Page 13 of 18

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 4:24 pm
by raven41
omsop wrote:hehe i didnt think so Red :)

just proving a point that a line in a post that didnt need to be here, a bit like alot of the posts lol

lol ... yeah well like I posted awhile ago I don't give a sh%# what you do with your OPs thats just more time you cant bother anyone elses :p ... plus sooner or later you will run out of daps if that was your only goal (Raise TH) so whatever not my prob. HF guys!

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 6:19 pm
by grimjim
Strange... isn't this basically what people were whinging at us about in the first days of outposts? I see people defending the practice that were rather excessively scornful of us at the time.

Make of that what you will.

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 6:28 pm
by oldmess
grimjim wrote:Strange... isn't this basically what people were whinging at us about in the first days of outposts? I see people defending the practice that were rather excessively scornful of us at the time.

Make of that what you will.
2 differences:

1. We're just transfering ownership, not trying to block anyone's ability to play. The actual battles to transfer ownership are occuring. You were declaring and then cancelling the battle at the last minute. (or at least that's how I remember it)

2. There was NO cost to you to do it before. So you could keep it up indefinitely.

Now that they've put an unavoidable cost (and rather large at this level of OP), I don't have a problem with someone using this practice to block an OP for a small time like a holilday or something like that. As I said at the time when they made the change. But, that's not what we're doing.

Thanks for playing.

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 7:01 pm
by sprite
grimjim wrote:Strange... isn't this basically what people were whinging at us about in the first days of outposts? I see people defending the practice that were rather excessively scornful of us at the time.

Make of that what you will.
Funny... I was gonna say something similar...

When you were doing it, karavan guilds got blamed for attacking you in the first place.

When we're doing something different that merely looks vaguely similar (differences explained by Oud) guess who gets blamed for what you strenuously denied was wrong? Ohmai, :eek: the karavan again. What a shocker.

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:10 pm
by ajsuk
rofl at those last few posts. XD
Jeez, someone lend the man some braincells. :p As Oud pointed out, thats some way off of what we're doing. We dont stoop that low and we're proud of it. The Void OPs will be static between us soon enough, we're an Alliance, trade/transfer is part of what its all about. :)

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:17 pm
by raven41
Can everyone Just leave the Karavan peeps alone now? let them trade there OPs in peace omg. They will run out of dappers sooner or later if they do decide to be cowards :P , but since for some reason I kinda doubt thats what there doing drop it and lets move on with our lives :)

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:34 pm
by dbritt
Lets settle something...

Kye, you know darn good and well when you sent me the /tell informing me we were about to be attacked what i said.

"Thank you for informing me, that's what they are here for :) , much respect for telling me"

So saying we are trying to exploit something, or play dirty....bah, give me a break...we are trying to do one thing, and that is to move OPs around to guilds that feel COMFORTABLE in holding and fighting for a lvl 250 OP in a so-called foriegn land. Remember, we've been attacked multiple times already.

That plan was messed up, true, first by our lack of planning, we didnt have enough people there to do it....

but SECOND was by KAMI trying to cause trouble and throw a wrench in things...if they would have left it alone, it would have already been done, and you could declare to your little hearts content. But instead, we had to waste...and yes I waid waste, 2 more days of our time doing this, KNOWING we will be attacked soon after (on past events(not yours Kye)I'd bet on Memorial Day(amost as bad as PF being attacked on NYD))

So if there is a gripe, look to and police your own, we do. Declare as you must, I DONT CARE anymore...If we win, we win, if we lose, we lose. But complaining about it here only makes people, and I mean all people look bad. These 2 OPs are not the only two out there in questionable hands.
I'm done talking about this. It has all been discussed with GMs till they are blue in the face telling us it's ok...get over it, wait till we're done and attack!

Now you all have the whole story, a private convo between 3 guilds with the input of others in our faction....interupted and SLOWED by our own planning, and that of the Kami....sorry, I'm only human.

Oh, but here again, I forgot the saying we have grown accustomed to..."Its only ok if the Kami do it"...IOOITKDI for short....thats been going around for awhile.

and one more thing, just because the reasoning makes sense in your head Grimjim, doesnt make it right, give it a rest, you arent the brightest bulb on the block...trust me on that one, this is not your game, it is everyones game, quit trying to speak for everyone when I havent seen more than one person besides you agree with what you say.

My apologies to everyone I told that I wouldnt post here for awhile...lunacy drags me into the gutter sometimes though.

Now as even Raven said...let it pass, let this thread go away, and lets enjoy the game as we have in the last couple weeks without this crap

H

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 8:43 pm
by omsop
ohhh Heavyn, anyone ever tell you, YOUR sooo Sexy when you get mad?

/target Heavyn
/love

:P

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 9:05 pm
by aardnebb
dbritt wrote:I havent seen more than one person besides you agree with what you say.
I usually don't find it necesary to say "I agree with X" after every post I agree with. In this case however: "I agree with Grimjim".

Now did that really need to be said?

Re: Outpost switching

Posted: Mon May 22, 2006 9:10 pm
by dbritt
aardnebb wrote:I usually don't find it necesary to say "I agree with X" after every post I agree with. In this case however: "I agree with Grimjim".

Now did that really need to be said?

Then make it two...hardly the majority...now I think since i'm in that kind of mood, i'm going to make a poll thread to vote for the forum president

H