Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Popsikle
Minmatar Caffeine Commodities Company
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 17:57:00 -
[241]
Originally by: Tobruk
Originally by: Laura Rampart
Originally by: Popsikle When griefing goes to far, CCP changes the rules to prevent people from being griefed out of the game. Privateers: Upped the cost to wardecs Suicide Ganking: Concord wtfpwnd drones and such Moo: well, lotsa things changed because of them.
Dynamic rules to prevent overgriefing is just the way it is in eve.
You really should be used to it by now
/winthread
NONE OF THOES CHANGES WERE RETROACTIVE TO BENEFIT SPECIFIC CORPS/ALLIANCES. the people who were killed by privateers didnt get their ships back and a sorry about that game mechanic its not what we meant to have happen. if you cant see the difference between the above and the sepcial favor done for bob then your simply being difficult.
If it was done when the petition was opened it would not be retroactive now would it?
GM's screwed up one of my petitions a while back. I could not wait for them to fix it, so I moved on. Later they helped me out because at the time of the petition I would have been able to do something that I should have been able to do at the time but could not later due to standings...
The time it takes for GM's to sort issues should NOT be a penalty on the player base. ____ <t20> i want to be in a manager potition at Hooters <SaraDawn> Garthagk, do you have it up ? <Garthagk> I can get it up anytime. |
ElweSingollo
The Higher Standard
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:00:00 -
[242]
Originally by: Tobruk I don't think CCP has a full appreciation of how dangerous a situation like this is to their game.
It is so ungodly frustrating to fight an entity in game that has developer support, its like your fighting the game itself. How long will we tolerate this ****??
Is it time for another open letter to CCP? no, its already gone past that point.
Frankly I find this **** too hard to stomach:
- spawning BPOS - Handing out motherships - Changing the titan memorial rules when molles titan died - refunding titans after saying they never would
2 Titans in game died to "broken mechanics" 1 AZN and 1 D2 both pilots petitioned the loss but no exception was given. A good policy. The game has rules, they can change, but until then we live, fly, and die by them.
People care that its BOB you did it for, because you have a LONG history of doing them special favors, but it really doesnÆt matter that its BOB, most people recognize that. It matters that YOU broke the rules and gave someone special treatment. WhatÆs even more insulting is that you changed their name to Band of Brothers Reloaded, as though, by not giving them their original name back somehow it would be ok. How stupid do you think we are? What a disgusting insult.
This action is shameful beyond words CCP. Your failure to act last time and your continued, blatant cheating is a slap in the face to every person who plays the game.
Lol developers mnust really suck then if they help BoB as you considering you have basically stuffed BoB into oblivion they have no space more or less they are in a rather precarious position having to rely on a one time enemy to basically stay alive... so yeah lol maybe BoB should get the developers to be your extra special friend and help you you never know you might just win eve .
In other news answer from GM is a bit meh but all the players going around screaming OMG the sky is falling please just quit the game now as you obviously aren't comfortable playing bOb online .
CCP and Eve Online... It's not a bug, it's a feature
In Before I Get M***** Again
|
Vostor Kral
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:00:00 -
[243]
*posting in a thread* Please re-size your signature in maximum height: 120 pixels ,maximum width: 400 pixels and maximum file size: 24,000 bytes (not Kbytes). ~ Applebabe |
Tobruk
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:08:00 -
[244]
Edited by: Tobruk on 24/03/2009 18:08:50
Originally by: Popsikle
Originally by: Tobruk
Originally by: Laura Rampart
Originally by: Popsikle When griefing goes to far, CCP changes the rules to prevent people from being griefed out of the game. Privateers: Upped the cost to wardecs Suicide Ganking: Concord wtfpwnd drones and such Moo: well, lotsa things changed because of them.
Dynamic rules to prevent overgriefing is just the way it is in eve.
You really should be used to it by now
/winthread
NONE OF THOES CHANGES WERE RETROACTIVE TO BENEFIT SPECIFIC CORPS/ALLIANCES. the people who were killed by privateers didnt get their ships back and a sorry about that game mechanic its not what we meant to have happen. if you cant see the difference between the above and the sepcial favor done for bob then your simply being difficult.
If it was done when the petition was opened it would not be retroactive now would it?
GM's screwed up one of my petitions a while back. I could not wait for them to fix it, so I moved on. Later they helped me out because at the time of the petition I would have been able to do something that I should have been able to do at the time but could not later due to standings...
The time it takes for GM's to sort issues should NOT be a penalty on the player base.
When all of the above incidents happend there was an announced change, it was put in patch notes and it was changed.
For bob it just happend. And still you havent adressed a single one of my points - did any of the people who were killed by a privateer wardec get thier ships back? NO. should bob get its name back. NO. What about people who got suicide ganked, did they get their stuff back? NO.
SO WHY IS BOB SPECIAL? the fact that they got their name back is what makes it retroactive (which has never been done, even for the people killed by t20s Spike L ammo). The fact that they are the only ones its ever been done for makes it special treatment. ----------------------------------------------
Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
|
VoiceInTheDesert
Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:08:00 -
[245]
This is not about a name. This is not about sov. This is about principles.
No alliance should get to break the rules. Period.
|
Mr M
Legion of Illuminated Social Rejects
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:09:00 -
[246]
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
QFT.
I copy it a second time just because it's so true
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
EVEgeek|Eden Underground Radio |
Lothros Andastar
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:10:00 -
[247]
Shame on you CCP. This Kind of Blatant favouritism was what the CSM was meant to stop. I guess it was all just smoke and mirrors to shut us up after all.
|
Garathyal
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:11:00 -
[248]
Seriously the tears are stupid. If you are so unhappy quit your subs and go. Believe me the game will be better without you.
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:11:00 -
[249]
This is yet another ridiculous decision.
They don't care what anyone else thinks. Period. Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Lyer
THE BLUE BEYOND
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:13:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Professor Impossible If I were CCP I would've stripped the original name from the fake corp Goonswarm created and given it back to BoB.
Goonswarm has admitted that they took the name just to harass BoB. They also admitted to wardeccing every BoB corp for the sole purpose of preventing them from being able to form a new alliance. They are just annoyed because CCP is putting its foot down regarding their harassment tactics.
It's a basic principle that players should get to choose the name of their corporation or alliance. Goonswarm intentionally tried to thwart that by using game mechanics inappropriately. Wardecs are not for the purpose of blocking alliance creation. And neither is it appropriate to create a corp name and ticker just to deny it to someone else. This isn't a case where its questionable whether Goonswarm did these things for legitimate purposes. They unequivocally stated that the wardecs and corp creation were to harass BoB.
Also, everyone knows that the BoB alliance was not disbanded because BoB wanted to disband, it was because of a spy in the executor corp. BoB is still stuck with the tactical repercussions of that, losing all sov. The name change is purely cosmetic. For Goonswarm to act like a purely cosmetic name change means that CCP is somehow helping them win the game is completely asinine. It has no tactical repercussions at all. Everyone is in the same place as before. What Goonswarm considers "unfair" is that someone would dare impede their right to grief the hell out of everyone in EVE.
I am not aware of an alliance being renamed, but I know of a corp and multiple characters that have been renamed because they were created for the express purpose of trying to pass themselves off as other corps or players. It completely makes sense to me that an alliance would be allowed to rename when it was used solely because other groups griefed them into using it.
I am glad CCP doesn't allow Goonswarm to run roughshod over this game, implicitly condoning their griefing by ignoring it. Goonswarm just has sour grapes that their juvenile antics aren't allowed to run rampant.
|
|
OldPueblo
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:13:00 -
[251]
We win regardless, BoB's new name is even stupider then the last one. But nobody gets to break the rules, I'd make the same big deal about any alliance. It's just a bonus that it gets to be BoB again.
|
Arthur Fonzareli
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:13:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Arthur Fonzareli on 24/03/2009 18:15:42 Anyone else noticing that most of the "stfu," "give me your stuff," "your tears are delicious" posts are all from characters without alliance/corp info available?
EDIT: lol, I chose the wrong character. Irony. This is Voice from a few posts up.
|
Falaricae
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:17:00 -
[253]
CCP, when you decide on another policy change in the future, it's advicable to announce it beforehand.
Also why is name change after months from the creation of the organisation "withing a reasonable timeframe" and why did the situation "warrant such action"? I'm somewhat familiar with the details of this case and I don't see either of those claims being even remotely valid. The database article on name changes indicates this should have never happened, but since things are different now, I want to know what the new rules are.
|
Garathyal
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:18:00 -
[254]
Edited by: Garathyal on 24/03/2009 18:18:59
Originally by: Arthur Fonzareli Edited by: Arthur Fonzareli on 24/03/2009 18:15:42 Anyone else noticing that most of the "stfu," "give me your stuff," "your tears are delicious" posts are all from characters without alliance/corp info available?
EDIT: lol, I chose the wrong character. Irony. This is Voice from a few posts up.
Teh Irony indeed.
edit: and laugh at all the legal speak. Suddenly eve is played by lawlyers....
|
Necronym
Ruthless Aggression Epidemic.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:23:00 -
[255]
I also agree that this 'change' was crap.. seen too many ppl (in 5 yrs of playing) not get any kind of name change for any reason!! So why now... and where's the proof of "others they done it for"??
But seriously, it's just a name and really had no effect in game... but I understand (and agree) that the continued favortism shown to this 1 alliance, of all the alliances in game, seems bit suspicous and leaves a distrust and immediate doubt in my mind about anything ccp & bob related!
However, all this emorage crap posting on forums is NOT going to change anything!!! You really feel that strongly about it, then cancel your account(s)and speak with your wallet!!!! Until then your emorage crap is doing nothing but giving them a good chuckle as they sit back eating thier Kobe steaks you just paid for!!!! PS- contract me your stuff when u emo-quit!!!
|
Mikel Banks
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:23:00 -
[256]
I may be the only goon happy about this decision but here goes. CCP thank you for finally allowing renaming petitions, I can finally get the name I always wanted for this character. I highly encourage everyone file a renaming petition for any characters, corporations, and alliances they want renamed because there finally is a precedent set regarding this. I eagerly await my new name of ililiilillllliilililillil, so I can join with my buddy ililililllililllilililill . Many thanks CCP
|
randomname4me
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:24:00 -
[257]
Originally by: Garathyal Edited by: Garathyal on 24/03/2009 18:18:59
Originally by: Arthur Fonzareli Edited by: Arthur Fonzareli on 24/03/2009 18:15:42 Anyone else noticing that most of the "stfu," "give me your stuff," "your tears are delicious" posts are all from characters without alliance/corp info available?
EDIT: lol, I chose the wrong character. Irony. This is Voice from a few posts up.
Teh Irony indeed.
edit: and laugh at all the legal speak. Suddenly eve is played by lawlyers....
Its a space based spreadsheet application now anyway why shouldn't it be a corporate law app as well.
EVE Online: Rated RRR- For Explicit Breakfast Piercing Bullets. |
Laura Rampart
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:24:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Tobruk For bob it just happend. And still you havent adressed a single one of my points - did any of the people who were killed by a privateer wardec get thier ships back? NO. should bob get its name back. NO. What about people who got suicide ganked, did they get their stuff back? NO.
Did Bob get their territory back? NO Did Bob get their name back? NO
The example above are only examples of when CCP changed rules. This discussion is about wheter CCP changed rules before and these are the proofs.
|
Disposable Spice
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:25:00 -
[259]
Originally by: GM Grimmi
We have previously changed names provided a petition was created within a reasonable timeframe and the situation warranted such action.
You have only ever done so for entities which misspelled either the organisation name or its corp ticker. I've actually been in an alliance which wanted to change its name a long time ago. Request denied.
Originally by: GM Grimmi The leadership of KenZoku/Band of Brothers did petition us immediately after they were disbanded and their name was taken.
Irrelevant. They lost the name through normal in game mechanics, ergo they cannot recreate something with the same name. Kinda makes sense, petitioning this is pointless since the name already exists. Petitions do not override game mechanics.
Originally by: GM Grimmi While we worked on the petition for about two months we do not feel that they should suffer because of that.
This is a wonderful new precedent, which I wholeheartedly welcome. No longer will players have to deal with "tough luck & speedy recovery" scenarios when a petition takes such a long time. It's almost amusing, I can think of a few petitions over time which meet the exact same requirements, I presume it is alright to reopen these.
Originally by: GM Grimmi Having them disband and lose sovereignty again was not deemed appropriate in this case.
Irrelevant, since they did not create a new organisation - with potential naming complications or spelling issues of entity name or ticker - so I fail to see the argument.
Originally by: GM Grimmi This action was limited to changing their name, as we have done before for others
Blatant lie. You have only given organisations the change to rename within a reasonable short time of creation, for cases of entity name or entity ticker.
Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment.
Well, I am incredibly curious for you to define "the same situation", and obviously provide evidence, since the only cases of renaming have been in the case of misspelling, and not of already long existing alliances. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:25:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Necronym However, all this emorage crap posting on forums is NOT going to change anything!!! You really feel that strongly about it, then cancel your account(s)and speak with your wallet!!!!
You have those backwards. -
DesuSigs |
|
Nahrix
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:28:00 -
[261]
Originally by: Mr M
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
QFT.
I copy it a second time just because it's so true
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
This isn't about 'kicking BoB when he's down'. This is about CCP. BoB is merely tied to the situation because they happen to be the alliance that CCP is showing the alleged favoritism.
Look at this thread. Goons aren't the only ones noticing the gravity of a situation in which a select group of players are allowed to cheat. The magnitude of the cheat does not matter; partially, this is a matter of principle; primarily, this is a matter that highlights the existance of a history of cheating which we all believed was behind us.
|
Tobruk
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:29:00 -
[262]
Edited by: Tobruk on 24/03/2009 18:31:14
Originally by: Laura Rampart
Originally by: Tobruk For bob it just happend. And still you havent adressed a single one of my points - did any of the people who were killed by a privateer wardec get thier ships back? NO. should bob get its name back. NO. What about people who got suicide ganked, did they get their stuff back? NO.
Did Bob get their territory back? NO Did Bob get their name back? NO
The example above are only examples of when CCP changed rules. This discussion is about wheter CCP changed rules before and these are the proofs.
no, because clearly THEY DIDNT CHANGE THE RULES even they havent claimed that. this discussion is about weather CCP broke the existing rules to give a special favor to one group.
to me its pretty clear. to you... well your debating some other topic/ can't admit you have no point and simply hate goonswarm (which is fine i hate them too). ----------------------------------------------
Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers Reloaded
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:30:00 -
[263]
Anyone from 4S posted in here yet?
アニメ漫画です
|
Garathyal
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:32:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Nahrix
Originally by: Mr M
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
QFT.
I copy it a second time just because it's so true
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
This isn't about 'kicking BoB when he's down'. This is about CCP. BoB is merely tied to the situation because they happen to be the alliance that CCP is showing the alleged favoritism.
Look at this thread. Goons aren't the only ones noticing the gravity of a situation in which a select group of players are allowed to cheat. The magnitude of the cheat does not matter; partially, this is a matter of principle; primarily, this is a matter that highlights the existance of a history of cheating which we all believed was behind us.
We will assume you are cancelling your subs then. Don't let the door hit you on the ass as you leave.
|
Gloria Lewis
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:37:00 -
[265]
Originally by: GM Grimmi Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment.
Are you kidding me? "We don't do name changes" unless you're BOB/KenZoku/.BoB.
|
VoiceInTheDesert
Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:39:00 -
[266]
Edited by: VoiceInTheDesert on 24/03/2009 18:40:23
Originally by: Garathyal
Originally by: Nahrix
Originally by: Mr M
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
QFT.
I copy it a second time just because it's so true
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
This isn't about 'kicking BoB when he's down'. This is about CCP. BoB is merely tied to the situation because they happen to be the alliance that CCP is showing the alleged favoritism.
Look at this thread. Goons aren't the only ones noticing the gravity of a situation in which a select group of players are allowed to cheat. The magnitude of the cheat does not matter; partially, this is a matter of principle; primarily, this is a matter that highlights the existance of a history of cheating which we all believed was behind us.
We will assume you are cancelling your subs then. Don't let the door hit you on the ass as you leave.
Your logic is so flawed, I'm not even sure why I'm talking to you.
Why is the "only" way to "really" protest to quit? We enjoy this game. We think the rules were broken...mostly because they were.
Saying we should just quit if we don't like what happened is like saying Rosa Parks should have just stopped using buses.
|
Mr M
Legion of Illuminated Social Rejects
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:39:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Aetec Raa I can't help but wonder how "big & bad" BoB would have been without T20...
Man... that **** is old. A sabre blueprint and some other stuff. It's not like they could base their entire alliance on that
EVEgeek|Eden Underground Radio |
Aetec Raa
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:40:00 -
[268]
Originally by: Garathyal
Originally by: Nahrix
Originally by: Mr M
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
QFT.
I copy it a second time just because it's so true
Originally by: Laura Rampart And to be honest, it's funny to see you guys sooo ****ed off for a stupid name. You still won versus Band of Brothers, but that doesn't seem enough for you.
This isn't about 'kicking BoB when he's down'. This is about CCP. BoB is merely tied to the situation because they happen to be the alliance that CCP is showing the alleged favoritism.
Look at this thread. Goons aren't the only ones noticing the gravity of a situation in which a select group of players are allowed to cheat. The magnitude of the cheat does not matter; partially, this is a matter of principle; primarily, this is a matter that highlights the existance of a history of cheating which we all believed was behind us.
We will assume you are cancelling your subs then. Don't let the door hit you on the ass as you leave.
Why would you assume that? I think we are simply looking for a clarification of the rules.
|
Aetec Raa
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:42:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Mr M
Originally by: Aetec Raa I can't help but wonder how "big & bad" BoB would have been without T20...
Man... that **** is old. A sabre blueprint and some other stuff. It's not like they could base their entire alliance on that
When you are caught cheating, all of your gains come into question. Ask Bernie Madoff.
|
Carver DiGriz
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:42:00 -
[270]
Quote: Saying we should just quit if we don't like it is like saying Rosa Parks should have just stopped using Buses.
Preach it, mate
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |