|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
   |
Posted - 2013.02.06 23:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Foxhound Elite wrote:SoLJae wrote:Ahhh, so we capitulated with the goal in mind of a bigger success in the future.
In other words...we won.
Go Zion! I think the original post kind of counters what you've just said. Shall we get the kill-posts up in here? Not to mention counting Zions vs SI's ISK loss, which was substantial on your side. enjoy the move from one crumbling alliance to another one about to be stomped on. http://i.imgur.com/WKbcI.gif I already posted the kills, and SI managed 3 total since Saturday, while we killed the 10 that showed up to fight. Not only that, but of the ISK spent on ships during this war, 67% of all losses were from SI, not ZTCD. In case you missed the report: http://ziontcd.eve-kill.net/?a=cc_detail&ctr_id=20519Fail troll is fail.
Um... Doesn't it clearly state that Zion lost almost twice as much ISK as SI did? At least those are the numbers I'm seeing on the link.
That said, good luck to SI in their continuing war.  |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 23:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
It is a fact that you lead in kills; however, although I don't play EVE myself, I think ISK is more important, isn't it? |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 23:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Ner'Zul Nexhawk wrote:It is a fact that you lead in kills; however, although I don't play EVE myself, I think ISK is more important, isn't it? It really depends on your perspective as to which is more important. I think both stats are equally important.
Well, if I lose more ships but also have more ISK, I can easily buy the same ones or something else. On the other hand, you wouldn't be able to replenish your forces that quickly, due to more ISK getting lost and the higher costs of ships destroyed. I don't know about general EVE population's stance on this, but here is my perspective. And this is why I believe SI has an advantage at this moment. |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 00:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quick update from the KB: Zion's efficiency dropped almost to 25%. Another battleship down, I assume?
I still don't see how can this situation be claimed as winning to Zion. |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 01:12:00 -
[5] - Quote
trollface dot jpg wrote:Ner'Zul Nexhawk wrote:Quick update from the KB: Zion's efficiency dropped almost to 25%. Another battleship down, I assume?
I still don't see how can this situation be claimed as winning to Zion. Don't know Eve well, but I would think dropping efficiency AFTER a wardec is over wouldn't be a factor in the results of a wardec. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I know little about Eve.
Well, the war still continues during the 24 hours after "the end" of the war. Moreover, as mentioned before, this was cause by a glitch, and the war will resume once the cooldown is over. |
Ner'Zul Nexhawk
Talos Incorporated
153
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 03:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
trollface dot jpg wrote:Ner'Zul Nexhawk wrote:trollface dot jpg wrote:Ner'Zul Nexhawk wrote:Quick update from the KB: Zion's efficiency dropped almost to 25%. Another battleship down, I assume?
I still don't see how can this situation be claimed as winning to Zion. Don't know Eve well, but I would think dropping efficiency AFTER a wardec is over wouldn't be a factor in the results of a wardec. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I know little about Eve. Well, the war still continues during the 24 hours after "the end" of the war. Moreover, as mentioned before, this was cause by a glitch, and the war will resume once the cooldown is over. Ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.  Edit: One more question; Is it clear that SI was the cause of the drop in efficiency? I can't make heads or tails of that stat sheet. 
Yes; that spreadsheet shows kills of SI ships and losses taken during fights with SI members. Thus, since Zion's ISK losses are three times as much as SI losses, herein comes the efficient rating of 25%.
kellyn whiteheart wrote:we had to battleships lost thats why we lost the efficiency rating. however that being said both losses were pilot error and error on myself as well. some others mentioned these small isk numbers dont mean much because they dont take into account pilot errors..
prior to the errors we were way ahead
i know all this because "i was there"
Yeah, I see your point. I bet 0.7 billion ISK is not a large sum for a corporation, is it? |
|
|
| |
|