|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
66
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 13:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
GM Zerat wrote:There is currently a blanket ban on can baiting in rookie systems, I just wanted to bring that up as many players make this mistake. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rookie_SystemsWarning: Can Flipping in Rookie Systems is considered Griefing. So if you are thinking about can baiting only older players in those systems, please do not.
Can flipping and can baiting are two very different things. Your page should say what you actually mean (according to the the posts by GM Homonoia) that can baiting is not allowed, but can flipping of non-rookies is ok. Specifically, the page should say, "Can Baiting in Rookie Systems is considered Griefing."
EDIT: If needed, I will be more than happy to write an independent article on can baiting. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
66
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 18:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:Ok, this seems to be getting out of hand and our rulings are pulled out of context. So let me state this in the most simple terms possible. 1. New PLAYERS are protected by CCP in the systems listed here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rookie_Systems2. No one is protected in systems outside of this list. 3. None but new PLAYERS are protected by CCP in any way. 4. If new PLAYERS keep getting harassed the list of systems may be expanded. 5. Players cannot see which characters are new PLAYERS and which are old players with new CHARACTERS; game masters CAN see this and we act accordingly. 6. It is impossible to define what a new PLAYER is in a way that is comprehensible, to the point and without loop holes, in addition to our players able to apply these rules to their fellow players around them. This means that we will not provide a hard definition to our player base, however game masters internally can apply these rules consistently and without bias. 7. In general do NOT mess around with new PLAYERS; anyone else is fair game. The above guidelines are not up for discussion and they will not be further clarified. If you need further clarification you are probably doing something you should not be doing.
Is there anyway that you can change the Rookie System page so that the warning states that can-baiting is considered griefing in these systems, not can-flipping, as you have mentioned in both related threads? As it stands, the wiki page is in direct conflict with your statements.
EDIT: I also want to thank you for having the patience to read through a second thread and put together a full reply to this. I greatly appreciate your time and effort in clarifying things - it's been a great help. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
66
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 18:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
GM Homonoia wrote:RubyPorto wrote: Since nothing of much economic value happens in rookie systems, the only thing this really applies to is something like "are Hulks in rookie systems 'rookies'?"
Dear lord... Hulks are advanced T2 ships. I am not going to dignify this with a real answer.
I literally lol'd at this. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
66
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 19:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Just for kicks, I'm going to throw this into the define a rookie debate.
Quote:I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. GÇöJustice Potter Stewart, concurring opinion in Jacobellis v. Ohio 378 U.S. 184 (1964), regarding possible obscenity in The Lovers. Linky
This is one of the most famous statements ever issued by the US Supreme Court and I think is remarkably applicable to the 'define a rookie' conundrum. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
68
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 20:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:Is there anyway that you can change the Rookie System page so that the warning states that can-baiting is considered griefing in these systems, not can-flipping, as you have mentioned in both related threads? As it stands, the wiki page is in direct conflict with your statements. If the problem is that there is no page describing can-baiting to link to, I will be more than happy to create/write the page and fully explain all of the intricacies of it.
EDIT: I also want to thank you for having the patience to read through a second thread and putting together a full reply to this. I greatly appreciate your time and effort in clarifying things - it's been a great help.
The Can Baiting page has been created and filled out. Now all that's needed is to get the wiki page regarding rookie systems updated to properly reflect the rules.
Thanks again for your responses in this thread GM Harmonoia. I know GD can be a frustrating place, considering the residents. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
68
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 20:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GM Homonoia wrote:Alright, instead of arguing this any further. Here one for you guys. I am sure that most of you understand our goals, now assuming you had ZERO development time, how would YOU word a policy that achieves these goals? Go back to the way everyone (including some of you guys, going by old petition quotes) thought it worked: In the starter and carreer agent systems, all forms of aggression games and unprovoked attacks are prohibited. Outside of the starter systems, anything goes. That is the policy. It means the distinction between rookie and vet becomes completely irrelevant, and it removes the ability to use rookie-like characters to hide behind the fear of the banhammer while still giving the rookies a safe zone to play in. The game-design part is to punch the NPE team in the soul until they give rookie accounts a big stonking GÇ£Here There Be DragonsGÇ¥ popup the first time they try to activate the gate out of those systems and until they create a mission where the theft mechanics are explained. If certain forms of rookie-griefing are rampant (e.g. the SOE arc), then tell the PvE group to adjust those missions to no longer feature the kinds of content that might trick the rookies GÇö e.g. no required lootable items. This is not a policy GÇö it's more along the lines of entertainment (for you, not being on the receiving end of said soul-punching). The solution isn't arbitrary, opaque, unobtainable, and potentially harsh rules with a gillion different (equally arbitrary, opaque and unknowable) edge cases referring to (occasionally incorrectly named) specific tactics (that the newbies won't know about or understand, and which the griefers will modify to work in a different way). The solution is a education GÇö for everyone GÇö about an easily available and categorically true rule set.
This is spot on. |
|
|
|