me to. My corporation speaks for itself and I encourage everyone else of the same seed to follow suit of stronger, better disciplined leaders such as ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can guarantee a NASAless sector, but there has to be a reassurance that there actually will be games held, I am not reserving a sector for 1 figth a week. How many corporations actually want to play dreads AND capable of playing in our time zone?

+1

 

I want some nail biting matches in US time. I'm staying up to 12 EST for matches!

 

I'm tired of the best opponent being drones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems so. My guess is he has a good comprehension on just how manu people are mad at him right now. No fault to his corporation though, he's a powerthirsty individual who knows no better than to run his mouth at wrong turns.

Poor leadership quality and poor show of personality... I certainly won't be making any deals with Arkhos at any stage as long as Nuke is running their show. Besides, none of this is even my battle, so I'm even offended he would try and drag me to. My corporation speaks for itself and I encourage everyone else of the same seed to follow suit of stronger, better disciplined leaders such as ourselves.

 

nah, c'mon, it's not that bad.

i do believe that the intentions were good, albeit there is always a component of dazzlement every leader has to overcome from time to time, especially when you carry your own momentum, and you rise fast very early. if you know what i mean.

there is no need to completely negativize one person, and blame him for everything. mistakes were made. it will have repercussions i am sure of. nuke might have to overthink his position aswell, might also need the time to rethink and learn from all this feedback.

after all, you can't lead solely by charisma and intentions, power always corrupts and nobody is perfect - sentences which sound like wisecracking, but they come from exactly these situations - only good thing, no real harm is done here, since it's just about a temporary situation (besides, that its in a game, but that actually doesnt make it less real in terms of social-people-emotion-stuff).

there is no natural born leader, except dictators.

 

the real "fuse" of the whole situation was external, as both parties have admitted. lets just not forget that.

Politics...

I think you should all just vote for a galactic dictator (me) to rule in your stead, solve all problems and allocate sectors to those corps that deserve them. I will bring justice to tbe galaxy! Vote for me!

so this is how you try to bypass my tyranny...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all that said and implied, [Arch] is still pushing on [bEAST] sector, not SALT, not FDEF, not NASA, not OWL - they push [bEAST], to me this is an attempt of a said "repercussions" to BEAST's attempt to stay neutral from your zerg or partially siding with NASA to resist Arch's threats. That is the thing I was talking about in that wall of text of mine, with all the great intents stated on forums, Arch is still only interested in small personal vendetta and that is how it acts in game.

 

NASA will help BEAST defend vs Arch wing, while they can focus on games with FDEF on equal ground (last night, as much as I know their final score was +/- 30 points to decide the match)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify things (that Kostyan said needed it):

 

The backstabbing was something Arch felt when BEASTs allowed NASA to attack with them, despite the fact that HalFfast had agreed with Nuke to help with the zerg rush against NASA (from what I was told by Nuke, and what I overheard in the part of the conversation between the two that I heard).

 

In Arch, I know me and Nuke felt like our good will was repeatedly thrown back in our faces when we had numerous times offered NASA spots to help us defend, and we made it clear they were guaranteed to get games if they helped us defend, whereas they weren't if they attacked. When NASA repeatedly attacked Arch instead of taking up our offers for defense, that not only showed us that NASA didn't care about getting games, it also made us feel as though NASA were blatantly refusing our offers as if they had something to prove. Most of the feeling that our good will had been thrown back in our faces came from when Nuke received PMs from Mustacho in which he said that NASA was more than willing to drive Arch out of fed space and ruin us if we wouldn't ready up against NASA (despite the fact that we made it clear to other NASA leaders that they weren't guaranteed games if they attacked).

 

When I refer to "all corporations involved" in the terms I proposed, I am referring to the following corps:

Arch, NASA, BEASTs, FDEF, RadiX, Ultra, SRO. Basically all the corps that agreed to zerg rush, and the corps on the receiving end of the zerg rush.

 

I can guarantee a NASAless sector, but there has to be a reassurance that there actually will be games held, I am not reserving a sector for 1 figth a week. How many corporations actually want to play dreads AND capable of playing in our time zone?

 

I think that is perfectly reasonable. If the smaller corps that the sector(s) would be reserved for agreed to ensure there is at least 1 attack per night (or at least an effort is made), then NASA and Arch should stay out of the sector. Otherwise, if NASA or Arch sees no efforts being made to keep fighting in that sector, the "safety net" will be turned off, and NASA and Arch will be allowed to engage in battles for the sector(s).

 

 

So, I think it a good idea if we can have all the corp CEOs (or whatever VP is acting CEO for US timezone), agree to the following updated terms.

 

1. Let the smaller corps have 1 or 2 sectors that will be free from Arch or NASA interference. This includes NASA and Arch helping with attacks and defenses, unless the smaller corps on both sides agreed it fair to let them attack or defend with them. (Maybe dedicate Vanguard and Colonization for this, so they have a GS and an iridium sector to fight for without interference). The sector(s) would only have the safety net IF and ONLY IF all the smaller corps involved can agree to ensure that at least one battle per night can occur (or at least have an effort made).

2. Arch will end its zerg rush on NASA/BEASTS, provided that corps don't go back on their word without valid reasoning, and that corp members don't send angry PMs that could be taken personally.

3. We all realize this is a game, and that we are taking this WAAY to seriously, and need to tone it down, as we all just want to have fun, and get games.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've PMed corps like crazy, I got Ultra and FDEF to show to Colon hub with ARCH showing on their own accord.

ultra failed to produce a wing for unknown reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all that said and implied, [Arch] is still pushing on [bEAST] sector, not SALT, not FDEF, not NASA, not OWL - they push [bEAST], to me this is an attempt of a said "repercussions" to BEAST's attempt to stay neutral from your zerg or partially siding with NASA to resist Arch's threats. That is the thing I was talking about in that wall of text of mine, with all the great intents stated on forums, Arch is still only interested in small personal vendetta and that is how it acts in game.

 

NASA will help BEAST defend vs Arch wing, while they can focus on games with FDEF on equal ground (last night, as much as I know their final score was +/- 30 points to decide the match)

super close, had we not screwed up (again) with 3 Main Cal Deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Arch, I know me and Nuke felt like our good will was repeatedly thrown back in our faces when we had numerous times offered NASA spots to help us defend, and we made it clear they were guaranteed to get games if they helped us defend, whereas they weren't if they attacked. When NASA repeatedly attacked Arch instead of taking up our offers for defense, that not only showed us that NASA didn't care about getting games, it also made us feel as though NASA were blatantly refusing our offers as if they had something to prove.

 

We, or at least I was not aware of this offer so we proceeded with attacks.

 

Most of the feeling that our good will had been thrown back in our faces came from when Nuke received PMs from Mustacho in which he said that NASA was more than willing to drive Arch out of fed space and ruin us if we wouldn't ready up against NASA (despite the fact that we made it clear to other NASA leaders that they weren't guaranteed games if they attacked).

 

Moustacho is gonna be moustacho, you cant really expect him to be diplomatic.

 

I think that is perfectly reasonable. If the smaller corps that the sector(s) would be reserved for agreed to ensure there is at least 1 attack per night (or at least an effort is made), then NASA and Arch should stay out of the sector. Otherwise, if NASA or Arch sees no efforts being made to keep fighting in that sector, the "safety net" will be turned off, and NASA and Arch will be allowed to engage in battles for the sector(s).

 

That is reasonable.

 

So, I think it a good idea if we can have all the corp CEOs (or whatever VP is acting CEO for US timezone), agree to the following updated terms.

 

1. Let the smaller corps have 1 or 2 sectors that will be free from Arch or NASA interference. This includes NASA and Arch helping with attacks and defenses, unless the smaller corps on both sides agreed it fair to let them attack or defend with them. (Maybe dedicate Vanguard and Colonization for this, so they have a GS and an iridium sector to fight for without interference). The sector(s) would only have the safety net IF and ONLY IF all the smaller corps involved can agree to ensure that at least one battle per night can occur (or at least have an effort made).

 

Agreed

 

2. Arch will end its zerg rush on NASA/BEASTS, provided that corps don't go back on their word without valid reasoning, and that corp members don't send angry PMs that could be taken personally.

 

Does this mean other than the sectors set aside for small corps, everything else is fair game?

 

3. We all realize this is a game, and that we are taking this WAAY to seriously, and need to tone it down, as we all just want to have fun, and get games.

 

That is our motto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to speak from the view of a small corporation owner, but note that this is my view and not anyone else's unless anyone else concurs.

 

I would personally have the energy to fight for a sector, because it comes with the guarantor that there has at least been combat involved and, therefore, an exercise of fun. People feel rewarded with the exercise of fighting for something and I'm certainly one of those people who feels that way; sure, there may be other corporations who would rather have their systems hand-served, but then you're devaluing something and allowing others to think it's okay to just float systems around as if it didn't matter.

 

Here's the truth. We want to be the ones on top and we want to be the people that are on level with the big people. Alliances with big people tie us down and push us deeper into the pit of low echelon corporations spawning from the midst of Tier 2 players who have no idea what they are doing, how to run or even recruit for a corporation. My approach, to avoid this, has been to give people the push to move up further without the need for politics and with the pure goal of "we want to shoot something therefore we kill"... And it's a fun state of mind to have. At the end of the day, win or lose, two factions gain something, shake hands and keep battling until there's nothing to battle over anymore.

 

So by just granting these small corporations systems and forming so many alliances so quickly, dealing so many favours within just days only to have the same situation come apart the very next day... Are you in this for yourselves or are you in this for the small corporations? Is spoon-feeding these people really what they need? Will these small corporations stay loyal to you while you are performing a Tier 4 dreadnought battle they do not even have the firepower for? Perhaps this is the strategy you need to think of. Not to spit in anyone's face, but it sounds as if you're trying to buy these people into your way and not all the time does it work. Most of the time, these people will just lose the assets they have because they aren't strong enough.

 

Ultimately, what I'm saying to you is, you're setting us up to fail. We'd rather you prepare us for future battles against people who aren't gong to take us so lightly so that we can be prepared for the future. That way, we don't have to be in a position where we are all going to lose everything because a corporation with completely maxed-out Tier 3 ships with purple upgrades, premium ships and ammunition will slaughter us when we're still in the middle of growing.

 

Maybe you should be discussing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess at this point I should clarify we did attack with the Zerg rush with a full squad of 8 our best, that day we had more than 8 members that wanted to play NASA filled our ranks and we were able to have two attacking  wings. (although the one attacking the gold sector was largely NASA there were active BEASTs along for the ride.

  Now we have a third sector Colon Hub and the xxhts going down.

     WE ARE HOSTING NO HARD FEELINGS ATTACKS

We will be defending their as long as we can, In an effort to get everyone a game Arch feel free to attack.

 understand this is not an effort to backstab anyone but to give everyone a game we will ask NASA to help us defend if you attack ( TO BE CLEAR THIS IS AN EFFORT TO GIVE EVERYONE A QUALITY GAME OR AS CLOSE TO IT AS WE CAN AND NOT A REHASHING OF PAST EVENTS)

 They have made it clear to us once the sector falls to a point there are enough attackers to take they will attack to capture it.

  HalFast CEO BEASTs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dirk, are you VP(or higher rank) of Arch?

Or you just kept little BS throwing with kosty for fun?

 

coz If you r not VP/CEO you have quite little to say in dread matter... other people will make decision what to do not ya  :012j:

 

 

btw

dOs00S6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Shadowblade, yes. All the other sectors aside from the 1 or 2 that would be reserved for smaller corps would be fair game to everyone.

 

@Tillo, no. I am not a VP. I'm well aware that normally I wouldn't have any say, but this is coming from a pilot who has the backing from his CEO, who has told me to keep being PR for Arch in these disputes (at least on the forums). 

 

 

Ultimately, what I'm saying to you is, you're setting us up to fail. We'd rather you prepare us for future battles against people who aren't gong to take us so lightly so that we can be prepared for the future. That way, we don't have to be in a position where we are all going to lose everything because a corporation with completely maxed-out Tier 3 ships with purple upgrades, premium ships and ammunition will slaughter us when we're still in the middle of growing.

 

Maybe you should be discussing that.

 

Fair points, but I think you are missing part of this whole deal. The one or two sectors NASA and Arch would leave alone for small corps aren't the only sectors we will let you fight for. They would be the sectors where you could fight without worry of Arch or NASA stomping you without being ready to face them. Any of the small corps will be more than welcome to attack any of the other sectors, but NASA or Arch will be able to defend against you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meow

 

RadiX gunna attack where RadiX gunna attack. srz 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dirk, are you VP(or higher rank) of Arch?

Or you just kept little BS throwing with kosty for fun?

 

coz If you r not VP/CEO you have quite little to say in dread matter... other people will make decision what to do not ya  :012j:

 

 

btw

meow

 

RadiX gunna attack where RadiX gunna attack. srz 

 

mickey_mouse_sacandose_los_ojos.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meow

 

RadiX gunna attack where RadiX gunna attack. srz 

 

Notice I never said you couldn't. Just said we can designate 1 or 2 sectors that NASA and Arch will have to stay out of (provided that games actually occur).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair points, but I think you are missing part of this whole deal. The one or two sectors NASA and Arch would leave alone for small corps aren't the only sectors we will let you fight for. They would be the sectors where you could fight without worry of Arch or NASA stomping you without being ready to face them. Any of the small corps will be more than welcome to attack any of the other sectors, but NASA or Arch will be able to defend against you.

Have NASA and Arkhos Core allocated these two positions yet or is this still in talking? What do these two positions offer? If another strong corporation attempts to assume the position, how will Arkhos and NASA enforce the freedom of these positions? Will support be provided by anyone from either corporation should nobody have the necessary firepower? What about corporation owners who are clearly showing an interest in Iridium? I have a lot more questions but this seems to be the most appropriate from someone who would show interest...

No doubt you will have thought these things through, but these are things you need to be discussing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in playing galaxy police, I think it will just lead to more crazy drama.

 

Why don't we just agree not to be dicks to each other, stay out of some newbie sectors and get back to flying?

 

It seems like peeps are cooling off and agreeing and stuff already anyways.

 

We should agree not to use temp-joins and coordinated alliance attacks on each other, stay out of sectors adjacent to the fed station (or something), then feel free to wreck each other and have fun everywhere else. There's ...a lot of sectors, you guys.

 

I haven't been a part of whatever's going on, so please don't feel like I'm singling someone out. I srsly just want to get back to the game.

I'm an Arkhos VP, if peeps didn't know.

 

If for some reason this post enrages you, private message me first, because I didn't mean it to. I suck at being political.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't we just agree not to be dicks to each other, stay out of some newbie sectors and get back to flying?

 

To all corporation CEO's and corporate political representatves... Can we have a collaborative definition of "newbie sector" please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...