Epsilon Server War #5

User avatar
Relentless
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 00:31
Reputation: 3
Galaxy: Epsilon

Re: War War War.

Postby Relentless » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 01:41

It's odd. In two threads, like 10-12 pages combined. I have not heard a single invite to the stomping grounds of 3SUM. Usually these guys are a friendly bunch and will accept visitors. Not now. I suppose they're trying to stay in character for the forum-warrior mission. Since un-bias is not what they are looking for and more so consolation for their losses.... perhaps someone should create a separate thread dubbed "Funeral Of CAT" or what may be truly appropriate and then we can actually separate logic from e-tears.

Yes suicides are bad, both sides experience them. Do we know for a fact that LUKE is responsible for suicides in TT? No. Do we know for a fact that TT is responsible for Suicides in LUKE? No. Can we speculate, waste our time and then point out our vocabulary is limited due to excessive self indulgent cussing thus making us forget our native tongue? Of course, because without fleet that's all one can do. Go on the forums that is and plea for sympathy; not reason.

Now, back to actual discussion of this War. I mean that's what the thread is called right? So anyone think this will happen again same time next year? Or will we have to wait some time for a confrontation like this due to current circumstances? Will epsilon be transformed into having to have the "Epsilon Pact" of "Non Aggression" :lol: Or...is there anything to suggest Epsi might find themselves in smaller factions once again?

Image
-Relentless
Emerald
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu 06 Nov, 2008 10:04
Reputation: 1
Galaxy: Epsilon
Location: California, USA

Re: War War War.

Postby Emerald » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 01:43

prespa wrote:
Emerald wrote:There were suicides on our blob this morning as well. Are we going to sit here and go OOOH LUKE DID IT?

No. We sucked it up, took out the rest of the fleet from those accounts and went on with our day.

While I am sure it completely sucks for you to have lost some of your fleets that way, perhaps some of you people were just tired of the game and decided to add some unneeded drama to the war. Not everything is a huge conspiracy against you.
Maybe some of them decided to make a drama, but not the guy who was 2 days inactive and then suddenly woke up in 5am in a Saturday morning and said: "why I don't use my IF fleet to suicide our biggest LE fleet?'.
You are still only giving conjecture though.

User avatar
prespa
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2008 09:44
Reputation: 2
Guild: [S³D]
Galaxy: Beta
Location: Macedonia

Re: War War War.

Postby prespa » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 01:49

albend wrote:
prespa wrote:If I had evidence I'm sure some ppl would have been banned by now. I simply follow logic and things doesn't add up.

And yes, I look for logical explanation, but everybody refuses to give me one.
Logic would dictate evidence, you cant just use the word logic to explain your lack of it. You dont say "lol use logic bro" you give us a detailed explanation of the logical process you used. Which is then debated whether it is logically sound.
Do you even know what happened? In just an hour or so couple of our LE killing fleets left guild and killed few our LE fleets. Then 300+ LE fleet went berserk and started killing around, until it was killed by few ppl that were online. The guy with biggest IF fleet that suicided was inactive for two days and suicided in 5am (his country time, not ST time). He could have do that anytime he wanted, he didn't have to wake up that early on Saturday morning to do that. And that's my logic, now show me where I'm mistaken.
Relentless wrote: Now, back to actual discussion of this War. I mean that's what the thread is called right? So anyone think this will happen again same time next year? Or will we have to wait some time for a confrontation like this due to current circumstances? Will epsilon be transformed into having to have the "Epsilon Pact" of "Non Aggression" :lol: Or...is there anything to suggest Epsi might find themselves in smaller factions once again?
After we crashed AA in Beta we all went back in our home guilds and now we are trying to make profitable hits whenever we can. Beta is a dynamic and balanced server now.

What will happen with Epsi depends completely on FTW and Co now. You don't have home guilds (I suppose), so you can either stay in FTW and turn Epsi into lolEpsi, or you can split into smaler guilds and play the game.
Last edited by prespa on Sun 25 Sep, 2011 01:58, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Relentless
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 00:31
Reputation: 3
Galaxy: Epsilon

Re: War War War.

Postby Relentless » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 02:12

The following is a fictional story.... however true.... it may not represent what that person would say (although it will seem very likely)

Relentless: There's still 2.5 billion LUKE fleet though :think:

prespa: :shhh: Shhh!!!!

Albend: As if the entire server doesn't know

prespa: :boohoo:

Perun: :snooty:

Emerald : :dance:

prespa: :boohoo: and this is the song that goes on and on! ....

Edit:

That being said there is 2.5b luke fleet still out there. I'm not sure the rest of us might split of if that ever actually happens with 2.5 billion luke fleet out there. I mean the force must be strong with you guys right? You're all midichlorians within some big entity named Luke Skywalker right?
Last edited by Relentless on Sun 25 Sep, 2011 02:14, edited 1 time in total.

Image
-Relentless
User avatar
Dro
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue 17 Feb, 2009 23:30
Reputation: 2
Guild: [RED]/[FTW]/[CFF]
Galaxy: Epsilon
Location: E22

Re: War War War.

Postby Dro » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 02:12

anywho good luck in your future endeavors

User avatar
albend
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 5977
Joined: Fri 30 May, 2008 22:36
Reputation: 106
Guild: RD
Galaxy: Epsilon
Location: Under a bridge

Re: War War War.

Postby albend » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 02:43

prespa wrote:
albend wrote:
prespa wrote:If I had evidence I'm sure some ppl would have been banned by now. I simply follow logic and things doesn't add up.

And yes, I look for logical explanation, but everybody refuses to give me one.
Logic would dictate evidence, you cant just use the word logic to explain your lack of it. You dont say "lol use logic bro" you give us a detailed explanation of the logical process you used. Which is then debated whether it is logically sound.
Do you even know what happened? In just an hour or so couple of our LE killing fleets left guild and killed few our LE fleets. Then 300+ LE fleet went berserk and started killing around, until it was killed by few ppl that were online. The guy with biggest IF fleet that suicided was inactive for two days and suicided in 5am (his country time, not ST time). He could have do that anytime he wanted, he didn't have to wake up that early on Saturday morning to do that. And that's my logic, now show me where I'm mistaken.
Relentless wrote: Now, back to actual discussion of this War. I mean that's what the thread is called right? So anyone think this will happen again same time next year? Or will we have to wait some time for a confrontation like this due to current circumstances? Will epsilon be transformed into having to have the "Epsilon Pact" of "Non Aggression" :lol: Or...is there anything to suggest Epsi might find themselves in smaller factions once again?
After we crashed AA in Beta we all went back in our home guilds and now we are trying to make profitable hits whenever we can. Beta is a dynamic and balanced server now.

What will happen with Epsi depends completely on FTW and Co now. You don't have home guilds (I suppose), so you can either stay in FTW and turn Epsi into lolEpsi, or you can split into smaler guilds and play the game.
Sounds like a text book suicide pact, thank you for proving your "logic" by explaining you have no evidence and are an incredibly sore loser.

Robert Frost wrote:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
lunarsilver
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed 06 Aug, 2008 18:41
Reputation: 0

Re: War War War.

Postby lunarsilver » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 03:01

This war can be summed up in two words: poop sandwich

I'm not super active, observant, or political but this war was a dud. All issues aside it is always more fun when it's competitive. It's because of the lopsidedness that all these issues are even brought up. so, i'll give it a week, but if there is a superguild on this server I, as well as many others, will just leave...

User avatar
Relentless
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 00:31
Reputation: 3
Galaxy: Epsilon

Re: War War War.

Postby Relentless » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 04:18

lunarsilver wrote:This war can be summed up in two words: poop sandwich

I'm not super active, observant, or political but this war was a dud. All issues aside it is always more fun when it's competitive. It's because of the lopsidedness that all these issues are even brought up. so, i'll give it a week, but if there is a superguild on this server I, as well as many others, will just leave...
1 post, So...who are you exactly?

Image
-Relentless
macbro
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun 07 Nov, 2010 17:47
Reputation: 2

Re: War War War.

Postby macbro » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 04:33

23 Sep 2011, 07:16:52 ..::Clarkey::.. Withdraw from guild
23 Sep 2011, 06:14:14 SuperME Withdraw from guild
23 Sep 2011, 06:08:05 HouseofGrass Withdraw from guild
23 Sep 2011, 05:59:38 -MenphisBlu- Withdraw from guild
The above is from the LUKE guild logs. It does not prove that it was a hijack or hack. It is only conjecture that what happened was not a suicide pact. It just sucked. It was a morale killer.

Our we butt hurt? Yes.
Did I lose my fleet in a futile attempt at trying to stop your landing? Yes.
Will I rebuild? Yes.
Does losing suck? Yes.
Do we need better tactics? Yes.

User avatar
FoxFire
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu 22 Oct, 2009 00:52
Reputation: 5
Galaxy: Epsilon

Re: War War War.

Postby FoxFire » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 04:41

I lost my entire fleet.

The only thing left for me right now is recyc's, but I'm looking forward greatly to going back to my guild and rebuilding and having fun as a guild again, not a mass

Epsi: [SIN2] Fox Fire
Kappa: [KAOS] Fox Fire
Lyra: [NIGHT] Fox Fire
User avatar
Winchester
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 17734
Joined: Tue 24 Mar, 2009 00:44
Reputation: 766
Location: The World Wide Cesspool

Re: War War War.

Postby Winchester » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 05:01

prespa wrote: Do you even know what happened? In just an hour or so couple of our LE killing fleets left guild and killed few our LE fleets. Then 300+ LE fleet went berserk and started killing around, until it was killed by few ppl that were online. The guy with biggest IF fleet that suicided was inactive for two days and suicided in 5am (his country time, not ST time). He could have do that anytime he wanted, he didn't have to wake up that early on Saturday morning to do that. And that's my logic, now show me where I'm mistaken.
Let's translate this to a logical format, shall we?

1: Several fleets attacked fleets that are typically considered their preferred target.
2: A levi fleet started killing other fleets.
3: One of the suiciders was offline for two days prior to the event.
4: His suicide occurred early in the morning.
5: He did not have to wake up early to suicide.
6: Therefore, the suicides were all or mostly all the product of cheating.

Allow me to explain the problem. This is not logic. You are giving a list of premises and then stating a conclusion, which is fine; however, none of those premises follow in a deductive format. Let's think about this, shall we? We know that in deductive logic "If P, then Q; P, therefore Q" is true, and that using the aforementioned as a premise we would find that "If P, then R; P, therefore R" would require us to change our deductive conclusion to "If P, then Q or R." Are you still following me? Great. Let's translate our above terms to truth-functional symbolic logic, and then play a bit.

1: A (attacked)
2: L (levi)
3: O (offline)
4: E (early)
5: N (not needed)
6: C (cheating)

Arguably, we should go with your one specific case that bears the most evidence, as that is the only one that you've deigned to provide much exposition on. We can also combine a few premises, as there is no need to keep them separate. Doing so produces this:

1: P (attacked, was previously offline, up early, didn't need to be)
2: Q (cheating)

Therefore, you are stating the following:

1: If P, then Q.
2: P, therefore Q.

That is logically valid. However, there is a problem, as noted earlier, in the fact that Q is not the only possible outcome of P. Consider the following:

1: Attacked other fleets.
2: Was previously offline.
3: Was up early.
4: Did not need to be.
5: Did this to eliminate suspicion of being a spy.

It is entirely logical to state that all of these actions that suggest the person would not have suicided are intentional, as anyone with even moderate intelligence would understand that - as you are clearly demonstrating - doing such things would remove suspicion. If he were online, dropped guild, suicided, joined the other guild, and boasted about his kills, then there is zero possibility that you would ever let him back in, which thus ends his usefulness as a spy. Correct? Whether or not this is true does not matter, as the only thing that matters is that we have a given set of premises that are logically valid, and which produce the conclusion of S - spy.

1: If P, then S.
2: P, therefore S.

We must now amend our previous logical statement to the following:

1: If P, then Q or S.
2: P, therefore Q or S.

Utilizing proper logic, we have now reached the conclusion that he is either a spy or that the other side was cheating. You cannot assert one unless you can disprove the other, which means that the assertion of cheating is illogical. Furthermore, I would like to note that you are using abductive reasoning in asserting that P necessitates Q, as there is not a necessary connection between the two when examined in the totality of the circumstance. You are stating that all of these things strongly suggest that the other side cheated; there is no logical necessitation, and thus your statement is in fact illogical.

Thanks for playing.

Ribbentrop, away!

"That's what I do. I drink and I know things."
User avatar
albend
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 5977
Joined: Fri 30 May, 2008 22:36
Reputation: 106
Guild: RD
Galaxy: Epsilon
Location: Under a bridge

Re: War War War.

Postby albend » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 05:14

That pretty much sums up a basic introduction to the word logic.

Robert Frost wrote:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
User avatar
Relentless
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 00:31
Reputation: 3
Galaxy: Epsilon

Re: War War War.

Postby Relentless » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 05:44

:clap: Thanks Ribbentrop. I think you may have taken some of the fun out of the thread but... considering the alternative of prespa posting again and again :wall: I suppose it can't hurt. Although if prespa can't understand my posts (which he thought were complex) I may find it slightly surprising if he understands what you just came up with. I for one prefer my posts not to sound so scientific. lol.

Image
-Relentless
macbro
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun 07 Nov, 2010 17:47
Reputation: 2

Re: War War War.

Postby macbro » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 05:56

Ribbentrop wrote:
prespa wrote: Do you even know what happened? In just an hour or so couple of our LE killing fleets left guild and killed few our LE fleets. Then 300+ LE fleet went berserk and started killing around, until it was killed by few ppl that were online. The guy with biggest IF fleet that suicided was inactive for two days and suicided in 5am (his country time, not ST time). He could have do that anytime he wanted, he didn't have to wake up that early on Saturday morning to do that. And that's my logic, now show me where I'm mistaken.
Let's translate this to a logical format, shall we?

1: Several fleets attacked fleets that are typically considered their preferred target.
2: A levi fleet started killing other fleets.
3: One of the suiciders was offline for two days prior to the event.
4: His suicide occurred early in the morning.
5: He did not have to wake up early to suicide.
6: Therefore, the suicides were all or mostly all the product of cheating.

Allow me to explain the problem. This is not logic. You are giving a list of premises and then stating a conclusion, which is fine; however, none of those premises follow in a deductive format. Let's think about this, shall we? We know that in deductive logic "If P, then Q; P, therefore Q" is true, and that using the aforementioned as a premise we would find that "If P, then R; P, therefore R" would require us to change our deductive conclusion to "If P, then Q or R." Are you still following me? Great. Let's translate our above terms to truth-functional symbolic logic, and then play a bit.

1: A (attacked)
2: L (levi)
3: O (offline)
4: E (early)
5: N (not needed)
6: C (cheating)

Arguably, we should go with your one specific case that bears the most evidence, as that is the only one that you've deigned to provide much exposition on. We can also combine a few premises, as there is no need to keep them separate. Doing so produces this:

1: P (attacked, was previously offline, up early, didn't need to be)
2: Q (cheating)

Therefore, you are stating the following:

1: If P, then Q.
2: P, therefore Q.

That is logically valid. However, there is a problem, as noted earlier, in the fact that Q is not the only possible outcome of P. Consider the following:

1: Attacked other fleets.
2: Was previously offline.
3: Was up early.
4: Did not need to be.
5: Did this to eliminate suspicion of being a spy.

It is entirely logical to state that all of these actions that suggest the person would not have suicided are intentional, as anyone with even moderate intelligence would understand that - as you are clearly demonstrating - doing such things would remove suspicion. If he were online, dropped guild, suicided, joined the other guild, and boasted about his kills, then there is zero possibility that you would ever let him back in, which thus ends his usefulness as a spy. Correct? Whether or not this is true does not matter, as the only thing that matters is that we have a given set of premises that are logically valid, and which produce the conclusion of S - spy.

1: If P, then S.
2: P, therefore S.

We must now amend our previous logical statement to the following:

1: If P, then Q or S.
2: P, therefore Q or S.

Utilizing proper logic, we have now reached the conclusion that he is either a spy or that the other side was cheating. You cannot assert one unless you can disprove the other, which means that the assertion of cheating is illogical. Furthermore, I would like to note that you are using abductive reasoning in asserting that P necessitates Q, as there is not a necessary connection between the two when examined in the totality of the circumstance. You are stating that all of these things strongly suggest that the other side cheated; there is no logical necessitation, and thus your statement is in fact illogical.

Thanks for playing.

Ribbentrop, away!
Q=Cheating
S= Spy
Both of those show an influence from FTW.

User avatar
Winchester
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 17734
Joined: Tue 24 Mar, 2009 00:44
Reputation: 766
Location: The World Wide Cesspool

Re: War War War.

Postby Winchester » Sun 25 Sep, 2011 05:58

So nice of you to show a complete lack of understanding of what we're talking about here. No where did I say that Q or S were the only options; my point was that the existence of any second option demonstrates that the conclusion of Q is illogical.

"That's what I do. I drink and I know things."

Return to “Epsilon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests