Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 61 post(s) |
Leeloo Malaquin
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
35
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 22:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was going to post this in the appropriate thread but CCP Loxy decided to lock it without any good reason. I still want to make a public statement since I believe I have the right to have my voice heard considering how much this has affected me. I represent only myself here.
To give you little background, I started eve same day Apocrypha was launched and Genos is the only corp I have ever been in. This year I had the opportunity to fly to Iceland for the 2012 fanfest and I won the eve pvp tournament there. I talked briefly with Sreegs, Loxy, Soundwave and other devs there. I also met Zastrow, Michael Bolton, Raivi and other players. This was the highlight of my EVE experience so far and I had a great time in Iceland.
When I saw CCP Sreegs post about excluding HYDRA from the tournament I felt sick, my face went pale and I felt dizzy. I'd say I have already worked roughly 100 hours during the past 3 weeks theorycrafting setups and fittings in addition to coordinating and participating in numerous practices we have had. AT is the best thing in EVE for me and now I find out I can't participate in it.
The reason Screegs gave for excluding HYDRA and OB was that he thinks HYDRA and OB are a "single entity" who are "practicing together in a single corporation on the test server in a single wormhole" while "masquerading as two units".
Here are the facts:
- HYDRA and OB are not a single entity. They are 2 different entities on TQ with their own history. CCP knows this very well. We worked together closely in AT9 but with the new rules we were only planning to test together(unless told we can't do it) before the tournament begins.
- CCP never defined in the rules how B-team is determined so we sent CCP email asking if it is ok we practice with OB. We told them we only plan to test together since we are a small entity that doesn't have enough players to do it on its own, and in the tournament we act separately under separate leadership. We never got a reply from CCP so we sent them another email and made a petition. Again, the email was never answered while petition was answered by Senior GM saying that training together is allowed. Later when asked again in the public forums, CCP replied that they would deal with our situation after the sign ups.
- Reason we joined the same corp in the TEST server was because of wormhole logistics. No one considered that a logistic technicality in the TEST server would suddenly be bannable when training together was not. And I don't understand Raivis comments when he says we made a mistake doing it, as we had been very open with CCP and told them we would practice together unless being told that we can't.
- This leads me to wonder what Screegs means when he talks about HYDRA and OB "masquerading as two units". We told them our intentions regarding the tournament, we told them we practice with each other, they know we are separate unit on TQ etc. I simply don't see what he is referring to.
Conclusion
It is obvious to me that CCP banned us because of AT9 final (Which we had not planned for since the chance of that happening seemed so small, which is why it looked so bad. We had intention to make it entertaining but ****** up due to mix of euphoria and fatigue and made a long post after the final saying how sorry we are). We followed all the rules last year and had every intention to follow them this year. CCP made the B team rule vague on purpose, so they could make whatever call they wanted. We did our best to get the rule specified but they never gave us the chance and stayed quiet so they could ban us.
This is how I feel and the hate I feel towards CCP staff makes it impossible for me to continue playing EVE. You really messed things up CCP.
PS. It would be nice if CCP would send me and other members of my team the Alienware computers that we won 2 months ago in the Fanfest pvp tournament. I don't know how many more emails I have to send to you regarding this matter.
|
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
80
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Perhaps Internal Affairs need to double check Sreeg's work and affiliations. |
spookydonut
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
102
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
1115
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team.
Solid advice right there. |
|
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
We hadn't technically at this point entered any team. !! |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
you entered your teams when you submitted names to hat |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. |
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hydra don't get to tell Outbreak what they should do. Outbreak don't get to tell Hydra what they should do. The key point is, you're talking about two entirely separate entities, the key issue that so many people refuse to understand no matter how clear it is. In fact you could get all of hydra and outbreak onto a Tennis Court and put all of hydra on one side of the net and all of outbreak on the other side of the net and notice that it's two groups of different people and still not get the point at all.
If this point is completely lost on you, if you refuse to understand that Hydra and Outbreak are two alliances of no common purpose but just respect each other's power and value in an alliance tournament format, if it's just so convenient to completely ignore that Hydra or Outbreak would literally work with any alliance that they believed were worth working with and feel they could trust, then your opinions and thoughts on the whole subject are your own but have no basis in reality and are therefore pointless thoughts based on a fictional world that exists in your mind only.
It's fine if people want to be forum warriors because it's the only place they can really feel any power, but it's not fine if they work at CCP and are put in charge of making decisions that affect hundreds of people. People put in those positions should be able to distinguish between reality and the fictional world in their mind where the situation is moulded to fit the evidence they're never expecting to see go public.
Just remember, if you're in the tournament, next time, it could be you. |
Duncan Tanner
Genos Occidere
210
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tyrrax Thorrk wrote:you entered your teams when you submitted names to hat
Yet we asked for clarification long before we entered any teams this was ignored until after we entered teams. The only clarification we received said we could do it and we saw other teams practicing together as well. - |
Terios Corvalis
HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
After AT9 finals I would say this rule was almost written personally for Hydra and Outbreak:
To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.
Seriously, what did you expect? |
|
MrWhitei God
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
54
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams.
Thats alot of "We" for two separate entities |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
70
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
you don't need a secured spot to get investigated, you just need a potential one (i.e. you sent in the 10 plex) |
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
85
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
After the pleas for advice, it's pretty disgusting you say that. No, seriously. |
Sven Hammerstorm
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
Zowie Powers wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. After the pleas for advice, it's pretty disgusting you say that. No, seriously. CCP will have its revenge |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
We got banned before securing a spot. But yes we did register as 0utbreak.
|
Ophelia Aivoras
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:35:00 -
[16] - Quote
Sven Hammerstorm wrote:Zowie Powers wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. After the pleas for advice, it's pretty disgusting you say that. No, seriously. CCP will have its revenge
Well, obviously it's what it is... |
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
Leeloo, I do feel sorry for you personally. However,
Leeloo Malaquin wrote:We worked together closely in AT9 but with the new rules we were only planning to test together(unless told we can't do it) before the tournament begins.
Let's look exactly at what could be implied by "worked closely in AT9", and let's see which of these activities you were not going to do this year. Obviously I can't be 100% sure about this as I don't have alts in your alliances, but I think I can make a reasonable guess.
- Shared theorycrafting. Since you've done all your practicing with both alliances, it's fair to assume that all setups and ideas were shared.
- Sharing pilots during practices. A common occurrence during practices is that a pilot with certain skills is needed, but is hard to find. Suppose that such a pilot is need for the Hydra team, but the only such pilot currently online is an 0utbreak guy. Do you honestly want to tell me that you would refrain from using the 0utbreak pilot in the Hydra team?
- Shared spying/intel. I would find it hard to believe that a spy for one team would not reveal information he got on, say, DarkSide, to the other team.
- Sharing characters between actual people. I believe that you were planning not to do that this year.
- Colluding and throwing matches in a way that benefits the other team. I believe that you were planning not to that this year. Definitely not in a clearly visible way.
Overall, I think the first two items, or even one of them are enough to deem the two teams working as one. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
Faffywaffy wrote:
- 1) Shared theorycrafting. Since you've done all your practicing with both alliances, it's fair to assume that all setups and ideas were shared.
- 2) Sharing pilots during practices. A common occurrence during practices is that a pilot with certain skills is needed, but is hard to find. Suppose that such a pilot is need for the Hydra team, but the only such pilot currently online is an 0utbreak guy. Do you honestly want to tell me that you would refrain from using the 0utbreak pilot in the Hydra team?
- 3) Shared spying/intel. I would find it hard to believe that a spy for one team would not reveal information he got on, say, DarkSide, to the other team.
- 4) Sharing characters between actual people. I believe that you were planning not to do that this year.
- 5) Colluding and throwing matches in a way that benefits the other team. I believe that you were planning not to that this year. Definitely not in a clearly visible way.
Overall, I think the first two items, or even one of them are enough to deem the two teams working as one. Believe it or not:
1) It wasn't actually sharing (in a sense that both alliances have complletely shared pool of setups to which both are contributing). We just told OB members into which ships they should get and how to fly if we wanted to test one setup vs another. All the theorycrafting was done by Garmon, Leeloo and Duncan with minor help from other Hydra members. 3) Leadership this time was kept completely separated. That is, no single OB member had access to actual intel (they did had access to decoy intel forum though) 4) Can't assure it didn't happen at all, but never saw it myself - when guy uses his account, he doesn't switch to account of other guy to optimize teams. Think it's because Hydra + OB has enough characters with AT-specific skills trained to 5. |
OlRotGut
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
I support the ban of those teams. Last year's finale, suuuuckkkkedd.... completely lame.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
339
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
i dont get it is this not EVE? so what two corps got in the finals metagamed and fixed the match? is this not what eve is about? you make ships that cost half a billion isk that can be killed by a destroyer...
oh i get it ... you can get ****** over in eve just as long as you dont make ccp look stupid in the process... PLEX FOR PIZZA!
TECH iii MINNING SHIPS! |
|
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:01:00 -
[21] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote: We just told OB members into which ships they should get and how to fly if we wanted to test one setup vs another.
Amazingly, that is exactly what we do with most of our pilots in DarkSide |
Calmoto
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:06:00 -
[22] - Quote
If these two groups were not colluding they would be in different corps/alliances in different wormholes with different ship setups, different ideas, different spying, different mentality on privacy and different ideas on winning
and most of all if you cant field enough players without cheating and getting a "hostile ringer" you should GTFO of the tourney
dont cry that you got caught being greasy |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:06:00 -
[23] - Quote
Faffywaffy wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote: We just told OB members into which ships they should get and how to fly if we wanted to test one setup vs another.
Amazingly, that is exactly what we do with most of our pilots in DarkSide I hope you noticed the 'if' part - when OB wanted to test specific situations and setups we just switched the roles and helped Zara & his FCs, it doesn't work otherwise. |
Qlfon
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:08:00 -
[24] - Quote
Oh, Faffywaffy again... let me say it again: Your ButtHurt is so obvious from loosing to 0utbreak last year in semi-final, that its just too funny how are you happy they are not in. And i can bet you will loose this year to some no-name **** team, only because you deserve this. |
Helen Connor
Warriors tribe DarkSide.
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:08:00 -
[25] - Quote
Faffywaffy wrote:Amazingly, that is exactly what we do with most of our pilots in DarkSide Yes, they always want me to do weird things without any explanation and then shout at me when I fly outside the arena to get away from them! Creeps.
|
LooknSee
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:09:00 -
[26] - Quote
Frankly, I felt Outbreak/Hydra should have been banned this year solely on the joke they made of the tourny last year. But if one needs a reason, this is as good as any.
Live by the metagame, die by the metagame I guess. |
DurrHurrDurr
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
506
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well? |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:17:00 -
[28] - Quote
nvm, wrong forum lol |
Ophelia Aivoras
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:21:00 -
[29] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well?
Of course not Darius Johnson wouldn't hurt his goon buddies |
Mercurial Blood
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:22:00 -
[30] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well?
Don't worry, you didn't violate the secret alliance tournament rule of "No separate teams are allowed to practice in a wormhole with one another unless they make it unnecessarily difficult for themselves by staying in separate corps."
Otherwise I find this turn of events pretty hilarious overall. |
|
Viribus
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:26:00 -
[31] - Quote
Mercurial Blood wrote:HELP I'M DYING TO THE CHEETAH
I think it's funny that the criticism of hydra is coming squarely from people who don't understand how wormholes work |
Hoarr
RPS holdings Clockwork Pineapple
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:32:00 -
[32] - Quote
Leeloo Malaquin wrote:
- Reason we joined the same corp in the TEST server was because of wormhole logistics. No one considered that a logistic technicality in the TEST server would suddenly be bannable when training together was not. And I don't understand Raivis comments when he says we made a mistake doing it, as we had been very open with CCP and told them we would practice together unless being told that we can't.
First, let me start by saying I respect what you guys do. You are serious no bullshit PVPers who crush the vast majority of people who wander across your path. The help that you've(Genos) offered to the community interested in PVP is commendable despite what happened at the end of EIE.
All that aside, let's not beat around the bush here. The no B team rule may has well have read, "Hydra and 0utbreak can't s*** up ATX again by rigging the final." Why in the name of unholy F*** you guys decided to not only practice with each other in the test server, but potentially be seen as actively thumbing your nose at CCP by joining the same corp to do it absolutely boggles my mind. How did it never cross your minds to actively stay away from each other in build up to ATX?? I understand that you're pals and you respect each other, blah blah blah. You MUST have realized the rule was made SPECIFICALLY targeting your two alliances. IMHO, sniggardly just got caught in the crossfire, and had they not been announcing the news of your ban, snig may not have caught one at all. And, let's be honest, PL was never going to get hit with a ban here (it also helps when your ceo is chairman of CSM).
GMs have been hilariously wrong in the past and CCP devs DO. NOT. ABIDE. BY. GM. RULINGS. EVER (see AHARM v RnK). I just do not understand the thought process to make you guys think that you would be totally golden not even TRYING to maintain a semblance of separate alliances in the build up to the tournament. I understand that it sucks. The tournament will not be the same without both alliances. It will lose some of it's luster. I hope that you guys come back to ATXI with a vengance. But you have to realize that this is completely on your head. CCP said here's the line. Not only did you guys say, "cool, we'll stay WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY the f*** away from the line", you started playing f'ing jump-rope with it. |
LooknSee
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
Viribus wrote:I think it's funny that the criticism of hydra is coming squarely from people who don't understand how wormholes work
I think it's funny outbreak/hydra took a giant dump on CCP and the community at large last year, had some good laughs about it, intended to do it again this year, and then CCP stepped in and said: "ACCESS IS DENIED... BIATCH". And now it's hydra/outbreak that's mad.
Maybe that's just me though.
|
Masamune Dekoro
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
142
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:35:00 -
[34] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:i dont get it is this not EVE? so what two corps got in the finals metagamed and fixed the match? is this not what eve is about? you make ships that cost half a billion isk that can be killed by a destroyer...
oh i get it ... you can get ****** over in eve just as long as you dont make ccp look stupid in the process...
this gentleman has a point. |
Qlfon
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
CCP you want make qualitatively best tournament but, you will look stupid as company, and gaming magazines will tell the story, after this what you doing this year, many ppl will make sure no1 will forget it next year, and year after, and year after, and so on. If you CCP want make serious ingame tournament, use only EULA rules, like no account sharing, no exploiting, why dont you care about other teams, with big alliances as their backup, there is several alliances cooperating, and FOR SURE they will share rewards. You are upset about last year final? Get used to, this year some1 else will trick you badly, and this is what i wish to CCP AT X Team. |
Kyros Xero
Xuronautics
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 00:57:00 -
[36] - Quote
It's very unfortunate that official CCP response to Hydra's emails was not more comprehensive and timely. That part sucks.
However, I had to respond to this:
Quote:"Any training done in a wormhole requires everyone to be in the same corporation for using the hangers." - Duncan Tanner From the standpoint of a tiny wormhole corp, I can say the logistics to running two POSes aren't that bad.
Having both teams in the same POS and same corp was a ridiculously bad judgement call. I don't see how that could not have been seen. With a single corp the lines are very blurred, in spirit and in mechanics. Maybe you didn't set out with the intent to collude again, but it makes it very difficult to plausibly keep things seperate.
Both teams intrinsically sharing the same corp hangars, the same corp chat, the same saved corp fittings? Based on your concern over logistics I would imagine you drew from the same pool of ship hulls and spare parts, possibly even swapping fitted practice ships?
I don't know how many of those things you took advantage of in a shared capacity, or which other teams also do that (also a bad idea) but it seems to me that to be in that situation shoulder-to-shoulder for weeks and not share tons of information and plans and intel, even if inadvertently... not to be overly harsh, but isn't that kind of like holding your AA meetings at a bar?
I would still like to see your A team allowed in because personally I believe you didn't set out to collude this time, but you guys certainly didn't do yourselves any favors on this one. You put CCP in a very difficult position.
(P.S. Loved the "Daily roam" concept, hope you don't quit. ) POS Layered Defenses: "Panic" mode and defense-automation arrays |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
91
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:00:00 -
[37] - Quote
Kyros Xero wrote:
Both teams intrinsically sharing the same corp hangars, the same corp chat, the same saved corp fittings? Based on your concern over logistics I would imagine you drew from the same pool of ship hulls and spare parts, possibly even swapping fitted practice ships?
Who actually uses corp chat and corp fittings?
You can see in any genos video that instead of corp chat, they have a channel for genos members + alts, just like nearly every other corp in the game. |
Aryndel Samson
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:17:00 -
[38] - Quote
Zowie Powers wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. After the pleas for advice, it's pretty disgusting you say that. No, seriously.
In contrast it's pretty awesome how angry you are with this post. Sound off like you got a pair Pilot. |
Mercurial Blood
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:27:00 -
[39] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Kyros Xero wrote:
Both teams intrinsically sharing the same corp hangars, the same corp chat, the same saved corp fittings? Based on your concern over logistics I would imagine you drew from the same pool of ship hulls and spare parts, possibly even swapping fitted practice ships?
Who actually uses corp chat and corp fittings? You can see in any genos video that instead of corp chat, they have a channel for genos members + alts, just like nearly every other corp in the game.
Hahahah I don't think we had ANY corp fittings used in the tourney practices. Everything was done in a separate chat channel; not everyone in Genos on SISI was participating in the tourney. One thing we DID use though was corp bookmarks, that was INCREDIBLY helpful.
In any case, the way things usually worked is that players would pull ships from the shared hanger and fit them with mods from a shared hanger in accordance with fits given to them by their team captains. Contrary to what people think, the teams were separate for the most part in practice, IE: Hydra had a dedicated logistics pilot, Outbreak had a dedicated logistics pilot. They always flew with their respective teams and team captains and so on. I can't say we were 100% perfect in having separate teams for practice, but we knew we had to keep it as separate as possible because once it hit the tourney proper, the gloves were coming off and each team needed to be fully practiced and competent in all areas.
We could have kept the corps separate, but it didn't make any sense to do so logistically. Given the feedback we had received with the GM petition, we thought we were good to go because, honestly, the way we do things on SISI should have no reflection or impact on anything to do with TQ. On TQ we are entirely separate entities, but when it comes to the alliance tournament, we practice with each other to improve our numbers and variety of setups we can test. |
spookydonut
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:28:00 -
[40] - Quote
You called CCP on their bluff.
Too bad CCP wasn't bluffing. |
|
Shiroi Okami
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
55
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:31:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
You know what is also solid advice? Develop customer support, because as it stands, CCP has none. I can not think of any other video game company that would repeatedly not respond to emails about a certain issue, feign ignorance about any emails and then condemn a Senior GM for actually responding (Supposedly incorrectly) to yet another email on the same issue.
It is a wonder of the modern world how such a business model has left with you any players at all. My Latest Video: Freestyle II |
SwindonBadger
0utbreak Outbreak.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:33:00 -
[42] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
Other then faffy ( who seems to be on a whole new level of seriouse/ rage )
I dont think you could look at any hydra/ 0utbreak player in the eyes with all the testing/ work we did do, have done this year, and say we dont take it seriously?
seriously,
We ask you can we test together as long as we play fair in the tourney.. you say yes (Senior GM) . we took it so seriously we asked multiple times... had you said no .. then we would not have.
As far as I can see sreegs/soundwave have a very personal grudge against us, (and of course faffy)
eg : " I'm sorry you disagree but we're also not going to bend on this issue. If you have to blame someone I'd recommend the people in the finals last year."
I was one of the people asking well before this happened if the congor lines/ cash for win fights could be delt with, you never said anything other then this is eve, so to go for a win you have to out play this tactic (eg wild boars co2) or at least be ready to deel with it.
If not last year than soon a final/ semi would have gone the same way, 0utbreak/ hydra are not big we do need something to test on.
We dont have the player bace of darkside and nothing like the hords goonies ect can choose from, what we do have though is allot of years playing this game fighting tooth and nail where most would not even think you could kill something., instead of embracing this side of eve, most of this kind of corperation has been killed off from many little things that help the big allaince,
So tonight you are also driving a pointy stick though the heart of two entities that have given more then most on inspiring others to go get the very best the game has to offer ( bar fubar final ).
If anyone is any reel doubt its very easy to see just how seperate hydra/0utbreak are by going through our kb, we met over a mutial love of fighting the hard fight.
there are not many such corpse left, and eve is a weeker game withought them. had either one of us failed to PL, Darkside it would be someone else another year you would put the blame on rather then manning up and stopping the many thrown matches long ago.
So conratulations on another tournament event, I hope as I have always hoped for fun exciting fights
Everyone I know in 0B was very prepared to fight hydra and maybe even pod them :) but you did a very good job at getting your way with the Senior GM trick, I salute you for such deviouseness, its quite easy to see with the spittle coming from sreegs just how badly you wanted to ban us.
It is far better to go out like this then to be beaten by faffy/ shadoo
love and kisses to all picked, and soon to be auctioned in,
sorry to pyro / zara for posting but I too feel this may be the last thing I have left to say/play. I would have loved to taken part this year as its the last thing on my to do list in eve ( other than leaving corp so I can kill 0utbreak memebrs and pod them).
over and out, and rounderbout
Swin the paw , ( thanks for all the happy memories to all we have fought ) |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:38:00 -
[43] - Quote
i was just thinking of something
were b-teams removed before being put in the hat ? if not, wouldn't b-teams still give you an edge getting into the tournament, even if one got bounced later? you could just make sure your ten guys had alts in both corps. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:39:00 -
[44] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well? everyone knows we are all drooling over the chance to shoot TEST legitimately without vile rat getting all mad and ain't nothing going to stop us |
Endeavour Starfleet
829
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:40:00 -
[45] - Quote
Perhaps with the controversy surrounding this event it is best to go ahead and suspend further official tournaments until a full set of rules taking into account most potential loopholes are in place. |
Okinata
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:41:00 -
[46] - Quote
I think good matches can be about more than just the pew pew. CCP seems to think it's only on the field. I guess the metagaming that led to Burn Jita (promised for getting 10k votes, the CSM banning, people feeling their votes were thrown away, etc) is fully supported by CCP but the metagaming that led to the end of AT IX is verboten.
Hypocritical, IMO.
Personally I thought AT IX stood for everything Eve is about. Enemies of enemies are friends, everyone has a price, meta gaming > all, trust no one, etc. But, I guess our emergent gameplay sandbox needs random rules applied to it for the sake of the tears over a dull (combat wise) final last year. |
Tinkeng
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:52:00 -
[47] - Quote
Leeloo Malaquin[b wrote:Here are the facts:
- HYDRA and OB are not a single entity. They are 2 different entities on TQ with their own history. CCP knows this very well. We worked together closely in AT9 but with the new rules we were only planning to test together (unless told we can't do it) before the tournament begins.
- Reason we joined the same corp in the TEST server was because of wormhole logistics. No one considered that a logistic technicality in the TEST server would suddenly be bannable when training together was not. And I don't understand Raivis comments when he says we made a mistake doing it, as we had been very open with CCP and told them we would practice together unless being told that we can't.
Ok so after reading how mad all you guys are I do believe it might be time for a small reality check.
Here are the facts:
- Last year you guys pretty much ruined the final for anyone who had any interest in the AT. From the people behind the screens at CCP to any player watching for their enjoyment. But what happened was totally legal according to rules for that tournament and because you guys played it out so well, most of the other big contenders tipped their hats to you guys cause you out staged the rest.
- This year CCP announces a new rule specifically aimed at avoiding what you guys did last year in the final. And I've seen countless posts (the mails and petions also confirm this) stating that you guys knew very well that you couldn't repeat last yearGÇÖs final.
This was your reaction (in my opinion):
- Hmmmm I guess we shouldn't stage another game like we did last year. But since both the alliances aren't big enough to come up with the 24 right players for testing we will test against each other. Not a bad idea to be honest but with the new anti colluding rule there was a realization that you might have to be careful with how to do this (the mails and petions confirm this). Now instead of taking it careful (a.k.a. let's not do it until we have confirmation that we are allowed to) you guys took the approach of: "Hey let's do it anyway cause no one told us we couldn't eventho there is a vague rule that is aimed at something we did last year". Not the best of ideas imho. On top of taking (in my opinion) the wrong approach to something that is vague you guys then went and did something sketchy that you didn't tell CCP about in your mails (the joining of both alliances in 1 corp). And for what? So you didn't have to setup another POS? The same amount of ships and modules had to be brought in through the same WH that you could probe out together. The only difference is that there would have to be 2 POSes setup and that if you only bring in 1 ship with hulls, you will have to eject from that ship so that someone from the other alliance can hop in it and unload it in their POS.
Now for all the readers out there that think I'm only of this opinion cause I'm in PL and we didn't get banned (a.k.a. mad pubbies). I would like to refer to what I wrote above this part and see the logic in it. But once more I'll attempt to explain the difference between the communication between PL+Waffles and CCP and Hydra+0utbreak and CCP. All the information disclosed to CCP from the PL side was backed up by the actions of both teams. We never overstepped or did anything more than the things we specified in the mails. Reading the communication between Hydra+0utbreak and CCP everyone can see that they did more than disclosed in these mails (once again the merging into 1 corp) and therefore created reasonable doubt that once again they might be up to something.
Now to finish this wall of text my opinion is that you only have yourself to blame since you took the wrong approach to an unclear and potentially disastrous situation. And the fact that you now feel the urge to quit playing only illustrates the fact that if something is that important to you, you should think twice before deciding on a dangerous approach.
Sorry for the wall of text death.... |
Kratisto
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 01:55:00 -
[48] - Quote
CCP and everyone in general was upset with the **** the 2 teams pulled for AT IX finale; it was boring, weak, and uninspiring. It was allowed to stand because, indeed as Raivi has said, there was no rule against gaming the system and pissing in everyone's drink.
CCP then said they will not tolerate "the same kind of ****", to paraphrase, as in the last tournament final. You guys tried to push the envelope. You claim transparency, linking mails detailing you would like to practice together. You leave out that you would also like to theorycraft together, hang out on the same comms together, swap players between teams while practicing, and who knows what else.... and feel surprised you are thought of as the same entity?
It sucks when you work hard for something like this and get it taken away. This is the punishment decreed by CCP for ruining their final last year and attempting to the same again this year. I support them 100%. I am not affiliated with any team whatsoever, but as a viewer I can tell you full well the feeling of disappointment you feel now is quite related, if indeed far lower in magnitude, to what you feel now.
Congratulations |
Andrew Curtin
101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:00:00 -
[49] - Quote
it sucks for hydra and outbreak to get bumped out. it's a lot of work to do what they did. what happened in the finals last year was a disappointment, and it's natural for CCP to make steps ensure that it doesn't happen again. i wouldn't be surprised though if hydra and outbreak approached CCP with a way to sort this out in an acceptable way. both teams would have to immediately differentiate. blah blah. no shenanigans.
also, both hydra and outbreak should differentiate just for the challenge. tourney or no tourney,everyone knows that these groups as the elite of the elite pvpers. prove to us, CCP, yourselves, that you guys are the best. i don't see how you guys could show that by repeating what you guys did last year.... |
Richard Stallmanu Stallmania
Exanthesis Attero Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:24:00 -
[50] - Quote
I love how this is all technically CCP's fault by giving them permission to train in such a manner, yet HYDRA and friends are the ones bearing the punishment.
Maybe everyone should just boycott AT X since everyone trained for it and that is now a dis-qualifier. |
|
Nethras
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:28:00 -
[51] - Quote
That is... a lot of emails that you seem to be getting no reply on. Perhaps you should double check where you're sending them and that it is in fact an email address CCP actually reads. That said, I personally would not be comfortable basing how I handled such things based on a petition response as I'd have no real guarantee that even a senior GM had actually talked to the people running the tournament. Asking your questions on the forums about where CCP was drawing the line, and then bugging them through email, twitter, the CSM, and any other avenues you could think of until you got a response would have more or less guaranteed it was actually from the people organizing the tournament and left CCP with less room to potentially exclude you if you were in fact doing things differently this time around. I'm not quite sure why they're excluding both of your teams under that rule, though I could see them claiming difficulty declaring one of you the primary team.
MeBiatch wrote:i dont get it is this not EVE? so what two corps got in the finals metagamed and fixed the match? is this not what eve is about?
Metagaming between 2 teams seriously trying to win would usually only result in knowing their setup or on very rare occasions a spy openly betraying a team in the tournament arena. Throwing a game by picking a deliberately bad setup (or a setup that can be effectively hard countered and then telling the other team what you're bringing) isn't exactly very interesting to watch, but is hard to actually detect if not too blatant. Going out into the tournament arena and refusing to compete goes above and beyond metagaming, though I don't believe it's been specifically banned in the past (and perhaps not now). A team immediately turning and flying out of the arena as a group would clearly raise the question for CCP whether they wanted to have that team participate in future tournaments, and about the only difference between that and the AT9 final is that the AT9 final was 12 minutes long and far more boring. EVE metagaming is not usually about meaningless actions (they were clearly colluding enough to have agreed to split the prizes however they wanted regardless of outcome, so no real need to fix the match itself), and metagaming at CCP's expense usually doesn't turn out well.
All that said, none of this makes how CCP handled this any clearer with regards to where exactly the lines they don't want crossed are, though if it was partially based on something like CCP believing due to server-side evidence that there were people that had characters on both teams I'm not sure how free they'd be to express that. On the other hand, if this decision was at all based on the events of AT9 as opposed to the rule being in response to that and this being an independent enforcement of the rules, I'd be much more comfortable if CCP would come out and state that. |
Suitonia
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:38:00 -
[52] - Quote
Faffywaffy wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote: We just told OB members into which ships they should get and how to fly if we wanted to test one setup vs another.
Amazingly, that is exactly what we do with most of our pilots in DarkSide
Maybe if you actually applied yourself and tried a bit harder |
Stewwhich
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:56:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
You know what would be sound advice? Trying to bring some consistency to CCP. For example, CCP pretty much said that they worked with excutors of RvB in order to facilitate the Alliance Tournament entry for them. Why did you not provide the same courtesy to Hydra and Outbreak? Did you even send correspondence to them asking them to stop combined training?
Considering that you already set precedence with RvB and that one of your own employees answered Hydra's petition regarding unified training you should rescind the ban and work out the issue with executors of Hydra / Outbreak. Otherwise you look like petulant children stomping their feet and saying "But I don't wanna have them in ATX, they gave me a booboo last year". |
Lazarus Telraven
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 02:59:00 -
[54] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well?
Test/GSF shoot each other. We dont share tactics/Ship fits/setups
TEST has done all of their own leg work and so has the GSF team... now if we can just make it into the tournament is the real challenge.
maybe Shamis will loan us some isk to buy a tourney slot |
Richard Stallmanu Stallmania
Exanthesis Attero Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 03:20:00 -
[55] - Quote
Lazarus Telraven wrote:DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well? Test/GSF shoot each other. We dont share tactics/Ship fits/setups TEST has done all of their own leg work and so has the GSF team... now if we can just make it into the tournament is the real challenge. maybe Shamis will loan us some isk to buy a tourney slot Or you can just use automated aggressive ratters like AAA. |
Tear Miner
Republic University Minmatar Republic
132
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 03:22:00 -
[56] - Quote
I think CCP was right to do this.
There's always next year kid.
And if you had that much of an adverse physical reaction to not being in the AT, you should rethink your priorities. |
Jovan Geldon
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
433
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 03:25:00 -
[57] - Quote
Lazarus Telraven wrote:*snip* DurrHurrDurr wrote:The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well? Test/GSF shoot each other. We dont share tactics/Ship fits/setups TEST has done all of their own leg work and so has the GSF team... now if we can just make it into the tournament is the real challenge. maybe Shamis will loan us some isk to buy a tourney slot
We shot ourselves for practice, and we used our own comms and entirely separate forums for theorycrafting during the process. The only involvement anyone in PL had was to say "We'll pay your entry fee if you can't cover it", and also one (literally one) recent graduate to Sniggerdly popped back in to help us make up the numbers once or twice when the turnout for training was low.
I can entirely understand the need to avoid potential match-throwing situations, but I can assure you, we would have relished the opportunity to beat the PL team, perhaps even more so than any other. As DHD rightly points out, CFC-bloc members will be helping each other out in training, and I'd be astonished if the inter-corp membership turnover wasn't relatively high amongst those alliances. But when it comes to the real thing, they *are* going to want to beat each other, no question about it. |
Nemesis Factor
Clann Fian
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:16:00 -
[58] - Quote
Zowie Powers wrote: In fact you could get all of hydra and outbreak onto a Tennis Court and put all of hydra on one side of the net and all of outbreak on the other side of the net and notice that it's two groups of different people and still not get the point at all.
I think we would get it after Outbreak sat down on the court and half-heartedly swing at the balls. |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:18:00 -
[59] - Quote
Nethras wrote:That is... a lot of emails that you seem to be getting no reply on. Perhaps you should double check where you're sending them and that it is in fact an email address CCP actually reads.
It was the official email used by the team as confirmed by Loxy.
All emails sent to the address from us were completely ignored and the only response we got from an official CCP entity was the response from the Senior GM. |
Nemesis Factor
Clann Fian
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:22:00 -
[60] - Quote
Shiroi Okami wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. You know what is also solid advice? Develop customer support, because as it stands, CCP has none. I can not think of any other video game company that would repeatedly not respond to emails about a certain issue, feign ignorance about any emails and then condemn a Senior GM for actually responding (Supposedly incorrectly) to yet another email on the same issue. It is a wonder of the modern world how such a business model has left with you any players at all.
The fact of the matter was you weren't getting into AT10 no matter what you did. If the actual players from Hydra/OB joined other alliances they wouldn't get in. If Hydra/OB completely rebranded themselves as new alliances they wouldn't get in. If Hydra/OB COMBINED themselves into a single alliance just to legitimately apply to AT10 they probably still wouldn't get in. After what you did last year I don't think many people really want to watch you fight. Sure you guys are really good (you won after all), but it's not worth it. Someone almost as good will take your place and it will have a better chance of being legitimately entertaining. |
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
95
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:26:00 -
[61] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Nethras wrote:That is... a lot of emails that you seem to be getting no reply on. Perhaps you should double check where you're sending them and that it is in fact an email address CCP actually reads. It was the official email used by the team as confirmed by Loxy. All emails sent to the address from us were completely ignored and the only response we got from an official CCP entity was the response from the Senior GM.
Its almost as if the AT team wanted you to get banned |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 04:57:00 -
[62] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Intigo wrote:Nethras wrote:That is... a lot of emails that you seem to be getting no reply on. Perhaps you should double check where you're sending them and that it is in fact an email address CCP actually reads. It was the official email used by the team as confirmed by Loxy. All emails sent to the address from us were completely ignored and the only response we got from an official CCP entity was the response from the Senior GM. Its almost as if the AT team wanted you to get banned
That much is obvious. I guess our leadership made the mistake of thinking they could cooperate with CCP when it came to things like this. |
ZONK DONKEY
Incestuous Cult of Paranoid Swamp People
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 05:15:00 -
[63] - Quote
I think this whole thing is stupid
If it were true to EVE, they should let it play out as it is like all other events.
To be fair, I think they should let either Hydra or Outbreak in the AT, they put in 8 hours a day, 5 days a week into practising (Which by the way, you guys REALLY need to find something else to do than just this. This is obsession beyond measure), while communication between CCP and them have been vague at best.
Yes they sort of ruined last year's finals, but they did it legitimately. Let it play as it would say.
But after this year, do not have another official EVE alliance tournament. Yes, it's quite fun to watch and prizes are good, but with it's artificialities goes against what EVE is as a sandbox game.
If you're going to have an alliance tournament in the future, put it in the hands of the players, maybe even the CSM or something, or elect another council to organise it rather than Devs etc.
Player sanctioned prizes and all.
Finish this one by handing out the Caldari ships and be done with. |
Stewwhich
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 05:26:00 -
[64] - Quote
Nemesis Factor wrote:Shiroi Okami wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. You know what is also solid advice? Develop customer support, because as it stands, CCP has none. I can not think of any other video game company that would repeatedly not respond to emails about a certain issue, feign ignorance about any emails and then condemn a Senior GM for actually responding (Supposedly incorrectly) to yet another email on the same issue. It is a wonder of the modern world how such a business model has left with you any players at all. The fact of the matter was you weren't getting into AT10 no matter what you did. If the actual players from Hydra/OB joined other alliances they wouldn't get in. If Hydra/OB completely rebranded themselves as new alliances they wouldn't get in. If Hydra/OB COMBINED themselves into a single alliance just to legitimately apply to AT10 they probably still wouldn't get in. After what you did last year I don't think many people really want to watch you fight. Sure you guys are really good (you won after all), but it's not worth it. Someone almost as good will take your place and it will have a better chance of being legitimately entertaining.
I dont think you know what you are talking about. And there are a lot of people who not only want to watch them fight but actually paid to watch them fight (hint: Eve is easy). |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
48
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 05:42:00 -
[65] - Quote
Stewwhich wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. You know what would be sound advice? Trying to bring some consistency to CCP. For example, CCP pretty much said that they worked with excutors of RvB in order to facilitate the Alliance Tournament entry for them. Why did you not provide the same courtesy to Hydra and Outbreak? Did you even send correspondence to them asking them to stop combined training? Considering that you already set precedence with RvB and that one of your own employees answered Hydra's petition regarding unified training you should rescind the ban and work out the issue with executors of Hydra / Outbreak. Otherwise you look like petulant children stomping their feet and saying "But I don't wanna have them in ATX, they gave me a booboo last year".
This really. Just when CCP seemed able to avoid massive PR clusterfucks for a while...
DurrHurrDurr wrote:
The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well?
Oh yeah, and lol double standards. So blatant. |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:02:00 -
[66] - Quote
Stewwhich wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. You know what would be sound advice? Trying to bring some consistency to CCP. For example, CCP pretty much said that they worked with excutors of RvB in order to facilitate the Alliance Tournament entry for them. Why did you not provide the same courtesy to Hydra and Outbreak? Did you even send correspondence to them asking them to stop combined training? Considering that you already set precedence with RvB and that one of your own employees answered Hydra's petition regarding unified training you should rescind the ban and work out the issue with executors of Hydra / Outbreak. Otherwise you look like petulant children stomping their feet and saying "But I don't wanna have them in ATX, they gave me a booboo last year".
This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:11:00 -
[67] - Quote
Intigo wrote:This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid. Let me quote myself, post from the other thread:
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Tyrrax Thorrk wrote:Pretty sure it was the tournament team that banned you (sreegs) and they didn't even know about what the GM said to you until it was posted in the thread, ergo they hadn't read any of your correspondence. I asked CCP Spitfire if particularly that GM is allowed to reply such questions. He assured that GMs won't reply questions concerning AT without asking proper people & said that this GM is really competent guy and his words might be relied on. I really doubt Senior GM with such credit would post random answer about things he has no clue about. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
504
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:43:00 -
[68] - Quote
Karma... Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
125
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:50:00 -
[69] - Quote
I will state that locking the previous topic to prevent discussion is bad form. The statement should have been locked right off, allowing for a separate comment thread, or not locked at all.
As far as I'm concerned, this is a sandbox game where metagaming is not only exists, but is a common part of the gameplay. As has seen in many previous tournaments, metagaming HAS been a part of the alliance tournament, with thrown matches, attempts at bribery, spying, betrayals and so on. What was different in AT9 was that two teams working together managed to make it to the finals.
I can understand CCP's desire to make the ATX finals exciting for all, but their behavior in this matter is less than desirable.
To state that Hydra and Outbreak are the same entity betrays their ignorance of the poltical spectrum in EVE. It is plainly obvious that the entities are completely separate, although they do work very closely together. The rule should have been stated more clearly, and Hydra's emails and petitions should have been answered promptly. The failure of the alliance tournament team to do so is not a point in their favor.
For what it's worth, I believe that with proper communication, the ATX team could have prevented this scenario from occurring in the first place. It feels to me that they intentionally let this slide until they could bring the hammer down. If true, this reeks of politics and poor form.
I would love to see a reconsideration and a response from the ATX team, because as far as I'm concerned right now, this has now turned into a case of bad PR. |
Suitonia
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:58:00 -
[70] - Quote
Hey man it's nearly June 21st and CCP needed to fulfill their controversy and negative PR quota |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 07:11:00 -
[71] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Intigo wrote:This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid. Let me quote myself, post from the other thread: Kadesh Priestess wrote:Tyrrax Thorrk wrote:Pretty sure it was the tournament team that banned you (sreegs) and they didn't even know about what the GM said to you until it was posted in the thread, ergo they hadn't read any of your correspondence. I asked CCP Spitfire if particularly that GM is allowed to reply such questions. He assured that GMs won't reply questions concerning AT without asking proper people & said that this GM is really competent guy and his words might be relied on. I really doubt Senior GM with such credit would post random answer about things he has no clue about.
Oh, I didn't see that.
So that's another CCP member telling us that the Senior GM can be trusted and that his word is given either from knowing what he's talking about or from asking the people responsible for the tournament itself what should be done in this case.
Yet the tournament team dismisses what he said entirely when it is the only response given from CCP to us on the entire matter when our emails were ignored?
It's a bit sad that CCP would ignore all communication and ban us from the tournament 30 minutes before the auctions open. |
Rear Infiltration
Tyrans d'Or
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 07:22:00 -
[72] - Quote
Maybe if you didn't make a joke of the finals in the previous year, this wouldn't be happening? |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 07:29:00 -
[73] - Quote
Rear Infiltration wrote:Maybe if you didn't make a joke of the finals in the previous year, this wouldn't be happening?
Have you read Duncans post from last year? Last years final was a massive mistake and was not intended to go down that way. Everyone involved with that sincerely regrets how it went down and would love for nothing else than to have shown a true, fun brawl for everyone involved (that means, the viewers) to enjoy to the fullest. Mistakes were made and many apologies were made on the forums last year.
Do the rules apply differently to us because of what happened last year? Is it fair to punish 2 teams for a genuine mistake (that was in every way unintentional) that happened a year prior by ignoring any attempt at communication (emails) and invalidating the statements from 2 CCP members (the Senior GM in question and CCP Spitfire).
I don't think you could find anyone more apologetic about how the finals went down last year than Duncan. We love to watch, follow and compete in the tournament as much as everyone else. We are fans like everyone else and it should be obvious how bad Duncan felt about the way the tournament ended. |
Spyker Slater
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 07:39:00 -
[74] - Quote
Let me start by saying I was very mad after the final last year. But I think maybe a compromise CCP could do is to let them compete as one alliance as is the case with RvB? |
Patient 2428190
DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School
207
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 07:53:00 -
[75] - Quote
How cute Outbreak/Hydra whine about their lost man hours but they didn't give a damn about shi*tting all over AT9 and the work CCP volunteers did.
|
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
103
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:04:00 -
[76] - Quote
Lots of Hydra tears in here, if only you were all in the CSM, coulda have bent the rules to suit like everyone else does. Everytime you dont like my comments/posts the terrorists win and your a disgrace to your country. |
DeBingJos
Avalon Project Shadow Rock Alliance
258
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:30:00 -
[77] - Quote
The fact is that both HYDRA and outbreak were the best teams of AT9.
They tried to communicate with CCP through official channels but got no response.
The teams where not yet sellected but CCP banned them from the tournament.
Normally I don't bash CCP much because I actually like the company, but in this case they were not reallyl fair. If you make rules, make them clear! And also apply them to everybody (GOON + TEST for example) the same way. Fix FW ! |
Dubez
Fractured Core Fatal Ascension
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:32:00 -
[78] - Quote
Quote:This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid.
Yeah, because you know, everyone who works at CCP is entitled to make decisions for a group completely unrelated to them. Oh yeah, and they are robots and never make mistakes ever. You say you sent countless mails. Lets see them. Own up or shut up imo.
I find it difficult to take anything seriously from a group of people senseless enough to slither around what is considered good form. You ****** up, own up. You humiliated not only CCP but the entire EVE community by pulling that bull **** at Fanfest. Why can't you play fair like everyone else? Sure Goonswarm and TEST team up, but they aren't sharing their ****. At least the have some dignity in that respect. You guys on the other hand; no, not worth my time, CCPs time, or the player bases' time. Goodbye and good riddance. |
Freeze3371
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:37:00 -
[79] - Quote
Kepp making excuses noob. |
Officer Nyota Uhura
240
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:46:00 -
[80] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Do the rules apply differently to us because of what happened last year? Is it fair to punish 2 teams for a genuine mistake ... ? I love Eve is easy. I've paid for watching those great videos. I loved the way you fought and I think you were the best of AT9. But I still think that YES - rules do apply differently because of the **** you fed me last year, and YES - it's fair to punish the two teams for that. I was genuinely excited for the whole AT9 and rearranged my work to see the finals, just to see that crap you guys gave us. IMO, while I'm a fan of yours, you get what you deserve. |
|
Nemesis Factor
Clann Fian
48
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:47:00 -
[81] - Quote
ZONK DONKEY wrote:I think this whole thing is stupid
If it were true to EVE, they should let it play out as it is like all other events.
To be fair, I think they should let either Hydra or Outbreak in the AT, they put in 8 hours a day, 5 days a week into practising (Which by the way, you guys REALLY need to find something else to do than just this. This is obsession beyond measure), while communication between CCP and them have been vague at best.
Yes they sort of ruined last year's finals, but they did it legitimately. Let it play as it would say.
But after this year, do not have another official EVE alliance tournament. Yes, it's quite fun to watch and prizes are good, but with it's artificialities goes against what EVE is as a sandbox game.
If you're going to have an alliance tournament in the future, put it in the hands of the players, maybe even the CSM or something, or elect another council to organise it rather than Devs etc.
Player sanctioned prizes and all.
Finish this one by handing out the Caldari ships and be done with.
The Alliance Tournament is not Eve. If it WERE the sandbox they would allow us to move in and interrupt the fight. It's completely separate. That means whatever rules CCP wants to put in.
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Intigo wrote:Do the rules apply differently to us because of what happened last year? Is it fair to punish 2 teams for a genuine mistake ... ? I love Eve is easy. I've paid for watching those great videos. I loved the way you fought and I think you were the best of AT9. But I still think that YES - rules do apply differently because of the **** you fed me last year, and YES - it's fair to punish the two teams for that. I was genuinely excited for the whole AT9 and rearranged my work to see the finals, just to see that crap you guys gave us. IMO, while I'm a fan of yours, you get what you deserve.
I concur. You can sit at least one out. People and organizations alike pay for mistakes, even if it wasn't anyone's fault (which it was). |
Ophelia Aivoras
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 08:56:00 -
[82] - Quote
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:[quote=Intigo] I was genuinely excited for the whole AT9 and rearranged my work to see the finals, just to see that crap you guys gave us.
People still mention AT9 ****** final (which was ****** no doubt) as if previous years finals were a really good show not a one sided ownage with no challenge |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:05:00 -
[83] - Quote
Dubez wrote:Quote:This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid. Yeah, because you know, everyone who works at CCP is entitled to make decisions for a group completely unrelated to them. Oh yeah, and they are robots and never make mistakes ever. You say you sent countless mails. Lets see them. Own up or shut up imo. I find it difficult to take anything seriously from a group of people senseless enough to slither around what is considered good form. You ****** up, own up. You humiliated not only CCP but the entire EVE community by pulling that bull **** at Fanfest. Why can't you play fair like everyone else? Sure Goonswarm and TEST team up, but they aren't sharing their ****. At least the have some dignity in that respect. You guys on the other hand; no, not worth my time, CCPs time, or the player bases' time. Goodbye and good riddance.
Fanfest?! The tournament at Fanfest was won by HYDRA fair and square - it was a 3v3 with Haart, Leeloo and Leeloo's friend flying. This has nothing to do with the Fanfest tournament.
And the mails sent to the Tournament team (that were all ignored and not answered) are in Garmons original post on this matter:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1356717#post1356717
Also, on the subject of testing together - CVA and 4th was considering (or have done) testing together too and you have no idea of what is shared or not shared between TEST / GSF. Nor do you realize what HYDRA & Outbreak are hiding from each other to bring out in case we met each other in the tournament.
Are you really arguing these things? Your points make no sense and have no basis in logic. |
Luis Graca
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:24:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
This is brilliant ccp dev making personal comments on eve forums
Let me trow some more fire if this is solve by letting this alliances enter the ATX are doing going to be force to pay to enter since the free slots are already given? (and 1 action already been made) |
Wob Wob Wob
Incestuous Cult of Paranoid Swamp People
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:28:00 -
[85] - Quote
Nemesis Factor wrote: The Alliance Tournament is not Eve. If it WERE the sandbox they would allow us to move in and interrupt the fight. It's completely separate. That means whatever rules CCP wants to put in.
Exactly
It doesn't feel like it is EVE, it just feels like an outside tournament among the elite.
The tournament itself I don't mind, I think it should be fair and just, but for something that doesn't really fit into the EVE ecosystem all that much, the prizes should not be so glamorous.
Just give them a monument and some game time or something rather than exclusive ships |
Anna Katarr
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:30:00 -
[86] - Quote
i really cant wait for kil2's pun-infested commentary, my hopes are high he takes his chances and that it will be glorious...
INVITE HYDRA GUY TO COMMENTATE BAN HYDRA GET FUN |
gary noballs
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 09:47:00 -
[87] - Quote
Ban cheaters > collect tears > go to the local in Reykjavik for post work beers
+1 CCP |
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:11:00 -
[88] - Quote
SwindonBadger and others: not sure how you came to the conclusion that I have some personal grudge/rage against Hydra/0utbreak. Yes, I do think you won last year unfairly, and I do think you deserve the punishment, but my feelings are nowhere near as intense as you imagine them to be. It's just internet spaceships, after all. I've also posted multiple times that I think one of your teams should be allowed into ATX, as it would make for a better tournament.
One amusing thing does come to mind though. A few people from Hydra/0utbreak said that last year's match against DarkSide was the actual/real final, and that therefore people shouldn't be upset about the official final. I agree with this assessment and am waiting for 50 Malices to be contracted to me |
Lallante
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:21:00 -
[89] - Quote
"but guys it technically wasn't cheating because I never swallowed" |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:28:00 -
[90] - Quote
DurrHurrDurr wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there. The TEST and GSF teams practice together, and share setups/fits/tactics. Are we going to be banned from participating as well?
Sigh. I think MB3's app to TEST's tournament team got denied (not by me). Durr who has never shown up for a practice or shown any interest in our AT team is using it as ammunition to support Hydra.
Never change TEST. Never change. Absolute chaos. This is like an extension of our internal forums.
For the record we stole one setup from Goons so far. It had Proteii in it and we have never flown it. And they beat us 80% of the time. We can't even get pilots with the trained skills to fly our own setups. Goons are clearly the superior team at this point. |
|
Lemster
Disconnected. Choke Point
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:33:00 -
[91] - Quote
Leeloo Malaquin wrote: - HYDRA and OB are not a single entity. They are 2 different entities on TQ with their own history. CCP knows this very well. We worked together closely in AT9 but with the new rules we were only planning to test together(unless told we can't do it) before the tournament begins.
If you watch last years final carefully I think you'll find that for tournament purposes you are one entity.
+1 CCP |
Spark's
Terra Hawks The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:53:00 -
[92] - Quote
CCP has made an example of you and Outbreak. as a warning to other alliances so deal with it. At the end of the day you will continue to play the game and most likely will enter next year. Just remember the rules next time to avoid this mess. you have only yourself to blame, the rule they done for you was to STOP what you did last year. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
272
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:55:00 -
[93] - Quote
banning both teams for f*cked up AT IX finals is a proper decision. props CCP |
Halarach
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:57:00 -
[94] - Quote
Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
272
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 10:57:00 -
[95] - Quote
Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
AT IX final was in fact very interesting. Oh I forgot irony tags there. you too? |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:03:00 -
[96] - Quote
Lemster wrote:Leeloo Malaquin wrote: - HYDRA and OB are not a single entity. They are 2 different entities on TQ with their own history. CCP knows this very well. We worked together closely in AT9 but with the new rules we were only planning to test together(unless told we can't do it) before the tournament begins.
If you watch last years final carefully I think you'll find that for tournament purposes you are one entity. +1 CCP
From someone who has watched every match from last year at least 6 times and gone over the killboards for most of them, I concur that for the purposes of blatantly stealing your setups you are one team.
We have stolen and analyzed pretty much every setup/match you have fielded/been in./. There are really no differences between the two teams. You did that Vindicator thing at the end almost as comedy. My complements on your metagaming, it was almost "as you say" too good.
My only comment is that if you would have bashed each others faces in and the winners made hip thrusting motions at the crowd of fans, then you are providing the sort of online tournament entertainment that people expect.
When you stop shooting half way through a match in the finals in a Starcraft Tournament... well I think you see my point. |
Rhatar Khurin
United Earth Directorate
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:05:00 -
[97] - Quote
Throwing two different matches including the final deserves both of you to be excluded dispite what you have recently been doing.
If it was upto me, both HYDRA and Outbreak would've be disqualified and the 1st/2nd place given to 3rd/4th |
Spark's
Terra Hawks The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:06:00 -
[98] - Quote
Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
Your opinion of course right? I think it's made this years AT much more interesting as the outcome looks far different. Who is going to win? We find out soon! |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
273
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:07:00 -
[99] - Quote
Rhatar Khurin wrote:Throwing two different matches including the final deserves both of you to be excluded dispite what you have recently been doing.
If it was upto me, both HYDRA and Outbreak would've be disqualified and the 1st/2nd place given to 3rd/4th
legit suggestion this man brings +1 |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:12:00 -
[100] - Quote
Quote:Who is going to win? We find out soon!
pandemic legion or pandemic legion ?
or maybe pandemic legion?
so entertaining Signature removed. Navigator |
|
Othran
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
200
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:12:00 -
[101] - Quote
Rhatar Khurin wrote:Throwing two different matches including the final deserves both of you to be excluded dispite what you have recently been doing.
If it was upto me, both HYDRA and Outbreak would've be disqualified and the 1st/2nd place given to 3rd/4th
I think they both deserved to be in the final last year, however what happened in the final was an insult to everyone running/watching the tournament.
I may actually watch the tournament now - I wasn't going to bother if last year's finalists were included in the draw.
From having a read through recent threads it appears both finalists thought they could take the **** this year as well, despite knowing full well that the rule changes were caused by them.
+1 to CCP for removing them, the tournament will be better for their absence. |
Spark's
Terra Hawks The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:26:00 -
[102] - Quote
xo3e wrote:Quote:Who is going to win? We find out soon! pandemic legion or pandemic legion ? or maybe pandemic legion? so entertaining
Maybe... Maybe.... But you know they will fight for their victory. But say they happen to win, hypothetically of course, do you think you'll get a little light headed and sick to your stomach? |
Musician
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:28:00 -
[103] - Quote
Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
This pretty much sums it up. You have removed the best... what is now left?
|
Rhatar Khurin
United Earth Directorate
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:34:00 -
[104] - Quote
Musician wrote:Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
This pretty much sums it up. You have removed the best... what is now left?
I dont know if you watched last years AT9, but i dont think i even saw a close fight in it.. Unlike previous ones with a couple of ships at the end pumping away.. none of that..
AT9 was the worst one yet :( |
Mirrodin
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:36:00 -
[105] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams.
Anyone else see this?
"OUR intentions were to field BOTH teams"
Coming from one person, talking about them fielding both teams. It is obvious, the mindset going on here. |
Lemster
Disconnected. Choke Point
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:37:00 -
[106] - Quote
Musician wrote:Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
This pretty much sums it up. You have removed the best... what is now left?
Have a look at last years final. I think you'll agree neither team looks particularly good at pvp, let alone the best.
I suppose you could call last years final interesting, but I think it's a different kind of interesting, possibly involving some pvp, which people are looking for from the tourney. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:38:00 -
[107] - Quote
xo3e wrote:Quote:Who is going to win? We find out soon! pandemic legion or pandemic legion ? or maybe pandemic legion? so entertaining
With the drone changes maybe they can make that HAM Tengu / Gila team work this year. I have a soft spot in my heart for both those ships. |
PMSing
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:41:00 -
[108] - Quote
xo3e wrote:Quote:Who is going to win? We find out soon! pandemic legion or pandemic legion ? or maybe pandemic legion? so entertaining
I think people are vastly overestimating us.
We're having too much fun in DayZ to care much about the tournament lately :3 |
Rhatar Khurin
United Earth Directorate
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:42:00 -
[109] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:xo3e wrote:Quote:Who is going to win? We find out soon! pandemic legion or pandemic legion ? or maybe pandemic legion? so entertaining With the drone changes maybe they can make that HAM Tengu / Gila team work this year. I have a soft spot in my heart for both those ships.
nano domi's this year i'm sure of it! *crosses fingers* |
Captain Woo
BLOOM. Bloomswarm
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:47:00 -
[110] - Quote
Boom! Hybris / Nemesis bitches. What did you expect from trying to outsmart the devs?
Start an alt corp and enter that into the competition. HYDRABREAK RELOADED? I'm so bad at this eve.-á Also PL spai.-á |
|
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
653
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:51:00 -
[111] - Quote
Leeloo Malaquin wrote:
The reason Sreegs gave for excluding HYDRA and OB was that he thinks HYDRA and OB are a "single entity" who are "practicing together in a single corporation on the test server in a single wormhole" while "masquerading as two units".
Followed by:
Leeloo Malaquin wrote: - Reason we joined the same corp in the TEST server was because of wormhole logistics. No one considered that a logistic technicality in the TEST server would suddenly be bannable when training together was not. And I don't understand Raivis comments when he says we made a mistake doing it, as we had been very open with CCP and told them we would practice together unless being told that we can't.
Oh please, if you really want to train on the testserver that badly its not hard to get two or even twohundred freighters into one WH. 5 man corps can do that.
Leeloo Malaquin wrote: - This leads me to wonder what Sreegs means when he talks about HYDRA and OB "masquerading as two units". We told them our intentions regarding the tournament, we told them we practice with each other, they know we are separate unit on TQ etc. I simply don't see what he is referring to.
See last year. See above. See logic. The reason the rules where changed where your actions, then you done and went and done it again...doesn't take a genius to figure out why you got scrapped.
You where ONE entity, training together intermingled in a wormhole, it doesn't matter you where on the testserver. And to top it all off you showed everybody just what would happen if another Outbreak/Hydra final would occur last year. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
483
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:52:00 -
[112] - Quote
And there I was thining they wanted to make ATX more interesting.
Only achievement: More drama and more selling out. Just quit with the crap called AT.
You ****** up when you let metagaming to to where it is now and you laugh about it, but as soon as it doesn't suit your arses you start to become Nay sayers.
You brought all the crap on yourselves CCP. Your ignorance knows no boundries.
Hydra get's told by one GM they can train together as one entity and as soon as they do you take out another rule and just blatantly ignore the GM's reply to it so you eventually can get your revenge for AT9.
But that what happened at AT9 was a product of your own baby is just another thing you just ignore. It is you who allow even worse metagaming for everything else and then expect people to behave within narrow boundries for 1 event.
No CCP. you ****** up and you don't even have the balls nor the common sense to admit it.
|
Halarach
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:53:00 -
[113] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Halarach wrote:Congratulations on making this year's AT much less interresting than what it could be CCP.
Hubris has already damaged you a lot as a company, thought you learned the lesson, was wrong.
AT IX final was in fact very interesting. Oh I forgot irony tags there. you too?
Yes it was interresting, for the very same reasons all the stories about scamming and metagaming are entertaining and part of eve so-called sandbox, where everything is supposedly possible.
Until it doesn't fit CCP's views, that is. |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:54:00 -
[114] - Quote
Quote:Start an alt corp and enter that into the competition. HYDRABREAK RELOADED?
no. we have enuff isks to buy plenty of characters to make 5-6 alliances for the next AT, and run this **** into the ground.
also we will spend this year to get as many chars in other alliances as we can, so next AT will become a total horseshitfest.
ccp wants a war. we will give it to them.
just butthurting. dont mind me Signature removed. Navigator |
MadbaM
Hard Knocks Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 11:56:00 -
[115] - Quote
OK so I'v skim read this thread and forgive me if I'm going to ask a question that's already been answered.
I know there argument is that there two individual teams and this doesn't really apply to there argument, but they have been banned under Rule 5. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.
If they have banned both teams who is the supposed 'A' team? because as far as I can see they shouldn't have banned both only the B or C entry's.
I'm sure you'l let me know if I'm wrong on this.
|
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:08:00 -
[116] - Quote
Quote:I think people are vastly overestimating us.
We're having too much fun in DayZ to care much about the tournament lately :3
so u say that CCP accidentally kicked only alliances that took AT10 seriously ? :333333
thats nice Signature removed. Navigator |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:10:00 -
[117] - Quote
Spyker Slater wrote:Let me start by saying I was very mad after the final last year. But I think maybe a compromise CCP could do is to let them compete as one alliance as is the case with RvB?
This would be a decent compromise, to forcibly join last years "one team" as with the precedent they've now set with RvB.
Just cutting both alliances out of the tourney because of their grudge about "BAD TV" last year doesn't make the AT Team look that good as people or representatives of their company...
MadbaM wrote: OK so I'v skim read this thread and forgive me if I'm going to ask a question that's already been answered.
I know there argument is that there two individual teams and this doesn't really apply to there argument, but they have been banned under Rule 5. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.
If they have banned both teams who is the supposed 'A' team? because as far as I can see they shouldn't have banned both only the B or C entry's.
I'm sure you'l let me know if I'm wrong on this.
And yeah I too am confused about this |
Officer Nyota Uhura
241
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:19:00 -
[118] - Quote
Mirrodin wrote:ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. Anyone else see this? "OUR intentions were to field BOTH teams" Coming from one person, talking about them fielding both teams. It is obvious, the mindset going on here.
This quote indeed sums it up - it was noted, though, already on the first page:
MrWhitei God wrote:ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. Thats alot of "We" for two separate entities
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
277
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:23:00 -
[119] - Quote
it is all right they are banned. its not only the rule in question alone, its also the fact they already proved how they think about the competition.
ban them permanently CCP. |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
21
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:27:00 -
[120] - Quote
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:Mirrodin wrote:ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. Anyone else see this? "OUR intentions were to field BOTH teams" Coming from one person, talking about them fielding both teams. It is obvious, the mindset going on here. This quote indeed sums it up - it was noted, though, already on the first page: MrWhitei God wrote:ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. Thats alot of "We" for two separate entities
Well I am part of a team that consisted of some 20 0utbreak members. So yes its a "we" I hope I have explained it ok as I did not intend to enter the tourney on my own as a Rambo. Although I understand the Hydra implication its not warranted here. |
|
Nik Domar
Acerbus Vindictum Stealth Wear Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:31:00 -
[121] - Quote
I do not have first hand information what has actually happened and done, so I have to rely on information provided by both Hydra and Outbreak and of course CCP Sreegs.
As confirmed by CCP, one of the Senior Game Masters replied to petition asking how both Hydra/Outbreak could train together on test server. Later this was said being a mistake by Game Master team and being investigated
Thus Hydra Reloaded and Outbreak started to train with the best knowledge they had on the rules. Unless there are other evidence that both Hydra Reloaded team and Outbreak teams have broken any other rules, in my opinion the flawed answer of the game master mislead the leaders of both teams to assume they were safe to train as they were planning to do.
Lack of proper communication has always been the greatest sin of CCP. In this, case it caused removal of two teams that had tried to contact CCP without any clear answer. In this case, there should have been action first to clear out the flawed answer provided by Senior GM and let Hydra and Outbreak make new training method to allow them continue to train in allowed way. Straight removal of team because of mistake done by Game Master is wrong.
In support of Leeloo Malaquin and Hydra Reloaded Nik Domar AV/Stealth Wear Inc. Fanfest 2012 PvP Tournament winner with Team Hydra Reloaded. "The hobo" |
Drew Solaert
University of Caille Gallente Federation
174
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:31:00 -
[122] - Quote
Ban should sick after last years complete fail fest. Way to **** up a great weekend for everyone watching. I lied :o
|
Officer Nyota Uhura
241
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:33:00 -
[123] - Quote
Raimo wrote:MadbaM wrote: If they have banned both teams who is the supposed 'A' team? because as far as I can see they shouldn't have banned both only the B or C entry's.
And yeah I too am confused about this
Maybe I can help you, Raimo and MadbaM, to be less confused (emphasis in the quote below is mine):
CCP Loxy wrote:We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644 |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
487
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:38:00 -
[124] - Quote
And enter the wallet warriors.
|
Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
130
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:39:00 -
[125] - Quote
Leeloo, I definitely sympathize with what you're feeling. If I was disqualified for the tournament with everything I put into it I would probably feel the same way. I really enjoyed talking to you and Haart about the tournament at Fanfest.
And I'll make it clear I was one of Hydra's biggest supporters after the final last year. Last year you guys broke no rules and you did amazing work getting to the finals. When you were there you tried something very unwise and messed up, but I believe that you intended the match to be entertaining.
But when I saw that you guys had moved 0utbreak into Genos on sisi while keeping them seperate on TQ I was really confused. It seemed an incredibly bad move to me considering how easy it would be for CCP to notice how close you were working together. You guys had to know that you'd be watched since they obviously made the B team rule in response to the final.
When I saw you join the same corp I never seriously considered the idea that it would be allowed. My first thought was "That's really stupid of them, they're either gonna get 0utbreak banned and half their guys won't be able to fly in the matches, or they're all gonna get banned outright".
CCP really needed to do better with the communication on this, I think everyone agrees on that. Communication was really bad here and need to be improved in the future. The main reason I bugged Loxy for a public channel for requests instead of just using the email he used to contact me as a commentator was that I was hoping they would let you know how stupid what you were doing was and prevent this. But I have a really hard time understanding why you guys thought both teams would ever be allowed while you test with each other so closely.
I understand if you're turned off from the game at the moment and can't even consider this right now, but I hope that by the next tournament you guys come back, merge the teams for real and enter again so we can see you defend your title on the field. |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
133
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:43:00 -
[126] - Quote
This is certainly one of the most vindictive exchanges I've ever read from this community. Come on guys, you can, and should be, better than this.
Regarding the issue in question, in no uncertain terms, Hydra and Outbreak worked together to a degree that could be considered collusion and thus by letter of the law, absolutely should be barred from competing together. However, where it gets messy is the correspondence of the Game Masters.
A Senior Game Master, an individual who is, reputedly, one of the highest authorities available to the playerbase for questions and concerns, said that what Hydra and Outbreak were doing, practicing together in the same system on the test server, was okay. Acting on good faith that what a Senior Game Master tells a player is true and accurate, Hydra and Outbreak went ahead and performed what was, by the rules of the tournament organizers, against the rules of Alliance Tournament X participation, and no opportunity for a dialogue between CCP and the banned parties has been publicly granted.
Do the Game Masters have reliable authority in Eve Online, or do they not? Can we, as players, take Game Masters at their word, and can we act in good faith that what a Game Master tells us is true, accurate, and reliable? The Game Masters are the front of customer service between the game's developers as operators of the online environment and the customer base; if we cannot trust that anything a game master tells a player will not be overridden by other employees at CCP, there is a horrific problem with the customer service aspect of the Eve Online service that should be addressed immediately. The ability for CCP's Game Masters to serve as a reliable source of information and advice to the player base has been substantially undermined by this incident. |
MrWhitei God
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 12:56:00 -
[127] - Quote
Quote:I would appreciate some direction and clarification regarding the roles for this yearGÇÖs alliance tournament GÇô specifically GÇ£We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team.GÇ¥ I cannot disagree with the policy, but I would like to be clear as to what constitutes a GÇ£BGÇ¥ team. For example, are 2 alliances sparring against each other and testing out ship setups before the tournament itself classed as breaking this rule?
Thanks for your time. xxxxx
What you also seem to be skimming over is the question put to the GM.
That GM didn't have the full context, what 2 alliances are testing together? The GM wouldn't have seen the other emails sent to the tourny team.
The question asked was if 2 alliances are allowed to spar against. If Hydra tested with some alliance not in the tournament they are still testing with another alliance and that would have been fine.
As far as i read that, the GM's reply is still valid and correct. |
Kaeda Maxwell
Black Rebel Rifter Club
94
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:00:00 -
[128] - Quote
First of all;
I'm sorry to see you leave Leeloo. I really appreciated what you did with the 'Daily Roams' and EVE will be a less awesome place without you around. Thank you for the effort you put into those roams. I understand your sentiment very well however. Good luck in whatever you end up playing after EVE.
To CCP;
I used to be somebody that would defend most of your decisions to my corp mates and the larger community when they came up. Your failure to step over your own shadows here has changed my attitude away from this and it saddens me.
You profess that you wanted to make the AT more fun and better for everyone. Well, I can't speak for others but you ruined AT X for me at least. Whatever the outcome now it will forever be 'tainted' because the defending champions weren't there to defend their title. Also if you truly view Hydra & Outbreak as the same entity you should have allowed them the same thing you allowed RvB. If nothing else this decision wouldn't have looked so much like you're being petty about last years finals then. |
HaartSp
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:04:00 -
[129] - Quote
Raivi wrote:I understand if you're turned off from the game at the moment and can't even consider this right now, but I hope that by the next tournament you guys come back, merge the teams for real and enter again so we can see you defend your title on the field. Come back to be banned once more by another vague rule? No, CCP doesn't have such credit now. |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:12:00 -
[130] - Quote
Quote:you should have allowed them the same thing you allowed RvB
no, they just wanted to get rid of us in any way, and they acted openly.
we would get disqualified due to some unconvincing reasons even if we applied to AT with only hydra or only outbreak.
so, no. i dont know about others but for me its enough. ccp can have its cake Signature removed. Navigator |
|
Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
132
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:12:00 -
[131] - Quote
HaartSp wrote:Raivi wrote:I understand if you're turned off from the game at the moment and can't even consider this right now, but I hope that by the next tournament you guys come back, merge the teams for real and enter again so we can see you defend your title on the field. Come back to be banned once more by another vague rule? No, CCP doesn't have such credit now.
Pretty sure if you just merge the teams on TQ like you originally intended to do for AT9 you'll be fine.
Again I understand if you can't imagine it right now but I do hope you come back next year and I hope CCP's communcation improves so we don't have this situation ever again.
The tournament is dimished by your absence and I hope that at some point in the future PL can get our chance to face your team on the field again. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
50
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:13:00 -
[132] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:This is certainly one of the most vindictive exchanges I've ever read from this community. Come on guys, you can, and should be, better than this. Regarding the issue in question, in no uncertain terms, Hydra and Outbreak worked together to a degree that could be considered collusion and thus by letter of the law, absolutely should be barred from competing together. However, where it gets messy is the correspondence of the Game Masters. A Senior Game Master, an individual who is, reputedly, one of the highest authorities available to the playerbase for questions and concerns, said that what Hydra and Outbreak were doing, practicing together in the same system on the test server, was okay. Acting on good faith that what a Senior Game Master tells a player is true and accurate, Hydra and Outbreak went ahead and performed what was, by the rules of the tournament organizers, against the rules of Alliance Tournament X participation, and thus were banned from competition. Thus far, no opportunity for a dialogue between CCP and the banned parties has been publicly granted. Do the Game Masters have reliable authority in Eve Online, or do they not? Can we, as players, take Game Masters at their word, and can we act in good faith that what a Game Master tells us is true, accurate, and reliable? The Game Masters are the front of customer service between the game's developers as operators of the online environment and the customer base; if we cannot trust that anything a game master tells a player will not be overridden by other employees at CCP, there is a horrific problem with the customer service aspect of the Eve Online service that should be addressed immediately. The ability for CCP's Game Masters to serve as a reliable source of information and advice to the player base has been substantially undermined by this incident.
Kaeda Maxwell wrote:First of all;
I'm sorry to see you leave Leeloo. I really appreciated what you did with the 'Daily Roams' and EVE will be a less awesome place without you around. Thank you for the effort you put into those roams. I understand your sentiment very well however. Good luck in whatever you end up playing after EVE.
To CCP;
I used to be somebody that would defend most of your decisions to my corp mates and the larger community when they came up. Your failure to step over your own shadows here has changed my attitude away from this and it saddens me.
You profess that you wanted to make the AT more fun and better for everyone. Well, I can't speak for others but you ruined AT X for me at least. Whatever the outcome now it will forever be 'tainted' because the defending champions weren't there to defend their title. Also if you truly view Hydra & Outbreak as the same entity you should have allowed them the same thing you allowed RvB. If nothing else this decision wouldn't have looked so much like you're being petty about last years finals then.
2 very good posts. |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
21
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:15:00 -
[133] - Quote
CCP Loxy wrote:We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team.
I would like to see that interpretated clearer. We are infact two independant "A" teams who just happened to not have enough numbers to field 24 folks on either side for the purposes of regular meaningful testing and practicing.
So we asked ahead of training for clarification about it whislt also outlining our intentions to be transparaent and co-operative. We also ask if we are going to get banned anyway and should we bother start training as its a lot of effort.
We were completely aware that this rule was for us and that CCP were gunning for us this year. We would have to be pretty ignorant to think otherwise and actually wanted to put on a good show anyway to make up for last years debacle,
So we get clarification that its ok and training commences. And I should point out that it is just infact training on the Test Server and not the Main Event.
300 0utbreak man hours for training later without warning about 2-3 minutes before the 1st auction, We were pointed towards a post just made and that it was final.
By now it was clear that this was a public execution predertimined some time before the event rules were even published. This was further reinforced by ropey desicions and intrepretations concerning other teams in similar predicaments. One set of folks were forced to combine into one team to still compete. And the B team of another collaberation was the one removed and not the "A" team as cleary stated in the rules,
So anyone who attempts to say it wasn't personal and a valid interpretation of the rules is under a misapprehension about all the details.
In any case its done and some will say we deserved it and others will have other opinions but even after all tthe route taken by CCP was cowardly, punitive and inconsistent and that makes me think even less of them then I did before. |
Ais Hellia
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:22:00 -
[134] - Quote
Raivi wrote:HaartSp wrote:[quote=Raivi]I understand if you're turned off from the game at the moment and can't even consider this right now, but I hope that by the next tournament you guys come back, merge the teams for real and enter again so we can see you defend your title on the field. I do hope you come back next year and I hope CCP's communcation improves so we don't have this situation ever again.
Obviously the problem is not the miscommunication but hurt feelings and personal grudge of certain CCP employees who would definitely find some reasons to get rid of us even if we field 1 team later
so next year changes nothing
|
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
129
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:32:00 -
[135] - Quote
I've been reading over this decision, the correspondence between CCP and various parties, as well as comments made by people in this thread, as well as other forums. As far as I'm concerned, my stance is as follows:
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak not attempted to contact CCP, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, and proceeded to train without receiving a response from neither the ATX team nor GMs, and proceeded to train together, the ban would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, received a response that they were not to train together, yet continued to do so, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, received a response from the GM team that they were permitted to train together, later to receive a response from the ATX team indicating the opposite, and then continued to train together, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
None of the above scenarios took place.
Instead, the ATX team failed to respond to the concerns raised by Hydra and 0utbreak. It can be argued that Hydra and 0utbreak should not have worked that closely together on the test server, but given that they had received permission to train together by a GM, an employee representing CCP, it is certainly plausible that they did so in order to reduce logistics.
Was it a smart thing to do? Probably not.
Is it plausible that they did so with no malicious intentions? Yes.
Given that the alliance tournament has not yet officially started, it is my opinion that the ATX team should have raised their objections with the Hydra and 0utbreak teams, by contacting both teams and established a dialogue. This is an especially important point considering that the ATX team failed to respond to requests from the Hydra and 0utbreak teams regarding this very issue.
The failure of the ATX team to establish a dialogue, combined with the harsh nature of their ruling, suggests that the ruling was made to intentionally punish the Hydra and 0utbreak teams for their actions during the last alliance tournament. It can be further speculated that their failure to respond to the concerns raised by the Hydra and 0utbreak teams was part of this plan.
Is this proof that this is the case? Do I believe this to be the case? No on both questions. But, given the information that we have, it is certainly plausible. In fact, it is about as plausible as Hydra and 0utbreak training together on SiSi in good faith, after having received a response from a GM permitting them to do so. |
Plentath
Sudden Buggery
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:36:00 -
[136] - Quote
The rule as written:
Quote:To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances. The rule as applied to RvB / PL&Waffles
Quote:To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances. The rule as applied to HYDRA / 0utbreak
Quote:To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances PLUS the A team in the case of HYDRA, or for an arbitrary reason if this won't stick. Yes, we're mad. |
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:43:00 -
[137] - Quote
In addition to my post, the following quote from CCP Loxy regarding RvB highlights my point:
Quote:We have been in contact with the executor of both alliances and have reached a decision that will allow both sides to compete together.
This clearly indicates that the ATX team contacted the RvB alliances regarding concerns that both teams were considered to be one entity.
That they failed to do so regarding Hydra and 0utbreak, despite requests from Hydra and 0utbreak for clarification, suggest that the ATX team either made a huge mistake in their correspondence with the teams, for which they rightfully should make amends and speak to both teams in order to reach a compromise, OR intentionally failed to respond to the concerns, with implications that are far worse. |
Tawa Suyo
The Tuskers
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:44:00 -
[138] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:I've been reading over this decision, the correspondence between CCP and various parties, as well as comments made by people in this thread, as well as other forums. As far as I'm concerned, my stance is as follows:
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak not attempted to contact CCP, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, and proceeded to train without receiving a response from neither the ATX team nor GMs, and proceeded to train together, the ban would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, received a response that they were not to train together, yet continued to do so, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
* Had Hydra and 0utbreak attempted to contact CCP, received a response from the GM team that they were permitted to train together, later to receive a response from the ATX team indicating the opposite, and then continued to train together, the decision to ban them would have been valid.
None of the above scenarios took place.
Instead, the ATX team failed to respond to the concerns raised by Hydra and 0utbreak. It can be argued that Hydra and 0utbreak should not have worked that closely together on the test server, but given that they had received permission to train together by a GM, an employee representing CCP, it is certainly plausible that they did so in order to reduce logistics.
Was it a smart thing to do? Probably not.
Is it plausible that they did so with no malicious intentions? Yes.
Given that the alliance tournament has not yet officially started, it is my opinion that the ATX team should have raised their objections with the Hydra and 0utbreak teams, by contacting both teams and established a dialogue. This is an especially important point considering that the ATX team failed to respond to requests from the Hydra and 0utbreak teams regarding this very issue.
The failure of the ATX team to establish a dialogue, combined with the harsh nature of their ruling, suggests that the ruling was made to intentionally punish the Hydra and 0utbreak teams for their actions during the last alliance tournament. It can be further speculated that their failure to respond to the concerns raised by the Hydra and 0utbreak teams was part of this plan.
Is this proof that this is the case? Do I believe this to be the case? No on both questions. But, given the information that we have, it is certainly plausible. In fact, it is about as plausible as Hydra and 0utbreak training together on SiSi in good faith, after having received a response from a GM permitting them to do so.
|
Boz Wel
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 13:58:00 -
[139] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:In addition to my post, the following quote from CCP Loxy regarding RvB highlights my point: Quote:We have been in contact with the executor of both alliances and have reached a decision that will allow both sides to compete together. This clearly indicates that the ATX team contacted the RvB alliances regarding concerns that both teams were considered to be one entity. That they failed to do so regarding Hydra and 0utbreak, despite requests from Hydra and 0utbreak for clarification, suggest that the ATX team either made a huge mistake in their correspondence with the teams, for which they rightfully should make amends and speak to both teams in order to reach a compromise, OR intentionally failed to respond to the concerns, with implications that are far worse.
I tend to agree. It's not hard to answer your emails in a timely fashion CCP and actually for the most part your company as a whole is great about customer service. As such, it's really difficult to believe that you just couldn't find any time to get back to these guys with an answer to their multiple attempts to contact you and/or give them a warning before taking steps to ban them from this year's tournament. As it is, your alliance tournament team completely fell down on the job when it came to responding to these guys, and to give such an extreme punishment after you failed to respond to their queries is uncalled for.
Even if you agree that what they were doing was against the plain language or the spirit of the tournament rules, it's unprofessional to act in this fashion. Give them a warning, let them merge their teams, and move on with the tournament. As it is, the alliance tournament team at CCP appears dysfunctional at best, and vindictive and petty at worst. Be the bigger man here CCP, back off your decision and let them enter a single team, and the tournament will be better for it. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:12:00 -
[140] - Quote
Boz Wel wrote:Pallidum Treponema wrote:In addition to my post, the following quote from CCP Loxy regarding RvB highlights my point: Quote:We have been in contact with the executor of both alliances and have reached a decision that will allow both sides to compete together. This clearly indicates that the ATX team contacted the RvB alliances regarding concerns that both teams were considered to be one entity. That they failed to do so regarding Hydra and 0utbreak, despite requests from Hydra and 0utbreak for clarification, suggest that the ATX team either made a huge mistake in their correspondence with the teams, for which they rightfully should make amends and speak to both teams in order to reach a compromise, OR intentionally failed to respond to the concerns, with implications that are far worse. I tend to agree. It's not hard to answer your emails in a timely fashion CCP and actually for the most part your company as a whole is great about customer service. As such, it's really difficult to believe that you just couldn't find any time to get back to these guys with an answer to their multiple attempts to contact you and/or give them a warning before taking steps to ban them from this year's tournament. As it is, your alliance tournament team completely fell down on the job when it came to responding to these guys, and to give such an extreme punishment after you failed to respond to their queries is uncalled for. Even if you agree that what they were doing was against the plain language or the spirit of the tournament rules, it's unprofessional to act in this fashion. Give them a warning, let them merge their teams, and move on with the tournament. As it is, the alliance tournament team at CCP appears dysfunctional at best, and vindictive and petty at worst. Be the bigger man here CCP, back off your decision and let them enter a single team, and the tournament will be better for it.
This. |
|
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
98
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:13:00 -
[141] - Quote
I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about. |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:16:00 -
[142] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:spookydonut wrote:Maybe you should have taken their warnings seriously and only entered one team. Solid advice right there.
You are right, they should have petitioned one of CCPs wise and knowledgeable GMs. In addition to having a comprehensive understanding of the game mechanics and rules, they can escalate your petition to a Dev and you can expect a prompt and courteous response that will address your particular question. I mean, you wouldn't want to submit two teams like PL did and wind up with both of them being banned.
oh wait... |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:19:00 -
[143] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about.
awesome to watch...you must be f*cking joking If you don't like it, you should go and ride your Emo high-horse all the way back to WoW.
|
Musician
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:23:00 -
[144] - Quote
CCP please reconsider your decision?
|
Kyros Xero
Xuronautics
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:29:00 -
[145] - Quote
People keep referring to the GM judgement like it was a bad or misleading thing, or trying to point to it as some sort of blank check to justify anything Hydra wanted to do on the test server. In contrast, the reality is that the GM response is a pretty barebones vanilla answer on a very specific thing: sparring together.
Hyrda/Outbreak wrote: .... For example, are 2 alliances sparring against each other and testing out ship setups before the tournament itself classed as breaking this rule? ....
GM common sense wrote:.... No, as long as those alliances are not working for the same team, so to speak. If we find out that these 2 alliances are pretty much the same people, but created a second alliance to try and stack the deck then both will be removed....
In a nutshell the GM is saying, two teams sparring is not in itself a rule breach however there's also a very explicit warning against appearing to be "pretty much the same people".
I think Hydra should be allowed in; they could be played up as the bad boys trying to redeem themselves. I think the unfortunate lack of timely official CCP response to the broader situation that was brewing would provide CCP an out to make a plausible and well-reasoned exception/clarification here. But let's not go around complaining about lack of CCP response and then **** all over the one guy who actually went out of his way to give you a reasonable response. POS Layered Defenses: "Panic" mode and defense-automation arrays |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:48:00 -
[146] - Quote
The simple fact you had to even ask CCP shows that you yourself were not even sure if you were one entity or not. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
491
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:54:00 -
[147] - Quote
ATX already is a farce.
CCP always promotes EVE as it is. A harsh metagaming community, and they love it. But not when it comes to their prized front in the form of the AT.
Micro transactions to purchase spots for the AT is considered a form to ensure only real PvPers participate. Sure, every PvP corp / alliance sets aside 40-50 PLEX worth just so they can bid on an AT spot which promotes CCP's game. You are paying to promote their game and you just love it. How ******** can you be. They should pay you for participating in a serious manner because the AT videos are used to promote and as an effect contribute to their wallets, not yours.
The whole crap of go and farm the 40-50 PLEX so you are allowed to bid is the most ridiculous crap. There are serious PvP corporations which work on the bare minimums. They take a short farm break to purchase new ships if needed and then go back to pew pew.
The only real benefits for this kind of crap I see for the old alliances and moonholders. And how odd that the CFC is the major moonholder and as such has enough in stock to purchase a spot for everyone of their members. So in how far can we say the CFC members aren't actually more in cahoots with eachother than Outbreak / Hydra?
Also the quicj and easy way they dispose the 2 alliances that messed up their previous trophy parade is typical revenge behavious, specially looking at how PL receives no ban whereas their feeder alliance get's removed.
No there certainly isn't any favouritism nor any revenge feelings playing here. It just looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but we all know it's a chicken.
|
Raqn Paudeen
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:57:00 -
[148] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about.
My question to the AT team is this.
If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT. |
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
105
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:01:00 -
[149] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:The simple fact you had to even ask CCP shows that you yourself were not even sure if you were one entity or not.
The simple fact they had to ask CCP shows it was indeterminable if CCP knew they were separate entities or not. And sure enough, it turns out that CCP have left it to one single partisan individual with a vested interest for his friend to make that determination, both badly, swiftly and wrongly.
Many people took great efforts to try to appease the requirements of CCP Vague Rules and great efforts to try to get them, not just clarified, but written in clear English.
The incredulous circumstances of the banning are a testament to the effort that went into that procedure. Had things been different CCP's inevitable banning of Hydra and Outbreak would have had to have been declared under the "Ban anybody for no reason we have to state" rule, leading to an even more bizarre situation than the one we have today, you're all just lucky that CCP managed to make something look believable at this stage, and all it has cost is all the self respect of CCP Sunset, CCP Soundwave and CCP Sreegs Friend Of Goons.
It was a good deal for them, and even better if they still get what it is they're actually after, the disbanding of Hydra alliance. --- ATX: The best of the rest. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:02:00 -
[150] - Quote
Raqn Paudeen wrote:
My question to the AT team is this.
If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
...To say the least. |
|
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
144
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:09:00 -
[151] - Quote
Raqn Paudeen wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about. My question to the AT team is this. If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
|
Beledia Ilphukiir
Proffessional Experts Group
37
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:13:00 -
[152] - Quote
This brings to mind the immortal words and heart felt sympathy of JC Denton. |
Easley Thames
The Maverick Navy Against ALL Authorities
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:16:00 -
[153] - Quote
Wow, it's wide open this year if we really have no Hydra, Outbreak, Darkside or PL involved.
Then again, whosoever wins this year will have won a somewhat less-impressive victory with none of the favorites playing this time.
|
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
105
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:17:00 -
[154] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about.
Butthurt over AT9 just doesn't seem a good reason for this. What I mean is....
Who won the first alliance tournament? And how many people who have heard of Eve and it's tournament know that?
Who won the second alliance tournament? And how many people who have heard of Eve and it's tournament know that?
and so on.. Now... Who won the NINTH alliance tournament? And how many people who have heard of Eve and it's tournament know that?
You see, you cannot buy advertising that good. Word of that farce spread far and wide, putting Eve on maps where ever it went. It's just not the sort of situation one could imagine CCP acting in such a viscious manner over. Viscious spite like this is usually reserved for matter pertaining to either pregnant daughters or money, lots of money.
I suspect it's more about ending Hydra alliance to make sure Eve Is Easy gets permanently ended, most likely in favour of professional coaching services to be introduced by an alliance more under CCP's control and pay roll.
--- ATX: The best of the rest. |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:17:00 -
[155] - Quote
Zowie Powers wrote:TheSkeptic wrote:The simple fact you had to even ask CCP shows that you yourself were not even sure if you were one entity or not. The simple fact they had to ask CCP shows it was indeterminable if CCP knew they were separate entities or not. And sure enough, it turns out that CCP have left it to one single partisan individual with a vested interest for his friend to make that determination, both badly, swiftly and wrongly. Many people took great efforts to try to appease the requirements of CCP Vague Rules and great efforts to try to get them, not just clarified, but written in clear English. The incredulous circumstances of the banning are a testament to the effort that went into that procedure. Had things been different CCP's inevitable banning of Hydra and Outbreak would have had to have been declared under the "Ban anybody for no reason we have to state" rule, leading to an even more bizarre situation than the one we have today, you're all just lucky that CCP managed to make something look believable at this stage, and all it has cost is all the self respect of CCP Sunset, CCP Soundwave and CCP Sreegs Friend Of Goons. It was a good deal for them, and even better if they still get what it is they're actually after, the disbanding of Hydra alliance.
Not saying it's right or not harsh, or even that I agree with it... but looking at it from a complete external perspective it just looks like mistakes were made, and now all of a sudden it's CCPs fault.
It really should be black and white regarding the rules. If this happened without you asking CCP first because you'd both separately entered knowing you are separate entities I'd easily share your shock and disappointment.
|
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:18:00 -
[156] - Quote
Quote:My question to the AT team is this.
If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
its obvious that CCP got our messages. so, relax. when CCP will get into structure - they'll definitely invent an excuse about why they missed this messages.
oh prolly their AT Team were so busy watching on our actions in wormhole that they missed emails. or their SMTP server went down or something else.
u just dont need to know what exactly happened, until the level of shietstorm reached its certain limits. Signature removed. Navigator |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:21:00 -
[157] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Raqn Paudeen wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about. My question to the AT team is this. If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
135
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:25:00 -
[158] - Quote
If you are Hydra or Outbreak this sucks.
If you are CCP you are probably still somewhat confused as to what Hydra / Outbreak really expected to happen when they did the same thing that precipitated the creation of the rule in the first place.
If you are a fan of EVE you love a good controversy leading up to a big event.
If you are me you are probably chuckling that a GM defense is not really a defense. :bitter:
If you are a fan of metagaming then you should love the irony of how making a terrible, terrible, terrible decision lost last year's 1 and 2 teams the tournament before the tournament even started.
If you are a competitor you are probably happy that the strongest 2-headed monster (swidt? (hydra) ) has been removed from the pool.
Such an interesting event...
|
Diana Valenti
United Abominations.
28
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:31:00 -
[159] - Quote
Im glad they are banned, last year final was terrible. |
SwindonBadger
0utbreak Outbreak.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:34:00 -
[160] - Quote
"When Sreegs says this is the final word then please respect that decision. Discussing the matter in a new thread is not constructive."
locked."
Respect is not given when it is not earned.
One of Two things happend,
A, Sreegs reads our mails and even chatted to Senior GM who had gve us grean light to test and then plots to lie to the comunity about knowing this in order to ban (Remember that you have time to watch us closely, and yet for some reason unable to find the time to talk with us, unlike RvB, unlike PL who you have broken your own rules for).
"We were not aware of the petition to the GM at the time of the ruling and feel itGÇÖs worth following up on to remove any perceived ambiguity. The request from the player in our petition system is as follows:" or
B, He really was unaware >
" Everyone, the GM response to the petition was not brought to the attention of the Alliance Tournament team and should not have been sent, this was an error that we will investigate further."
as a result admits that not only was the seniour GM not to send us this , but it was an error.....yet although the error lies in CCP hands we take the fall.
But much much worse to me then this vendictve attitude is I hear ( from non hydra entities) he was activly trying to stop Hydra from reciving the prizes won at the last fanfest.
how could I repesct this person? |
|
Gnaw LF
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:38:00 -
[161] - Quote
Dubez wrote:Quote:This is a good post. I'm still amazed that every single email sent to the tournament team was completely ignored and the only official response we got (a Senior GM out of touch with the tournament team) was deemed invalid. Yeah, because you know, everyone who works at CCP is entitled to make decisions for a group completely unrelated to them. Oh yeah, and they are robots and never make mistakes ever. You say you sent countless mails. Lets see them. Own up or shut up imo. I find it difficult to take anything seriously from a group of people senseless enough to slither around what is considered good form. You ****** up, own up. You humiliated not only CCP but the entire EVE community by pulling that bull **** at Fanfest. Why can't you play fair like everyone else? Sure Goonswarm and TEST team up, but they aren't sharing their ****. At least the have some dignity in that respect. You guys on the other hand; no, not worth my time, CCPs time, or the player bases' time. Goodbye and good riddance.
Its not about CCP or who in the company talk to who. Its about player alliance, in this case Hydra and Outbreak, as far as they concerned they had OFFICIAL response from CCP, then CCP goes and bans them. If this response by GM is ignored it sets a bad example that it does not matter what the GM tells you in game, someone else from CCP can completely revert his decision and ban you. |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
102
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:41:00 -
[162] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:
If you are a competitor you are probably happy that the strongest 2-headed monster (swidt? (hydra) ) has been removed from the pool. .
With the exception of darkside, who had to change their pants, I dont think anyone in the AT agrees with this decision. |
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:42:00 -
[163] - Quote
Were Hydra and 0utbreak stupid to merge into a single corp on SiSi for the tournament practice?
Yes.
Did they have malicious intent?
I don't know. I want to believe that they did not.
Were CCP stupid to make such a harsh ruling, and sticking with it even after learning about the GM response?
Yes.
Did they have malicious intent?
I don't know. I want to believe that they did not. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
138
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:44:00 -
[164] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote: Its not about CCP or who in the company talk to who. Its about player alliance, in this case Hydra and Outbreak, as far as they concerned they had OFFICIAL response from CCP, then CCP goes and bans them. If this response by GM is ignored it sets a bad example that it does not matter what the GM tells you in game, someone else from CCP can completely revert his decision and ban you.
I see you are new here, welcome to EVE.
Hydrabreak know the score. GM responses are pretty much worthless at the end of the day. Zeee logs show nuthingZ.
Using a GM response as a defense is justification. They KNEW that the rule got put in place because of what happened last year. So they thought they could do the same thing and get away with it?
They made a bad decision. It was not IF CPP was going to pull the plug. It was WHEN. Were they going to wait until the tournament started? Until the finals? No, they pulled the plug as soon as the teams demonstrated nothing has changed, business as usual.
"Too Good to Fail" |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:46:00 -
[165] - Quote
If the GM response was the only attempt at getting information out of the tournament team that would be relevant, but it was not. |
Gnaw LF
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:46:00 -
[166] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:This is certainly one of the most vindictive exchanges I've ever read from this community. Come on guys, you can, and should be, better than this. Regarding the issue in question, in no uncertain terms, Hydra and Outbreak worked together to a degree that could be considered collusion and thus by letter of the law, absolutely should be barred from competing together. However, where it gets messy is the correspondence of the Game Masters. A Senior Game Master, an individual who is, reputedly, one of the highest authorities available to the playerbase for questions and concerns, said that what Hydra and Outbreak were doing, practicing together in the same system on the test server, was okay. Acting on good faith that what a Senior Game Master tells a player is true and accurate, Hydra and Outbreak went ahead and performed what was, by the rules of the tournament organizers, against the rules of Alliance Tournament X participation, and thus were banned from competition. Thus far, no opportunity for a dialogue between CCP and the banned parties has been publicly granted. Do the Game Masters have reliable authority in Eve Online, or do they not? Can we, as players, take Game Masters at their word, and can we act in good faith that what a Game Master tells us is true, accurate, and reliable? The Game Masters are the front of customer service between the game's developers as operators of the online environment and the customer base; if we cannot trust that anything a game master tells a player will not be overridden by other employees at CCP, there is a horrific problem with the customer service aspect of the Eve Online service that should be addressed immediately. The ability for CCP's Game Masters to serve as a reliable source of information and advice to the player base has been substantially undermined by this incident.
Nailed on the head a thousand times over. The issue here is not whether or not Hydra or Outbreak deserve a ban, but rather should such a ban be placed under the current circumstances. Considering they head OFFICIAL ******* GO AHEAD FROM CCP, doesnt matter who in CCP, they had a response telling them that they are within the rules. To then turn around and ban them without so much as a warning or ultimatum is not only capricious but also malicious. Do the right thing CCP.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
139
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:49:00 -
[167] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Were Hydra and 0utbreak stupid to merge into a single corp on SiSi for the tournament practice?Yes. Did they have malicious intent?I don't know. I want to believe that they did not. Were CCP stupid to make such a harsh ruling, and sticking with it even after learning about the GM response?Yes. Did they have malicious intent?I don't know. I want to believe that they did not.
Well at least you are kind enough to point out they may actually be stupid. I suppose that is better than malicious.
... |
Jack Parr
University of Caille Gallente Federation
61
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:50:00 -
[168] - Quote
Funniest thread I've read in a long time. I hope you enjoy your ban watching the better players competing while you sit on the sidelines. "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average goon." -á -á-á - The Mittani |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
212
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:52:00 -
[169] - Quote
xo3e wrote:its obvious that CCP got our messages. so, relax. when CCP will get into structure - they'll definitely invent an excuse about why they missed this messages Right, i even asked spitfire to poke proper persons within CCP so we get reply ASAP. He said he doesn't know the person behind evetv address, but will ask navigator to poke proper people (because he should know). At 7th may Navigator was out of the offince (at least i was told so), then i contacted spitfire multiple times on 9th, 10th and 15th may. On 15th i finally got a response that spitfire passed the request to navigator, but it didn't help in any way.
Guise, just imagine amount of attention we put into this queestion. We contacted CCP by the all means we had. Obviously GM's response, confirmed to be legal by _CCP_ official (which i already mentioned in this thread) relaxed us. |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
104
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:52:00 -
[170] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Gnaw LF wrote: Its not about CCP or who in the company talk to who. Its about player alliance, in this case Hydra and Outbreak, as far as they concerned they had OFFICIAL response from CCP, then CCP goes and bans them. If this response by GM is ignored it sets a bad example that it does not matter what the GM tells you in game, someone else from CCP can completely revert his decision and ban you.
I see you are new here, welcome to EVE. Hydrabreak know the score. GM responses are pretty much worthless at the end of the day. Zeee logs show nuthingZ. Using a GM response as a defense is justification. They KNEW that the rule got put in place because of what happened last year. So they thought they could do the same thing and get away with it? They made a bad decision. It was not IF CPP was going to pull the plug. It was WHEN. Were they going to wait until the tournament started? Until the finals? No, they pulled the plug as soon as the teams demonstrated nothing has changed, business as usual. "Too Good to Fail"
Yes, it was a bad idea to even try it, but they tried as hard as they could to see if it was allowed. They got 1 response which was yes, and no response from anyone that actually mattered. |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:54:00 -
[171] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:This is certainly one of the most vindictive exchanges I've ever read from this community. Come on guys, you can, and should be, better than this. Regarding the issue in question, in no uncertain terms, Hydra and Outbreak worked together to a degree that could be considered collusion and thus by letter of the law, absolutely should be barred from competing together. However, where it gets messy is the correspondence of the Game Masters. A Senior Game Master, an individual who is, reputedly, one of the highest authorities available to the playerbase for questions and concerns, said that what Hydra and Outbreak were doing, practicing together in the same system on the test server, was okay. Acting on good faith that what a Senior Game Master tells a player is true and accurate, Hydra and Outbreak went ahead and performed what was, by the rules of the tournament organizers, against the rules of Alliance Tournament X participation, and thus were banned from competition. Thus far, no opportunity for a dialogue between CCP and the banned parties has been publicly granted. Do the Game Masters have reliable authority in Eve Online, or do they not? Can we, as players, take Game Masters at their word, and can we act in good faith that what a Game Master tells us is true, accurate, and reliable? The Game Masters are the front of customer service between the game's developers as operators of the online environment and the customer base; if we cannot trust that anything a game master tells a player will not be overridden by other employees at CCP, there is a horrific problem with the customer service aspect of the Eve Online service that should be addressed immediately. The ability for CCP's Game Masters to serve as a reliable source of information and advice to the player base has been substantially undermined by this incident. Nailed on the head a thousand times over. The issue here is not whether or not Hydra or Outbreak deserve a ban, but rather should such a ban be placed under the current circumstances. Considering they head OFFICIAL ******* GO AHEAD FROM CCP, doesnt matter who in CCP, they had a response telling them that they are within the rules. To then turn around and ban them without so much as a warning or ultimatum is not only capricious but also malicious. Do the right thing CCP.
Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same If you don't like it, you should go and ride your Emo high-horse all the way back to WoW.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
139
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:56:00 -
[172] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Time Funnel wrote:
If you are a competitor you are probably happy that the strongest 2-headed monster (swidt? (hydra) ) has been removed from the pool. .
With the exception of darkside, who had to change their pants, I dont think anyone in the AT agrees with this decision.
Then you probably don't want to win. |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:57:00 -
[173] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:xo3e wrote:its obvious that CCP got our messages. so, relax. when CCP will get into structure - they'll definitely invent an excuse about why they missed this messages Right, i even asked spitfire to poke proper persons within CCP so we get reply ASAP. He said he doesn't know the person behind evetv address, but will ask navigator to poke proper people (because he should know). At 7th may Navigator was out of the offince (at least i was told so), then i contacted spitfire multiple times on 9th, 10th and 15th may. On 15th i finally got a response that spitfire passed the request to navigator, but it didn't help in any way. Guise, just imagine amount of attention we put into this queestion. We contacted CCP by the all means we had. Obviously GM's response, confirmed to be legal by _CCP_ official (which i already mentioned in this thread) relaxed us.
And with this much doubt, on your side of the table, in the legitimacy of your actions you continued along a path which you knew could exclude you both from competition...
If you don't like it, you should go and ride your Emo high-horse all the way back to WoW.
|
Gnaw LF
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:57:00 -
[174] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Gnaw LF wrote: Its not about CCP or who in the company talk to who. Its about player alliance, in this case Hydra and Outbreak, as far as they concerned they had OFFICIAL response from CCP, then CCP goes and bans them. If this response by GM is ignored it sets a bad example that it does not matter what the GM tells you in game, someone else from CCP can completely revert his decision and ban you.
I see you are new here, welcome to EVE. Hydrabreak know the score. GM responses are pretty much worthless at the end of the day. Zeee logs show nuthingZ. Using a GM response as a defense is justification. They KNEW that the rule got put in place because of what happened last year. So they thought they could do the same thing and get away with it? They made a bad decision. It was not IF CPP was going to pull the plug. It was WHEN. Were they going to wait until the tournament started? Until the finals? No, they pulled the plug as soon as the teams demonstrated nothing has changed, business as usual. "Too Good to Fail"
You are in Test and you are calling me new? And I don't care about your personal experiences with GMs, the idea is that their decisions and responses to petitions are OFFICIAL. It may not work that way all the time, or any of the time for that matter, but that is precisely why we need to voice our concerns, otherwise we just let CCP off the hook with their inconsistent approach to moderating the game. |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:58:00 -
[175] - Quote
It's ok - CCP has started deleting posts now. Excellent work. |
Kyros Xero
Xuronautics
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 15:58:00 -
[176] - Quote
The GM response was a narrow ruling on a specific item - sparring against other teams - and specifically included a warning against "appearing to be the same people". Holding that up as a blank check for anything Hydra might choose to do on the test server (merging corps, etc) is weak sauce.
It would be like getting the ok from your buddy to go hang out, then banging his Mom. Not the same thing.
Don't villainize the GM. POS Layered Defenses: "Panic" mode and defense-automation arrays |
sevyn nine
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:00:00 -
[177] - Quote
Sooo, uhhhh, since you're not busy practicing in a wormhole, you want to practice with the Razor team? We need our butts kicked on the test server. |
Darius III
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
1355
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:01:00 -
[178] - Quote
I have voiced my displeasure officially as CSM in the CSM/CCP secret place.
CCP doesnt have good track record with PR or communications with players and this incident highlights inadequacies with both. This has left a stain on the AT itself and is unfortunate and would have been easily avoided by CCP by making policies crystal clear and/or answering more succinctly *OR* the alliances themselves by simply going forward in complete separation.
I will miss HYDRA's participation greatly and I wish they hadn't taken a chance on trusting CCP to make the rules clear to everyone, nor taken a chance to even risk what could be viewed as collaboration if they did not in fact collaborate. HYDRA has always been an outfit with peerless skill and combat acumen and I am deeply saddened by their banning and the circumstances surrounding it. Hmmm |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
140
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:01:00 -
[179] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same
First off, what is the actual intent of the "No alternate teams" rule? Is it meant to stop the same entity from entering multiple teams from the same alliance/organization? Is it intended to prevent an alts vs alts situation such as the finale of AT9? If it's the former, Red vs Blue looks to have been granted preferential treatment while engaging in similar behavior. If it's the latter, I wasn't aware Hydra and Outbreak are alt corps; are they? |
Hecater
Scullthrone
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:02:00 -
[180] - Quote
Quote:It's ok - CCP has started deleting posts now. Excellent work.
dont be afraid dear CCP dudes
this shiet will definetely reach certain media and i am also trying to contact Sony atm. |
|
Contorted
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:04:00 -
[181] - Quote
It's so funny that you base your whole "defense" on this GM Quote.
You asked:
Quote: For example, are 2 alliances sparring against each other and testing out ship setups before the tournament itself classed as breaking this rule?
You get a "No, that's okay BUT BE CAREFUL TO NOT OVERSTEP IT!" as an answer and what are you very intelligent people going to do? You take his ruling and bend it like a ******* ***** over and put your **** as far as possible up it's ass that the ONLY OUTCOME of this was what you can see now. There is NO WAY you didn't see this coming and you did it anyway. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
139
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:04:00 -
[182] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote: You are in Test and you are calling me new? And I don't care about your personal experiences with GMs, the idea is that their decisions and responses to petitions are OFFICIAL. It may not work that way all the time, or any of the time for that matter, but that is precisely why we need to voice our concerns, otherwise we just let CCP off the hook with their inconsistent approach to moderating the game.
Yeah well you are preaching to the choir. I was simply pointing out that this has been a problematic area for quite a while now. GMs saying things that do not reflect CCPs stances for whatever reason. Undefined interactions between customer support, devs, GMs, etc. If you have any experience with the game at all you know that what a GM says means literally nothing when it comes to a big issue.
If you have put a rule in place to prevent the kid 4 doors down from firing pumpkins into your yard, and the kid starts building another huge slingshot at what point do you take action? Probably right away. You won't wait for the pumpkin to land in your living room.
I can comment on all this from the comfort of my armchair and watch good juicy drama unfold in forums other than TEST forums. And maybe help it along once in a while. |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:05:00 -
[183] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Hyrda did not disclose the full extent of what they were doing. Placing both teams in the same corp in the same pos on the test server and saying "trust us, were not working together THAT much" is a load of bull. If they had FULLY DISCLOSED what they were doing i am confident the answer would not have been the same First off, what is the actual intent of the "No alternate teams" rule? Is it meant to stop the same entity from entering multiple teams from the same alliance/organization? Is it intended to prevent an alts vs alts situation such as the finale of AT9? If it's the former, Red vs Blue looks to have been granted preferential treatment while engaging in similar behavior. If it's the latter, I wasn't aware Hydra and Outbreak are alt corps; are they?
If they want to compete like alt corps then what exactly are then in reference to the AT? They can cry foul all they want about having permission, but without full disclosure they can't be surprised, even though they are moaning its not fair.
Please tell me, why didn't they ouline their entire plan for practice to the GM if they were so concerned about the legitimacy. Please. If you don't like it, you should go and ride your Emo high-horse all the way back to WoW.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
217
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:06:00 -
[184] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:And with this much doubt, on your side of the table, in the legitimacy of your actions you continued along a path which you knew could exclude you both from competition... It wasn't doubt, we felt we're doing right thing.
But information we possessed was enough to conclude that behavior of some CCP AT crew members in this case is biased and we just didn't know what to expect, thus had to ask for clarification.
My personal opinion, is that *if* we were more careful - we would have even more stupid accusations applied onto us, outcome would be the same anyway. It's not rule enforcement, it's punishment for screwed finals, which made some bitter CCP employees looking for a ways to inflict maximum damage. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:07:00 -
[185] - Quote
Hecater wrote:Quote:It's ok - CCP has started deleting posts now. Excellent work. dont be afraid dear CCP dudes this shiet will definetely reach certain media and i am also trying to contact Sony atm.
good
Just in case you missed it, compare:
http://eve-search.com/thread/113251-1
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113251 |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
141
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:13:00 -
[186] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:[If they want to compete like alt corps then what exactly are then in reference to the AT? They can cry foul all they want about having permission, but without full disclosure they can't be surprised, even though they are moaning its not fair.
Please tell me, why didn't they ouline their entire plan for practice to the GM if they were so concerned about the legitimacy. Please.
For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
217
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:15:00 -
[187] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
I want to emphasize that it wasn't just GM, it was senior GM which was confirmed to be one of the most adequate by CCP official (in private convo). |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
503
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:16:00 -
[188] - Quote
Contorted wrote: You get a "No, that's okay BUT BE CAREFUL TO NOT OVERSTEP IT!" as an answer and what are you very intelligent people going to do? You take his ruling and bend it like a ******* ***** over and put your **** as far as possible up it's ass that the ONLY OUTCOME of this was what you can see now. There is NO WAY you didn't see this coming and you did it anyway.
Isn't the rule bending to the max one of the key corner stones of Goonswarm?
Do you get away with it because you have homies at the CCP team now?
It makes EVE so darn easy once you have a batphone. Doesn't it.
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:18:00 -
[189] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:Contorted wrote: You get a "No, that's okay BUT BE CAREFUL TO NOT OVERSTEP IT!" as an answer and what are you very intelligent people going to do? You take his ruling and bend it like a ******* ***** over and put your **** as far as possible up it's ass that the ONLY OUTCOME of this was what you can see now. There is NO WAY you didn't see this coming and you did it anyway.
Isn't the rule bending to the max one of the key corner stones of Goonswarm? Do you get away with it because you have homies at the CCP team now? It makes EVE so darn easy once you have a batphone. Doesn't it. i see you're fleeing here after getting 0wned repeatedly elsewhere
remember that time i told you i knew an infinite number of names in the hat and you thought that meant i had a batphone
good times, good times, pity it got deleted |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:18:00 -
[190] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:And with this much doubt, on your side of the table, in the legitimacy of your actions you continued along a path which you knew could exclude you both from competition... It wasn't doubt, we felt we're doing right thing. But information we possessed was enough to conclude that behavior of some CCP AT crew members in this case is biased and we just didn't know what to expect, thus had to ask for clarification.
that is total bull and you know it. If there was NO DOUBT in your actions you wouldn't have petitioned it in the first place. If it was simply stupidity that whoever wrote the petition happened to forget the actual suspicious actions in the petition then you know where to point the finger.
Kadesh Priestess wrote: My personal opinion, is that *if* we were more careful - we would have even more stupid accusations applied onto us, outcome would be the same anyway. It's not rule enforcement, it's punishment for screwed finals, which made some bitter CCP employees looking for a ways to inflict maximum damage.
It is MY personal opinion that you screwed over last years final, tried to screw it this year, and are now trying to make CCP look bad by trying the showing the information in your favor
To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:20:00 -
[191] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:For starters, you can try to give the benefit of the doubt with regards to intent. Second, it is very difficult to frame a full disclosure question that provides a good contextual framework from which the question was asked. It's entirely possible, and not unreasonable, that the question asked of the GM was perceived to adequately provide context to the issue in question.
I want to emphasize that it wasn't just GM, it was senior GM which was confirmed to be one of the most adequate by CCP official (in private convo).
adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.
You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Gobbins
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:20:00 -
[192] - Quote
I think CCP has been engaging in a completely new stance of community management.
The old days of "bro CCP" are gone and their new focus is on wider PR.
They have learned that individual alliances can be unfairly punished without that generating too much of a fuss: see the shitcanning of Mittens for example, other bans before that, and today this low blow they did on hydra.
I imagine they want to send a clear message: "mess with our public events (fanfest panel for mittens, AT finals for hydra) and consequences will never be the same" ; since they cannot control what players will do in a live event, and eve is full of trolls, their only way to deal with the problem is to make an example and hope it will act as a deterrent |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
505
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:20:00 -
[193] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:i see you're fleeing here after getting 0wned repeatedly elsewhere
remember that time i told you i knew an infinite number of names in the hat and you thought that meant i had a batphone
good times, good times, pity it got deleted
I don't know what your definition of "getting owned" is but clearly it's not the same definition commonly used. Also you didn't tell me, but you told in general you knew an infinite humber of names. But that is nittpicking and I prefer to leave that to you. Can't beat the master there.
And ofcourse it got deleted. Now let's all wonder why.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
140
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:22:00 -
[194] - Quote
Dear GM:
We at HYDRA RELOADED and Outbreak. would like a pre-ruling on the activities that we have planned during the time leading up to the tournament. We will outline everything we are planning on doing and wait for an official response before taking any action.
We would like to have the members of [Alliance A] join the corp of [Alliance B] to facilitate logistics and testing inside the wormhole that we have selected on Singularity server. This is for logistical purposes only. This does not mean that we are the same team. It is a relationship of convenience, not an indication that we share setups, leadership, or anything of that nature. It is only to facilitate our sparring.
We understand that the reason that this rule was put in place was due partly to our apparent collusion in last year's Alliance Tournament (AT IX). The last match was done through agreement and created an un-entertaining final for the tournament showcasing CCPs product. We can assure you that the actions that we are taking this year, while exactly the same actions as last year, do not mean that we will collude or pre-arrange fights or outcomes in any fashion. We believe that you can accept on good faith that our intentions are nothing like last year even though our actions are almost identical.
We are also sending this letter to the appropriate parties at CCP and we would hope you would consult with [List of VIPs] before giving us your ruling. We know we are already under the microscope and if we make any false step we will get squished.
Sincerely,
The letter writer you should have had to prevent this whole terrible situation from happening in the first place.
PS. If you remove us from the tournament we are going to cry.
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
169
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:25:00 -
[195] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Dear GM:
We at HYDRA RELOADED and Outbreak. would like a pre-ruling on the activities that we have planned during the time leading up to the tournament. We will outline everything we are planning on doing and wait for an official response before taking any action.
We would like to have the members of [Alliance A] join the corp of [Alliance B] to facilitate logistics and testing inside the wormhole that we have selected on Singularity server. This is for logistical purposes only. This does not mean that we are the same team. It is a relationship of convenience, not an indication that we share setups, leadership, or anything of that nature. It is only to facilitate our sparring.
We understand that the reason that this rule was put in place was due partly to our apparent collusion in last year's Alliance Tournament (AT IX). The last match was done through agreement and created an un-entertaining final for the tournament showcasing CCPs product. We can assure you that the actions that we are taking this year, while exactly the same actions as last year, do not mean that we will collude or pre-arrange fights or outcomes in any fashion. We believe that you can accept on good faith that our intentions are nothing like last year even though our actions are almost identical.
We are also sending this letter to the appropriate parties at CCP and we would hope you would consult with [List of VIPs] before giving us your ruling. We know we are already under the microscope and if we make any false step we will get squished.
Sincerely,
The letter writer you should have had to prevent this whole terrible situation from happening in the first place.
PS. If you remove us from the tournament we are going to cry.
its like you guys are deliberately ignoring the facts.... To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Kratisto
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:26:00 -
[196] - Quote
What I find most amusing about this thread is Outbreak. and Hydra attempting to lawyer their way into the tournament. That works in civil courts with laws and rules, and accountability of judges.
CCP is the sovereign lord and master of the game and tournament. They do not have to do anything. Basically it comes down to this: Who needs whom more; Does Hydra/Outbreak need CCP for the tournament, or does CCP need them. It is frankly quite easy to say CCP has all the leverage; you guys should be on your knees begging for mercy, not on your feet trying to worm your way around like a lawyer. Sue for tempered understanding, not technicalities.
Your rage and tears do nothing but feed the masses who harbor resentment for the anticlimactic ending of last year, where (intentionally or not) you swung your dicks around and slapped all the viewers and organizers in the face. Yes you were within the law that time, but the new rules were specifically added to prevent the same thing from happening! You changed nothing, and expected no punishment? It was clear to all viewers, that last year one team was preordained to win. That there was an A team, and a B team.
In this thread I hear you apologized and feel bad about how that ended. Your apologies were not publicized, if they were given. You will find little compassion, unless you issue a very public and heartfelt apology for last year, ask for forgiveness and understanding, and request one team be allowed to compete.
Right now, all I see is lawyering. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
218
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:26:00 -
[197] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:that is total bull and you know it. If there was NO DOUBT in your actions you wouldn't have petitioned it in the first place. If it was simply stupidity that whoever wrote the petition happened to forget the actual suspicious actions in the petition then you know where to point the finger. This is not a bull. When you have a guy who directs his BFG9k at you you have to think about every your step and ask / consult him as much as possible. It's exactly our situation, and it's exacctly what we did.
Karl Planck wrote:It is MY personal opinion that you screwed over last years final, tried to screw it this year, and are now trying to make CCP look bad by trying the showing the information in your favor No, it wasn't intentional. No, we didn't plan to screw any matches this year. What you're writing here is just your speculations, while I have all the inside information to state that we never ever planned to make fools out of CCP, neither AT IX nor AT X.
I understand that you may not trust me, but I never lied to community - this is just stupid for the gameplay style I chose, with no alts or toons, it kills your authority which you earned throughout the years of playing eve. |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
141
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:28:00 -
[198] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.
You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions
It was entirely possible for CCP to pursue extra clarification; no single party can be blamed for inadequate understanding here.
Quote:that is total bull and you know it. If there was NO DOUBT in your actions you wouldn't have petitioned it in the first place. If it was simply stupidity that whoever wrote the petition happened to forget the actual suspicious actions in the petition then you know where to point the finger.
Strawman. As was indicated by my previous post, I found that the intent and specifics of the rules regarding the alternate team clauses are not clear.
Now, for my full disclosure: I think that Hydra and Genos should be allowed to participate, so long as the characters used in the tournament do not belong to the same people. EDIT: Meant to say Hydra and Outbreak. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
219
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:30:00 -
[199] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.
You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions This is true. However, please consider that this petition was filled by outbreak member as act of free will - he has no direct relationship to HYDRA leadership. He just knew we're waiting for email response and decided to help, presenting us just GM's reply.
Who knew that question wasn't worded correctly enough. If anybody would know & notice it - question would have been reworded with 100% chance, i remind you of amount of attention we were putting into this. |
Daneel Trevize
The Scope Gallente Federation
128
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:31:00 -
[200] - Quote
Kratisto wrote:In this thread I hear you apologized and feel bad about how that ended. Your apologies were not publicized, if they were given. You will find little compassion, unless you issue a very public and heartfelt apology for last year, ask for forgiveness and understanding, and request one team be allowed to compete. Did you miss Duncan's detailed write-up response last year with Garmon's apology, or something? |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
171
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:34:00 -
[201] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:adaquate response cannot be given when the details of what you were doing (specially those that crossed the line) were not disclosed to the GM making the decision.
You got an answer to the question you asked, it was the wrong question to validate your actions This is true. However, please consider that this petition was filled by outbreak member as act of free will - he has no direct relationship to HYDRA leadership. He just knew we're waiting for email response and decided to help, presenting us just GM's reply. Who knew that question wasn't worded correctly enough. If anybody would know & notice it - question would have been reworded with 100% chance, i remind you of amount of attention we were putting into this.
This being the case why did you practice together until you got clearence? Everything in eve works like this. For example, if you are exploiting something that seems like a bug then the GM can temp ban you for doing it (if they THINK you had intent to break the rules).
This is no different. You guys were playing with fire and you got burned.
All of this said, I am sad you guys wont be competing as HYDRA has done very well in the past, but that sadness is much much less than my appriciation for CCP holding up the rules it set out. To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:38:00 -
[202] - Quote
Kratisto wrote:What I find most amusing about this thread is Outbreak. and Hydra attempting to lawyer their way into the tournament. That works in civil courts with laws and rules, and accountability of judges.
judges in real cases are free to go "**** you we all know what you were up to" too, you only get to get hypertechnical when the judge is forbidden from being reasonable (cases like new york contract law) |
Jimmy Luv
Sileo In Pacis THE SPACE P0LICE
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:42:00 -
[203] - Quote
Pretty simple really......
Senior GM responds to Garmon giving them the go ahead to practice with each other on the test server. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed in the first place then the blame can only lie with CCP. A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.
There simply is no other argument to be made.
Sort your S**t out CCP. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
7365
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:47:00 -
[204] - Quote
Jimmy Luv wrote:A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras. It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properlyGǪ
Yoink.
GǪbah! Breaking sipes by deletion is a much bigger GM issue! GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Shift-click does nothing GÇö why the Unified Inventory isn't ready for primetime. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:48:00 -
[205] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:This being the case why did you practice together until you got clearence? You must've missed my post where i said that we wouldn't get response from evetv email address no matter what.
We would understand if CCP would limit both HYDRA/OB to fielding one team, using previous year as precedent.
We would even understand if CCP told us that both HYDRA and OB are not allowed to participate in tournament on 2nd may, when they published the rules.
But making it just now, when thousands of man-hours (3-5 training sessions a week + logi + theorycrafting + spying stuff) were spent and making such lame excuses makes me thing that the only thing which drove CCP in this case is bitterness of certain persons who placed their own opinion above anything else.
I entered HYDRA just few months ago to participate in ATX. After hanging around for a while - I really thought these guys are tinfoiled and that they really overestimate amount of hatred towards HYDRA. After recent events, it turns out they had a good reason to do so. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:49:00 -
[206] - Quote
Tippia wrote:It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properlyGǪ I would be glad to hear your advice on how we would have to communicate with CCP.
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
80
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:50:00 -
[207] - Quote
Jimmy Luv wrote:Pretty simple really......
Senior GM responds to Garmon giving them the go ahead to practice with each other on the test server. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed in the first place then the blame can only lie with CCP. A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras.
There simply is no other argument to be made.
Sort your S**t out CCP.
Permission to practice with each other is different from permission to use same SiSi corp / logistics / theorycraft / setups Right up until tourney starts ( at which point one can only assume they'd still be in constant communication and metagaming together )
But yeah the Tourney team should've communicated better. Doesn't mean the GM gave them permission to behave as if their two alliances were one team. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
505
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:51:00 -
[208] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:I would be glad to hear your advice on how we would have to communicate with CCP.
Get a batphone.
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:54:00 -
[209] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Jimmy Luv wrote:A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras. It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properlyGǪ
...what did we do wrong when we emailed the official Alliance Tournament address twice?
Zero reply. |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
172
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:57:00 -
[210] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:This being the case why did you practice together until you got clearence? You must've missed my post where i said that we wouldn't get response from evetv email address no matter what. We would understand if CCP would limit both HYDRA/OB to fielding one team, using previous year as precedent. We would even understand if CCP told us that both HYDRA and OB are not allowed to participate in tournament on 2nd may, when they published the rules.
Waiting for a response and continuing to perpetrate risky behavior is what I am talking about. While CCP should have gotten into contact with H/O, pushing forward like you got the clearance was rediculas.
RvB was given an exception, exceptions are by definition not standard practice and you had absolutely no reason to expect one.
To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
172
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 16:58:00 -
[211] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Tippia wrote:Jimmy Luv wrote:A lack of communication on they're part should not consitute a problem on Outbreak/Hydras. It is when Outbreak/Hydra are the ones not communicating properlyGǪ ...what did we do wrong when we emailed the official Alliance Tournament address twice? Zero reply.
you continued to operate deep in the gray area under the assuption it was ok, that is what you did wrong To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:00:00 -
[212] - Quote
I also like how Sreegs seems to imply that reducing logistics is somehow dishonest because other teams have to work harder. I'm pretty sure any small alliance has to work harder per person compared to Goons and PL. Those guys are loaded and they have the numbers so logistics and procurement are not as big a burden. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:04:00 -
[213] - Quote
Karbox Delacroix wrote:I also like how Sreegs seems to imply that reducing logistics is somehow dishonest because other teams have to work harder. I'm pretty sure any small alliance has to work harder per person compared to Goons and PL. Those guys are loaded and they have the numbers so logistics and procurement are not as big a burden.
Or TEST. Don't forget about us. We don't even bother with wormholes, that is how little we work.
Don't pick on the little guys you CCP meanies!
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
220
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:05:00 -
[214] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Waiting for a response and continuing to perpetrate risky behavior is what I am talking about. While CCP should have gotten into contact with H/O, pushing forward like you got the clearance was rediculas.
RvB was given an exception, exceptions are by definition not standard practice and you had absolutely no reason to expect one.
Again, we got response from Senior GM and it was basically approved by CCP official who's on my skype. We got the clearance, we tried our best to contact AT team directly to completely ensure it. We didn't have a batphone to sort it out.
RvB is completely other situation because they were contacted by CCP, not vice versa (or at least they deserved CCP's attention if they initiated the contact). We would never ever field 2 teams after we started trainings together, if we knew it is considered as offence by CCP. We would never ever start training together if we got quick reply to our first email disallowing us to do so.
Please stop playing words - it won't make you right or wrong. Just face the fact that our requests to the highest AT commands were intentionally ignored by CCP, even though at least 1 person within company (or even two or 3) had our message at hands with appropriate requests to pass it to AT team, even if mail delivery failed. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
284
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:21:00 -
[215] - Quote
Hydra Outbreak Reloaded should STFU finally and get over the fact you have been banned from an official event you ruined last year. Even miscommunication with GMs should be reason enough to let you participate in AT again, EVER. You are banned and its good the way it is, DEAL WITH IT. |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:26:00 -
[216] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Hydra Outbreak Reloaded should STFU finally and get over the fact you have been banned from an official event you ruined last year. Even miscommunication with GMs shouldn't be reason enough to let you participate in AT again, EVER. You are banned and its good the way it is, DEAL WITH CONSEQUENCES.
In response to this, and other posts like it, why are you guys so vindictive and angry at the previous champions for doing well enough in the previous tournament to secure both slots of the final match? |
Tawa Suyo
The Tuskers
39
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:28:00 -
[217] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Raqn Paudeen wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about. My question to the AT team is this. If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
141
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:31:00 -
[218] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:Hydra Outbreak Reloaded should STFU finally and get over the fact you have been banned from an official event you ruined last year. Even miscommunication with GMs shouldn't be reason enough to let you participate in AT again, EVER. You are banned and its good the way it is, DEAL WITH CONSEQUENCES. In response to this, and other posts like it, why are you guys so vindictive and angry at the previous champions for doing well enough in the previous tournament to secure both slots of the final match?
I think that the previous champions are the ones angry here. Just sayin' |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:32:00 -
[219] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:[Again, we got response from Senior GM and it was basically approved by CCP official who's on my skype. We got the clearance, we tried our best to contact AT team directly to completely ensure it. We didn't have a batphone to sort it out. we've seen the gm response and it doesn't support your case |
pBump
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:34:00 -
[220] - Quote
Tawa Suyo wrote:Pallidum Treponema wrote:Raqn Paudeen wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I pretty much imagine the way this went down is the AT team giggling as they got each email from Garmon, passing it around the office and giggling some more.
This is clearly revenge for last year's finals, even though the metagaming antics of HYDRA made the entire tournament awesome to watch and think about. My question to the AT team is this. If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
|
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
173
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:35:00 -
[221] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Waiting for a response and continuing to perpetrate risky behavior is what I am talking about. While CCP should have gotten into contact with H/O, pushing forward like you got the clearance was rediculas.
RvB was given an exception, exceptions are by definition not standard practice and you had absolutely no reason to expect one.
Again, we got response from Senior GM and it was basically approved by CCP official who's on my skype. We got the clearance, we tried our best to contact AT team directly to completely ensure it. We didn't have a batphone to sort it out.
Again, for like the tenth time, you got clearence for only a portion of what you were doing. You did not mention that you were in the same corp on sisi, in a wh, practicing together with mixed teams/coms/fittings/mods
If you want to provide some evidence of THAT correspondence, i'll change my tune
Kadesh Priestess wrote: RvB is completely other situation because they were contacted by CCP, not vice versa (or at least they deserved CCP's attention if they initiated the contact). We would never ever field 2 teams after we started trainings together, if we knew it is considered as offence by CCP. We would never ever start training together if we got quick reply to our first email disallowing us to do so.
Please stop playing words - it won't make you right or wrong. Just face the fact that our requests to the highest AT commands were intentionally ignored by CCP, even though at least 1 person within company (or even two or 3) had our message at hands with appropriate requests to pass it to AT team, even if mail delivery failed.
While it is unfortunate there was a lack of communication, you were completely in the wrong for going ahead like you had a green light. And you are certainly not boo-hoo'ing CCP because of lack of email clarity (calling for a reformat of how CCP delegates information), you are trying to get a reverse decision when you should have known (and obviously did know) how you were operating could get you disqualified.
To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:35:00 -
[222] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:I think that the previous champions are the ones angry here. Just sayin'
They certainly are angry, and I honestly don't blame them for it. What I don't understand is why so many people are making statements like "they should be banned from ever attempting to participate in the alliance tournament again," etc. |
Anna Katarr
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:36:00 -
[223] - Quote
Raqn Paudeen wrote:
My question to the AT team is this.
If you have been paying so much attention to HYDRA and what they have been doing, how did you overlook all the messages they sent to you? The whole thing seems a bit.. fishy, and honestly its a **** start to the AT.
this.
also the fact that hydra nor outbreak never broke any rules during the last tournament, yeah, the final was a farce, but it was conform to the rules, like it or not.
and a SENIOR gm, not some trainee, allowed them to do whatever they did in that wormhole... i think its pretty clear that ccp's intention just was to **** hydra/outbreak as hard in the ass as they could, no matter what...
and then, they did... |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
142
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:38:00 -
[224] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:CCP official who's on my skype
Hey one of you guys was looking for a batphone. Kadesh has one. I don't have one. I am jealous AND out meta-gamed.
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
142
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:39:00 -
[225] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Time Funnel wrote:I think that the previous champions are the ones angry here. Just sayin' They certainly are angry, and I honestly don't blame them for it. What I don't understand is why so many people are making statements like "they should be banned from ever attempting to participate in the alliance tournament again," etc.
People making statements like that are often referred to as "Trolls"
I am also a Troll. So pay attention to me and keep talking to me. |
Kratisto
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:47:00 -
[226] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:Hydra Outbreak Reloaded should STFU finally and get over the fact you have been banned from an official event you ruined last year. Even miscommunication with GMs shouldn't be reason enough to let you participate in AT again, EVER. You are banned and its good the way it is, DEAL WITH CONSEQUENCES. In response to this, and other posts like it, why are you guys so vindictive and angry at the previous champions for doing well enough in the previous tournament to secure both slots of the final match?
So Germany and Spain decide for the Euro final they want the score to be 8-9 in Spains favor. The Germans come in and score 8 goals with apparent ease, and then stand about as Spain then returns the favor. They spend the last 20 minutes shaking hands and congratulating themselves about how awesome they are to reach 1 and 2 and share the prize money 50/50.
The fans and everyone in the crowd, they should be happy right?
They showed up to watch football, not to watch a giant pile of ****. Granted, the pile of **** was legal the first time around, so the result stood. But next tournament the teams seem to be doing the same thing, and this time there are rules against it. Are the fans who showed up to the farce supposed to have pity?
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
224
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:49:00 -
[227] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Again, for like the tenth time, you got clearence for only a portion of what you were doing. You did not mention that you were in the same corp on sisi, in a wh, practicing together with mixed teams/coms/fittings/mods
If you want to provide some evidence of THAT correspondence, i'll change my tune Testing against each other pretty much implies we do it in the same place. being in the same corp - is purely technical moment (like shared CEO of executor corp between trusted persons, because you can't have multiple characters fulfilling this role), it doesn't change anything regarding being entity or not. As you may know, we did it for corporate hangar access.
Sreegs says it is a difference which matters, i see you're inclined to believe him. But formal reasoning leads to few conclusions:
1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics 2) He doesn't care so much about what's shown in tournament, he wants to waste participants efforts on something which is largely behind the scenes - and only then he will call it fair
Or, as i previously voiced my opinion - he published opinion of the part of AT collective which is bitter because of AT IX finals.
Karl Planck wrote:While it is unfortunate there was a lack of communication, you were completely in the wrong for going ahead like you had a green light. And you are certainly not boo-hoo'ing CCP because of lack of email clarity (calling for a reformat of how CCP delegates information), you are trying to get a reverse decision when you should have known (and obviously did know) how you were operating could get you disqualified. Don't belittle significance of lack of communication. It was primary reason of recent events resulting in hydra ban.
And please stop justifying that CCP are humans too and can make mistakes from time to time. Making mistake isn't a problem, handling it - is. |
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:51:00 -
[228] - Quote
QQ more, chicken mcnublets |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
227
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:53:00 -
[229] - Quote
Kratisto wrote:They showed up to watch football, not to watch a giant pile of ****. AT players are humans too and making mistakes. And we're not obstinate, we admit them even on official level:
http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1531508-0/page/1 |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
227
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:55:00 -
[230] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:QQ more, chicken mcnublets I'm not surprised that you're so happy, We outplayed you on your own field even before AT matches started, you had bad chances to get 1st place in such conditions.
I'm really sure you will win this one, but it won't change the fact that you were completely outspied by someone who learned spy mastery from you few years ago. |
|
Dr Robertson
ImpeviA
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 17:58:00 -
[231] - Quote
Kratisto wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:Hydra Outbreak Reloaded should STFU finally and get over the fact you have been banned from an official event you ruined last year. Even miscommunication with GMs shouldn't be reason enough to let you participate in AT again, EVER. You are banned and its good the way it is, DEAL WITH CONSEQUENCES. In response to this, and other posts like it, why are you guys so vindictive and angry at the previous champions for doing well enough in the previous tournament to secure both slots of the final match? So Germany and Spain decide for the Euro final they want the score to be 8-9 in Spains favor. The Germans come in and score 8 goals with apparent ease, and then stand about as Spain then returns the favor. They spend the last 20 minutes shaking hands and congratulating themselves about how awesome they are to reach 1 and 2 and share the prize money 50/50. The fans and everyone in the crowd, they should be happy right? They showed up to watch football, not to watch a giant pile of ****. Granted, the pile of **** was legal the first time around, so the result stood. But next tournament the teams seem to be doing the same thing, and this time there are rules against it. Are the fans who showed up to the farce supposed to have pity?
First of all AT isn't nowhere near sports/e-sports, and by looking at many previous ATs it never intended to be. We had many situations like this in past proving this (matches thrown/sold/outplayed), and CCP never intervened in past, and even said players should harden up, cause this is how EVE Online should look/feel like. Kinda hipocritic. |
Gabriel Kaile
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:02:00 -
[232] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:penifSMASH wrote:QQ more, chicken mcnublets I'm not surprised that you're so happy, We outplayed you on your own field even before AT matches started, you had bad chances to get 1st place in such conditions. I'm really sure you will win this one, but it won't change the fact that you were completely outspied by someone who learned spy mastery from you few years ago.
Wave your spacedick around some more, not everyone can see it. |
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
90
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:04:00 -
[233] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:penifSMASH wrote:QQ more, chicken mcnublets I'm not surprised that you're so happy, We outplayed you on your own field even before AT matches started, you had bad chances to get 1st place in such conditions. I'm really sure you will win this one, but it won't change the fact that you were completely outspied by someone who learned spy mastery from you few years ago.
sorry I can't hear your whining from my 3-time champions table |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
174
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:06:00 -
[234] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Again, for like the tenth time, you got clearence for only a portion of what you were doing. You did not mention that you were in the same corp on sisi, in a wh, practicing together with mixed teams/coms/fittings/mods
If you want to provide some evidence of THAT correspondence, i'll change my tune Testing against each other pretty much implies we do it in the same place. being in the same corp - is purely technical moment (like shared CEO of executor corp between trusted persons, because you can't have multiple characters fulfilling this role), it doesn't change anything regarding being entity or not. As you may know, we did it for corporate hangar access. Sreegs says it is a difference which matters, i see you're inclined to believe him. But formal reasoning leads to few conclusions: 1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics 2) He doesn't care so much about what's shown in tournament, he wants to waste participants efforts on something which is largely behind the scenes - and only then he will call it fair Or, as i previously voiced my opinion - he published opinion of the part of AT collective which is bitter because of AT IX finals.
You are now changing the criterion of what you are arguing, just pointing that out, but its fine.
There is a HUGE thick line between sparring with people and combining together, as a united entity. I simply cannot believe you cannot see the difference. Furthermore, the items you list are evidence of a unified team, not of simplifying things. Notice all of the we's in every thread. You guys are together, as one, doing the exact same thing, and getting punished for it, together, like a team.
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Don't belittle significance of lack of communication. It was primary reason of recent events resulting in hydra ban.
And please stop justifying that CCP are humans too and can make mistakes from time to time. Making mistake isn't a problem, handling it - is.
I am not belittling it, but it is not your point. This thread isn't a "call for CCP to answer their emails" its a call for you to get an exception to breaking the rules when you were only attempting to bend them.
To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Merdaneth
Defensores Fidei Curatores Veritatis Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:10:00 -
[235] - Quote
"We are testing in a wormhole because we don't want anyone else to get as much as the smallest glimpse of our setups and tactics, we are very secretive."
"Except of course for one other team who is allowed complete access to all of our setups and tactics and from which we have no secrets at all."
"Oh: the other team is completely independent from us of course."
It is not rocket science: any two (or more) teams who have no secrets from each other, but try to keep as much secrets as possible from other teams are basically one team with just a different alliance label.
It is also not rocket science that CCP would be likely to act if they noticed this behaviour after the fiasco of a finale last year. |
Vily
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:12:00 -
[236] - Quote
During the pre-entry stage, Goonswarm had a group that wanted to run a second team from within the alliance (WiDot) they had the means, the ability and the history to do so.
We asked them not to enter because the knew rules were very clear on what the consequences could be if we did so. As such we entered only one team.
When you play with fire, it is only yourself you can blame when you get bruned |
Beledia Ilphukiir
Proffessional Experts Group
38
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:12:00 -
[237] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Again, for like the tenth time, you got clearence for only a portion of what you were doing. You did not mention that you were in the same corp on sisi, in a wh, practicing together with mixed teams/coms/fittings/mods
If you want to provide some evidence of THAT correspondence, i'll change my tune Testing against each other pretty much implies we do it in the same place. being in the same corp - is purely technical moment (like shared CEO of executor corp between trusted persons, because you can't have multiple characters fulfilling this role), it doesn't change anything regarding being entity or not. As you may know, we did it for corporate hangar access. Sreegs says it is a difference which matters, i see you're inclined to believe him. But formal reasoning leads to few conclusions: 1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics 2) He doesn't care so much about what's shown in tournament, he wants to waste participants efforts on something which is largely behind the scenes - and only then he will call it fair Or, as i previously voiced my opinion - he published opinion of the part of AT collective which is bitter because of AT IX finals. Karl Planck wrote:While it is unfortunate there was a lack of communication, you were completely in the wrong for going ahead like you had a green light. And you are certainly not boo-hoo'ing CCP because of lack of email clarity (calling for a reformat of how CCP delegates information), you are trying to get a reverse decision when you should have known (and obviously did know) how you were operating could get you disqualified. Don't belittle significance of lack of communication. It was primary reason of recent events resulting in hydra ban. And please stop justifying that CCP are humans too and can make mistakes from time to time. Making mistake isn't a problem, handling it - is.
They tried to old and failed method of getting a GM "permission" by intentionally leaving out relevant points from their petition in an effort to secure a positive outcome to that petition from their perspective. They then proceeded with the obviously dubious activity and when caught, try to wave around their worthless petition ruling as a justification for their actions.
Nothing in their actions says to me they had a genuine intention of try to sort things out and play by the rules. Everything points out to trying to get around the intention of the rule, but still have some technical point to fall back on, if they can't get away with what they are doing. They intended to cheat, but thought the backup plan would allow them to continue in the tournament normal in the case CCP didn't agree with them. They were confident it would work, since they have a very high opinion about their own importance to the game. It didn't work.
CCP certainly could have used soft gloves and just stopped what they were planning by a warning them, but they also had justification to just ban them outright. I'm guessing CCP took their efforts to get around the rules as a giant FU and went: "F me? Oh no, no, no! FU!". Since CCP is actually the only party with the ultimate power concerning everything EVE related, it was a bad move to try to **** in their face and tell them it's raining. |
Merdaneth
Defensores Fidei Curatores Veritatis Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:14:00 -
[238] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote: 1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics
I'm sure there were many more sparring partners available that would have gladly joined your WH corp to easy the burden of their logistics. I guess you didn't want them?
If your are very picky about your sparring partners, but do share almost everything with those selected sparring partners, you should really think again about your definitions of sparring partners and competitors.
|
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
91
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:20:00 -
[239] - Quote
on the plus side, Garmon now can dedicate more time to losing Adrestias to brick squad |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:21:00 -
[240] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote:Karl Planck wrote:Again, for like the tenth time, you got clearence for only a portion of what you were doing. You did not mention that you were in the same corp on sisi, in a wh, practicing together with mixed teams/coms/fittings/mods
If you want to provide some evidence of THAT correspondence, i'll change my tune Testing against each other pretty much implies we do it in the same place. being in the same corp - is purely technical moment (like shared CEO of executor corp between trusted persons, because you can't have multiple characters fulfilling this role), it doesn't change anything regarding being entity or not. As you may know, we did it for corporate hangar access. Sreegs says it is a difference which matters, i see you're inclined to believe him. But formal reasoning leads to few conclusions: 1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics 2) He doesn't care so much about what's shown in tournament, he wants to waste participants efforts on something which is largely behind the scenes - and only then he will call it fair Or, as i previously voiced my opinion - he published opinion of the part of AT collective which is bitter because of AT IX finals. You are now changing the criterion of what you are arguing, just pointing that out, but its fine. There is a HUGE thick line between sparring with people and combining together, as a united entity. I simply cannot believe you cannot see the difference. Furthermore, the items you list are evidence of a unified team, not of simplifying things. Notice all of the we's in every thread. You guys are together, as one, doing the exact same thing, and getting punished for it, together, like a team.
The line is blurry because the most troublesome forms of collusion are the hardest ones to prove. People have cited the importance of theory crafting and setups, but CCP cannot monitor private out of game emails or voice chats. Two alliances could be sitting in a private server somewhere talking up a storm and CCP would never know. Also, given that sparring is allowed, someone will see the killmails somewhere. Fittings and tech will be released simply through the very action of sparring. Presumably an Alliance that spars more is more prepared. Larger Alliance have more members and deeper wallets to do this internally. It is not unreasonable for smaller alliances to seek out external sparring partners.
What does joining together on a test server prove? Nothing. We already knew they had a close working relationship and we also knew that we could not black out their out of game communications. It was admitted earlier that Goons and Test were sparring against each other. Do we have any doubts that if they face each other they will both fight as hard as they can?
CCP wanted an excuse to punish Hydra/Outbreak so they created a pretext to revenge themselves. |
|
Gobbins
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:23:00 -
[241] - Quote
another lonely friday for Jalebi |
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
174
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:24:00 -
[242] - Quote
Merdaneth wrote:Karl Planck wrote: 1) We were banned just because we were easining burden of logistics
I'm sure there were many more sparring partners available that would have gladly joined your WH corp to easy the burden of their logistics. I guess you didn't want them? If your are very picky about your sparring partners, but do share almost everything with those selected sparring partners, you should really think again about your definitions of sparring partners and competitors.
I didn't write that btw To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Hroya
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:26:00 -
[243] - Quote
Wouldnt be eve without drama, but geesh you're pushing it with this one.
Clearly some mistakes have been made in both giving information and implementing said information. For a showcase like AT you could take a step back a bit and not let everyones personall feelings about metagaming and assorted shenannigans get in the way. And surely holding a grudge over last years AT final is ... a long grudge i tell you.
Like some one else said, devs etc arent robots, as players we are all humans and humans make mistakes. Grow up and admit a mistake and help solve the situation. That's what grown ups do.
Maybe you could settle on a middleground here. Let them compete at the AT, but let them only field 1 combined team or none.
You go your corridor but. |
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
153
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:49:00 -
[244] - Quote
Kratisto wrote: So Germany and Spain decide for the Euro final they want the score to be 8-9 in Spains favor. The Germans come in and score 8 goals with apparent ease, and then stand about as Spain then returns the favor. They spend the last 20 minutes shaking hands and congratulating themselves about how awesome they are to reach 1 and 2 and share the prize money 50/50.
The fans and everyone in the crowd, they should be happy right?
No, the fans shouldn't be happy. But, in AT9, that was within the rules. There's precedent regarding fall matches in the past, it just hadn't happened in the final so far.
Let's do another football analogy.
For the next world cup, FIFA rules that individual states are not allowed to enter the world cup.
England and Scotland, both being countries in the UK ask for clarification by contacting FIFA twice, without a response. Later, Scotland asks a lesser FIFA official if they're permitted to train together, as long as they enter as separate entities. They receive an okay.
England and Scotland fly to the same training camp. At the training camp, they practice together, occasionally swapping a player or two. The two teams share accomodations, eat together, play together and hang out after practice together.
Then comes the day to officially enter the draw for the world cup. Both England and Scotland are excited, until the point when the FIFA general states that England and Scotland are being banned from the world cup, as they are two individual states within the UK, and in the training camp acted as a single entity.
The thing is, everyone who knows football know that England and Scotland are separate entities as far as football is concerned. They have their own leagues, their own national teams, but due to what happened at the training camp, they are considered to be a single entity in the eyes of FIFA. |
Denarus Arran
ANZAC ALLIANCE Executive Outcomes
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 18:58:00 -
[245] - Quote
Break the rules get banned. Next topic. PEWPEWPEW |
Uggs
Imperial Technology
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 19:08:00 -
[246] - Quote
What I don't understand is, Hydra/0utbreak claim to have spent a ton of time preparing for the tournament, but apparently it was too much work to spend an extra 30 mins to set up a second pos to keep the 2 corps separate. I do think they should still be allowed one team though, but they could of easily had both in if they weren't dumb. |
gazarsgo
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 19:16:00 -
[247] - Quote
Kratisto wrote:What I find most amusing about this thread is Outbreak. and Hydra attempting to lawyer their way into the tournament. That works in civil courts with laws and rules, and accountability of judges.
What's funny is that they would lose. From Oliver Wendell Holmes, on the fundamentals of Western legal practice:
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it. The principle cannot be explained b-â -òay-ûng that we are not only commanded to abstain from certain actsGÇÜ but also to f-ûnd out that we are commanded. For if there were such a second command, it is ver-â clear that the guilt of failing to obe-â it would bear no proportion to that of di-òobey-ûng the principal command if knownGÇÜ yet the fa-ûlure to know would receive the same punishment as the failure to obe-â the principal law. Public polic-â -òacr-ûfices the individual to the general good. It is desirable that the burden of all should be equalGÇÜ but -ût is still more desirable to put an end to robber-â and murder. For the most partGÇÜ the purpose of the cr-ûminal law is onl-â to induce external conformit-â to rule. Considering this purel-â external purpose of the law together with the fact that it is read-â to -òacr-ûfice the individual so far as necessary in order to accomplish that purposeGÇÜ we can see more read-ûl-â than before that the actual degree of personal guilt involved in an-â particular tran-ògress-ûon cannot be the only elementGÇÜ -ûf it is an element at all, in the liabilit-â incurred. It is found in the conception of the average man, the man of ordinar-â intelligence and rea-òonable prudence. L-ûability is said to arise out of such conduct as would be blameworthy in him. But he is an ideal beingGÇÜ represented by the jury when they are appealed to, and h-ûs conduct is an external or objective standard when applied to an-â given individual. That individual ma-â be morally without -òta-ûn, because he has less than ordinary intelligence or prudence. But he is required to have those qualities at his peril. If he has them, he will not, as a general rule, incur liability without blameworthiness."
TL;DR:
None of us read the laws on the books, but we abide by the law anyway because we know that certain conduct is not acceptable in society. Holmes suggests that those people who read the rules and ask questions about the interpretations of those rules are only trying to break those rules. Instead, the most morally praiseworthy individuals go about their business with no knowledge of the specifics of the law, but merely conform to how a reasonable person in society would behave. The implication of this theory is a principle deeply rooted in our legal system: mistake of law (i.e., misinterpreting the meaning of a law) is generally no excuse against guilt for breaking that law.
Hydra-Outbreak have committed such a mistake of law - they misinterpreted the meaning of the rule against B teams. In the real world, in almost all cases, a mistake of law still results in a conviction.
There are a number of exceptions against the general rule against mistake of law. The only relevant exception for Hydra-Outbreak is the reliance exception: If the individual has relied on an official interpretation of the law, then mistake of law can be a good defense against guilt. Importantly, "official interpretation" means something very specific in legal terminology. So, if I go to the district attorney and ask clarification on a law, and the district attorney (DA) gives me a piece of paper with his signature on it saying that my behavior is OK, and then I do the behavior that turns out to be illegal, I am still not off the hook. The DA's memo is not considered an official interpretation! Rather, an official interpretation must be published, in either a high court decision or a publicly-available publication by the agency in charge of enforcement. In the Hydra-Outbreak situation, the GM correspondence is not an official interpretation, since a random GM's petition response is more analogous to a DA's memo than to an official published opinion by an executive agency.
TL;DR of the TL;DR: Hydra-Outbreak were not reasonable in their reliance on a Senior GM's statement when Hydra-Outbreak knew or should have known that a Senior GM's statement was not endorsed by the tournament organizers. Even if they try to "lawyer" their way into the tournament, their argument would still lose.
|
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
154
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 19:28:00 -
[248] - Quote
Ah, but in real life there are also so many laws that no one can be expected to know them all. Many laws in existence also are severely outdated, or so broad that they can be interpreted to mean anything.
Many law enforcement officials, as well as prosecutors have also been known to abuse this fact in order to prosecute people for breaking an obscure law when they've wanted a conviction but was unable to convict for a more reasonable crime. |
Hroya
49
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 19:33:00 -
[249] - Quote
Sad thing is, without a mature compromise to the situation, afer the tournament the new champion will not recieve the praises they should get because the forums will be crowded with posts like:
"But the former champion and runner up were banned and they would have beaten you" "The competition was less then last year" "It was rigged" etc etc
It's a shame really but i think that is what it will be like. You go your corridor but. |
gazarsgo
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 19:34:00 -
[250] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Ah, but in real life there are also so many laws that no one can be expected to know them all. Many laws in existence also are severely outdated, or so broad that they can be interpreted to mean anything.
Many law enforcement officials, as well as prosecutors have also been known to abuse this fact in order to prosecute people for breaking an obscure law when they've wanted a conviction but was unable to convict for a more reasonable crime.
And you raise an important point - the breadth of prosecutorial discretion. Since the Hydra-Outbreak ban does not offend any notion of fair play or substantial justice, CCP as the prosecutor and judge can do pretty much whatever they want. |
|
Ohh Yeah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
68
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:26:00 -
[251] - Quote
Sorry spacefriend, that wasn't a TL;DR |
Ayeson
Hard Knocks Inc.
36
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:30:00 -
[252] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:on the plus side, Garmon now can dedicate more time to losing Adrestias to brick squad
This is what i came here for Ask me about Rengas-dar, HRDKX's Most recent, groundbreaking, game-changing, wormhole-collapsing research endeavour. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
729
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:49:00 -
[253] - Quote
MrWhitei God wrote:ScoRpS wrote:We had neither 0utbreak or Hydra on the roster. We didn't get picked and as such we never had either team a secured spot in the tournament. So technically no we didnt but our intentions were to field both teams. Thats alot of "We" for two separate entities
hahaha true. This is so obviously a big lie by the OP. Sorry I'm not buying it. Hydra is suddenly honorable and would never do anything underhanded?
Sorry but be proud of your history Hydra, don't try to act Innocent. Why dust 514 is on Console and not PCBattle field 3 salesXbox 360: 2.2 millionPlayStation 3: 1.5 millionPC: 500,000 |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
729
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 20:52:00 -
[254] - Quote
Hroya wrote:Sad thing is, without a mature compromise to the situation, afer the tournament the new champion will not recieve the praises they should get because the forums will be crowded with posts like:
"But the former champion and runner up were banned and they would have beaten you" "The competition was less then last year" "It was rigged" etc etc
It's a shame really but i think that is what it will be like.
But ti's on video, no one outside of Hydra is/or was looking forward to seeing them in the final. They lost and then the other team gave it to them. Which is in the spirit or eve, but to make it so obvious, it was a lazy rush job. And now they've done it again, at least from my point of view. And got caught.
Last year the two alliances fighting in the final were the same alliance. Everyone knew at the time, but we figured they would still give a good fight. And as there are only 64 spots, I hope Hydra gets back in, but as just themselves. No more. becuase they suck at rigging matches, totally un entertaining. Why dust 514 is on Console and not PCBattle field 3 salesXbox 360: 2.2 millionPlayStation 3: 1.5 millionPC: 500,000 |
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:00:00 -
[255] - Quote
ATX will miss Hydra, but they got caught... blatantly. And now sing the forum tune of its not our fault.
No ones buying it, your leadership made a serious serious error, live with it.
As a note to the explanation... if committing fraud, you do not get a beat cop (gm in this case) who doesn't have a clue to validate what your doing. Specially when a judge (ccp) has already made it clear that your actions specifically in a previous case were unacceptable.
Many were actually shocked you weren't just banned from this year anyway because of last years final, and then you tried this anyway... bad call.
Hydra pvp = awesome sauce of the highest caliber. Hydra leadership = arrogant slimy and in denial. |
Luis Graca
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:09:00 -
[256] - Quote
wondering what will kil2 answer in ATX to the question "what do you this of this year tournament?" |
Peekabooy
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:28:00 -
[257] - Quote
Luis Graca wrote:wondering what will kil2 answer in ATX to the question "what do you this of this year tournament?" Obviously all of the commentators are going to be forbidden to mention this situation in any shape or form. |
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
155
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:50:00 -
[258] - Quote
Makkz wrote:No ones buying it, your leadership made a serious serious error, live with it.
Actually, if you read through this thread, you'll see that there are quite a few people who believe Hydra's story, or at the very least that Hydra's story is a plausible explanation given the circumstances and evidence that have so far been presented. |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
638
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:56:00 -
[259] - Quote
This is starting to remind me of the Aperture Harmonics wormhole exploits awhile back, and mainly the interaction between the GM's and Aperture prior to the whole situation blowing up in their faces. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
509
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:59:00 -
[260] - Quote
Actually. If it all were as blatantly obvious as certain people / devs want it to look like then:
-Why do other people don't see the blatantly obvious. -Why does it breath "damagecontrol" all over it that Devs even break EULA rules one sided. -Why the attmepts to remove certain replies.
It all reeks like a cover up for a revenge action towards Hydra / Outbreak and we can't discuss about it because .....
CCP went from Rebel company to Rebel without a direction over the years.
|
|
LooknSee
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 21:59:00 -
[261] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Actually, if you read through this thread, you'll see that there are quite a few people who believe Hydra's story, or at the very least that Hydra's story is a plausible explanation given the circumstances and evidence that have so far been presented.
There were a lot of people that bought into the story that Hydra was taking donations to purchase supercaps a year or two ago too. They're called, kindly, "suckers."
|
Willl Adama
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
187
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:05:00 -
[262] - Quote
Oh well, I was tired of eve anyway Hi |
Luis Graca
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:06:00 -
[263] - Quote
Willl Adama wrote:Oh well, I was tired of eve anyway
what no more vids? |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Angry Mustellid Iron Oxide.
170
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:12:00 -
[264] - Quote
Hroya wrote: "But the former champion and runner up were banned and they would have beaten you"
Why shouldn't they get that? if PL had been kicked out last time don't you think that's what everyone would be saying about Hydra?
I'm not even a hydra fan in the slightest, I'm just a fan of EVE and this goes completely against it, especially when officials don't even admit their mistake and would rather make cu- erm.. pathetic forum jabs.
|
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
511
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:13:00 -
[265] - Quote
Don't you just love that Internal Affairs is only for ingame behaviour of Devs, GM's and other affiliated people but when it comes to forum moderation and such the whole thing gets evaluated by the same people who decided in the first place.
|
Altaen
Lutinari Syndicate Electus Matari
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:18:00 -
[266] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Time Funnel wrote:
If you are a competitor you are probably happy that the strongest 2-headed monster (swidt? (hydra) ) has been removed from the pool. .
With the exception of darkside, who had to change their pants, I dont think anyone in the AT agrees with this decision. Then you probably don't want to win.
Or, maybe they want to win against the best. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:40:00 -
[267] - Quote
Altaen wrote:Time Funnel wrote:Michael Harari wrote:Time Funnel wrote:
If you are a competitor you are probably happy that the strongest 2-headed monster (swidt? (hydra) ) has been removed from the pool. .
With the exception of darkside, who had to change their pants, I dont think anyone in the AT agrees with this decision. Then you probably don't want to win. Or, maybe they want to win against the best.
Test Alliance, Best Alliance
o7m8 |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
143
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 22:58:00 -
[268] - Quote
Oh and I love how everyone refers to the two independent alliances as "Hydra".
Outbreak is clearly the dominant force. |
Slutty Underwear
The Assassin's Creed Zombie Ninja Space Bears
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:08:00 -
[269] - Quote
All I can say about this is "Poor Show CCP. Poor Show indeed".
To ban 3 Alliances for (Not proven) Meta-gaming in a game that is built on meta-gaming bad. But not only do you ban 3 Alliances for meta-gaming. You let one off (PL) for no good reason. All 4 of them should be in or all 4 should be out. It is very unfair for the rest that PL are in and the rest not. Your rule say no "Team B's". PL had 1 and you still let them in. Shame on you CCP. Shame. Hryda and Outbreak did not (1") have a "B Team". They had 2 "A Teams" practising. CCP you have mad a right HASH of this.
As a side note. I ******* hated the last match of last years Alliance Tournament. It ******* sucked ass to watch. But that is when I fully realised how this game is played. I Have no love for Hydra or Outbreak. I Do have a soft spot for PL. Don't know why. But I do. (Love shooting at their Tect Pos's in Black Rise). But to ban for bullshit reasons just so you can hope not to have the same repeated as last year is madness. Do you really think the Meta-game will not carry on? In fact, There is no way to really stop it. Do you really think "CFC" don't have a "Team B" or 2 in the Alliance Tournament? Do you really think PL don't have one hidden away? Hell take a look at this and tell me it is not imposable.
http://www.evenews24.com/2012/05/11/garths-trek-pay-to-win/
1" - But I maybe very wrong as I have no clue if they did or not
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
178
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:30:00 -
[270] - Quote
Slutty Underwear wrote:All I can say about this is "Poor Show CCP. Poor Show indeed". To ban 3 Alliances for (Not proven) Meta-gaming in a game that is built on meta-gaming bad. But not only do you ban 3 Alliances for meta-gaming. You let one off (PL) for no good reason. All 4 of them should be in or all 4 should be out. It is very unfair for the rest that PL are in and the rest not. Your rule say no "Team B's". PL had 1 and you still let them in. Shame on you CCP. Shame. Hryda and Outbreak did not (1") have a "B Team". They had 2 "A Teams" practising. CCP you have mad a right HASH of this. As a side note. I ******* hated the last match of last years Alliance Tournament. It ******* sucked ass to watch. But that is when I fully realised how this game is played. I Have no love for Hydra or Outbreak. I Do have a soft spot for PL. Don't know why. But I do. (Love shooting at their Tect Pos's in Black Rise). But to ban for bullshit reasons just so you can hope not to have the same repeated as last year is madness. Do you really think the Meta-game will not carry on? In fact, There is no way to really stop it. Do you really think "CFC" don't have a "Team B" or 2 in the Alliance Tournament? Do you really think PL don't have one hidden away? Hell take a look at this and tell me it is not imposable. http://www.evenews24.com/2012/05/11/garths-trek-pay-to-win/1" - But I maybe very wrong as I have no clue if they did or not
read up on this thread fool, CCP is not at fualt To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
|
Karl Planck
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
178
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:34:00 -
[271] - Quote
Pallidum Treponema wrote:Makkz wrote:No ones buying it, your leadership made a serious serious error, live with it.
Actually, if you read through this thread, you'll see that there are quite a few people who believe Hydra's story, or at the very least that Hydra's story is a plausible explanation given the circumstances and evidence that have so far been presented.
thats not quite right. Its more that they thought the MIGHT be in the ok and decided to go ahead LIKE THEY HAD THE OK To all everyone concerned over the fairness involving the H/O disqualification https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113351&find=unread |
Tyzzara
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:47:00 -
[272] - Quote
Tyzzara wrote:/me sighs
Having a rule that essentially allows CCP to pick and choose teams at their leisure sucks.
However, it is a necessary evil. The challenge to create written rules which would address AT9 problems is not realistic. Unless they are going to single people out and/or create a gridlock mess of fine print to be interpreted by anyone with an opinion.
v0v
Nobody wants to see two 'friends' meet up for the final match and then count seconds while watching the clock. That match sucked. Bad. (attempting to ensure no repeat of AT9 final is damn difficult here folks due to the level of meta-gaming, etc...)
The way they are doing it 'clean-slate' is the only choice out of several poor options to choose from.
I think CCP is handling it as well as can be expected.
/me waves hand at others
Continue...
I find it humorous that the same people who were able to entirely manipulate last years event are now screaming from the rooftops about CCP decision. You should have applied some creative thought to specifically making it look like two separate teams from the start. You guys knew the situation. You knew all eyes were on you.
Then you Derped. You are all intelligent enough to know that you should have been more pro-active to ensure CCP had no reason to do this.
Now we all pay the price. Champs are not even in the running. Hmmph....
Life... there is nothing like it. I mean... you can't make this **** up. AFK Time Zone |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:51:00 -
[273] - Quote
Slutty Underwear wrote:All I can say about this is "Poor Show CCP. Poor Show indeed".
To ban 3 Alliances for (Not proven) Meta-gaming in a game that is built on meta-gaming bad. But not only do you ban 3 Alliances for meta-gaming. You let one off (PL) for no good reason. All 4 of them should be in or all 4 should be out. It is very unfair for the rest that PL are in and the rest not. Your rule say no "Team B's". PL had 1 and you still let them in. Shame on you CCP. Shame. Hryda and Outbreak did not (1") have a "B Team". They had 2 "A Teams" practising. CCP you have mad a right HASH of this.
I agree CCP could've handled all this a lot better, I don't agree that PL had a B-team since I know Shamis was quite emphatic about wanting all their focus on a single team, but CCP have their own definitions and their own interpretations (and lack of intel obviously) CCP have no way of knowing what PL / hydra / 0utbreak are thinking or doing out of game so they can only base their decisions on apperances, hydrbreak were really stupid and failed horribly to make it look like they weren't breaking the rule, that's all there is to it really.
CFC is a coalition not an alliance so of course they have multiple teams, no PL don't have one hidden away, they want to win under their own name and rightly focus all their resources on doing so without risking getting banned for stupidity.
That link is to a completely unrealistic and pointless scenerio, no it's not impossible - yes it is ********. |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 23:54:00 -
[274] - Quote
That CCP trumpets how their poor permission system led to a spy disbanding an entire alliance while simultaneously decrying the meta-game in ATX(*) is simply silly.
Live by the SPA! die by the SPAI.
* Let ATX forever be known as ATX(*). Let the winner of ATX(*) be known as the winner(*) of ATX(*).
|
Zo'ha
Techno Miners
39
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 00:52:00 -
[275] - Quote
The way I see it as an outsider:
- asks intentionally ambiguous question (the petition) - gets an answer they are happy with and decides that they can do what they intended. - get banned from tournament for breaking the rules - poasts on forum taking the petition response out of context and claiming they are hard done by - community harvests tears
I dont think anyone doubts that 0utbreak/Hydra are separate entities on TQ under normal circumstances. But lets be honest here, the alliance tourney is not normal circumstances and they have proven in the past they work together.
Its their own stupid fault and they have nobody to blame but themselves. It was clear those rules were created so people didnt take the p1ss like last year, so what do you do? Oh yeah, log in to sisi and all join the same corp and share ships and fittings. DERPDERP |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 00:58:00 -
[276] - Quote
Zo'ha wrote:The way I see it as an outsider:
- asks intentionally ambiguous question (the petition) - gets an answer they are happy with and decides that they can do what they intended. - get banned from tournament for breaking the rules - poasts on forum taking the petition response out of context and claiming they are hard done by - community harvests tears
I dont think anyone doubts that 0utbreak/Hydra are separate entities on TQ under normal circumstances. But lets be honest here, the alliance tourney is not normal circumstances and they have proven in the past they work together.
Its their own stupid fault and they have nobody to blame but themselves. It was clear those rules were created so people didnt take the p1ss like last year, so what do you do? Oh yeah, log in to sisi and all join the same corp and share ships and fittings. DERPDERP
Why are you ignoring the multiple emails they sent directly to the AT team? |
Zo'ha
Techno Miners
39
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 01:08:00 -
[277] - Quote
If you were in the same position and didn't get a response would you just assume you could do what you wanted?
Personally, if I was investing the amount of time they are purporting to I would err on the side of caution, would you not? |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
107
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 01:24:00 -
[278] - Quote
Zo'ha wrote:If you were in the same position and didn't get a response would you just assume you could do what you wanted?
Personally, if I was investing the amount of time they are purporting to I would err on the side of caution, would you not?
Obviously they knew that the GM response wasnt sufficient, so they emailed the AT organizers several times.
No response. I would go with the only thing I heard from a staff member of CCP. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
52
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 06:41:00 -
[279] - Quote
Tyrrax Thorrk wrote:CFC is a coalition not an alliance so of course they have multiple teams
Yeah, *of course* - and being TQ allies they would never share fittings or conspire to metagame together in any way, right?
Karbox Delacroix wrote:That CCP trumpets how their poor permission system led to a spy disbanding an entire alliance while simultaneously decrying the meta-game in ATX(*) is simply silly.
Live by the SPA! die by the SPAI.
* Let ATX forever be known as ATX(*). Let the winner of ATX(*) be known as the winner(*) of ATX(*).
Indeed, this
Michael Harari wrote:Zo'ha wrote:If you were in the same position and didn't get a response would you just assume you could do what you wanted?
Personally, if I was investing the amount of time they are purporting to I would err on the side of caution, would you not? Obviously they knew that the GM response wasnt sufficient, so they emailed the AT organizers several times. No response. I would go with the only thing I heard from a staff member of CCP.
And this. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
52
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 07:02:00 -
[280] - Quote
Gobbins wrote:I think CCP has been engaging in a completely new stance of community management.
The old days of "bro CCP" are gone and their new focus is on wider PR.
They have learned that individual alliances can be unfairly punished without that generating too much of a fuss: see the shitcanning of Mittens for example, other bans before that, and today this low blow they did on hydra.
I imagine they want to send a clear message: "mess with our public events (fanfest panel for mittens, AT finals for hydra) and consequences will never be the same" ; since they cannot control what players will do in a live event, and eve is full of trolls, their only way to deal with the problem is to make an example and hope it will act as a deterrent
This is a good post worth repeating btw. If you don't like the "new CCP" you should voice it ("New CCP" has masqueraded as something else after last summer shitstorms but here we see the make up failing) |
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
729
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 08:32:00 -
[281] - Quote
Raimo wrote:This is a good post worth repeating btw. If you don't like the "new CCP" you should voice it ("New CCP" has masqueraded as something else after last summer shitstorms but here we see the make up failing)
We get it Raimo you're mad.
But heres the thing:
You asked "Can 2 teams test against each other".
You were told yes.
If thats all you had done, you'd be fine, but you didn't do that did you?
Did you?
No, no you didn't.
Maybe you should have asked "Hey we're gona roll both teams into one for testing purposes on SiSi, is that cool?" and you would have gotten the answer you're getting now: No, no you can't.
Can you see the difference between what you did and what you should have done? Your team was the one that pissed off the tournament presenters last year, your team is the one that should have been making EXTRA sure you weren't doing anything to **** them off this year.
And no, writing misleading emails that leave out vital things like your intent to practice as one team and then acting even though those emails weren't answered by the proper people is not making EXTRA sure.
We get it, you're mad that you've been bounced, but I would say that we're all equally mad that you had the balls to even try what you were trying because a god damn drooling ****** lobotomized downs syndrome patient would have seen your ban coming a mile off.
|
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
514
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 10:00:00 -
[282] - Quote
If they ask if they can test against / with eachother on Sisi then what does the format matter? What happens on Sisi is / can be different from things on Tranqility.
If CCP can't even be bothered to pull their heads out of their arses and communicate then screw AT completely.
AT isn't about alliance against alliance anymore. It's about wallet versus wallet. And CCP needs their shiny AT toy to promo a game with but not letting a major part of that game actually seep through into the AT.
Let's put it blatantly clear.
CCP screwed up here big time. A simple communication effort of them would have resolved the whole matter easy. But like a little kid which still had a grudgematch open for last years AT they didn't bother and smashed their toys in anger and took it out on those bad bad Hydra / Outbreak people.
A Heretic spokesman keeps saying here how well deserved that was but the underlying message is actually " Damn lucky we got rid of 2 very impressive teams which makes it easier for us" Where the Goon brosefs stance is was already clear, no need to waste any words on them.
There are so many solutions which would have been way more elegant or diplomatic but CCP chose to take none of those solutions. They stomp their feet, break their own rules to get the message through because ofcourse they can break them at a whim and reinforce them in the same breath again. We call that childish behaviour where we enforce a rule which only the rulemaker can break.
And the best part is that talking about it get's either made impossible by locks or simply ignoring people up to post deletion and even singlesided rule enforcement.
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 10:09:00 -
[283] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: because a god damn drooling ****** lobotomized downs syndrome patient would have seen your ban coming a mile off.
Ah, a show of character, nice. You're kind of special, aren't you?
And no, I'm not particularly mad. I was never going to be a big part of the team this year. To me this is more a question of "FFS will the CCP Goon get away with *ANYTHING*?"
Killer Gandry wrote:
Let's put it blatantly clear.
CCP screwed up here big time. A simple communication effort of them would have resolved the whole matter easy. But like a little kid which still had a grudgematch open for last years AT they didn't bother and smashed their toys in anger and took it out on those bad bad Hydra / Outbreak people.
A Heretic spokesman keeps saying here how well deserved that was but the underlying message is actually " Damn lucky we got rid of 2 very impressive teams which makes it easier for us" Where the Goon brosefs stance is was already clear, no need to waste any words on them.
There are so many solutions which would have been way more elegant or diplomatic but CCP chose to take none of those solutions. They stomp their feet, break their own rules to get the message through because ofcourse they can break them at a whim and reinforce them in the same breath again. We call that childish behaviour where we enforce a rule which only the rulemaker can break.
And the best part is that talking about it get's either made impossible by locks or simply ignoring people up to post deletion and even singlesided rule enforcement.
...And yes, this is quite clear. |
Killer Gandry
V I R I I Ineluctable.
518
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 10:11:00 -
[284] - Quote
Don't you mean CCP GoonS, as in plural.
|
Kyang Tia
Matari Exodus
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:04:00 -
[285] - Quote
I really dno't want to get into this discussion, since it is getting inceasingly pointless.
Just one thing: Hydra and Outbreak members, you have my highest respect for being among the best PvPers in this game. You may have screwed up the finals of AT9, but then again, the whole tourney before that would not have been half as entertaining without you. Without the best, AT10 is probably going to be a somewhat boring affair. You will be missed. Fly safe. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:05:00 -
[286] - Quote
Kyang Tia wrote:I really dno't want to get into this discussion, since it is getting inceasingly pointless.
Just one thing: Hydra and Outbreak members, you have my highest respect for being among the best PvPers in this game. You may have screwed up the finals of AT9, but then again, the whole tourney before that would not have been half as entertaining without you. Without the best, AT10 is probably going to be a somewhat boring affair. You will be missed. Fly safe.
o7 and thanks.
|
Edenmain
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:17:00 -
[287] - Quote
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1429
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:26:00 -
[288] - Quote
Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
56
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:41:00 -
[289] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.
Sorry CCP Sreegs (I did promise to post less) but I'm quite fascinated by this new somethingawful.com version of CCP. "Tears", "spewing", "(U) mad" are a new sight from people basically trying to sell us their product... But it seems to suit you and the powers that be, carry on. |
Edenmain
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 11:57:00 -
[290] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.
I not particularly "Mad" I've not lost anything of any value, lost the chance to again participate in the tourney maybe and maybe win some pixelated ship and/or isk.
You on the otherhand seem to have lost any credibility with some very old EVE gamers, alienated a vast majority of the EVE public and devalued the Alliance Tournament on it's 10th anniversay.
I think I'm losing the "who's maddest" contest. |
|
Ravelin Eb
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:16:00 -
[291] - Quote
Edenmain wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. I not particularly "Mad" I've not lost anything of any value, lost the chance to again participate in the tourney maybe and maybe win some pixelated ship and/or isk. You on the otherhand seem to have lost any credibility with some very old EVE gamers, alienated a vast majority of the EVE public and devalued the Alliance Tournament on it's 10th anniversay. I think I'm losing the "who's maddest" contest.
You devalued the alliance tournament by deliberately breaking the rules(you know the one created to stop what you did last year), CCP are on the ball and caught you out, its your own fault that the tournament is 'devalued' at the loss of your teams. |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:18:00 -
[292] - Quote
Wow CCP...
First singlewindow inventory that doesn't work properly at all, in fact it's worse then it's predecessor.
AND EVERY FCUKING BODY ON SISI TOLD YOU NOT TOO. Then you go ahead and ban last years champions from even defending their hard won 1st spot?
No rules were broken so far, and with corp bookmarks being the most awesome thing you ever did for wormholes. I can understand why they'd rather be in one corp.
This is by far the most cocky move ever done, and I don't like it one bit.
Now PL has no competition at all.... |
Lemster
Disconnected. Choke Point
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:19:00 -
[293] - Quote
Edenmain wrote: alienated a vast majority of the EVE public and devalued the Alliance Tournament on it's 10th anniversay.
I think I'm losing the "who's maddest" contest.
If you believe that you speak for the vast majority of the EVE public then I think you may have pulled yourself back into the lead ;) |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:37:00 -
[294] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.
But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi. In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality.
You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate.
But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.
Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:39:00 -
[295] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi. In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality. You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate. But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.
Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.
:edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
280
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:43:00 -
[296] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi. In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality. You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate. But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both. Please tell me more about court I've never been in one. :edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow. Screegs you cant win againts trolls |
Dr Robertson
ImpeviA
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:44:00 -
[297] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.
lulz, some1 is very mad here :D' Keep good posting, lose more in eyes of community, GJ
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:44:00 -
[298] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.
Please tell me more about court I've never been in one. :edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.
Please don't ignore the bolded underline line. Ignored problems don't magicly vanish. |
Klown Walk
Fat People Lag IRL
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:45:00 -
[299] - Quote
Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:46:00 -
[300] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.
Please tell me more about court I've never been in one. :edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow. Please don't ignore the bolded underline line. Ignored problems don't magicly vanish.
Bolding and underlining don't magicly make words relevant. Read the stickies. They're not bolded and underlined but they do explain the situation! "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:47:00 -
[301] - Quote
Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?
hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:48:00 -
[302] - Quote
A lot of reference to the many letters sent to AT people for clarity, perhaps you should be thinking in other terms.
CCP probably got those letters and it simply reaffirmed what they thought, and all those letters were just further proof of what hydra et all had planned. Obviously we don't know the content of the letters but from what we've seen i bet CCP read them as this.
Dear CCP,
We in Hydra are blatantly breaking the rules again, you know those rules everyone knows were brought in because of us, a gm said its ok so were going to carry on anyway, thats ok right?
Hydra |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:50:00 -
[303] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.
Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned.
Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now.
Quote:Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.
And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:51:00 -
[304] - Quote
Makkz wrote:A lot of reference to the many letters sent to AT people for clarity, perhaps you should be thinking in other terms.
CCP probably got those letters and it simply reaffirmed what they thought, and all those letters were just further proof of what hydra et all had planned. Obviously we don't know the content of the letters but from what we've seen i bet CCP read them as this.
Dear CCP,
We in Hydra are blatantly breaking the rules again, you know those rules everyone knows were brought in because of us, a gm said its ok so were going to carry on anyway, thats ok right?
Hydra
Pretty sure the letters everyone keeps harping about were posted here somewhere. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Klown Walk
Fat People Lag IRL
90
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:51:00 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.
You could have told them not to practice together at all since you made the rule after what they did last year. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:51:00 -
[306] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned. Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now. Quote:Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances. And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule.
You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!
"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1433
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:52:00 -
[307] - Quote
Klown Walk wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. You could have told them not to practice together at all since you made the rule after what they did last year.
Sure could have if that was illegal. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
57
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:52:00 -
[308] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.
"I hope this helps" added to "drivel", "tears", "spewing", "(U) mad". Fascinating watching a "forum suicide" really. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
280
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:54:00 -
[309] - Quote
Raimo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. "I hope this helps" added to "drivel", "tears", "spewing", "(U) mad". Fascinating watching a "forum suicide" really. And he is keeping his own score how sweet. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
448
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:54:00 -
[310] - Quote
Raimo wrote:Fascinating watching a "forum suicide" really.
it sure is, your meltdown is quite the spectacle to watch eh |
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:55:00 -
[311] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned. Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now. Quote:Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances. And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule. You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close! You're probably the biggest troll of us all Sreegs. But the only thing you did was crush my expectation to see how Hydra was going to fare in this new AT.
Genuinly dissappointed with CCP in general now. I can't believe how happy I was when crucible got released. And now it's back to ye olde CCP with no regards for playerbase, unified inventory being the perfect example from that.
Thank you for ruining my viewing pleasure of ATX, and taking out what probably would have been the most fun fights to watch. |
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:57:00 -
[312] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi. In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality. You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate. But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both. Please tell me more about court I've never been in one. :edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.
I've read the post, and it seams to me that you implying that being part of the same Alliance on SiSi is why you concluded that Hydra/OB are working as one team. But if they had stayed separate on SiSi and done the same thing that would be alright.
You are also pointing out that you can not predict the future, I agree with you that is impossible. But I also find it impossible to read minds. As the rule about A and B teams are vague at best and reading your mind as to what constitutes "working as one team" is. Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.
On the other part you were willing to open a dialog with both RvB and PL to make sure they did not get banned over some technicality but were unable to do so with Hydra and OB could be an oversight on your part and should be admitted and attempts should be made to amend this.
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:03:00 -
[313] - Quote
And Sreegs did you read this article: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/24/internet-spaceships-are-serious-business
It was posted on EvE Online's Facebook a few days ago. When I read that article I thought that's exactly what eve is like and that makes it unique.
I don't know if it was your sole decision to ban Hydra/OB, or if other people were involved in the making. But I bet you were one of the higher ups in that equasion, and choices like the one made here.
Banning both teams instead of one, such choices make noone happy but the worst of trolls (and goonplayers somehow).
I like EVE very much, because there is no other MMO out there that keeps fascinating me this much. But sometimes I think, you guys don't know what your doing.
It just makes no sense to any logical, objective, observant. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
448
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:03:00 -
[314] - Quote
Kalvunia IV wrote:Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.
the great thing about rules is that they leave a lot of wiggle room for interpretation
for instance, "they did the same thing last year" eh |
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:07:00 -
[315] - Quote
They didn't need to open a dialogue, they had plenty of evidence provided by the people involved, proving they were working together.
AT isn't EVE that has been true since its conception, CCP had evidence proving that Hydra and ally were doing exactly what happened last year, all of the letters almost constantly refer to the hydra/OB group as a "we".
As put before I'm with many that ATX will miss hydra they truly are top notch pvpers, of the highest caliber, but they were clearly breaking the rules that were brought in because of there actions last year, I think this tiny pre 20 page thread shows that this is NOT that big a deal to the majority of EVE players, its definitely no threadnaught. |
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:08:00 -
[316] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Kalvunia IV wrote:Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team. the great thing about rules is that they leave a lot of wiggle room for interpretation for instance, "they did the same thing last year"
True. But what is eating at me is CCP's forthcoming attitude towards open dialog with RvB but almost no approach was made by CCP to Hydra/OB even after they tried to contact the AT team. |
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:10:00 -
[317] - Quote
Makkz wrote:
all of the letters almost constantly refer to the hydra/OB group as a "we".
Semantics is not proof of guilt in my book. |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
67
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:20:00 -
[318] - Quote
CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: |
ZONK DONKEY
Incestuous Cult of Paranoid Swamp People
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:25:00 -
[319] - Quote
I think the biggest problem here is that the Alliance tournament means so much to Hydra and Outbreak.
It's all they live for all year. This creates a problem, because they're no longer out there to fight the big wars, to make it mean something. I remember back when Outbreak used try and make it big, make the headlines; now they just to petty skirmishes
Unfortunately for the rest of the game, the prizes are so exclusive, while the measly tournament as a whole means so little to the whole EVE ecosystem.
The Alliance tournament to me, feels like:
1. Just a PR stunt 2. Something out of a theme park MMO, the Devs create and manage all content and rules so that everyone gets a fair go and all is fair.
EVE isn't supposed to be fair. Give the power back to the people, let the people organise the Alliance tournament, or have the people elect those who organise it, just like the CSM. Or cancel next year's one altogether, it's not a sandbox experience, it doesn't really need to exist any more. Or drastically reduce the prizes to something like a statue and some PLEXes and their names on a wall or something.
This tournament affects too much for something so (in contrast to other events in the game), petty.
I'm not hating on you guys, but if all year round, this is all Hydra and Outbreak live for any more, then I'm sorry, but your presence in New Eden is meaningless |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:27:00 -
[320] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!
To go further, I still have to see the rule where it says A-teams will also be banned. You never mention that you will also disqualify A-teams.
|
|
Kazruw Drol
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:38:00 -
[321] - Quote
Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.
In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. |
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:39:00 -
[322] - Quote
Hmmm
Attempt to stop ''B'' team metagaming, thats ok with me, leads to better pewpew imo whilst still allowing the other forms of tournament metagaming.
Forcibly stop one 'group' from entering multiple teams, thats cool too.
Ban that same group from entering completely, bearing in mind they are the previous winners, well known pvpers and a good team, not good, we want the best pvp teams, not 'the best of the rest'.
On another note, waffles (sniggwaffe) would LOVE to kick PL's ass in the tourney, seriously, no quarter would be given by either side.
We're too busy with D3, DayZ and continous BF3 Ownag3 to seriously contend in the tourney.
|
Karak Terrel
As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions
73
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 13:54:00 -
[323] - Quote
Seriously what did you expect? You killed the AT IX Finals for everyone with your multiteam strategy. It sucked!! It really really sucked!! And now you try to do it again and got caught.
If they had not removed you both we would see twice the amount of treads whining about why they let you both participate again and i would start the first one!
Whine more! I hope they don't get soft and change that decision!
And to all the people that try to argument with the sandbox. Confused much? This is an event not TQ, so as long as you can't get jumped with blob of supercaps during the match this has absolutely nothing to do with the sandbox. It is for entertainment and people like Hydra/Outbreak that ruin the experience for everyone else should be removed. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
297
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:03:00 -
[324] - Quote
Where is the rule that you can be banned for being in same corp/alliance on the test server... what happens on the test server has never before affected what happened on the real server... so that reason alone is very bad |
Donedy
Snuff Box
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:06:00 -
[325] - Quote
Why PL is not banned from AT X like Outbreak/Hydra considering they were team A of sniggwaffe?
Also, why do you consider "alliance tournament x random draw results" as valid, when you know that RED Overlord and RED federation were together and had two "papers" in the helmet?
Eating paper dont make a lottery more trustfull. ( http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=72777 )
Is that CCP make their rules a mess or I missed something? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:11:00 -
[326] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Klown Walk wrote:Why didn-¦t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them? hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps. Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned. Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now. Quote:Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances. And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule. You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close! You're probably the biggest troll of us all Sreegs. But the only thing you did was crush my expectation to see how Hydra was going to fare in this new AT. Genuinly dissappointed with CCP in general now. I can't believe how happy I was when crucible got released. And now it's back to ye olde CCP with no regards for playerbase, unified inventory being the perfect example from that. Thank you for ruining my viewing pleasure of ATX, and taking out what probably would have been the most fun fights to watch.
I'm pretty sure I usually blame the people responsible for wrongdoing when I get mad. I don't blame the prison. Hopefully this helps point your anger in the right direction. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:13:00 -
[327] - Quote
Kalvunia IV wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Edenmain wrote:
Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.
The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad. But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi. In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality. You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate. But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you. You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX. Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both. Please tell me more about court I've never been in one. :edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow. I've read the post, and it seams to me that you implying that being part of the same Alliance on SiSi is why you concluded that Hydra/OB are working as one team. But if they had stayed separate on SiSi and done the same thing that would be alright. You are also pointing out that you can not predict the future, I agree with you that is impossible. But I also find it impossible to read minds. As the rule about A and B teams are vague at best and reading your mind as to what constitutes "working as one team" is. Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team. On the other part you were willing to open a dialog with both RvB and PL to make sure they did not get banned over some technicality but were unable to do so with Hydra and OB could be an oversight on your part and should be admitted and attempts should be made to amend this.
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:14:00 -
[328] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:And Sreegs did you read this article: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/24/internet-spaceships-are-serious-businessIt was posted on EvE Online's Facebook a few days ago. When I read that article I thought that's exactly what eve is like and that makes it unique. I don't know if it was your sole decision to ban Hydra/OB, or if other people were involved in the making. But I bet you were one of the higher ups in that equasion, and choices like the one made here. What were you thinking? Banning both teams instead of one, such choices make noone happy but the worst of trolls (and goonplayers somehow). I like EVE very much, because there is no other MMO out there that keeps fascinating me this much. But sometimes I think, you guys don't know what your doing. It just makes no sense to any logical, objective, observant.
You can read my explanation in the stickied posts above. If that doesn't make sense to any logical, objective, or observant, whatever those are, then I apologize. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:15:00 -
[329] - Quote
Makkz wrote:They didn't need to open a dialogue, they had plenty of evidence provided by the people involved, proving they were working together.
AT isn't EVE that has been true since its conception, CCP had evidence proving that Hydra and ally were doing exactly what happened last year, all of the letters almost constantly refer to the hydra/OB group as a "we".
As put before I'm with many that ATX will miss hydra they truly are top notch pvpers, of the highest caliber, but they were clearly breaking the rules that were brought in because of there actions last year, I think this tiny pre 20 page thread shows that this is NOT that big a deal to the majority of EVE players, its definitely no threadnaught.
If you remove Hydra and outbreak from this forum there are less threads and this one is pretty tiny... oh it doesn't exist either. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:17:00 -
[330] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker:
If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:18:00 -
[331] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!
To go further, I still have to see the rule where it says A-teams will also be banned. You never mention that you will also disqualify A-teams.
Try reading the rule because we actually said we'd ban both teams. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:18:00 -
[332] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: You're probably the biggest troll of us all Sreegs. But the only thing you did was crush my expectation to see how Hydra was going to fare in this new AT.
Genuinly dissappointed with CCP in general now. I can't believe how happy I was when crucible got released. And now it's back to ye olde CCP with no regards for playerbase, unified inventory being the perfect example from that.
Thank you for ruining my viewing pleasure of ATX, and taking out what probably would have been the most fun fights to watch.
I'm pretty sure I usually blame the people responsible for wrongdoing when I get mad. I don't blame the prison. Hopefully this helps point your anger in the right direction.
If you want to go that way let's prosecute them in front of a jury of peers. Still need to see the rule where it states that A-teams will be disqualified aswell.
If you're so hung on to them, show me proof that they're were going to do this again. And that still doesn't give you the right to ban both divisions of what is, according to you/whoever made the decision one team. Because it's nowhere stated in the new or old rules |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:20:00 -
[333] - Quote
Kazruw Drol wrote:Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident.
Yes, banning a team from the tournament for continued wrongdoing is similar to developer scandals involving item creation. You clearly have a firm grasp on reality and are good with perspective. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:21:00 -
[334] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: You're probably the biggest troll of us all Sreegs. But the only thing you did was crush my expectation to see how Hydra was going to fare in this new AT.
Genuinly dissappointed with CCP in general now. I can't believe how happy I was when crucible got released. And now it's back to ye olde CCP with no regards for playerbase, unified inventory being the perfect example from that.
Thank you for ruining my viewing pleasure of ATX, and taking out what probably would have been the most fun fights to watch.
I'm pretty sure I usually blame the people responsible for wrongdoing when I get mad. I don't blame the prison. Hopefully this helps point your anger in the right direction. If you want to go that way let's prosecute them in front of a jury of peers. Still need to see the rule where it states that A-teams will be disqualified aswell. If you're so hung on to them, show me proof that they're were going to do this again. And that still doesn't give you the right to ban both divisions of what is, according to you/whoever made the decision one team. Because it's nowhere stated in the new or old rules
It's cute that you think we would do this but we never have and never will. You are wasting everyone's time including mine and your own. There is not, nor has there ever been implied, any democracy in the alliance tournament. Nor will there be. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:22:00 -
[335] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:Hmmm
Attempt to stop ''B'' team metagaming, thats ok with me, leads to better pewpew imo whilst still allowing the other forms of tournament metagaming.
Forcibly stop one 'group' from entering multiple teams, thats cool too.
Ban that same group from entering completely, bearing in mind they are the previous winners, well known pvpers and a good team, not good, we want the best pvp teams, not 'the best of the rest'.
On another note, waffles (sniggwaffe) would LOVE to kick PL's ass in the tourney, seriously, no quarter would be given by either side.
We're too busy with D3, DayZ and continous BF3 Ownag3 to seriously contend in the tourney.
You missed the part where how good they are at spaceships don't exempt them from the rules. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
234
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:22:00 -
[336] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. PL had a b-team in AT9 and probably even earlier. During at9 they probably had even c-team, can't really remember.
They didn't **** up with finals, but it doesn't mean they were not 'cheating'. They were defeated mid-way before public could realize they had b-/c- teams. |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:22:00 -
[337] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't.
What facts did he miss?
The part where a Senior GM concluded it was ok to practice together?
The part where other teams practiced together?
The part where CVA was confused about the rules as well and had to ask for clarification because HYDRA & Outbreak were instantly banned?
The part where you left the rules intentionally vague so you could ban teams that you had a grudge against even though they had already attempted to get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:23:00 -
[338] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Where is the rule that you can be banned for being in same corp/alliance on the test server... what happens on the test server has never before affected what happened on the real server... so that reason alone is very bad
Read the stickies you seem to have missed them. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:24:00 -
[339] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. PL had a b-team in AT9 and probably even earlier. They didn't **** up with finals, but it doesn't mean they were not 'cheating'.
Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:25:00 -
[340] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. What facts did he miss? The part where a Senior GM concluded it was ok to practice together? The part where other teams practiced together? The part where CVA was confused about the rules as well and had to ask for clarification because HYDRA & Outbreak were instantly banned? The part where you left the rules intentionally vague so you could ban teams that you had a grudge against even though they had already attempted to get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team?
You can keep pretending you were banned for "practicing together" as much as you want. That was never the case. If I wanted you out you'd never have entered. Stop being obtuse. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
297
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:25:00 -
[341] - Quote
Sreeg you are really really bad at talking to the playerbase... you should find someone else to do it for you... you are acting like Hilmar did before he had to say sorry to everyone. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:27:00 -
[342] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Sreeg you are really really bad at talking to the playerbase... you should find someone else to do it for you... you are acting like Hilmar did before he had to say sorry to everyone.
ok "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:27:00 -
[343] - Quote
I think he's doing fine this time actually, at least he's communicating ) |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
234
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:28:00 -
[344] - Quote
nvm, my reading comprehension |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:29:00 -
[345] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!
To go further, I still have to see the rule where it says A-teams will also be banned. You never mention that you will also disqualify A-teams. Try reading the rule because we actually said we'd ban both teams. Vague wording at best, it's not even included in the FULL RULE LIST which you can find in the dev blog archive. Excerpt from devblog ( http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644 ):
Quote:These are some of the main rule changes which we feel will add to the overall betterment of Alliance Tournament. Below is the full rule list for your information.
Match Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ teams for bigger Alliances.
Where is it hidden ;-) |
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:30:00 -
[346] - Quote
Quote: None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't.
PL and RvB do not have a history of cheating, neither does Hydra and OB as they were well within the AT9 rules last year, as you CCP did state at the time. And Hydra and OB were not the only so called 'A and B' team, as you well know. They just happen to both as capable as the other as opposed to PL's B team.
And you state in your reply that you found it necessary to have have a conversation with PL and RvB, but it did not occur to you to have the same dialog with Hydra/OB? What is this, The Banana Bending Factory?
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:31:00 -
[347] - Quote
Yeah yesterday I too was trying to find where it said both teams would get banned, but I couldn't :< |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:31:00 -
[348] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. What facts did he miss? The part where a Senior GM concluded it was ok to practice together? The part where other teams practiced together? The part where CVA was confused about the rules as well and had to ask for clarification because HYDRA & Outbreak were instantly banned? The part where you left the rules intentionally vague so you could ban teams that you had a grudge against even though they had already attempted to get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team? You can keep pretending you were banned for "practicing together" as much as you want. That was never the case. If I wanted you out you'd never have entered. Stop being obtuse.
That may very well be, but the rules under which HYDRA & Outbreak were banned were so vague that anyone who practiced together could have been banned under them.
You clarified them after banning HYDRA & Outbreak that joining a single corp is the basis for which you are officially "ban-worthy"
Did you read the post by the CVA member yet? They were considering doing the very same thing because your rules were so vague that was impossible to tell if that was legal or not.
You have no way of saying "HYDRA & Outbreak should have seen this coming" when other teams considered doing the very same thing.
How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?!
This goes for YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT as well. Because the rule was so vague they had no way of knowing they were breaking them - this is not exclusive to HYDRA & Outbreak's situation, it goes for every team in the tournament.
If you had seen CVA & 4th doing the same thing we did prior to banning HYDRA & Outbreak would you have banned both their teams too? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:31:00 -
[349] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker.
Correct, but read this: CCP Sreegs wrote:Kalvunia IV wrote:I've read the post, and it seams to me that you implying that being part of the same Alliance on SiSi is why you concluded that Hydra/OB are working as one team. But if they had stayed separate on SiSi and done the same thing that would be alright.
You are also pointing out that you can not predict the future, I agree with you that is impossible. But I also find it impossible to read minds. As the rule about A and B teams are vague at best and reading your mind as to what constitutes "working as one team" is. Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.
On the other part you were willing to open a dialog with both RvB and PL to make sure they did not get banned over some technicality but were unable to do so with Hydra and OB could be an oversight on your part and should be admitted and attempts should be made to amend this.
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. I hope this helps but it probably won't. Here Sreegs claims he made an exclusion for RvB and PL because they were not 'cheating' previously, which is not true - in a sense if we apply new rule to previous ATs. If we don't, then Hydra/OB were not cheating either, and his claim is wrong again.
That's not what I said. Do not purposely misrepresent me. I am perfectly capable of speaking for myself and the quote you quoted doesn't say what you said it does. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:32:00 -
[350] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!
To go further, I still have to see the rule where it says A-teams will also be banned. You never mention that you will also disqualify A-teams. Try reading the rule because we actually said we'd ban both teams. Vague wording at best, it's not even included in the FULL RULE LIST which you can find in the dev blog archive. Excerpt from devblog ( http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644 ): Quote:These are some of the main rule changes which we feel will add to the overall betterment of Alliance Tournament. Below is the full rule list for your information.
Match Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ teams for bigger Alliances. Where is it hidden ;-)
Clearly not there nevermind let me unban them. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:33:00 -
[351] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker.
Correct, but read this: CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Kalvunia IV]stuff... Here Sreegs claims he made an exclusion for RvB and PL because they were not 'cheating' previously, which is not true - in a sense if we apply new rule to previous ATs. If we don't, then Hydra/OB were not cheating either, and his claim is wrong again.
My point is specifically towards previous tournaments, the sperging and quick unchecked replies with regard to this one are a different barrel of gunpowder and matches.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:34:00 -
[352] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. PL had a b-team in AT9 and probably even earlier. They didn't **** up with finals, but it doesn't mean they were not 'cheating'. Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker.
B team also tested 100% separately from the main team. it had its own fits and tactics. it never merged 2 teams/corps/alliances into one corp and hid in a worm hole.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:34:00 -
[353] - Quote
Kalvunia IV wrote:Quote: None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't.
PL and RvB do not have a history of cheating, neither does Hydra and OB as they were well within the AT9 rules last year, as you CCP did state at the time. And Hydra and OB were not the only so called 'A and B' team, as you well know. They just happen to both as capable as the other as opposed to PL's B team. And you state in your reply that you found it necessary to have have a conversation with PL and RvB, but it did not occur to you to have the same dialog with Hydra/OB? What is this, The Banana Bending Factory?
No conversation was had with PL. The conversation with RvB was about how to ensure that they were functioning properly for the tournament. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
234
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:35:00 -
[354] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:That's not what I said. Do not purposely misrepresent me. I am perfectly capable of speaking for myself and the quote you quoted doesn't say what you said it does. Okay, i missed word 'exactly'. So, cheating with slightly other methods (and still making B-team this year again, per your sticky thread) is a valid excuse? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:35:00 -
[355] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. What facts did he miss? The part where a Senior GM concluded it was ok to practice together? The part where other teams practiced together? The part where CVA was confused about the rules as well and had to ask for clarification because HYDRA & Outbreak were instantly banned? The part where you left the rules intentionally vague so you could ban teams that you had a grudge against even though they had already attempted to get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team? You can keep pretending you were banned for "practicing together" as much as you want. That was never the case. If I wanted you out you'd never have entered. Stop being obtuse. That may very well be, but the rules under which HYDRA & Outbreak were banned were so vague that anyone who practiced together could have been banned under them. You clarified them after banning HYDRA & Outbreak that joining a single corp is the basis for which you are officially "ban-worthy" Did you read the post by the CVA member yet? They were considering doing the very same thing because your rules were so vague that was impossible to tell if that was legal or not. You have no way of saying "HYDRA & Outbreak should have seen this coming" when other teams considered doing the very same thing. How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?! This goes for YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT as well. Because the rule was so vague they had no way of knowing they were breaking them - this is not exclusive to HYDRA & Outbreak's situation, it goes for every team in the tournament. If you had seen CVA & 4th doing the same thing we did prior to banning HYDRA & Outbreak would you have banned both their teams too?
Keep grasping buddy eventually you'll find something that sticks and we'll let you back in. Honest.
"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:36:00 -
[356] - Quote
Tappits wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. PL had a b-team in AT9 and probably even earlier. They didn't **** up with finals, but it doesn't mean they were not 'cheating'. Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker. B team also tested 100% separately from the main team. it had its own fits and tactics. it never merged 2 teams/corps/alliances into one corp and hid in a worm hole.
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:36:00 -
[357] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. What facts did he miss? The part where a Senior GM concluded it was ok to practice together? The part where other teams practiced together? The part where CVA was confused about the rules as well and had to ask for clarification because HYDRA & Outbreak were instantly banned? The part where you left the rules intentionally vague so you could ban teams that you had a grudge against even though they had already attempted to get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team? You can keep pretending you were banned for "practicing together" as much as you want. That was never the case. If I wanted you out you'd never have entered. Stop being obtuse. That may very well be, but the rules under which HYDRA & Outbreak were banned were so vague that anyone who practiced together could have been banned under them. You clarified them after banning HYDRA & Outbreak that joining a single corp is the basis for which you are officially "ban-worthy" Did you read the post by the CVA member yet? They were considering doing the very same thing because your rules were so vague that was impossible to tell if that was legal or not. You have no way of saying "HYDRA & Outbreak should have seen this coming" when other teams considered doing the very same thing. How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?! This goes for YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT as well. Because the rule was so vague they had no way of knowing they were breaking them - this is not exclusive to HYDRA & Outbreak's situation, it goes for every team in the tournament. If you had seen CVA & 4th doing the same thing we did prior to banning HYDRA & Outbreak would you have banned both their teams too?
I'd recommend checking the sticky threads for your answer. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
41
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:37:00 -
[358] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Keep grasping buddy eventually you'll find something that sticks and we'll let you back in. Honest.
How am I grasping? I presented some questions to you that you chose to ignore (a fairly common trend, with the Alliance Tournament team, it would appear).
How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?!
Did you read the CVA thread yet? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:38:00 -
[359] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Tappits wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Kadesh Priestess wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in. PL had a b-team in AT9 and probably even earlier. They didn't **** up with finals, but it doesn't mean they were not 'cheating'. Until ATX secondary teams was not a rule breaker. B team also tested 100% separately from the main team. it had its own fits and tactics. it never merged 2 teams/corps/alliances into one corp and hid in a worm hole. It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is. The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned. Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Yes let's conjecture since reality isn't working. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:39:00 -
[360] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Keep grasping buddy eventually you'll find something that sticks and we'll let you back in. Honest.
How am I grasping? I presented some questions to you that you chose to ignore (a fairly common trend, with the Alliance Tournament team, it would appear). How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?! Did you read the CVA thread yet?
Do you maybe speak Spanish? How do I say "Read the stickies" in Spanish? Someone help this guy out. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:41:00 -
[361] - Quote
Intigo wrote:
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Don't confuse my posts with anything other than replies related to previous tournies, go back a bit further and you'll see i do not agree with the complete ban, even the rules previously posted don't mention A-Teams being banned for having b,c, etc teams
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:43:00 -
[362] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:Intigo wrote:
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Don't confuse my posts with anything other than replies related to previous tournies, go back a bit further and you'll see i do not agree with the complete ban, even the rules previously posted don't mention A-Teams being banned for having b,c, etc teams
We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:44:00 -
[363] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Intigo wrote:
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Don't confuse my posts with anything other than replies related to previous tournies, go back a bit further and you'll see i do not agree with the complete ban, even the rules previously posted don't mention A-Teams being banned for having b,c, etc teams We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament. And that's the precise reason why you should step out and let someone above you handle this. |
Hathrul
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exhale.
90
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:44:00 -
[364] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Sreeg you are really really bad at talking to the playerbase... you should find someone else to do it for you... you are acting like Hilmar did before he had to say sorry to everyone.
ive never seen someone so directly communicating with the player base.....id say hes doing the best damn job of all ccp |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:46:00 -
[365] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Intigo wrote:
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Don't confuse my posts with anything other than replies related to previous tournies, go back a bit further and you'll see i do not agree with the complete ban, even the rules previously posted don't mention A-Teams being banned for having b,c, etc teams We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament. And that's the precise reason why you should step out and let someone above you handle this.
ok
:edit: haha j/k I'm still here "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Duncan Tanner
Genos Occidere
223
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:51:00 -
[366] - Quote
It's alright Sreegs, it's clear that trying to come to a resolution that allowed the defending champions to participate was never a priority for you.
Maintaining a high level of competitiveness for the tournament was never a priority for you.
Dealing with the situation professionally was never a priority for you.
We've wanted to believe that this was a misunderstanding on your end so we tried to post clarification and come to a resolution.
We were wrong however, the misunderstanding is on our end. You never intended for us to participate in the tournament to begin with. If you had you would've talked to us as you talked to others before taking action.
We've come to accept this now.
Enjoy your tournament. - |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
71
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:52:00 -
[367] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't.
The first point could be false, however the following still stands:
0utbreak, Hydra etc. sent emails to that email address with queries about the Alliance Tournament. At this point, two things happened:
i) You read those emails and thought about what to do with them OR ii) You didn't read them.
Since other teams have revealed that they've sent in their own queries and that they've been answered, it's pretty clear that those emails have been read and that you deliberately chose not to respond to 0utbreak/Hydra's queries.
By refusing to communicate with them, you knew that they would continue along this road and that you would have to ban them from the tournament.
If your primary concern was to make this tournament as good as possible, you would want them in the tournament. Why? They are in the highest "tier" of tournament teams - they have ISK, they have experience, they have skillpoints and they have teamwork. Most teams only have 1-2, some with 3. Not many have all 4.
But, you didn't want them in the tournament. Your feelings regarding last year's final ruled supreme over your desire to make this the best alliance tournament ever.
Do I think you shouldn't host the AT? No, you obviously have a passion for it otherwise you wouldn't be replying about it on a Saturday afternoon when I presume you're off the clock. And the improvements to ship points/team sizes etc. should shake it up quite nicely, with more gank orientated setups which are more fun to watch than the logi orientated setups.
Just admit that you had a lapse of judgement and for the greater good will allow them to submit a joint team and most of this will go away.
As for deleting posts? Compare and contrast https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113748 with http://eve-search.com/thread/113748-1. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:53:00 -
[368] - Quote
Duncan Tanner wrote:It's alright Sreegs, it's clear that trying to come to a resolution that allowed the defending champions to participate was never a priority for you.
Maintaining a high level of competitiveness for the tournament was never a priority for you.
Dealing with the situation professionally was never a priority for you.
We've wanted to believe that this was a misunderstanding on your end so we tried to post clarification and come to a resolution.
We were wrong however, the misunderstanding is on our end. You never intended for us to participate in the tournament to begin with. If you had you would've talked to us as you talked to others before taking action.
We've come to accept this now.
Enjoy your tournament.
Everyone will thanks! "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:53:00 -
[369] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Intigo wrote:
It's a good thing that CCP clarified that joining the same corp was not allowed, but practicing together is.
The fact that the rule is so vague is the very reason that CVA & 4th were confused. They had considered doing the very same thing before HYDRA & Outbreak were banned.
Do you think Sreegs would have instantly banned their teams too?
Don't confuse my posts with anything other than replies related to previous tournies, go back a bit further and you'll see i do not agree with the complete ban, even the rules previously posted don't mention A-Teams being banned for having b,c, etc teams We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament. And that's the precise reason why you should step out and let someone above you handle this. ok :edit: haha j/k I'm still here
As some one who is representing CCP publicly on this forum you should act more professional in my honest opinion. |
carbomb
Super Team Munkey
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:55:00 -
[370] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:[
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't.
I'm Sorry, where did it say that what happend in AT9 was against the rules? No rules were broken! therefore they can not be regarded as "cheats" for it.
What would probably end all this posting is an admission from sreegs and co that basically this is them hitting back at last years finalists out of spite. You outmetagamed the metagamers and fair play ccp, you did it well. Just admit that this is payback and this matter will be closed. Its pretty pathetic how you are behaving. Most people can see that this was your attempt at revenge. You really are a bunch of kids at times. You made mistakes, you tried cover them up. admit your wrong doings and move along. By the way, If one of my employee's spoke to my customers the way you do to yours you would be out on your ear! Show some professionalism, man.
also love how you hung the Senior GM who responded to Hydra/0utbreak out to dry to cover you behinds. Smooth! |
|
ElextriX
Snuff Box
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:56:00 -
[371] - Quote
Hathrul wrote:Bubanni wrote:Sreeg you are really really bad at talking to the playerbase... you should find someone else to do it for you... you are acting like Hilmar did before he had to say sorry to everyone. ive never seen someone so directly communicating with the player base.....id say hes doing the best damn job of all ccp
By treating paying customers in a rude, arrogant and obnoxious manner? The lack of professionalism in his responses is frankly shocking. |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:57:00 -
[372] - Quote
Even a simpleton can easily why they went off together for the sake of convenience. And if you're a bit serious about winning, like Hydra & outbreak are. You go practice in a wormhole.
They only need 1 corp. They can train against worthy adversaries. Fleet finder is a nifty handy tool when you can just tick "corporation".
And there's this super awesome feature introduced (after being pushed by an elected official of the playerbase, TwoStep) called Corporation Bookmarks.
As wormhole dwelling resident, I can tell you this one was a lifechanger. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:57:00 -
[373] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. The first point could be false, however the following still stands: 0utbreak, Hydra etc. sent emails to that email address with queries about the Alliance Tournament. At this point, two things happened: i) You read those emails and thought about what to do with them OR ii) You didn't read them. Since other teams have revealed that they've sent in their own queries and that they've been answered, it's pretty clear that those emails have been read and that you deliberately chose not to respond to 0utbreak/Hydra's queries. By refusing to communicate with them, you knew that they would continue along this road and that you would have to ban them from the tournament. If your primary concern was to make this tournament as good as possible, you would want them in the tournament. Why? They are in the highest "tier" of tournament teams - they have ISK, they have experience, they have skillpoints and they have teamwork. Most teams only have 1-2, some with 3. Not many have all 4. But, you didn't want them in the tournament. Your feelings regarding last year's final ruled supreme over your desire to make this the best alliance tournament ever. Do I think you shouldn't host the AT? No, you obviously have a passion for it otherwise you wouldn't be replying about it on a Saturday afternoon when I presume you're off the clock. And the improvements to ship points/team sizes etc. should shake it up quite nicely, with more gank orientated setups which are more fun to watch than the logi orientated setups. Just admit that you had a lapse of judgement and for the greater good will allow them to submit a joint team and most of this will go away. As for deleting posts? Compare and contrast https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113748 with http://eve-search.com/thread/113748-1.
I don't delete posts nor have I asked for any to be deleted. Please don't say what I did or didn't know. I'm not a psychic and neither are you. The email sent is irrelevant as I've already pointed out and I'm tired of explaining that. I'm also tired of explaining that how good someone is doesn't have any bearing on the rules or how they're applied.
I'm also tired of explaining that if I didn't want them in the tournament they wouldn't have been able to apply.
I know it all seems pretty simple when I write that but that's because it is.
You won't be seeing Hydra or Outbreak in this tournament in any form as per the stickies. I already said that as well. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:58:00 -
[374] - Quote
carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't. I'm Sorry, where did it say that what happend in AT9 was against the rules? No rules were broken! therefore they can not be regarded as "cheats" for it. What would probably end all this posting is an admission from sreegs and co that basically this is them hitting back at last years finalists out of spite. You outmetagamed the metagamers and fair play ccp, you did it well. Just admit that this is payback and this matter will be closed. Its pretty pathetic how you are behaving. Most people can see that this was your attempt at revenge. You really are a bunch of kids at times. You made mistakes, you tried cover them up. admit your wrong doings and move along. By the way, If one of my employee's spoke to my customers the way you do to yours you would be out on your ear! Show some professionalism, man. also love how you hung the Senior GM who responded to Hydra/0utbreak out to dry to cover you behinds. Smooth!
Read the stickies. You seem to have missed them "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
47
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:59:00 -
[375] - Quote
Reiterating "read the stickies" does not explain anything at all. CVA & 4th considered doing the very same thing we did without being aware at all that it was not allowed because your rules were so vague that you can suit any ruling to fit your needs.
Does the fact that they had the same plan initially not give you a hint at how vague your ruleset is and how silly it is for the entire Alliance Tournament team to ignore all attempts at communication from Garmon?
And yet you instantly ban 3 teams taking all those things into consideration.
It's impressive. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:59:00 -
[376] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:Even a simpleton can easily why they went off together for the sake of convenience. And if you're a bit serious about winning, like Hydra & outbreak are. You go practice in a wormhole.
They only need 1 corp. They can train against worthy adversaries. Fleet finder is a nifty handy tool when you can just tick "corporation".
And there's this super awesome feature introduced (after being pushed by an elected official of the playerbase, TwoStep) called Corporation Bookmarks.
As wormhole dwelling resident, I can tell you this one was a lifechanger.
If you're serious about winning you enter two teams and act that way. Just like every team that will be competing this year. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:00:00 -
[377] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Reiterating "read the stickies" does not explain anything at all. CVA & 4th considered doing the very same thing we did without being aware at all that it was not allowed because your rules were so vague that you can suit any ruling to fit your needs.
Does the fact that they had the same plan initially not give you a hint at how vague your ruleset is and how silly it is for the entire Alliance Tournament team to ignore all attempts at communication from Garmon?
And yet you instantly ban 3 teams taking all those things into consideration.
It's impressive.
Read the stickies. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
21
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:00:00 -
[378] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament.
Of course it is, you are currently the only member of CCP staff actively and publicly replying to this issue. Most arguments are about them being completely excluded are based on no rules say 'A' teams will be banned as well if found to have 'B' / 'C' etc teams.
Your saying there is a section saying these teams will be removed but won't link/quote it.
Also, there are competing teams asking for this information so dig it up for them.
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:00:00 -
[379] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:Even a simpleton can easily why they went off together for the sake of convenience. And if you're a bit serious about winning, like Hydra & outbreak are. You go practice in a wormhole.
They only need 1 corp. They can train against worthy adversaries. Fleet finder is a nifty handy tool when you can just tick "corporation".
And there's this super awesome feature introduced (after being pushed by an elected official of the playerbase, TwoStep) called Corporation Bookmarks.
As wormhole dwelling resident, I can tell you this one was a lifechanger. If you're serious about winning you enter two teams and act that way. Just like every team that will be competing this year. And so they did! They just trained against each other! |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:01:00 -
[380] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:Even a simpleton can easily why they went off together for the sake of convenience. And if you're a bit serious about winning, like Hydra & outbreak are. You go practice in a wormhole.
They only need 1 corp. They can train against worthy adversaries. Fleet finder is a nifty handy tool when you can just tick "corporation".
And there's this super awesome feature introduced (after being pushed by an elected official of the playerbase, TwoStep) called Corporation Bookmarks.
As wormhole dwelling resident, I can tell you this one was a lifechanger. If you're serious about winning you enter two teams and act that way. Just like every team that will be competing this year. And so they did! They just trained against each other!
oh it's this old untruth again haven't seen that one before! "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:02:00 -
[381] - Quote
Quote:How can you justify banning HYDRA & Outbreak without any warning, without responding to any attempts at communication when other teams had considered doing the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did in order to make wormhole practicing ENDURABLE?!
Without any warning ? Really ? Only if they were blind or didn't bother to read the rules. ENDURABLE ? Really ? You actually think it's that hard ? Maybe you should try actually living in a wormhole before acting like being in two corps and using two poses would've been an insurmountable obstacle.
As for other teams, they would've been able to get away with more due to a lack of history of collusion, but working that closely together is pretty dubious even when it isn't hydrabreak. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:02:00 -
[382] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: We did mention it somewhere it just really isn't worth my time digging it up for people who won't be participating in this year's alliance tournament.
Of course it is, you are currently the only member of CCP staff actively and publicly replying to this issue. Most arguments are about them being completely excluded are based on no rules say 'A' teams will be banned as well if found to have 'B' / 'C' etc teams. Your saying there is a section saying these teams will be removed but won't link/quote it. Also, there are competing teams asking for this information so dig it up for them.
Whether we'd remove both teams or not is irrelevant to the team in question who is spamming these forums at the moment. The team who won't be competing. I'll try to dig it up in a second. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Kalvunia IV
Born-2-Kill
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:03:00 -
[383] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Reiterating "read the stickies" does not explain anything at all. CVA & 4th considered doing the very same thing we did without being aware at all that it was not allowed because your rules were so vague that you can suit any ruling to fit your needs.
Does the fact that they had the same plan initially not give you a hint at how vague your ruleset is and how silly it is for the entire Alliance Tournament team to ignore all attempts at communication from Garmon?
And yet you instantly ban 3 teams taking all those things into consideration.
It's impressive.
I think it's becoming more and more apparent to everyone that answering simple questions with more then "read stickies" is above the dev in questions cognitive functions. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:03:00 -
[384] - Quote
HYDRA RELOADED and Outbreak. (Refered to commonly as Hydra) seem to be missing the point. I still think that Outbreak. is the better team, but everyone calls them HYDRA.
It is not about words, statements, a-teams and b-teams. That is the way the rule is "worded" (which you are harping on) but that is not the point. Since you seem to be too dense to understand the meaning behind the rules, perhaps I will lay it all out for you in an easy to understand format which highlights the key points.
It is about COLLUSION.
Since you seem to not know what that is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion
And if you are too lazy to look at that here you go:
Collusion is an agreement between two or more persons, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage.
Now what you did last year is you DEMONSTRATED a PATTERN of COLLUSION which NECESSITATED a RULE CHANGE which INCONVENIENCED a lot of LEGITIMATE TEAMS this year due to its IMPLEMENTATION. COLLUSION is BANNED in most tournament formats including poker for the UNFAIR ADVANTAGE that it give teams WORKING TOGETHER over the rest of the FIELD.
What you are doing this year is EXACTLY THE SAME as what you did last year, and CCP had NO CHOICE but to ban you.
Yes, you guys made a mistake. Karma is a *****.
Also to summarize what is going on in this thread.
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BHHAHAHWWWWHHAHAAAAAAAAA WHAAA WHHAAA WHHAAAAAAAAaAAAAAa |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
72
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:04:00 -
[385] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Suleiman Shouaa]CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: -snipe- I don't delete posts nor have I asked for any to be deleted. Please don't say what I did or didn't know. I'm not a psychic and neither are you. The email sent is irrelevant as I've already pointed out and I'm tired of explaining that. I'm also tired of explaining that how good someone is doesn't have any bearing on the rules or how they're applied. I'm also tired of explaining that if I didn't want them in the tournament they wouldn't have been able to apply. I know it all seems pretty simple when I write that but that's because it is. You won't be seeing Hydra or Outbreak in this tournament in any form as per the stickies. I already said that as well.
When did I say you were the one deleting them? I said "CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this". Are you saying that someone outside CCP is deleting them?
So if all teams are treated equally regardless of how good they, how come one team was responded to but another team or two wasn't responded to?
This is what I don't understand. You're willing to work with RvB, PL etc. so they can participate. But not with 0utbreak or Genos. Why not? And don't say they're previous cheaters when there were no rules against what they did (in fact, PL did the same thing, just were less successful - no insult to PL meant).
There's a difference between being firm and just refusing to listen. |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:08:00 -
[386] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX.
So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:09:00 -
[387] - Quote
Ding feeble 20 page thread o/ |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:09:00 -
[388] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Suleiman Shouaa]CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: -snipe- I don't delete posts nor have I asked for any to be deleted. Please don't say what I did or didn't know. I'm not a psychic and neither are you. The email sent is irrelevant as I've already pointed out and I'm tired of explaining that. I'm also tired of explaining that how good someone is doesn't have any bearing on the rules or how they're applied. I'm also tired of explaining that if I didn't want them in the tournament they wouldn't have been able to apply. I know it all seems pretty simple when I write that but that's because it is. You won't be seeing Hydra or Outbreak in this tournament in any form as per the stickies. I already said that as well. When did I say you were the one deleting them? I said "CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this". Are you saying that someone outside CCP is deleting them? So if all teams are treated equally regardless of how good they, how come one team was responded to but another team or two wasn't responded to?This is what I don't understand. You're willing to work with RvB, PL etc. so they can participate. But not with 0utbreak or Genos. Why not? And don't say they're previous cheaters when there were no rules against what they did (in fact, PL did the same thing, just were less successful - no insult to PL meant). There's a difference between being firm and just refusing to listen.
Neither one of those teams was cheating in this way. I hope this helps. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:09:00 -
[389] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:So do you have proof that this year they were going to do the same thing as last year? Did you watch them while traininig? Do you have a spy on their voice servers relaying you intel? Or which source is telling you that this year's AT will be the same one as the one before?
Because if the logs show nothing, what's your decision resting on.
You seem to be confused, CCP was never going to be able to know for sure, all they have to go on is appearances and pattern of behavior. Hydra and 0utbreak only have themselves to blame for presenting the wrong ones. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:10:00 -
[390] - Quote
Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together.
No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
16
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:11:00 -
[391] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. A fact that could also easily be achieved by just banning one of them. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:11:00 -
[392] - Quote
Raimo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: No conversation was had with PL. The conversation with RvB was about how to ensure that they were functioning properly for the tournament.
And Hydra (+Outbreak) who tried to initiate a similar conversation so they could function properly in the tournament (the oft mentioned emails) did not deserve it but RvB did? Dev favouritism, plain and simple. Also, this thread with all them (archived elsewhere) game dev responses are pure comedy gold. When the weekend is over some CCP high ups will be very interested I'm sure... You cannot invent this stuff. Somebody who is actually employed and would assumedly need to keep his manners up :) CCP Sreegs wrote:
Did you read the CVA thread yet?
Do you maybe speak Spanish? How do I say "Read the stickies" in Spanish? Someone help this guy out.
Ed: This
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:
This is what I don't understand. You're willing to work with RvB, PL etc. so they can participate. But not with 0utbreak or Genos. Why not? And don't say they're previous cheaters when there were no rules against what they did (in fact, PL did the same thing, just were less successful - no insult to PL meant).
There's a difference between being firm and just refusing to listen.
[/quote]
Hi you seem to have missed the stickies on this topic. Please read them. I'd say come back when you're done but you've already said the same thing enough today. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:12:00 -
[393] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. A fact that could also easily be achieved by just banning one of them.
Deleting TQ or cancelling the tournament would solve that problem also while we're conjecturing. I think I'm getting good at this. It's so much easier than dealing with reality thanks! "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
carbomb
Super Team Munkey
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:14:00 -
[394] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't. I'm Sorry, where did it say that what happend in AT9 was against the rules? No rules were broken! therefore they can not be regarded as "cheats" for it. What would probably end all this posting is an admission from sreegs and co that basically this is them hitting back at last years finalists out of spite. You outmetagamed the metagamers and fair play ccp, you did it well. Just admit that this is payback and this matter will be closed. Its pretty pathetic how you are behaving. Most people can see that this was your attempt at revenge. You really are a bunch of kids at times. You made mistakes, you tried cover them up. admit your wrong doings and move along. By the way, If one of my employee's spoke to my customers the way you do to yours you would be out on your ear! Show some professionalism, man. also love how you hung the Senior GM who responded to Hydra/0utbreak out to dry to cover you behinds. Smooth! Read the stickies. You seem to have missed them
if they cheated in AT9 then you would have disqualified them both and certainly not awarded them their prizes. The reason you didn't, is because there were no rules about what they did. You can not brandish them as cheats when they did not break any rules. |
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:14:00 -
[395] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome.
This only feeds the paranoids who will site this as proof of bias and that some were looking for a pretext to exclude Hydra and Outbreak.
|
Sumeragy
Isstastor Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:15:00 -
[396] - Quote
Is it just me or does he troll everyone who wants to have a serious discussion
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
146
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:16:00 -
[397] - Quote
Raimo wrote:Ding feeble 20 page thread o/
Considering the special interest group carrying this thread on I would say that the crying is strong.
Man up. Take your medicine. Don't do it again.
Stop crying. |
Dr Robertson
ImpeviA
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:16:00 -
[398] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP still mad due to AT IX Final (despite the semi-finals being better than most finals). CCP staff who are dedicated to the AT chose not to respond to Hydra's emails, despite responding to other emails from other teams. CCP bans 0utbreak/Genos, despite them having all the time in the world to tell them to knock it off if they actually wanted them in the tournament (ie. greater good for all the viewers). CCP starts deleting posts on forums related to this
:shocker: If you're going to post a timeline insert facts. Don't misrepresent me or the team purposely. That doesn't look like a request because it isn't. The first point could be false, however the following still stands: 0utbreak, Hydra etc. sent emails to that email address with queries about the Alliance Tournament. At this point, two things happened: i) You read those emails and thought about what to do with them OR ii) You didn't read them. Since other teams have revealed that they've sent in their own queries and that they've been answered, it's pretty clear that those emails have been read and that you deliberately chose not to respond to 0utbreak/Hydra's queries. By refusing to communicate with them, you knew that they would continue along this road and that you would have to ban them from the tournament. If your primary concern was to make this tournament as good as possible, you would want them in the tournament. Why? They are in the highest "tier" of tournament teams - they have ISK, they have experience, they have skillpoints and they have teamwork. Most teams only have 1-2, some with 3. Not many have all 4. But, you didn't want them in the tournament. Your feelings regarding last year's final ruled supreme over your desire to make this the best alliance tournament ever. Do I think you shouldn't host the AT? No, you obviously have a passion for it otherwise you wouldn't be replying about it on a Saturday afternoon when I presume you're off the clock. And the improvements to ship points/team sizes etc. should shake it up quite nicely, with more gank orientated setups which are more fun to watch than the logi orientated setups. Just admit that you had a lapse of judgement and for the greater good will allow them to submit a joint team and most of this will go away. As for deleting posts? Compare and contrast https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=113748 with http://eve-search.com/thread/113748-1.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:17:00 -
[399] - Quote
carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't. I'm Sorry, where did it say that what happend in AT9 was against the rules? No rules were broken! therefore they can not be regarded as "cheats" for it. What would probably end all this posting is an admission from sreegs and co that basically this is them hitting back at last years finalists out of spite. You outmetagamed the metagamers and fair play ccp, you did it well. Just admit that this is payback and this matter will be closed. Its pretty pathetic how you are behaving. Most people can see that this was your attempt at revenge. You really are a bunch of kids at times. You made mistakes, you tried cover them up. admit your wrong doings and move along. By the way, If one of my employee's spoke to my customers the way you do to yours you would be out on your ear! Show some professionalism, man. also love how you hung the Senior GM who responded to Hydra/0utbreak out to dry to cover you behinds. Smooth! Read the stickies. You seem to have missed them if they cheated in AT9 then you would have disqualified them both and certainly not awarded them their prizes. The reason you didn't, is because there were no rules about what they did. You can not brandish them as cheats when they did not break any rules.
Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:17:00 -
[400] - Quote
Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. This only feeds the paranoids who will site this as proof of bias and that some were looking for a pretext to exclude Hydra and Outbreak.
if you say so
:edit: we don't need pretexts "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:18:00 -
[401] - Quote
Sumeragy wrote:Is it just me or does he troll everyone who wants to have a serious discussion
There isn't a serious discussion on this forum in the past 24 hours except where that one guy asked a question that subsequently got filled with garbage by Hydra and I'm not trolling. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
77
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:18:00 -
[402] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Neither one of those teams was cheating in this way. I hope this helps.
They asked for clarification since what you've stated as "working together" is so loose it's actually incredible. Why didn't you just say that:
Doing X,Y,Z will get you banned
BUT
U,V,W is ok
They asked for clarification via the official line of communication. You did not respond to said request.
So, they sent it again. Again you did not respond.
So, since the official line of communication wasn't responding, they used another line of communication to reach the same source at the end of the day since the GMs should be able to defer any queries to the appropriate party and get the right response.
They got a response and went with it since it was the first response they got.
What else do you want them to do? Can you please post your phone number so if you ignore two of my emails, I can get a hold of you? |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:18:00 -
[403] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. A fact that could also easily be achieved by just banning one of them. Deleting TQ or cancelling the tournament would solve that problem also while we're conjecturing. I think I'm getting good at this. It's so much easier than dealing with reality thanks! That's an even better option! It would get rid of 2 problems at once! But I just want to see Hydro or Outbreak, since your of the opinion that they're one team, in the tournament for ~gudfites~ guess I can't expect that coming from a blobman :-( |
Shiroi Okami
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
63
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:19:00 -
[404] - Quote
How did this idiot even become a dev.... My Latest Video: Freestyle II |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:20:00 -
[405] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok".
Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever?
A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. |
Duncan Tanner
Genos Occidere
226
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:20:00 -
[406] - Quote
. - |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:21:00 -
[407] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Neither one of those teams was cheating in this way. I hope this helps. They asked for clarification since what you've stated as "working together" is so loose it's actually incredible. Why didn't you just say that: Doing X,Y,Z will get you banned BUT U,V,W is ok They asked for clarification via the official line of communication. You did not respond to said request. So, they sent it again. Again you did not respond. So, since the official line of communication wasn't responding, they used another line of communication to reach the same source at the end of the day since the GMs should be able to defer any queries to the appropriate party and get the right response. They got a response and went with it since it was the first response they got. What else do you want them to do? Can you please post your phone number so if you ignore two of my emails, I can get a hold of you?
The response they got didn't ok what they did nor did they say what they were doing in the email making both irrelevant but I already explained this. Now I know why there are canned responses this is getting tiring. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:22:00 -
[408] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it.
Still waiting on the link/quote stating 'A' teams will get banned if they are deemed to have a 'B' team.
|
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:22:00 -
[409] - Quote
Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation? |
DeBingJos
Avalon Project Shadow Rock Alliance
263
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:22:00 -
[410] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it.
If they were cheating, then why did they win AT9 instead of being disqualified??
Everything they did at AT9 was within the rules. Fix FW ! |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:22:00 -
[411] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome.
That's a great way to run a tournament. Ban teams this year based on what they did last year when the ruleset was entirely different.
The more you reply the more obvious it gets that banning HYDRA & Outbreak is entirely because of a grudge held by CCP. The Alliance Tournament team ignores all emails sent to them and you create a ruleset so vague that you can fit it to your needs as you go.
CVA & 4th intended to do the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did because they were practicing in a wormhole too - you still have yet to address that at all. The fact that CVA & 4th felt that this was within the rules (just as we did) is a testimony to how insane it is that you ban HYDRA & Outbreak over doing it. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:23:00 -
[412] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. A fact that could also easily be achieved by just banning one of them. Deleting TQ or cancelling the tournament would solve that problem also while we're conjecturing. I think I'm getting good at this. It's so much easier than dealing with reality thanks! That's an even better option! It would get rid of 2 problems at once! But I just want to see Hydro or Outbreak, since your of the opinion that they're one team, in the tournament for ~gudfites~ guess I can't expect that coming from a blobman :-(
I'd have loved to see them as well. As stated in the two stickies at the top of this forum. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Kazruw Drol
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:23:00 -
[413] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Kazruw Drol wrote:Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. Yes, banning a team from the tournament for continued wrongdoing is similar to developer scandals involving item creation. You clearly have a firm grasp on reality and are good with perspective. The point was that in both cases CCP failed to treat alliances equally. t20 created valuable items, you prevented people from getting them and destroyed the Alliance Tournament. You clearly antagonized Hydra and 0utbreak while giving a freepass to RvB and PL. The rules clearly state that 'B' and 'C' can be disqualified, but say nothing about 'A' teams. Considering their actions last year, I'm not surprised that this rule was applied, but it only allows you to disqualify ONE of the teams, like you did with PL and Waffles.
Trying to troll paying customers is generally a bad idea as CCP should have learned last summer, so I suggest you stop it. Trying to rules lawyers you're way into the clear is outright ludicrous, since this is EVE and you're arguing with real lawyers. Right now you're just undoing all the hard work CCP has done to redeem it's horrible reputation. Instead of stonewalling you should admit your mistake, step down and let Hydra participate. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:23:00 -
[414] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. Still waiting on the link/quote stating 'A' teams will get banned if they are deemed to have a 'B' team.
I linked it a page or two ago. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:25:00 -
[415] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation?
I'm going to worry about that next year. Right now I have this year's tournament to worry about. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Edenmain
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:25:00 -
[416] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome.
Awwwww and there we go, an admision of bitterness. Last year we did nothing wrong , no cheating nothing that was described in the rules as cheating. Yeah might have upset a few people with the final blah blah.
Funny stuff! |
Dr Robertson
ImpeviA
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:26:00 -
[417] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation?
Does it matters what he says? they always can say his response "should not have been sent, this was an error that we will investigate further." |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:26:00 -
[418] - Quote
DeBingJos wrote:Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. If they were cheating, then why did they win AT9 instead of being disqualified?? Everything they did at AT9 was within the rules.
There were changes to the AT10 rules because of what happened in AT9. Does this help? |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:27:00 -
[419] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. That's a great way to run a tournament. Ban teams this year based on what they did last year when the ruleset was entirely different. The more you reply the more obvious it gets that banning HYDRA & Outbreak is entirely because of a grudge held by CCP. The Alliance Tournament team ignores all emails sent to them and you create a ruleset so vague that you can fit it to your needs as you go. CVA & 4th intended to do the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did because they were practicing in a wormhole too - you still have yet to address that at all. The fact that CVA & 4th felt that this was within the rules (just as we did) is a testimony to how insane it is that you ban HYDRA & Outbreak over doing it.
I know it suits your desire to be martyrs to keep pretending there's some grudge but as I said you have yourself, well really your leaders to blame and absolutely nobody else. I'm sorry accepting responsibility for your own actions that we didn't make you do is so difficult but at some point you're going to have to come to grips with you. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Karbox Delacroix
Emo Rage Quit
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:27:00 -
[420] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. This only feeds the paranoids who will site this as proof of bias and that some were looking for a pretext to exclude Hydra and Outbreak. if you say so
As you say, you know what happened last year and it won't be happening this year. You are using their actions last year, cooperation to infer that they meant the same thing this year. The question of bias comes from the weighting of evidence. We know that PL and Waffles cooperate all the darn time. But even though their history of cooperation, same CEO for both organizations, their attempt to enter two teams was not seen as a grave offense. Why? Because they did not throw the final match of ATIX. DekCo, the Alliance of Alliances is also famed for working together.
In response to your edit: You need a pretext if you want to claim to be working within the published rules. Another option one could take would be to state that CCP retains the right to determine what makes a good AT and the inclusion of certain Alliances a bad AT, ipso fact, these following alliances will not be included. Problem solved. |
|
Anna Katarr
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:27:00 -
[421] - Quote
Kazruw Drol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Kazruw Drol]Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. The rules clearly state that 'B' and 'C' can be disqualified, but say nothing about 'A' teams.
oh, nice... so... is hydra or outbreak considered the 'a' team? unban them then...? pretty please? |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:28:00 -
[422] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:DeBingJos wrote:Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. If they were cheating, then why did they win AT9 instead of being disqualified?? Everything they did at AT9 was within the rules. They weren't kicked out last year good thing I didn't say they were cheating then. What's different? They're both the sole A-teams of their respective alliances. They just spar together for the sake of convenience |
Typhu5
Isstastor Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:28:00 -
[423] - Quote
Shiroi Okami wrote:How did this idiot even become a dev....
Plz..... be respectful. |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
78
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:29:00 -
[424] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:The response they got didn't ok what they did nor did they say what they were doing in the email making both irrelevant but I already explained this. Now I know why there are canned responses this is getting tiring.
Can you please tell me why you didn't respond to them?
Also I would like your phone/Skype/MSN messenger details in case it turns out that you refuse to respond to any emails I might send in the future regarding the AT?
And by you I mean the entire CCP team in charge of the alliance tournament (not singling you out in particular just because the others have slithered away..).
Thanks! |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:29:00 -
[425] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation? I'm going to worry about that next year. Right now I have this year's tournament to worry about.
If that were actually true you wouldn't be here now responding. Can you answer the question again properly please?
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:29:00 -
[426] - Quote
Kazruw Drol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Kazruw Drol wrote:Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. Yes, banning a team from the tournament for continued wrongdoing is similar to developer scandals involving item creation. You clearly have a firm grasp on reality and are good with perspective. The point was that in both cases CCP failed to treat alliances equally. t20 created valuable items, you prevented people from getting them and destroyed the Alliance Tournament. You clearly antagonized Hydra and 0utbreak while giving a freepass to RvB and PL. The rules clearly state that 'B' and 'C' can be disqualified, but say nothing about 'A' teams. Considering their actions last year, I'm not surprised that this rule was applied, but it only allows you to disqualify ONE of the teams, like you did with PL and Waffles. Trying to troll paying customers is generally a bad idea as CCP should have learned last summer, so I suggest you stop it. Trying to rules lawyers you're way into the clear is outright ludicrous, since this is EVE and you're arguing with real lawyers. Right now you're just undoing all the hard work CCP has done to redeem it's horrible reputation. Instead of stonewalling you should admit your mistake, step down and let Hydra participate.
The only thing destroying this tournament is people having to read the same regurgitated post in this forum over and over again. I'm sorry you feel applying the rules as we said we would destroys CCP's reputation but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:29:00 -
[427] - Quote
Edenmain wrote:
Awwwww and there we go, an admision of bitterness. Last year we did nothing wrong , no cheating nothing that was described in the rules as cheating. Yeah might have upset a few people with the final blah blah.
Funny stuff!
That is like saying a judge is "bitter" and "holding a grudge" for enforcing a rule that may as well be called the "Hydra Rule" because it was put in place for what you did last year. |
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:29:00 -
[428] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:IamBeastx wrote:Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. Still waiting on the link/quote stating 'A' teams will get banned if they are deemed to have a 'B' team. I linked it a page or two ago.
Missed it due to edit: Anyway, Quote ''We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team.''.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:30:00 -
[429] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation? I'm going to worry about that next year. Right now I have this year's tournament to worry about. If that were actually true you wouldn't be here now responding. Can you answer the question again properly please?
You got your answer and quoted it. It's the only one you're getting. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Harold Tuphlos
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
55
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:30:00 -
[430] - Quote
I am finding Hydra/outbreak's complaining that the rule is vague to be hilarious. A simple look at the rule in the context of which it was made tells us that hydra/outbreak practicing together was a bad idea. Doing so as a single corp in a wormhole was guaranteed to get at least one of their teams banned.
Here is context for anybody that might be a little confused: IN AT IX, Hydra and Outbreak are/work together as a single team (completely legal) They make it to the final match. Bad match, people are mad.
For AT X, CCP bans multiple teams from the same group because of the final that Hydra and Outbreak made. Hydra and Outbreak ask if they can practice together when they didn't have enough to practice seperately, they get no response from the tournament team. They finally get a GM to give them a positve answer. Rather than doing what they asked, they went into a wormhole on SiSi and practiced as a single entity.
Since the the rule was made to prevent A and B teams from getting to the final, and CCP cannot tell the intentions of that group, one of them has to be removed from the tournament. And since it is the very two "teams" that caused the rule to be made in the first place, CCP removed both. |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:31:00 -
[431] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:DeBingJos wrote:Time Funnel wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote: Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
And there you have it. They were cheating and that is why they were banned. Since the rule changes what they did last year is "no longer ok". Do you guys still want to argue about who said what and whatever? A stupid monkey with a learning disability could see they were cheating. Nobody wanted to say it. If they were cheating, then why did they win AT9 instead of being disqualified?? Everything they did at AT9 was within the rules. They weren't kicked out last year good thing I didn't say they were cheating then. What's different? They're both the sole A-teams of their respective alliances. They just spar together for the sake of convenience
the difference is that last year was last year? Do I really have to say this? "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Hroya
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:32:00 -
[432] - Quote
If they were cheating then that would be awesome. I mean come on, this is EvE, if you-¦re not cheating you are concidered a carebear. Cheating, changing the deck, misinformation, manipulation, bending rules, that is what we ( most are i presume ) enjoy about this game.
You cant honestly expect that all those dirty bastards go play by the rules all of a sudden, can you ? It's ATX by the way, a milestone in AT's. It should be grand, awesomesauce, highly entertaining and a big pr boost in some form or fashion. It should (could) be an event to insert some enjoyment and mutuall laughter by ccp and the participants. Not a collection of threadnoughts and tarnished perspective for people out there.
Good job if you catch people setting up schemes to do something "wrong", but please go a bit easy on the punishments. Ease up a little. There are proberbly shennanigans going on you might not even detect in time. AT's past, present and future cant be regulated by just rules.
This discussion wont get a satisfying conclusion from eihter side, everyone just claims and blames, not one from eihter side comes forward and says they were wrong, lets fix this. Instead it's an endless debate about rules, interpretations, accusations and what not. Sorry, but that doesnt look mature from eihter side.
It's not a battle of wits or a game of power here, it's about ATX and making it great.
I plea to both sides to consider some maturity and refrain from slanderous propaganda back and forth. It's not going to get anywhere and only tarnishes what should be a great milestone.
You go your corridor but. |
Typhu5
Isstastor Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:33:00 -
[433] - Quote
Anna Katarr wrote:Kazruw Drol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Kazruw Drol]Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. The rules clearly state that 'B' and 'C' can be disqualified, but say nothing about 'A' teams. oh, nice... so... is hydra or outbreak considered the 'a' team? unban them then...? pretty please?
No. Hydra is the B-Team for Outbreak and Outbreak the B-Team for Hydra. That means, both are B-teams and got banned.
:-) |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:33:00 -
[434] - Quote
Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Karbox Delacroix wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
I'm not a psychic and neither are you.
Actually, yes you are, or at least you are claiming to be. You are claiming this because you seem to be stating that because they trained together, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT, that they intended to collude together during the ATX(*) and possibly throw matches like the final ATIX. So yes, you are claiming a motivation that is inside the mind of the individuals. You would have to be psychic to know that they were intending to collude together because they were sparring together. No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. This only feeds the paranoids who will site this as proof of bias and that some were looking for a pretext to exclude Hydra and Outbreak. if you say so As you say, you know what happened last year and it won't be happening this year. You are using their actions last year, cooperation to infer that they meant the same thing this year. The question of bias comes from the weighting of evidence. We know that PL and Waffles cooperate all the darn time. But even though their history of cooperation, same CEO for both organizations, their attempt to enter two teams was not seen as a grave offense. Why? Because they did not throw the final match of ATIX. DekCo, the Alliance of Alliances is also famed for working together. In response to your edit: You need a pretext if you want to claim to be working within the published rules. Another option one could take would be to state that CCP retains the right to determine what makes a good AT and the inclusion of certain Alliances a bad AT, ipso fact, these following alliances will not be included. Problem solved.
I don't need a pretext I already told you this. Insisting that I do doesn't make it so. I don't need to rewrite the rules because we're doing A OK enforcing the ones we have thanks. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:34:00 -
[435] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:The response they got didn't ok what they did nor did they say what they were doing in the email making both irrelevant but I already explained this. Now I know why there are canned responses this is getting tiring. Can you please tell me why you didn't respond to them? Also I would like your phone/Skype/MSN messenger details in case it turns out that you refuse to respond to any emails I might send in the future regarding the AT? And by you I mean the entire CCP team in charge of the alliance tournament (not singling you out in particular just because the others have slithered away..). Thanks!
yeah let me get right on that "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:35:00 -
[436] - Quote
Typhu5 wrote:Anna Katarr wrote:Kazruw Drol wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[quote=Kazruw Drol]Guys relax. It's just springtime for CCP, and they have a tradition of going full Screegs this time of the year. I just wish this years Alliance Tournament wasn't based on Whose line is it anyway.In the future it would be best if all similar decision had to be accepted by the CSM in order to avoid another Screegs/t20 incident. The rules clearly state that 'B' and 'C' can be disqualified, but say nothing about 'A' teams. oh, nice... so... is hydra or outbreak considered the 'a' team? unban them then...? pretty please? No. Hydra is the B-Team for Outbreak and Outbreak the B-Team for Hydra. That means, both are B-teams and got banned. :-)
We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team.
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:35:00 -
[437] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. That's a great way to run a tournament. Ban teams this year based on what they did last year when the ruleset was entirely different. The more you reply the more obvious it gets that banning HYDRA & Outbreak is entirely because of a grudge held by CCP. The Alliance Tournament team ignores all emails sent to them and you create a ruleset so vague that you can fit it to your needs as you go. CVA & 4th intended to do the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did because they were practicing in a wormhole too - you still have yet to address that at all. The fact that CVA & 4th felt that this was within the rules (just as we did) is a testimony to how insane it is that you ban HYDRA & Outbreak over doing it. I know it suits your desire to be martyrs to keep pretending there's some grudge but as I said you have yourself, well really your leaders to blame and absolutely nobody else. I'm sorry accepting responsibility for your own actions that we didn't make you do is so difficult but at some point you're going to have to come to grips with you.
And again you completely ignore the point. You have yet to address that CVA & 4th considered doing the very same thing just prior to HYDRA & Outbreak getting banned. How is that NOT proof that your ruleset is insanely vague and a pretty good indication that banning 2 teams outright over it is unjustly harsh? HYDRA & Outbreak were not trying to hide that we practiced together in a single corporation because we thought it was well within the rules just like CVA would have thought.
Why should I blame the HYDRA leaders that asked the Alliance Tournament team for clarification (and were ignored multiple times) and thought they were acting within the rules?
How can you not see that the fact that 2 other teams considered doing the very same thing well within the rules is an indication of how terribly vague that rule is? And that banning 2 teams over it is insane when you have made no attempts to COMMUNICATE, CLARIFY or WARN them prior to it happening.
This could have happened to CVA & 4th (if, of course, you are consistent about rules being applied to all teams) just as well as HYDRA & Outbreak if they had just done it a bit earlier.
Or would the rules have been applied differently because they didn't **** you off during AT IX? |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:36:00 -
[438] - Quote
Hroya wrote:If they were cheating then that would be awesome. I mean come on, this is EvE, if you-¦re not cheating you are concidered a carebear. Cheating, changing the deck, misinformation, manipulation, bending rules, that is what we ( most are i presume ) enjoy about this game.
You cant honestly expect that all those dirty bastards go play by the rules all of a sudden, can you ? It's ATX by the way, a milestone in AT's. It should be grand, awesomesauce, highly entertaining and a big pr boost in some form or fashion. It should (could) be an event to insert some enjoyment and mutuall laughter by ccp and the participants. Not a collection of threadnoughts and tarnished perspective for people out there.
Good job if you catch people setting up schemes to do something "wrong", but please go a bit easy on the punishments. Ease up a little. There are proberbly shennanigans going on you might not even detect in time. AT's past, present and future cant be regulated by just rules.
This discussion wont get a satisfying conclusion from eihter side, everyone just claims and blames, not one from eihter side comes forward and says they were wrong, lets fix this. Instead it's an endless debate about rules, interpretations, accusations and what not. Sorry, but that doesnt look mature from eihter side.
It's not a battle of wits or a game of power here, it's about ATX and making it great.
I plea to both sides to consider some maturity and refrain from slanderous propaganda back and forth. It's not going to get anywhere and only tarnishes what should be a great milestone.
Live by the metagame, die by the metagame. You make a stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, decision to flaunt the rules with some flimsy response from a GM and what do you really ******* expect. I mean comeon.
|
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
27
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:36:00 -
[439] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation? I'm going to worry about that next year. Right now I have this year's tournament to worry about. If that were actually true you wouldn't be here now responding. Can you answer the question again properly please? You got your answer and quoted it. It's the only one you're getting.
We know it's over this year so now the question is what about next year?
or is this game of smoke and mirrors going to continue? |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:37:00 -
[440] - Quote
Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. |
|
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
54
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:40:00 -
[441] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails.
I would love to know this too.
And the fact that he has yet to address anything about CVA considering to do the very same thing we did and thinking it was well within the rules (as we did). |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:40:00 -
[442] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: What's different? They're both the sole A-teams of their respective alliances. They just spar together for the sake of convenience
the difference is that last year was last year? Do I really have to say this? Still don't see how they broke a "rule" if you cannot provide any proof of their malicious intent.
They just trained together in one wh, against each other. Because you can't get crap for fights on sisi.
And next time proof read, because you didn't include the "rule", the one and only, in the full rule list of the devblog. It's not in there, it's above there. But you did update all the other rules properly... Done on purpose for an entierly different reason?
Quote:Next week we will be going into more detail about how you can participate in the random draw and how to apply for an auction spot. Today we want to look at tournament rules and what we wanted to achieve with these. While a full listing is available below for your perusal, and will be updated on the new Alliance Tournament page next week, we would like to take a moment and highlight some of the important changes:
We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the qualifying rounds from five to six. We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the final two weekends from 10 to 12. Match times have been reduced from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. Ship point values have been changed with some ships going down in cost. Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees. These are some of the main rule changes which we feel will add to the overall betterment of Alliance Tournament. Below is the full rule list for your information.
Match Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ teams for bigger Alliances. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:40:00 -
[443] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails.
Translation: Just give me a victory. Give me some satisfaction. Anything. I need to be right about something! I need to blame someone for something! |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:41:00 -
[444] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome. That's a great way to run a tournament. Ban teams this year based on what they did last year when the ruleset was entirely different. The more you reply the more obvious it gets that banning HYDRA & Outbreak is entirely because of a grudge held by CCP. The Alliance Tournament team ignores all emails sent to them and you create a ruleset so vague that you can fit it to your needs as you go. CVA & 4th intended to do the very same thing that HYDRA & Outbreak did because they were practicing in a wormhole too - you still have yet to address that at all. The fact that CVA & 4th felt that this was within the rules (just as we did) is a testimony to how insane it is that you ban HYDRA & Outbreak over doing it. I know it suits your desire to be martyrs to keep pretending there's some grudge but as I said you have yourself, well really your leaders to blame and absolutely nobody else. I'm sorry accepting responsibility for your own actions that we didn't make you do is so difficult but at some point you're going to have to come to grips with you. And again you completely ignore the point. You have yet to address that CVA & 4th considered doing the very same thing just prior to HYDRA & Outbreak getting banned. How is that NOT proof that your ruleset is insanely vague and a pretty good indication that banning 2 teams outright over it is unjustly harsh? HYDRA & Outbreak were not trying to hide that we practiced together in a single corporation because we thought it was well within the rules just like CVA would have thought. Why should I blame the HYDRA leaders that asked the Alliance Tournament team for clarification (and were ignored multiple times) and thought they were acting within the rules? How can you not see that the fact that 2 other teams considered doing the very same thing well within the rules is an indication of how terribly vague that rule is? And that banning 2 teams over it is insane when you have made no attempts to COMMUNICATE, CLARIFY or WARN them prior to it happening. This could have happened to CVA & 4th (if, of course, you are consistent about rules being applied to all teams) just as well as HYDRA & Outbreak if they had just done it a bit earlier. Or would the rules have been applied differently because they didn't annoy you during AT IX? After all, it appears earlier that HYDRA & Outbreak were banned entirely because of what happened in AT IX.
I know you want to pretend there's no point because it's convenient. Frankly I'm not going to waste any more time trying to explain things to you. If you or your alliance continue to spam this subforum you will lose your posting privileges and that should be about that. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Typhu5
Isstastor Corp.
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:41:00 -
[445] - Quote
IamBeastx wrote:We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644
I tried a bit sarcasm... and it did not worked... OK
Yes i saw the rule and i interpreted it as, one of this two can still join the ATX, because only the B and C Team got banned. But now i am only tired reading this thread. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:41:00 -
[446] - Quote
Intigo wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. I would love to know this too. And the fact that he has yet to address anything about CVA considering to do the very same thing we did and thinking it was well within the rules (as we did).
CVA should be banned! They did what we did! We were banned! THIS IS SO TERRIBLY UNFAIR.
WHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:41:00 -
[447] - Quote
ScoRpS wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:ScoRpS wrote:Sreegs since you're the only one responding, which i guess i am greatful for can you clarify that we will be ok to apply again next year or will the AT team be as strident and underhanded again in opposition to our participation? I'm going to worry about that next year. Right now I have this year's tournament to worry about. If that were actually true you wouldn't be here now responding. Can you answer the question again properly please? You got your answer and quoted it. It's the only one you're getting. We know it's over this year so now the question is what about next year? or is this game of smoke and mirrors going to continue? Stomping your feet and demanding an answer isn't going to get you one. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:43:00 -
[448] - Quote
iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: What's different? They're both the sole A-teams of their respective alliances. They just spar together for the sake of convenience
the difference is that last year was last year? Do I really have to say this? Still don't see how they broke a "rule" if you cannot provide any proof of their malicious intent. They just trained together in one wh, against each other. Because you can't get crap for fights on sisi. And next time proof read, because you didn't include the "rule", the one and only, in the full rule list of the devblog. It's not in there, it's above there. But you did update all the other rules properly... Done on purpose for an entierly different reason? Quote:Next week we will be going into more detail about how you can participate in the random draw and how to apply for an auction spot. Today we want to look at tournament rules and what we wanted to achieve with these. While a full listing is available below for your perusal, and will be updated on the new Alliance Tournament page next week, we would like to take a moment and highlight some of the important changes:
We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the qualifying rounds from five to six. We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the final two weekends from 10 to 12. Match times have been reduced from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. Ship point values have been changed with some ships going down in cost. Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees. These are some of the main rule changes which we feel will add to the overall betterment of Alliance Tournament. Below is the full rule list for your information.
Match Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ teams for bigger Alliances.
I get it. You're not going to get it. Enough. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:43:00 -
[449] - Quote
Typhu5 wrote: But now i am only tired reading this thread.
Amen brother. This troll is moving on. |
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:44:00 -
[450] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:iLLeLogicaL wrote: What's different? They're both the sole A-teams of their respective alliances. They just spar together for the sake of convenience
the difference is that last year was last year? Do I really have to say this? Still don't see how they broke a "rule" if you cannot provide any proof of their malicious intent. They just trained together in one wh, against each other. Because you can't get crap for fights on sisi. And next time proof read, because you didn't include the "rule", the one and only, in the full rule list of the devblog. It's not in there, it's above there. But you did update all the other rules properly... Done on purpose for an entierly different reason? Quote:Next week we will be going into more detail about how you can participate in the random draw and how to apply for an auction spot. Today we want to look at tournament rules and what we wanted to achieve with these. While a full listing is available below for your perusal, and will be updated on the new Alliance Tournament page next week, we would like to take a moment and highlight some of the important changes:
We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the qualifying rounds from five to six. We are increasing the number of ships you can field in the final two weekends from 10 to 12. Match times have been reduced from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. Ship point values have been changed with some ships going down in cost. Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees. These are some of the main rule changes which we feel will add to the overall betterment of Alliance Tournament. Below is the full rule list for your information.
Match Rules
Tournament Rules
This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter. There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day. All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012. All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games. To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ teams for bigger Alliances. I get it. You're not going to get it. Enough.
No you don't. You made a stupid mistake and didn't include in the list. Ergo not a valid rule. |
|
Hroya
51
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:46:00 -
[451] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote: Live by the metagame, die by the metagame. You make a stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, decision to flaunt the rules with some flimsy response from a GM and what do you really ******* expect. I mean comeon.
Hehe yeah, if that happens then cest la vie. But come on, they got "caught", wich i might add doesnt seem all that difficult to me to do if you have the right tools at your disposal, but in the spirit of this milestone you could combine punishement with some true eve understanding and not go for a complete whipe but go for the middleground. It would make this years AT that much more hillarious, unless of course it's all serious schnitzelbussiness and those pixels mean the world to you. Like i said, some schemes you wont even catch in time, they are that well hidden.
You go your corridor but. |
Tish Magev
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:47:00 -
[452] - Quote
You know what both Sreegs and Soundwave are causing more ruccous round here than anyone else.
Hilmar, i implore you that during the next round of CCP staff cuts get rid of these two idiots, SW should have gone last time as it is.
But hey who would have expected it from these two, oh wait, once a goon always a goon. |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
57
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:48:00 -
[453] - Quote
How am I spamming, Sreegs? I am just asking questions. If I am breaking any forum rules then please remind me which rules I am breaking and I will cease to do so.
And again, you ignored the part about other teams considering doing the very same thing.
And the unanswered emails.
Time Funnel wrote:Intigo wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. I would love to know this too. And the fact that he has yet to address anything about CVA considering to do the very same thing we did and thinking it was well within the rules (as we did). CVA should be banned! They did what we did! We were banned! THIS IS SO TERRIBLY UNFAIR. WHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA
I don't want CVA banned, they are awesome guys. I am using them as an example, simply. You should be able to see how silly it is that 2 teams get instantly banned over something that 2 entirely different entities had considered doing thinking it was well within the rules - just as HYDRA & Outbreak thought.
And this being after any attempts at clarification were completely ignored by the Alliance Tournament team.
This is the part in question:
Quote:-4th and CVA decided to train against each other, testing setups. We would dicsuss failures, wins, errors made etc, but in the end we would never make a deal, just train together. -We discussed forming 1 (ONE) corporation to make these training in wormholes possible; if we wouldnt merge, 4th would have been forced to spend days and days to setup their own pos, to do this.
|
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:50:00 -
[454] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. Translation: Just give me a victory. Give me some satisfaction. Anything. I need to be right about something! I need to blame someone for something!
Please point out where I'm lying. Screegs goes from "you're wrong about the facts" to trolling once I do actually post the facts. I thought it's supposed to be the other way around ? |
ScoRpS
0utbreak Outbreak.
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:50:00 -
[455] - Quote
Sreegs you are a diplomatic nightmare. CCP should actually curbe your rights to post tbh.
|
SwindonBadger
0utbreak Outbreak.
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:50:00 -
[456] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails.
This would end allot of forum posting, just be honest, its ok, remeber after the whole Im s powerful If I wanted to ban you I can ban you speach, |
Ruareve
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:51:00 -
[457] - Quote
Seems to me CCP is enforcing the spirit of the rules rather than the letter. The rules said an alliance could not have a B team entered. Hydra and Outbreak are clearly two alliances entering two separate A teams.
However...
If you change the wording to Hydra and Outbreak were operating as one team with two entrants then the spirit of the rules has been met even though the letter was not.
Now take a look at the case of PL. They were fulfilling the spirit of the rules while CCP claimed PL broke the letter. In this case CCP ignored their own wording and failed to punish both teams as they said they would.
At this point I would say the confusion surrounding the wording of the AT rules is enough to warrant re-looking the issue.
How much can two separate entities train against each other before they are considered the same team?
Do movements of personnel and corps/alliances on Sisi have the consequence as movements on Live?
While I agree the final match last year was a complete and total letdown I think the current method of handling the situation has been rather poor. CCP spelled out the rules vaguely, clarification was sought with a poorly worded inquiry, and now there has been two different forms of enforcement for the same infraction.
Given all of the drama over the rules, and the lack of two of the strongest competitors, I'm wondering if the AT is even gonna be worth watching this year.
(Please not I didn't even come close to mentioning the conspiracy thoughts behind PL's massive Plex bid and the fact they remain in the tournament even though CCP said they broke the rules) |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:51:00 -
[458] - Quote
Tish Magev wrote:You know what both Sreegs and Soundwave are causing more ruccous round here than anyone else.
Hilmar, i implore you that during the next round of CCP staff cuts get rid of these two idiots, SW should have gone last time as it is.
But hey who would have expected it from these two, oh wait, once a goon always a goon.
Wtf ? Soundwave did a fantastic job after the layoffs, firing him would've been a huge mistake. You're an idiot. |
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
93
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:53:00 -
[459] - Quote
Sreegs, I think you are doing a great job handling ATX and responding to these myriad of troll questions. Keep up the good work. |
Jovan Geldon
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
434
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:54:00 -
[460] - Quote
Tyrrax Thorrk wrote:Tish Magev wrote:You know what both Sreegs and Soundwave are causing more ruccous round here than anyone else.
Hilmar, i implore you that during the next round of CCP staff cuts get rid of these two idiots, SW should have gone last time as it is.
But hey who would have expected it from these two, oh wait, once a goon always a goon. Wtf ? Soundwave did a fantastic job after the layoffs, firing him would've been a huge mistake. You're an idiot.
You might call it...an ~awesome~ job
Heh
...I'll get my coat |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1435
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:56:00 -
[461] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:Sreegs, I think you are doing a great job handling ATX and responding to these myriad of troll questions. Keep up the good work.
I'm demanding overtime! "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:00:00 -
[462] - Quote
Intigo wrote: I don't want CVA banned, they are awesome guys. I am using them as an example, simply. You should be able to see how silly it is that 2 teams get instantly banned over something that 2 entirely different entities had considered doing thinking it was well within the rules.
If you think that you are under the microscope because you were a large part of the reason that the rules against collusion got put in place you are probably right.
What do you really expect to happen? I mean seriously.
Sure you are good at this game and at tournaments. in fact you were the primary archetype that I used when putting together a team for this year, examining your setups, methods, and whatnot.
But you made a tactical mistake. And someone hit you with the rulebook. Overall it sucks, but they needed to stomp out collusion. It gives people an unfair advantage in a tournament format.
If you thought for a minute one guy on "Team Liquid" in Starcraft was soft playing his senior member on the same team during a final, there would be fan outrage. That is not fair, balanced, or good for anyone involved.
When a rule changes there is inertia. I believe this is the inertia.
Sorry you were made an example of. Move on. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:01:00 -
[463] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Time Funnel wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. Translation: Just give me a victory. Give me some satisfaction. Anything. I need to be right about something! I need to blame someone for something! Please point out where I'm lying. Screegs goes from "you're wrong about the facts" to trolling once I do actually post the facts. I thought it's supposed to be the other way around ?
Please point out where I am saying you are lying.
What is with you? |
DA Cassel
The Hobo Lords
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:03:00 -
[464] - Quote
Shreegs, did you get killed by Hydra/Ob on tranq? |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:05:00 -
[465] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:penifSMASH wrote:Sreegs, I think you are doing a great job handling ATX and responding to these myriad of troll questions. Keep up the good work. I'm demanding overtime!
You still haven't responded at all to the example I presented in regards to CVA & 4th. They were not mentioned in the stickies - I checked.
Time Funnel wrote:Intigo wrote: I don't want CVA banned, they are awesome guys. I am using them as an example, simply. You should be able to see how silly it is that 2 teams get instantly banned over something that 2 entirely different entities had considered doing thinking it was well within the rules.
If you think that you are under the microscope because you were a large part of the reason that the rules against collusion got put in place you are probably right. What do you really expect to happen? I mean seriously. Sure you are good at this game and at tournaments. in fact you were the primary archetype that I used when putting together a team for this year, examining your setups, methods, and whatnot. But you made a tactical mistake. And someone hit you with the rulebook. Overall it sucks, but they needed to stomp out collusion. It gives people an unfair advantage in a tournament format. If you thought for a minute one guy on "Team Liquid" in Starcraft was soft playing his senior member on the same team during a final, there would be fan outrage. That is not fair, balanced, or good for anyone involved. When a rule changes there is inertia. I believe this is the inertia. Sorry you were made an example of. Move on.
I am not saying we are "under the microscope" - that is perfectly fair if we were. What I am arguing is that other teams considered doing the EXACT same thing we did because they thought it was well within the rules (just as we did).
That is an excellent example of the fact that the rules are incredibly vague and that banning 2 separate teams over it after ignoring ALL attempts at clarification/communication and giving no warning is ludicrous.
The ruling here was based off what happened in AT IX - there is no way you can justify it based entirely off what happened in AT X. And that is just sad. "We discussed forming 1 (ONE) corporation to make these training in wormholes possible; if we wouldnt merge, 4th would have been forced to spend days and days to setup their own pos, to do this." 2 separate teams considered doing the same thing HYDRA & Outbreak did - how can you justify banning 2 teams who thought it was within the rules? |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
84
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:06:00 -
[466] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Time Funnel wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. Translation: Just give me a victory. Give me some satisfaction. Anything. I need to be right about something! I need to blame someone for something! Please point out where I'm lying. Screegs goes from "you're wrong about the facts" to trolling once I do actually post the facts. I thought it's supposed to be the other way around ? Please point out where I am saying you are lying. What is with you?
Time Funnel wrote: Just give me a victory. Give me some satisfaction. Anything. I need to be right about something!
Either I'm lying or I'm telling the truth. If I'm not pulling, I'm telling the truth. Telling the truth = I must be right correct.
|
carbomb
Super Team Munkey
11
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:07:00 -
[467] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:carbomb wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:[
None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't. I'm Sorry, where did it say that what happend in AT9 was against the rules? No rules were broken! therefore they can not be regarded as "cheats" for it. What would probably end all this posting is an admission from sreegs and co that basically this is them hitting back at last years finalists out of spite. You outmetagamed the metagamers and fair play ccp, you did it well. Just admit that this is payback and this matter will be closed. Its pretty pathetic how you are behaving. Most people can see that this was your attempt at revenge. You really are a bunch of kids at times. You made mistakes, you tried cover them up. admit your wrong doings and move along. By the way, If one of my employee's spoke to my customers the way you do to yours you would be out on your ear! Show some professionalism, man. also love how you hung the Senior GM who responded to Hydra/0utbreak out to dry to cover you behinds. Smooth! Read the stickies. You seem to have missed them if they cheated in AT9 then you would have disqualified them both and certainly not awarded them their prizes. The reason you didn't, is because there were no rules about what they did. You can not brandish them as cheats when they did not break any rules. Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
It is a wonder why you do what you do when you cant even grasp the meaning of words you use. I believe you might have a serious problem and should seek medical help. Or atleast return to school for a brush up on English Language. You dont understand the meaning of cheating or "being a cheat" here is a definition from wiki "Cheating, a term generally used for the breaking of rules to gain advantage in a competitive situation" and from the dictionary.. "cheats" to violate rules or regulations; I hope this helps!
There were not rule in AT9 that got broken. You are wrongly accusing them of being cheats. If they had done the same in this years tournament then you would be correct in calling them cheats, however, they did not, so you cant. The fact that you "believed" they were going to is irrelevant really. You are punishing them for something they have not yet done.
|
Edenmain
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:08:00 -
[468] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Intigo wrote: I don't want CVA banned, they are awesome guys. I am using them as an example, simply. You should be able to see how silly it is that 2 teams get instantly banned over something that 2 entirely different entities had considered doing thinking it was well within the rules.
If you think that you are under the microscope because you were a large part of the reason that the rules against collusion got put in place you are probably right. What do you really expect to happen? I mean seriously. Sure you are good at this game and at tournaments. in fact you were the primary archetype that I used when putting together a team for this year, examining your setups, methods, and whatnot. But you made a tactical mistake. And someone hit you with the rulebook. Overall it sucks, but they needed to stomp out collusion. It gives people an unfair advantage in a tournament format. If you thought for a minute one guy on "Team Liquid" in Starcraft was soft playing his senior member on the same team during a final, there would be fan outrage. That is not fair, balanced, or good for anyone involved. When a rule changes there is inertia. I believe this is the inertia. Sorry you were made an example of. Move on.
So people not in the same corp but who are working together aren't colluding?
I'm looking forward to seeing how CCP or Shregs, whoever, are going to police all forms of colusion, hacking TS/vents? Hacking into forums?
The most heinous crime of all, having the same corp ticker on SiSi! Mother of God.
How you going to stop collusion then Shreegs? |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
61
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:08:00 -
[469] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Suleiman Shouaa wrote:Can you just state why the CCP Alliance Tournament team chose not to respond to them, but responded to other emails. I think we all know why.
I wish I knew. If Sreegs would reply we could all rest easy because we'd have an official response! "We discussed forming 1 (ONE) corporation to make these training in wormholes possible; if we wouldnt merge, 4th would have been forced to spend days and days to setup their own pos, to do this." 2 separate teams considered doing the same thing HYDRA & Outbreak did - how can you justify banning 2 teams who thought it was within the rules? |
IamBeastx
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
25
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:09:00 -
[470] - Quote
Typhu5 wrote:IamBeastx wrote:We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a GÇÿBGÇÖ or GÇÿCGÇÖ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28644 I tried a bit sarcasm... and it did not worked... OK Yes i saw the rule and i interpreted it as, one of this two can still join the ATX, because only the B and C Team got banned. But now i am only tired reading this thread.
This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team. |
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
81
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:09:00 -
[471] - Quote
Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them.
Gee it's almost as if personal attacks weren't allowed or something. |
Sahjahn
Nex Exercitus Raiden.
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:12:00 -
[472] - Quote
So how come you didn't get banned for calling Tish an idiot?
Not personal enough?
Oh no, double standards, i forget, and of course, goons. |
KSUDruid
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:13:00 -
[473] - Quote
Man, this thread is golden!
Ok so HYDRA & Outbreak can't compete... Yes it's a shame that the defending 'champions' won't be there! But hey, at least the finals will actually be exciting to watch.
Maybe a ban to either HYDRA or Outbreak might've sufficed but to both seems a little extreme... but hey ho!
Carry on getting those tears Screegs :) |
Bruce Vendetta
Final-Vendetta
2
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:13:00 -
[474] - Quote
So, lets break this down.
- Hydra/Outbreak metagame the previous tournament then through hard-work and skill win said tournament in a undignified fashion.
- CCP, unable to do anything about the metagaming and final since it's well within tournament rules, create a new rule for the following tournament which gives them carte blanche to ban anyone from the tournament that even looks like they're colluding together or attempting to enter multiple teams.
- Hydra/Outbreak finds out about the rule change and attempts to communicate with the AT team via email to their official email address in order to ascertain exactly how far two teams can work together during testing. They state multiple times that they have no intention of working together beyond testing (which is only being done because of pilot number issues).
- The AT team ignores all communications from the two teams.
- H/O is losing time and patience and decides to try another official source that can be trusted. A senior GM is reached who basically repeats what the rules already say -
"Are 2 alliances sparring against each other and testing out ship setups before the tournament itself classed as breaking this rule?" "No, as long as those alliances are not working for the same team, so to speak"
- So far H/O have detailed their intentions to CCP on more than one occasion but received no real reply.
- Time is running short so they begin testing together anyway. Both teams merge into one corp to make the testing process easier and less time consuming.
- Another team in a similar situation to H/O (RvB) are contacted by CCP and a solution that allows them to participate is figured out. H/O are still ignored.
- Hours before the first bidding war is about to commence CCP announces that both H and O are banned because the AT team believes they are attempting a repeat of last year. Their main reason for this belief being that the two teams merged on Singularity into one corporation for testing purposes. Another duo also is banned because they are breaking this new rule as well however in their case only one of the teams from the duo are banned.
- It's later revealed that none of the communications between the AT team and H/O were even read and the GM response was not heard of until after the banning occurred.
- Through mass amounts of posting we learn that the (primary and seemingly only) reason that H/O are both banned is not because they were testing together but because they merged corps on the test server. This (and nothing else) gave CCP the indication that they were attempting a repeat of last year.
- It's stated multiple times by the AT team that the previous year has nothing to do with the banning.
- It's also stated that GM's have no say on the rulings of the AT and that any reply is basically useless. Devs are the only trusted source.
CCP Sreegs wrote:No but what I do know is what they did last year and it won't be happening again now. You're welcome.
From the way that the AT team is acting and responding many could claim bias and revenge as a motive for banning both teams rather than only one or trying to come to a mutually beneficial solution.
In my humble opinion the complete retardation surrounding this debacle has removed any credibility the AT team had. In addition, with the way Sreegs is replying you can see frustration is the cause for the lack of professionalism. However, I sincerely hope this AT is ruined completely so you can feel the pain of hundreds of wasted man hours just like H/O did. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:14:00 -
[475] - Quote
Edenmain wrote: So people not in the same corp but who are working together aren't colluding?
I'm looking forward to seeing how CCP or Shregs, whoever, are going to police all forms of colusion, hacking TS/vents? Hacking into forums?
The most heinous crime of all, having the same corp ticker on SiSi! Mother of God.
How you going to stop collusion then Shreegs?
Here is a man who explains it so much better than I can.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1357442#post1357442
That guy wins at eve. And probably life. |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
1175
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:15:00 -
[476] - Quote
Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them.
You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers. |
|
penifSMASH
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
95
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:15:00 -
[477] - Quote
Sahjahn wrote:So how come you didn't get banned for calling Tish an idiot?
Not personal enough?
Oh no, double standards, i forget, and of course, goons.
ex-GBC trash are still upset they got beat by goons on TQ for the 13th time :shobon: |
DA Cassel
The Hobo Lords
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:16:00 -
[478] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers.
Have you read what Shreegs says about everybody here? |
Intigo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
64
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:20:00 -
[479] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers.
Hi Soundwave, one of my many Danish brethren!
Do you know why all emails sent in an attempt to communicate and get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team by Garmon were completely ignored while the RvB ones were handled without issue and a compromise was made?
Alternatively, what do you think about the fact that HYDRA & Outbreak were banned over something that 2 other teams considered doing thinking it was well within the rules (just as HYDRA & Outbreak did)? "We discussed forming 1 (ONE) corporation to make these training in wormholes possible; if we wouldnt merge, 4th would have been forced to spend days and days to setup their own pos, to do this." 2 separate teams considered doing the same thing HYDRA & Outbreak did - how can you justify banning 2 teams who thought it was within the rules? |
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:21:00 -
[480] - Quote
Time Funnel wrote:Edenmain wrote: So people not in the same corp but who are working together aren't colluding?
I'm looking forward to seeing how CCP or Shregs, whoever, are going to police all forms of colusion, hacking TS/vents? Hacking into forums?
The most heinous crime of all, having the same corp ticker on SiSi! Mother of God.
How you going to stop collusion then Shreegs?
Here is a man who explains it so much better than I can. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1357442#post1357442That guy wins at eve. And probably life.
Ease of logistics. Setting up POSes, getting ships hauled in, getting right hangar access set up etc. etc. takes ages of time and having to redo this several times during the course of the tournament as SiSi updates (how often does SiSi update anyway? every week or so is what I thought....)
Doing that for two different towers takes twice as long as doing it for one. If you have two guys (one for each team) doing the logistics and it takes 100 hours every fortnight, but you could make it so each guy only spends 50 hours every fortnight, that gives you more time for life/theorycrafting/training etc. |
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1435
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:21:00 -
[481] - Quote
DA Cassel wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers. Have you read what Shreegs says about everybody here?
No please tell me what I said about everybody here. "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
iLLeLogicaL
The Red Circle Inc.
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:21:00 -
[482] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers. If I buy you a $1000 jeans will you forgo your personal vendetta against last year champs? Both teams of them.
And this isn't personal, it's just a stupid mistake to ban them both. |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
82
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:21:00 -
[483] - Quote
Sahjahn wrote:So how come you didn't get banned for calling Tish an idiot?
Not personal enough?
Oh no, double standards, i forget, and of course, goons.
I'm guessing nobody reported me for it )))))))))))
also I was right |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:21:00 -
[484] - Quote
Sahjahn wrote:So how come you didn't get banned for calling Tish an idiot?
Not personal enough?
Oh no, double standards, i forget, and of course, goons.
Oh hello Raiden(dot). Are you BoB Mk 4 or 5? I really have lost track. UMAD I assume after losing all your space? IT are back, but I guess they don't have a (dot) in their name, so you are not really interested in them. Spewing lightning bolts from your fingers is way cooler I guess.
Apparently we didn't slope you hard enough. You still are clinging to a station in Vale I see. Oh and one in Geminate too! You are nothing if not stubborn.
I have noticed a pattern. You used to win by packing 150 capitals into a node that could only support 250 people, making fights impossible. Then you used to win by dropping Titans on everything.
While you may not be gone, you are certainly not very relevant. You will know if you ever get relevant again when you get steamrolled. Again. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
1435
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:22:00 -
[485] - Quote
Intigo wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers. Hi Soundwave, one of my many Danish brethren! Do you know why all emails sent in an attempt to communicate and get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team by Garmon were completely ignored while the RvB ones were handled without issue and a compromise was made? Alternatively, what do you think about the fact that HYDRA & Outbreak were banned over something that 2 other teams considered doing thinking it was well within the rules (just as HYDRA & Outbreak did)?
wow "Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012 |
|
DA Cassel
The Hobo Lords
3
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:24:00 -
[486] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Intigo wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Sahjahn wrote:Apparantly you're not allowed to state how useless you feel certain members of CCP staff are.
Strange you'd think as paying customers you would be entitled to such opinions and able to air them. You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers. Hi Soundwave, one of my many Danish brethren! Do you know why all emails sent in an attempt to communicate and get clarification from the Alliance Tournament team by Garmon were completely ignored while the RvB ones were handled without issue and a compromise was made? Alternatively, what do you think about the fact that HYDRA & Outbreak were banned over something that 2 other teams considered doing thinking it was well within the rules (just as HYDRA & Outbreak did)? wow
Why dont you just answer the questions? |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
61
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:26:00 -
[487] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote: You think that's strange? I'm not really familiar with any games that would let people abuse staff members just because they're customers.
Oh some other CCPers reading, fascinating, so it's not just the Goon.
But yeah thread is full of gold after a brief browsing pause, and this:
carbomb wrote:
There were not rule in AT9 that got broken. You are wrongly accusing them of being cheats. If they had done the same in this years tournament then you would be correct in calling them cheats, however, they did not, so you cant. The fact that you "believed" they were going to is irrelevant really. You are punishing them for something they have not yet done.
CCP Sreegs wrote: None of those teams had a history of cheating using the exact same methods they were using again this year. Were we not to have to enforce these new rules a conversation with PL or RvB wouldn't have been necessary because those teams would have been in.
I hope this helps but it probably won't.
____
Yes, banning a team from the tournament for continued wrongdoing is similar to developer scandals involving item creation. You clearly have a firm grasp on reality and are good with perspective.
____
Thank you for telling me why I do what I do. They are cheats because they were cheating which is why they won't be in this year's tournament as explained in two sticky posts in this very forum.
So Hydra and OB didn't cheat last year, in CCP Sreegs' opinion? (Several different quotes merged due to the forum limit)
penifSMASH wrote:Sreegs, I think you are doing a great job handling ATX and responding to these myriad of troll questions. Keep up the good work.
Agreed |
Ravelin Eb
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:26:00 -
[488] - Quote
I like you Sreegs, you deft handling of the myriad of idiots and cheaters bawwing in this thread brings a small tear of joy to my otherwise dead eye.
If only people knew what collusion means, then we could of done without every hydrabreak/pubbie post. |
Time Funnel
Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 16:27:00 -
[489] - Quote
Suleiman Shouaa wrote: Ease of logistics. Setting up POSes, getting ships hauled in, getting right hangar access set up etc. etc. takes ages of time and having to redo this several times during the course of the tournament as SiSi updates (how often does SiSi update anyway? every week or so is what I thought....)
Doing that for two different towers takes twice as long as doing it for one. If you have two guys (one for each team) doing the logistics and it takes 100 hours every fortnight, but you could make it so each guy only spends 50 hours every fortnight, that gives you more time for life/theorycrafting/training etc.
Wow, so you WEREN'T colluding like you were last year. So sorry. It is just WAY EASIER to operate as one entity and not two. That way you don't have to come up with new and original setups and can share resources like intel, theorycrafters, and logistics. |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
1351
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 21:57:00 -
[490] - Quote
As the discussion runs in circles with all the arguments exchanged, there is nothing much more constructive to add and thus I lock this thread.
As reminder I would like to point to the following official statements: Devblog about Alliance Tournament X Rules Teams removed from Competition Clarification on Hydra/Outbreak and the GM response
CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one page] |