^^^ this
Seriously though, when do we get to buy and fly the Thargoid ships... that'd raise the PvP to a whole new level
*facedesk
How do we kick Aegis out of Obsidian Orbital?
- Thread starter WR3ND
- Start date
*facedesk
Ignoring the is Aegis worth supporting argument, you can't kick aegis out of the Maia system because they arn't there in any real sense. They are not part of the systems BGS. Fdev have said they have a lab there in galnet which may as well be out of game.
True, but that does not mean that an arguement that includes an ad hominem is automatically wrong. You win the Fallacy Fallacy.
On the other hand, I actually spend 5 seconds on Google and easily found the Galnet article proving their point:
Galnet said:
I'm just sitting here watching those goal posts move. When the initial station attacks came, the pro-Thargoid crowd claimed that the Thargoids where just anti-Aegis (as if that proves Aegis was bad or something), because those stations were controlled by Aegis. Then they attack stations where Aegis is a non-controller power and now a station where Aegis isn't even present (except for some obscure Galnet article a few months ago).
It's still all about Aegis despite the dozens of destroyed mega ships all around the Pleiades; bulk cargo, fuel transport, and even prison ships. None of these ships had any connection to Aegis, many of these ships have logs where they clearly state they made no actions against the Thargoids, yet they were all attacked and destroyed.
Aegis doesn't even control anything. They were created by all the super powers to develop weapons to protect humans. If Aegis is bad, then all the super powers are just as bad for creating them in the first place.
I would be on board with an initiative like this.
I think it's important to understand however, Aegis is not really the true power we should be fighting. Aegis is just being used as a front organization for them, and it includes good people as well as bad, much like INRA before them.
If we want to be against the powers and forces behind manipulating Aegis - as I think we should - fighting Aegis directly might be a part of that, but it's not the end goal. This is going to go far beyond just them and involve superpowers and megacorporations as well.
Like I said though, I'm in.
Which brings us round full circle to the question: Are the Thargoids attacking the stations because they are new in the Pleiades (their territory) or because they are AEGIS ? Either reason holds at the moment. If the Thargoids attack other stations, we will know it is not only AEGIS.
Putting aside the fact that it was common knowledge that Obsidian had an Aegis lab. That port was the main place for Thargoid research. for the past few months the traffic reports at Obsidian shot up, nothing to do with Belugas and tourists seeing the sights. A lot to do with Palin and looting Thargoid crash sites.
Last edited:
That's not goalpost moving, the goalpost, as you said yourself, clearly always been "Aegis".
If I am reading the stats correctly it would appear that Hagglebeard's Heros have the majority influence in the system at the moment. What I don't understand is that if HH has 34.2% influence and the Ant Hill Mob has only 3.2%, how does the AHM retain controlling power?
While I personally think it's because of Aegis, you're not wrong.
I think on of the major keys here might be the claim of in-game logs where Aegis talks about moving some tech for a research lab "before the Thargoids come for it" or whatever. I've not seen that text myself, but if it is there, that's a huge sign that the stations are being attacked specifically because of Aegis.
That said though, it's entirely possible, if not likely, that there comes a point for the Thargoids that the line between "Aegis" and "humanity" is irrelevant. I think that point will come at some point. And I think it's on us, as CMDR's, to make that line clear by pushing back on Aegis/their controllers before we've passed that point.
AHM were likely involved in an conflict state when their influence reached parity with the others, this prevented the normal war from activating. You'd need to push another faction up to 60% to trigger a war for control of the system (if my BGS knowledge is accurate)
You just found a list of stations with new Aegis labs.
That all stations attacked are on this list is not prove that these stations got attacked because there are Aegis labs on those stations.
It can be seen as a clue/indication that this might be the reason why the Thragoids attacked those stations.
How many of the stations in the Pleiades region are on that list?
How big is the chance that a randomly selected station has an Aegis lab?
BTW, finding the articles or information for myself was never the problem. My google-fu is strong.
Getting my opponent to provide relevant information/links for the his side of the argument vs a "because I said so" line of defense was the issue.
Nothing but the facts Ma'am (in my best Sgt Friday voice).
Yes, which was the point.
Why would FD put that list on Galnet? Obviously it's because it's important in some way. All the long "boring" info we get is important or useful in someway, even if some people think that use is boring.
Why would FD give us a list of labs that are not even represented in the BGS? "Because they're going to be relevant in a different way", seems to be pretty obvious conclusion.
That's worth looking into. Ideally for someone with a bit more free time today than I have.
I think it's important to not dismiss this evidence just because it isn't absolute proof though. We're not going to get a written statement of intent from the Thargoids here - we're not going to have absolute proof. We need to chart our actions in light of all evidence available.
So, you knew that what they were saying was technically accurate, but you were just being petulant because they weren't personally catering to your ego by giving you a link you already found?
Well ok then.
WOW!
Talk about denial! lol! [haha]
Where I come from, we tend to call a Spade "A Spade".
The link between these attacks and Aegis is beyond obvious. For anyone to even suggest that there is any doubt as to the motive is to flat out deny the evidence, the facts, the reality.
Amazing! [rolleyes]
(But in the real world, the same overwhelming evidence doesn't stop the Room Temperature IQ crowd from denying Climate Change.... So there are parallels in the real world to show a lack of understanding between provable facts and irrational beliefs)
Last edited:
It's pretty naive to think that FDev didn't have Obsidian Orbital or any of the other research / Palin in the Pleiades not part of the larger Thargoid narrative.
They were never really interested in being educated to the facts. I knew before I even replied that their comment about providing evidence and they would admit they were wrong was disingenuous B S.
Their later reaction to the evidence I provided was no surprise. I gave them the benefit of the doubt as I always do, but after decades on forums, you tend to see these people coming for miles.
Thanks for taking the time to post the actual link to one of (Hundreds) of references to the facts. [up]
A real piece of work right?
This one more than earned inclusion on my Ignore List. I don't have a problem with differing opinions, but I draw the line at flat out liars, trolls and pretend intellectuals.
The latter did provide some amusement though I must say... You could tell that they thought they were coming off as some kind of genius with the written word, when in reality they were projecting the exact opposite impression.
We can hope we are dealing with a self important teenager. If this was coming from an adult, then they truly have my sympathy.
Last edited:
They were never really interested in being educated to the facts. I knew before I even replied that their comment about providing evidence and they would admit they were wrong was disingenuous B S.
Their later reaction to the evidence I provided was no surprise. I gave them the benefit of the doubt as I always do, but after decades on forums, you tend to see these people coming for miles.
Thanks for taking the time to post the actual link to one of (Hundreds) of references to the facts. [up]
I've been posting on forums and the like for a couple of decades now too, so I know what you mean.
I agree that it's always worth giving the benefit of the doubt though. Very often the disagreements we have - in person or online - are actually pretty small, and they just get blown up over differences in terminology, expectation, or pride.
For example; I agree with you about the link between Thargoid attacks and Aegis labs. The evidence, to me, is very strong in support of that conclusion. But it's still important to acknowledge it's still evidence that supports that conclusion, it's not a plainly stated conclusion in and of itself (nor should it be I think, in a game, but that's a different topic). There is, I think, a strongly implied causation, yes. I think it's about as strong as "evidence" that we will get in the game; it's clear FD doesn't like spelling things out for us (and I kinda like that), so "evidence" rather than "fact" is as strong as we'll get, and I think "Thargoids are trying to hit the Aegis labs" is the best hypothesis that fits the known facts.
So, given that, I do take some issue when people claim things like those who disagree with that hypothesis are denying facts. They aren't really. At least, from what I can tell, CMDR's like Zadian Lichtfrost are not: He said "That all stations attacked are on this list is not prove that these stations got attacked because there are Aegis labs on those stations." which is true, and "It can be seen as a clue/indication that this might be the reason why the Thragoids attacked those stations.", which is true.
Denying fact would be saying something like "those stations don't have Aegis labs" - that's a proven fact. (Well, they might not all anymore, ha!)
So basically, arguing against CMDR's like him I think is counterproductive, because it's an argument rooted in interpersonal misunderstanding and miscommunication.
You're saying "I believe this conclusion, based on these facts."
I'm saying "Given those facts, I agree with that conclusion."
He's saying "Those facts support that conclusion, but they do not yet prove it. The evidence might be circumstantial."
I don't see any of those points as being in disagreement, to be honest. I think those points are all correct, even. We all agree on the facts, we all agree what they might imply, we just have one person saying he'd like more data before lending that conclusion the weight of "fact".
So rather than bicker over our agreement, we should be, say, compiling a list of all known starports (and maybe surface bases too?) in the Pleiades "region" (I suppose we should also define that region), mark which ones have Aegis labs, an Aegis BGS presence, or no known Aegis influence at all, and start comparing that to the list of attacked stations. That will help to move the discussion forward, rather than just move it around in circles as we attack each others tails.
/If I remember when I get off work tonight, I might try to start that
You're right that there are plenty of people on the internet who will not be moved by any amount of evidence. I don't think that's the case for most in this thread though. (most) Importantly, some of those saying there's not enough evidence yet to get them to support our conclusion have laid out a realistic and meetable standard of evidence (that I've seen asked for many other times in these forums). So we should all - everyone interested in the Thargoid story - be interested in that evidence. Because if we care about this plotline, that data affects us all.
//This is why I tend to be overly-nitpicky about semantics sometimes. In my experience, if we work through those barriers of semantics, we generally agree a lot more than we realize.
Last edited: