Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Annie Sprookov
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 02:37:00 -
[121] - Quote
Exert from page 12 of the CODE of CONDUCT Standard Operating Proceedure
[2] Situational Modus Operandi Tactical Training
(a) When facing similiar numbers:
C an we win if the field is even? O hhh shite no! D uck out the back door bro's E xecute elaborate media hype :"We did it for the ISK"
(b) When facing a newbie:
C orner the newbie ship O bliterate it
I will not be dilvulging the source of this leaked document, and am unwilling to reveal any more content at this time..
I will, however add, this Operating Manual appears to be an elobaration of the footnote at the bottom of every page "Live by the CODE don't die by it!" |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5807
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 04:08:00 -
[122] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: Sure it is. Players that specifically go out of their way to disrupt the entire tournament receive a harsher penalty than those caught cheating for personal gain.
It doesn't get much more clear cut than that, as one is much, much more disruptive to the tournament than the other.
And... to put it bluntly... I don't really much care if the crap on my shoe gets upset when I scrape it off.
Really, watching matches where the outcome has been predetermined by the participants is entertaining? And I still don't see how failing to show up for a match (something that has been common in previous years) disrupts the tournament to any serious extent - if a team doesn't show by the deadline just declare them as forfeiting and move on. And your last sentence is to my point. If you don't like CODE. and don't want them to participate just be intellectually honest with yourself and admit that, rather than framing their actions as some sort of exceptional slight to the tournament that merits an unprecedented punishment. They have done nothing that hasn't been done dozens of times before and is objectively less serious than the transgressions of other major alliances in previous years. No, watching a predetermined match is not entertaining. That is why tournament rules have become more strict and will result in a Ban now. However trying to profit from fixing a match is a bit less encompassing than trying to disrupt the entire tournament schedule.
In the past when a team could not field a full team or otherwise participate in their assigned match, they at least communicated it in advance of the match. Code failed to make this good will gesture and brag that it was intentional.
And lastly, my misguided friend, I heartily approve of Code and their particular play style as an integral part of the EVE environment. They play their part and play it well. However when they stoop to disrupting an event specifically removed from the EVE universe proper as a form of pure competition for the enjoyment of the entire player base it shows complete contempt for the game, the development team, and the player base as a whole (including you and I).
It puts things on a whole different level, and is somewhat akin to kicking your chess opponent in the groin (obvious chess boxing jokes aside for the moment). Its at that moment leaving behind simply having an obnoxious play style that is perfectly valid, and crossing the line into actively trying (and ultimately failing) to be destructive to the game and player base itself.
I am quite comfortable standing by my earlier analogy. If you like EVE Online and War Thunder content stop by my YouTube channel.-á
Ranger 1 Presents https://www.youtube.com/user/Ranger1Presents |
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3350
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 04:34:00 -
[123] - Quote
Removed a post discussing moderation. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Valkin Mordirc
110
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 06:38:00 -
[124] - Quote
I used to think CODE. was something useful, however it's become ever more apparent and clear as time passes by, that they are nothing but a closed gated community laughing at the same jokes that have been passed around the same table for sometime now. The outside world which are shunned, consider them more and more of a joke to laughed at, and maybe a read about in the morning because you have nothing better to do. Rather than something useful and content creative, sure you can gank a empty freighter but what they've done to themselves, they've become a redundant source to the game. The fact that they simply joined AT just to quit as a joke, makes them a laughstock of EVE.
Not so much as a comedian, but the town fool. CODE have made themselves the joke of the community, and they don't even understand that they are the butt of the joke. And have become a faceless ghost of what they were before, I hope CODE can reform to what they once stood for, but right as it stands they are just as bad as the NPC-Acolytes they once said they would stop. Mindless ganking, with no real goal. Psychotic Monk for CSM9 |
Rabe Raptor
The Conference Elite CODE.
79
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 07:10:00 -
[125] - Quote
Revis Owen wrote:Rayo Atra wrote:infraction X = annoying CCP id guess. Possible, but not proportional. If you're saying CCP doesn't have to be proportional in it's reaction to infractions, I disagree.
careful, questioning a ruling constitutes an attack on CCP which we certainly don't want
Together we can make Highsec a better place! The Law of Highsec Read it, share it, learn it, quote it, live it! |
Jessica Talvanen
Furyan Federation Carthage Empires
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 07:46:00 -
[126] - Quote
Just because you have attention does not mean you have respect. |
Anal Canal
The Conference Elite CODE.
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 09:06:00 -
[127] - Quote
Jessica Talvanen wrote:Just because you have attention does not mean you have respect.
Respect is overrated. It's like bland franchise chain cheese pizza. Throw in something snazzy.
Anchovies. The-áterminal end of the digestive system.-á |
Ro Fenrios
Armilies corporation Gatekeepers Universe
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 10:30:00 -
[128] - Quote
I was totally expecting CODE to provide a decree of laughter and be humiliated in AT, say... RvB FC telling his squad to watch while he goes solo massacre entire CODE team or something equally stupid. Not showing up was a slight disappointment at first, but the attempt for damage control and hilariously claiming that community is in tears over this has been almost as good now - and it seems to be only getting better.
I do think community is in tears. Tears of laughter though. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 11:09:00 -
[129] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Black Pedro wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: Sure it is. Players that specifically go out of their way to disrupt the entire tournament receive a harsher penalty than those caught cheating for personal gain.
It doesn't get much more clear cut than that, as one is much, much more disruptive to the tournament than the other.
And... to put it bluntly... I don't really much care if the crap on my shoe gets upset when I scrape it off.
Really, watching matches where the outcome has been predetermined by the participants is entertaining? And I still don't see how failing to show up for a match (something that has been common in previous years) disrupts the tournament to any serious extent - if a team doesn't show by the deadline just declare them as forfeiting and move on. And your last sentence is to my point. If you don't like CODE. and don't want them to participate just be intellectually honest with yourself and admit that, rather than framing their actions as some sort of exceptional slight to the tournament that merits an unprecedented punishment. They have done nothing that hasn't been done dozens of times before and is objectively less serious than the transgressions of other major alliances in previous years. No, watching a predetermined match is not entertaining. That is why tournament rules have become more strict and will result in a Ban now. However trying to profit from fixing a match is a bit less encompassing than trying to disrupt the entire tournament schedule. In the past when a team could not field a full team or otherwise participate in their assigned match, they at least communicated it in advance of the match. Code failed to make this good will gesture and brag that it was intentional. And lastly, my misguided friend, I heartily approve of Code and their particular play style as an integral part of the EVE environment. They play their part and play it well. However when they stoop to disrupting an event specifically removed from the EVE universe proper as a form of pure competition for the enjoyment of the entire player base it shows complete contempt for the game, the development team, and the player base as a whole (including you and I). It puts things on a whole different level, and is somewhat akin to kicking your chess opponent in the groin (obvious chess boxing jokes aside for the moment). Its at that moment leaving behind simply having an obnoxious play style that is perfectly valid, and crossing the line into actively trying (and ultimately failing) to be destructive to the game and player base itself. I am quite comfortable standing by my earlier analogy.
If we are going with chess analogies, I would put forth that you don't always have to forfeit a match by kicking your opponent, or the officials, in the nuts. You can forfeit by informing the organizers that you are not willing to play, or alternatively ,by not making it to the chess match on time because you slept in, got lost on the way to the venue, or you decided your time is better spent in your hotel room with a hooker. Each of these show varying levels of disrespect for the tournament organizers, but usually (aside from the nut-kicking) would typically just result in you forfeiting that match in a tournament, not a permaban.
I guess our different view points arise from what I said before - parts of the community view the failure to show as blatant disrespect akin to kicking CCP in the nuts because of CODE.'s general attitude and that they don't take the game as seriously as them (AKA a form of butthurt). But really, they did nothing that many other teams have done in previous years - failing to show just makes them look bad to some and doesn't really disrupt the tournament despite what some claim here. And in fact their transgression was much less than others who were left unpunished with a permanent ban. The heavy-handed permaban and the general hysterical response from the community (not from you friend, your response has been measured and at least rational from your point of view) just reinforces that CODE.'s antics have gotten to many, and this is a win for the Code.
More proof that really the Code always wins. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 11:12:00 -
[130] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Black Pedro wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: Sure it is. Players that specifically go out of their way to disrupt the entire tournament receive a harsher penalty than those caught cheating for personal gain.
It doesn't get much more clear cut than that, as one is much, much more disruptive to the tournament than the other.
And... to put it bluntly... I don't really much care if the crap on my shoe gets upset when I scrape it off.
Really, watching matches where the outcome has been predetermined by the participants is entertaining? And I still don't see how failing to show up for a match (something that has been common in previous years) disrupts the tournament to any serious extent - if a team doesn't show by the deadline just declare them as forfeiting and move on. And your last sentence is to my point. If you don't like CODE. and don't want them to participate just be intellectually honest with yourself and admit that, rather than framing their actions as some sort of exceptional slight to the tournament that merits an unprecedented punishment. They have done nothing that hasn't been done dozens of times before and is objectively less serious than the transgressions of other major alliances in previous years. No, watching a predetermined match is not entertaining. That is why tournament rules have become more strict and will result in a Ban now. However trying to profit from fixing a match is a bit less encompassing than trying to disrupt the entire tournament schedule. In the past when a team could not field a full team or otherwise participate in their assigned match, they at least communicated it in advance of the match. Code failed to make this good will gesture and brag that it was intentional. And lastly, my misguided friend, I heartily approve of Code and their particular play style as an integral part of the EVE environment. They play their part and play it well. However when they stoop to disrupting an event specifically removed from the EVE universe proper as a form of pure competition for the enjoyment of the entire player base it shows complete contempt for the game, the development team, and the player base as a whole (including you and I). It puts things on a whole different level, and is somewhat akin to kicking your chess opponent in the groin (obvious chess boxing jokes aside for the moment). Its at that moment leaving behind simply having an obnoxious play style that is perfectly valid, and crossing the line into actively trying (and ultimately failing) to be destructive to the game and player base itself. I am quite comfortable standing by my earlier analogy.
If we are going with chess analogies, I would put forth that you don't always have to forfeit a match by kicking your opponent, or the officials, in the nuts. You can forfeit by informing the organizers that you are not willing to play, or alternatively ,by not making it to the chess match on time because you slept in, got lost on the way to the venue, or you decided your time is better spent in your hotel room with a hooker. Each of these show varying levels of disrespect for the tournament organizers, but usually (aside from the nut-kicking) would typically just result in you forfeiting that match in a tournament, not a permaban.
I guess our different view points arise from what I said before - parts of the community view the failure to show as blatant disrespect akin to kicking CCP in the nuts because of CODE.'s general attitude and that they don't take the game as seriously as them (AKA a form of butthurt). But really, they did nothing that many other teams have done in previous years - failing to show just makes them look bad to some and doesn't really disrupt the tournament despite what some claim here. And in fact their transgression was much less than others who were left unpunished with a permanent ban. The heavy-handed permaban and the general hysterical response from the community (not from you friend, your response has been measured and at least rational from your point of view) just reinforces that CODE.'s antics have gotten to many, and this is a win for the Code.
More proof that really the Code always wins. |
|
Mira Robinson
115
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 12:03:00 -
[131] - Quote
Rabe Raptor wrote:Revis Owen wrote:Rayo Atra wrote:infraction X = annoying CCP id guess. Possible, but not proportional. If you're saying CCP doesn't have to be proportional in it's reaction to infractions, I disagree. careful, questioning a ruling constitutes an attack on CCP which we certainly don't want I don't think many of us have much of a problem with dropping it once they've put their foot down.
Their. Game.
Once the decision has been made, you should most definitely shut the hell up and take your punishment like an at-the-keyboard capsuleer.
Don't like it? By all means, stop giving them money. Earlier today, the Dixon Mining Guild and the Butz Manufacturing Corporation formed a coalition.
It's hard to tell if there is a light at the end of the tunnel for the Dixon-Butz Alliance. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
6537
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 12:29:00 -
[132] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:
If we are going with chess analogies, I would put forth that you don't always have to forfeit a match by kicking your opponent, or the officials, in the nuts. You can forfeit by informing the organizers that you are not willing to play, or alternatively ,by not making it to the chess match on time because you slept in, got lost on the way to the venue, or you decided your time is better spent in your hotel room with a hooker. Each of these show varying levels of disrespect for the tournament organizers, but usually (aside from the nut-kicking) would typically just result in you forfeiting that match in a tournament, not a permaban.
I guess our different view points arise from what I said before - parts of the community view the failure to show as blatant disrespect akin to kicking CCP in the nuts because of CODE.'s general attitude and that they don't take the game as seriously as them (AKA a form of butthurt). But really, they did nothing that many other teams have done in previous years - failing to show just makes them look bad to some and doesn't really disrupt the tournament despite what some claim here. And in fact their transgression was much less than others who were left unpunished with a permanent ban. The heavy-handed permaban and the general hysterical response from the community (not from you friend, your response has been measured and at least rational from your point of view) just reinforces that CODE.'s antics have gotten to many, and this is a win for the Code.
The trouble is, that what they did differs clearly from any of your examples. I can see 3 basic levels of severity to their general infraction. The mildest is really not being able to play, but making every effort to notify the organizer immediately and working with them in good faith to mitigate the trouble. An automatic loss of the match seems an appropriate response. Rematch could be possible, if both sides and the organizer come to an agreement. The middle being just not showing up without any effort put forth to inform and mitigate possible issues. A ban from the tournament would be appropriate here.
What happened this time is a bit more severe, since they just walked out from the competition intentionally dismissing and avoiding to respond to the tournament organizer. Their team didn't exactly just fail to show up. They were already there. They gave no valid reason not to fight. They chose to walk away and they dismissed the CCP without a reason and avoided their attempts at discussing the situation. Later on came the different bragging stories of questionable validity, but they probably didn't help. Clearly something more severe then a tournament ban was appropriate, but since the event is separated from the normal game CCP's options are fairly limited. Personally I can't say I would have permabanned them from the event, but they were expected to be one of the weakest tournament teams/possible joke team, so there really is very little reason to make a fuss over their demise. Basically it just means a team with no chance of making in to the final weekend can't compete in future tournaments. The quality of the tournament certainly isn't going to suffer because of them not being there and it acts as a warning to the real teams to not pull off anything similar. It's not even an obstacle for the players in their team for future participation. All they have to do is take part under a different colored flag. |
Marcius Decimus
The Dutch Rudder
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 14:59:00 -
[133] - Quote
All I have to say is that if the use of "tears" and "rage" have been redefined to what people are declaring in this thread, then the definition of "tears" and "rage" have been greatly expanded beyond any meaning. |
lt anglehe
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 15:11:00 -
[134] - Quote
Revis Owen wrote:lt anglehe wrote:Personally I would expand it to perma bans for the team captain and alliance leader, send the message, In Mother Iceland CCP fucks you
I don't imagine that happening. However, your rage is yummy . . . keep it up! :)
You see you are the epitome of why CODE is nothing more than a bunch of basement dwelling idiots.
You only see things as .. agree with us .. cool ... disagree with us .. OMFG RAGE KTHXS TEARS KKGG .
There is a whole spectrum of emotional responses to what you do that you fail to recognise because your ego's are so flimsy and insubstantial they cannot survive the idea that to 99% of the EVE population you are nothing. That's right, nothing. Non Entities, No Marks, who the **** is CODE anyway?
Keep believing you are relevant, hate to break it to you but... you are not. |
Bruce the Baker
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 15:12:00 -
[135] - Quote
I've heard the Code team have already begun preperations for participation in the New Eden Open.
The tears and the angst from the anti Code brigade when they register will no doubt be magnificent. |
Ilithyia Borgia
Overly Caffeinated
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 15:14:00 -
[136] - Quote
Let's take a moment to get our facts straight - nearly everyone CAN SHOOT BACK.
All the mining barges have drone bays, and last I checked drones are weapons that enable barges to shoot back - pretty damn effective weapons if you take some time to train for them. Skiffs and procurers even get bonuses to drone damage. Ventures are warp stabbed, can fly drones, and fit guns. Moreover A well tanked retriever can tank a good amount of damage and pose a challenge for even a seasoned solo ganker. Moreover, Concord always shoots back with 100% efficiency.
The low-level industrials all have hard-points for missile launchers and/or turrets. The buffs to the transport ships have made them pretty damn bad-ass.
These are not combat ships, but to say they cannot shoot back (especially the mining barges) is simply false.
The only ships that cannot shoot back are freighters, shuttles, and pods. Even so shuttles are speed/sig tanked, pods insta-warp, and freighters were just given options to tank (though their pitiful align time makes them pretty helpless and ISBOXER should be considered a bot program, but I digress).
Let's not forget Concord-tank. .8, .9, and 1.0 systems have asteroids...
As for fair fights - What the hell is a fair fight in EVE? Does this mean I can demand that the four HACS (with their EWAR and logi) camping me leave so I can fight 1 v 1 against a similar ship? What about a similar SP character? If you take a "fair fight" you've stepped into a trap.
Highsec is not Safesec and Eve is not about consensual PVP.
|
Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
311
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 15:21:00 -
[137] - Quote
Tear Jar wrote:8 EyedSpy wrote:Coffee Rocks wrote:b) they are victims of CCP "violating their rights unfairly". CCP has the right to do whatever they want but when one group is harshly punished for something and others are not it strikes me as pretty unfair. Yeah, I think there is something else going on that CCP isn't telling us. The only reason I can think of is that CCP just doesn't like CODE and looks for excuses to punish us. I hope that isn't the case and there is some other reason for a permaban.
The closest thing to "interesting" your group comes to is the immense force you turn out in when it comes to terms of damage control. Trust me, that's only a little entertaining - like watching a Westboro baptist church social event.
One of these days, you poor folk will realize we picture you like the smelly kid in the classroom who rubs their own poop on the wall and thinks it is hilarious. The rest of us are simply trying to ignore you exist, hoping that you'll either a) drop out of school, or b) get expelled.
In this case, though, you interrupted a football match by running out into the field naked, hit the fetal position, and started sobbing uncontrollably. It was embarrassing for you, it embarrassed the school, and it simply wasted the teams' time. So, the school chose to ban you from further football games.
Personally, I'd prefer if they just up and expelled you completely. But it's a game - you'd just resub under a new account, so v0v. http://www.thecoffeerocks.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |
Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
311
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 15:23:00 -
[138] - Quote
Marcius Decimus wrote:All I have to say is that if the use of "tears" and "rage" have been redefined to what people are declaring in this thread, then the definition of "tears" and "rage" have been greatly expanded beyond any meaning.
Right?
That's part of what I mean by their "damage control" - start logging into alts and trying to redefine what happened, and in this case, the definition of terms. It's weird, man, lol. http://www.thecoffeerocks.com Twitter: @thecoffeerocks |-áSteam: CoffeeRocks-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221 |
Fuji Tamura
Relentless Storm Cartel
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 16:14:00 -
[139] - Quote
Code knows they are a joke....and they are trying really hard to defend themselves!
If they did not care, why are they spending so much time pouring over this thread and reposting quotes and so vehemently defending a reputation they supposedly do not care about?
Go ahead CODE. and quote this on a reply and tell us again how you do not care, your pretentious tears amuse us all.
|
Rabe Raptor
The Conference Elite CODE.
85
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 16:40:00 -
[140] - Quote
Fuji Tamura wrote:Code knows they are a joke....and they are trying really hard to defend themselves!
If they did not care, why are they spending so much time pouring over this thread and reposting quotes and so vehemently defending a reputation they supposedly do not care about?
Go ahead CODE. and quote this on a reply and tell us again how you do not care, your pretentious tears amuse us all.
We don't care :) Together we can make Highsec a better place! The Law of Highsec Read it, share it, learn it, quote it, live it! |
|
Kazekage Dono
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 17:48:00 -
[141] - Quote
Rabe Raptor wrote:Fuji Tamura wrote:Code knows they are a joke....and they are trying really hard to defend themselves!
If they did not care, why are they spending so much time pouring over this thread and reposting quotes and so vehemently defending a reputation they supposedly do not care about?
Go ahead CODE. and quote this on a reply and tell us again how you do not care, your pretentious tears amuse us all.
We don't care :)
Sure you do. Troll gone bad and now we attempt to keep our heads held high.
You trolled the holy AT and now you recieve not just a hammer ... you recieved Thor's hammer. So how did it feel? |
Sa'haira
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 18:04:00 -
[142] - Quote
I am so buttmad that i challenge CODE (all of it) to a duel.
|
YinKo Toranaga
Tokko Tai
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 19:21:00 -
[143] - Quote
Revis Owen wrote:Cheating in AT = Disqualification from that AT, but no perma-ban. "Infraction X" in AT = Permaban from AT.
Could someone please fill in "Infraction X" above, which CODE. alliance committed. Obviously, "Infraction X" must be far, far worse than cheating. No-showing, even no-showing without warning, isn't worse than cheating.
If 1) no-showing without warning = AT permaban, then surely: 2) cheating = AT permaban at least, if not EVE permaban.
What was CODE.'s "Infraction X"? Because if we're just talking about "no-show without warning", I'm not seeing correct proportionality in CCP's sanction of that relative to how they sanctioned pure cheating.
Infraction X is deliberately screwing around with CCP and messing with their tournament. Notice I say "deliberately" - because it is pretty obvious that loyalanon decided to say "screw CCP" and just pull a no-show instead of withdrawing. The failure of you guys to respond in any way to CCP's inquiry was just your way of flipping them off -
so they decided to flip you all off instead with a permaban from the AT.
I'd say that is the opinion over at CCP, and it is their opinion that counts since - contrary to the opinion of James 315 - it is their game and not yours. |
Maximus Tyberius
Valhallas Gates Investment Not Yet Critical
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 00:09:00 -
[144] - Quote
It doesn't matter, C.O.D.E. can't stand a fight against REAL PVPers from a wormhole alliance. Just like Goonswarm.... |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5811
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 04:44:00 -
[145] - Quote
YinKo Toranaga wrote:Revis Owen wrote:Cheating in AT = Disqualification from that AT, but no perma-ban. "Infraction X" in AT = Permaban from AT.
Could someone please fill in "Infraction X" above, which CODE. alliance committed. Obviously, "Infraction X" must be far, far worse than cheating. No-showing, even no-showing without warning, isn't worse than cheating.
If 1) no-showing without warning = AT permaban, then surely: 2) cheating = AT permaban at least, if not EVE permaban.
What was CODE.'s "Infraction X"? Because if we're just talking about "no-show without warning", I'm not seeing correct proportionality in CCP's sanction of that relative to how they sanctioned pure cheating. Infraction X is deliberately screwing around with CCP and messing with their tournament. Notice I say "deliberately" - because it is pretty obvious that loyalanon decided to say "screw CCP" and just pull a no-show instead of withdrawing. The failure of you guys to respond in any way to CCP's inquiry was just your way of flipping them off - so they decided to flip you all off instead with a permaban from the AT. I'd say that is the opinion over at CCP, and it is their opinion that counts since - contrary to the opinion of James 315 - it is their game and not yours. Well, as was pointed out a little earlier, it wasn't just a no show.
They showed up, but when they were informed of what the bans were for the match they all decided to log off in unison and then not respond to CCP's efforts to find out what was going on.
That's a much more severe infraction than simply being a no show with no notification. If you like EVE Online and War Thunder content stop by my YouTube channel.-á
Ranger 1 Presents https://www.youtube.com/user/Ranger1Presents |
John E Normus
New Order Logistics CODE.
186
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 06:52:00 -
[146] - Quote
"And a man in my position can't afford to be made to look ridiculous." ~ Jack Woltz, The Godfather part 1
Relax guys, we get it.
Between Ignorance and Wisdom |
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 08:10:00 -
[147] - Quote
Since CODE was able to win the entire tournament without showing up to their match, this permaban won't stop them from repeating the feat and defending their title next year.
I would like to know what kind of action is being taken against RvB for their 200 billion isk bribe of CODE, and their 12 trillion isk manipulation of the betting markets. By RvB taking the pathetic step of paying their opponents to not show up, I think they should also face sanction by CCP. |
Meisuko Lian
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 08:26:00 -
[148] - Quote
What, pay and take away a fight from us? RvB fights... Individual members may have bet on the match, but that was born from our confidence in handling CODE. in the fight. |
Pro TIps
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 08:34:00 -
[149] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: Sure it is. Players that specifically go out of their way to disrupt the entire tournament receive a harsher penalty than those caught cheating for personal gain.
It doesn't get much more clear cut than that, as one is much, much more disruptive to the tournament than the other.
And... to put it bluntly... I don't really much care if the crap on my shoe gets upset when I scrape it off.
Really, watching matches where the outcome has been predetermined by the participants is entertaining? And I still don't see how failing to show up for a match (something that has been common in previous years) disrupts the tournament to any serious extent - if a team doesn't show by the deadline just declare them as forfeiting and move on. And your last sentence is to my point. If you don't like CODE. and don't want them to participate just be intellectually honest with yourself and admit that, rather than framing their actions as some sort of exceptional slight to the tournament that merits an unprecedented punishment. They have done nothing that hasn't been done dozens of times before and is objectively less serious than the transgressions of other major alliances in previous years.
|
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of Eden
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.24 15:11:00 -
[150] - Quote
Meisuko Lian wrote:What, pay and take away a fight from us? RvB fights... Individual members may have bet on the match, but that was born from our confidence in handling CODE. in the fight.
I don't see how paying the other side 200 billion to throw the match and not show up is anything other than being afraid of a fight. Loyalanon has assured me, both over chat and on teamspeak, that the only reason Code didn't show up is because RvB was afraid to face them, and paid them 200 billion to no show. See http://evenews24.com/2014/08/18/code-claims-to-be-paid-for-standing-down/
Quite a sad day for RvB.....
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |