April 22, 2010

Response to an angry man.

So after my Holy Eve part 1 post, I noticed a comment. I shall post it for all to read on RSS.



"I had recently started reading your blog to hear a little bit of what was going on in the NC/IT conflict. Then we come to today’s post. You've lost a reader, not that you care I'm sure. You're pretty critical of almost every other group but you're own. Some of it’s fairly accurate. Then we come to your loggoffski tactics, and your comments that any rational person understands that it’s a valid tactic. I'm sure, even if you allow this post on to the blog, that you'll say something like I just don't understand, or I'm one of those e-honor fanbois. The fact is, you just lost all credibility. Is running away from a fight the correct tactic when out numbered? Of course it is. Is logging off? Not only no, but hell no. You are trying to hold Maverick Navy out to be a superior PVP group, but everyone will just look at your killboards and say, "I wonder what the stats would look like if they weren't loggoffskis addicts? Probably pretty fail." How can you even criticize the tactics and strategies of others, when you won’t accept the consequences or your own failed decisions? You criticize a bunch of carebears who suck at baiting, but won’t take your lumps for being dumb enough to run a group deep into their home turf and being unable to figure a way out. If you’re in a position that the only way to save your fleet from serious loss is to loggoffski, then you failed at proper route planning and/or group composition. You stuck your head into an improperly scouted situation, and then you turned limp dick. Rationalize it however you want in your own mind, but don’t delude yourself into thinking you came across as a competent FC."

I found this post amusing on many levels. Let me first say that although he doesn't seen to think so, everyone that flies with me agrees with my competency being quite high. I trust them more than a random reader of my material. I give him credit for having the balls to write a huge emo rant. He must have felt quite strongly, I would guess a member of the NC. In the off chance he still reads this blog, or if anyone out there from the NC reads, please remember this: I am a member of IT Alliance. I try to keep things fairly non-political, but I am still a member of IT. This means I do have opinions. I'm sorry if these opinions bug you but its not going to change. That being said, apparently this gentleman missed the post where I commented on our own failures as an alliance. The Looney Toons in local (which is the post he commented on) certainly noticed this entry in my blog and described it as me "emo emo on IT FCs emo emo" or something to that extent. I guess DDH missed that one. Lastly, but not leastly, I stand by my conviction that logging off is appropriate in certain situations. Mr. DDH disagrees, which is fine. Ask any competent FC out there and they will agree that it is appropriate at times. When you're 10 man gang is facing 30 hostiles in a system with probes out you have two options. Either bounce safes for however long it takes for them to get bored, or log off. Running works up until their dictors/interceptors tackle  your guys 1 by 1 and get them killed. Safing and then bouncing safes tends to keep the enemy more occupied, and less likely to leave the field. So logging off makes more sense. If that makes me a "limp dick" then so be it. If it keeps my guys alive then so be it. The safety and morale of my guys is a million times more important than worrying about being perceived as a "limp dick". I will note that more times than I can count, NC gangs and members have logoffskied the moment our scout enters system. Does that make them incompetent? Hell no. Or shall we generalize it and say that the cloaky gangs are "limp dicks"? The ones that only engage the one or two people they can kill and hide for the gangs that can kill them?

Hell NO.

Are they annoying, like the damn mosquito at the BBQ? Yes. Is it a valid tactic? ABSOLUTELY.

Why?

Because it gets results and minimizes your losses. I could give two shits about killboard stats. We are in a war, and war requires what? Money and manpower. When you die it tends to degrade both.

So, Mr. DDH. If you happen to be an FC, please, next time you face a gang with 3x numbers and heavier core composition, Hero prep your boys and suicide them on it. I ask this doubly if that 3x gang has me as FC :)

That is all.

4 comments:

paritybit said...

Actually, he's got a pretty good point. Think about it from this point of view: if somebody jumps into your gate camp and logs off to avoid being blown up, would you consider that lame? A 'limp dick' use of game mechanics? Sure you would.

But here you are using the same game mechanic to get out of losing your ships. You didn't equip cloaks (and therefore suffer from the penalties or restrictions). You didn't equip warp core stabilizers or T3 warp interdiction nullifiers. By all rights you and your fleet should have perished, but you exploited a game mechanic intended for use by people who have lost connection.

Perseus Kallistratos said...

No gate camp. Loggin off in gate camp is retarded because you will sit in space tackled and die. We logged off in system before their tacklers could catch up. A few of us (3/9) stayed online to wear off aggression timers and chat in local. Had we bounced safes we wouldn't have perished either, and that doesn't involve logging off. Its just easier to log off those that don't have aggro and want to bio. Loggin isn't a save all end all, then can still probe for 1 min no aggro 15 min aggro. They waited 13 minutes before leaving and set no traps or scouts or anything.

Bottom line is that losers whine about their best and winners go home and fuck the prom queen.

I have seen time and time again targets log off. I laugh and move on. To emo rage about E-Honor is fine but a waste of time. If you never log off to set a trap or avoid a fight that you will lose I think you are stupid, but hey you have your pride in your eyes.

Clark said...

I dunno, maybe i'm alone on this, but i must have TOTALLY missed the memo about taking ANYTHING into a fleet engagement with warp stabs in the lows.....wtf??? You're not transporting shit in high or low sec. And cloaks....cov ops = awesome, ANYTHING else with a cloak = FC: "target is someone in a something", YOU: " oh sorry it took me 20years to lock them and i'm dead." I wish everyone I fight puts stabs in the lows and cloaks on bc's and bs's!!!! Will you please apply to be an FC of every gang I ever fight??? That would be awesome!!

xalorous said...

Logging off in enemy territory:

a. Mid-warp logoff because you know there's a bad outcome at the other end.

b. Bouncing safes until all timers are off so you can safely log out and come back later seems a valid tactic.

c. NPC station - can you say 'treed like a coon?'

I believe the responder to your other post was riffing on your use of a. Most people seem to refer to this as a logoffski. Many people find it a fail tactic.

If you make regular use of this, and your fleet members do not object, people from the group that dislikes the tactic will draw certain conclusions.

Hey, it's Eve. Somebody hates you already.

Blog Archive