EVE Search - [Proposal] Disband BOBR

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] Disband BOBR

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 70 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Retepp Nedsmul	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:09:00 - [1741] Does the CSM have a position on this?
Pedowitsch Marquie-X Corp Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:10:00 - [1742]
Cipher7	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:11:00 - [1743] nerds whining about their e-civil rights news at 11 ---
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:11:00 - [1744] Edited by: Yaay on 24/03/2009 23:11:37 Originally by: Xianbei Originally by: Buxaroo Edited by: Buxaroo on 23/03/2009 21:34:19 I already made a bet that someone would make a post like this. Thanks for making me 100 mil isk. And if it wasn't for a POOR game mechanic, you know, disbanding an alliance in a SECOND when you can't even LEAVE a corp in 24 hours, then there wouldn't be a NEED to a renaming. how many fsking bugs and poor mechanics are in this game that EVERY FREAKING player has to deal with you spoiled, cheating piece of crap and damn, you had a chance to rename your alliance and you chose THAT ? phailbuffet oops... Refer to 5 post up please DD changes Docking PVP games
Geralt Rivia Xanadu	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:11:00 - [1745] again , which msn contact was it this time?
Wu Jiaqiu Minmatar	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:11:00 - [1746] Originally by: Yaay I'm confused, what happened again? A GM did something to favor bob... really, a GM? So this GM did something epicly horrible? And we're sure it's a GM? So and like it was something game changing and unallowable? What could this supposedly GM have done? CHANGE A NAME? Dear god, black is white, up is down, bob are goons. It's a ****ing game. Something unintended did happen... The Mittanni clearly INTENDED to disband your alliance. Also this isn't about a simple name change, its about the rules.
Thea Yulivee Gemeinschaft interstellarer Soeldner	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:12:00 - [1747]
Surreal Angeline	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:13:00 - [1748]
Akoudoulos Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:13:00 - [1749] Originally by: Yaay emo but good post It is a big deal only because with the name change you kept the sov, you could have done it the proper way as the rest, create a new alliance I agree with you that game mechanics happen to not work as intended and are getting fixed all the time, but thats game mechanins, alliance name change IS NOT a game mechanism, it is pure favorism and THAT is unacceptable by CCP or ANY other company that want to see their fixed rate paying customers the same
Gim Memore Legion Federation	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:14:00 - [1750]
TheGunslinger42	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:14:00 - [1751] Renaming Kenzoku was completely unnecessary, I thought name changes were just for "offensive" names and such, not for people deciding hey we want to jump into this alliance to quickly get some sov and then change it to a new name later
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:14:00 - [1752] Originally by: Wu Jiaqiu Originally by: Yaay I'm confused, what happened again? A GM did something to favor bob... really, a GM? So this GM did something epicly horrible? And we're sure it's a GM? So and like it was something game changing and unallowable? What could this supposedly GM have done? CHANGE A NAME? Dear god, black is white, up is down, bob are goons. It's a ****ing game. Something unintended did happen... The Mittanni clearly INTENDED to disband your alliance. Also this isn't about a simple name change, its about the rules. Again, you're quoting rules of a game... not even a real sport, but a cyber online fun game. And even worse, nobody is affected by this one b/c nobody who want's a name change has a history to back up the logic for their change like BoB does. grow up you tool DD changes Docking PVP games
Dhejay Centrix The Wailing Doom	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:15:00 - [1753] Edited by: Dhejay Centrix on 24/03/2009 23:15:29 I'd like an immediate refund of the isk spent when reforming our alliance after it was formed incorrectly the first time please, just for the sake of fairness. Let's see if that happens.... Disband BoBr... If you pronounce the ticker it sounds more like Band of Bristolians now.
Himo Amasacia Minmatar Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:15:00 - [1754] Originally by: Yaay remember when WE bumped people out of a POS with titans. Game mechanics were in place to allow it, but zomg, it was so haxorly bad and game changing... it must stop!!! and it did. And players got threatened with bans because of using a game mechanic in an unintended fashion. Firtst of all I corrected what you said Actually it was labeled an exploit, and then suddenly because of your whining it was NOT labeled an exploit anymore despite NO in game methods being there to stop it. Then YOU did it dozens of times a day for a solid month, and then the VERY DAY goonswarm launched its first mothership, thereby gaining the capability to do it back to you, the GMs suddenly said it was an exploit again and not to do it. No sign of favoritism there really. "Constant practice devoted to one subject often outdoes both intelligence and skill." -Cicero
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:15:00 - [1755] Originally by: Akoudoulos Originally by: Yaay emo but good post It is a big deal only because with the name change you kept the sov, you could have done it the proper way as the rest, create a new alliance I agree with you that game mechanics happen to not work as intended and are getting fixed all the time, but thats game mechanins, alliance name change IS NOT a game mechanism, it is pure favorism and THAT is unacceptable by CCP or ANY other company that want to see their fixed rate paying customers the same or they could roll back the sov and give us our alliance back... this is the far less of 2 evils... it's not like we didn't suffer initially. Talk about wanting to kick a guy while he's down. DD changes Docking PVP games
Princess Scarlite Heatseekers	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:16:00 - [1756]
Major Deviant	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:16:00 - [1757]
iakxos	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:16:00 - [1758] shame on ccp.. one rule for all..
Palmer Eldritch Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:18:00 - [1759] Originally by: Yaay Again, you're quoting rules of a game... not even a real sport, but a cyber online fun game. And even worse, nobody is affected by this one b/c nobody who want's a name change has a history to back up the logic for their change like BoB does. grow up you tool So even you admit that this was special favouritism CCP only shows to BoB. ------------ Coranor you all know i can't stand most of the gbc but while we have them we may as well give them something challenging where they can actually learn a bit Dian fair point
Talon Scorpio Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:20:00 - [1760] Originally by: Akoudoulos Originally by: Talon Scorpio law or justice? We all know that the disbanding of bob was done in a way that begs the question of what was intended by CCP policy with regard to the one button option. That sort of thing was not intended to be used in the way it was. We know that. Further, the letter of the law...is open to interpretation in its application. And none of you are the judges in this case. You are the public. You are complicating simple stuff, Disbanding of BOB even though i do not agree with the action, was under VALID game mechanics, CCP is to say what should be from NOW on and change the specific mechanism, but what has happened is history and more importantly within the rules On the other hand renaming an already named alliance is AGAINST the rules of CCP not to even mention the character limit. Not a game mechanism not even related to button within the game or option of EVERY single eve pilot, YOU got pumpered again, on the backs of the rest that CANNOT because we MUST follow rules that you do not At this point this is a 58 page thread. Of course its complicated. The matter is still under investigation by CCP. Any changes CCP makes will benefit all of EVE. In fact, I could reasonably argue that what CCP has done already has opened up all sorts of possibilities for flexibility in how CCP applies these rules. This game is not static.
Flo Freak	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:20:00 - [1761] I support this!
Recon Three 181st Legion W A S T E L A N D	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:22:00 - [1762] Edited by: Recon Three on 24/03/2009 23:22:56 I like your "it's just a game" defense. "It's just a game, get over the fact we're at the center of yet another rule-breaking fit of nepotism, it's not important. It's just a game. Go outside. Let us sweep this under the carpet with our other shenanigans. NOTHING TO SEE HERE!" And then you see a CCP logo in an open closet making humping motions towards a loud slurping noise. _____ Guns > Missiles.
Sartyva Gemeinschaft interstellarer Soeldner	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:23:00 - [1763] The question for me is - would CCP have done this for anyone else? and the answer is obviously no....
Wu Jiaqiu Minmatar	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:23:00 - [1764] Originally by: Yaay Originally by: Wu Jiaqiu Originally by: Yaay I'm confused, what happened again? A GM did something to favor bob... really, a GM? So this GM did something epicly horrible? And we're sure it's a GM? So and like it was something game changing and unallowable? What could this supposedly GM have done? CHANGE A NAME? Dear god, black is white, up is down, bob are goons. It's a ****ing game. Something unintended did happen... The Mittanni clearly INTENDED to disband your alliance. Also this isn't about a simple name change, its about the rules. Again, you're quoting rules of a game... not even a real sport, but a cyber online fun game. And even worse, nobody is affected by this one b/c nobody who want's a name change has a history to back up the logic for their change like BoB does. grow up you tool Quoting the rules of a game is wrong? That shows how ignorant you are. "Like BoB does" Too bad, CCP shouldnt be choosing favorites over others. A failed alliance is a failed alliance, we can't just bail you out because your too big of a company to fail. /wink wink
Akoudoulos Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:26:00 - [1765] Originally by: Yaay Originally by: Akoudoulos Originally by: Yaay emo but good post It is a big deal only because with the name change you kept the sov, you could have done it the proper way as the rest, create a new alliance I agree with you that game mechanics happen to not work as intended and are getting fixed all the time, but thats game mechanins, alliance name change IS NOT a game mechanism, it is pure favorism and THAT is unacceptable by CCP or ANY other company that want to see their fixed rate paying customers the same or they could roll back the sov and give us our alliance back... this is the far less of 2 evils... it's not like we didn't suffer initially. Talk about wanting to kick a guy while he's down. mate have they ever rolled back the server?? not even with the POS exploit that happened, and that was a serious problem, i totally get where you are coming from, if you want to be named KOUKOUROUKOU Band of Brothers thats a valid request, the mechanics of the game allows you to Create any alliance name you want, the function that got bob disolved WAS a a valid mechanism, right or wrong but it was there, what happened cannot be changed, although CCP must introduce a fix or something because it is really not how disbanding should happen, But you must follow the rules because atm you didn't and that have impact on the rest, you kept sov 3! I for example 2-3 weeks ago i petitioned, to change my alts corp history and delete a corp from the list, THAT couldn't hurt anybody, yet i got a negative answer stating that Characters names and history CANNOT be changed, iguess the GM was wrong after all. should i petition again? it was pure sentimental value for my alt to just have 1 corp in his history should i be treated differintly?
Recon Three 181st Legion W A S T E L A N D	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:27:00 - [1766] Originally by: Wu Jiaqiu Quoting the rules of a game is wrong? That shows how ignorant you are. "Like BoB does" Too bad, CCP shouldnt be choosing favorites over others. A failed alliance is a failed alliance, we can't just bail you out because your too big of a company to fail. /wink wink Oh snap, bailout reference. IT'S ON! _____ Guns > Missiles.
Alpha Dragh	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:29:00 - [1767]
Nnamuachs Kiith Paktu Veneratio Venator Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:31:00 - [1768] While i'm not really a fan of Goonswarm, atleast they don't pretend to be some benevolent alliance of loving goody two-shoes and friendly to all like some people assume they should be... they're ***s and that's that... However, this does set a relatively poor precedent once again that "CCP favors TAFKABOB". Whether through the action of a rogue GM/Dev etc.. (In which this is obviously "not" a case of a rogue GM since it was not "immediately" rectified") In which it seems like a sanctioned change specifically for this alliance, with "less" of a reason to have their name changed than alliances that accidently made a mistype and have to reform their alliance + fees. Kenzoku Existed for quite a few months "before" the former bob corporations joined into it to start on their sov fest. There was no legitimate petition to be made here, there apparently were no complaints about Kenzoku's name until the former BoB members joined up at which point they had no standing. They could have easily created a new alliance on the spot with their preferred name costing them an hour of time at most since alliance creation is instantaneous. They did not do this when it was an option because they had supposedly bigger priorities, and now it has turned into a big PR nightmare for CCP because of their actions in helping former BoB members. I cannot help but put in my support for this matter as it is an obvious violation of CCP's own ethics to break/bend their rules for a singular or limited entity, regardless of how big or small the slight supposedly was it puts into motion a very slippery slope of events. As a side note.. for those saying (paraphrasing here because quoting every single one of them would use up all my posting space.) "BoB was the first alliance to have this exploit* (legitimate game mechanic) used on them, so they should be given some leeway". Is a terrible argument for the mere fact that almost the exact same thing happened to Maximum yarrage, and if you did any sort of research you would know that.
Xianbei	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:31:00 - [1769] Originally by: Yaay Edited by: Yaay on 24/03/2009 23:11:37 Originally by: Xianbei Originally by: Buxaroo Edited by: Buxaroo on 23/03/2009 21:34:19 I already made a bet that someone would make a post like this. Thanks for making me 100 mil isk. And if it wasn't for a POOR game mechanic, you know, disbanding an alliance in a SECOND when you can't even LEAVE a corp in 24 hours, then there wouldn't be a NEED to a renaming. how many fsking bugs and poor mechanics are in this game that EVERY FREAKING player has to deal with you spoiled, cheating piece of crap and damn, you had a chance to rename your alliance and you chose THAT ? phailbuffet oops... Refer to 5 post up please please link a post where CCP says that the game mechanic which lead to Bob disbanding was UNINTENDED game mechanic. please link that post or blog and I will go away.
Wu Jiaqiu Minmatar	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:31:00 - [1770] Originally by: Recon Three Originally by: Wu Jiaqiu Quoting the rules of a game is wrong? That shows how ignorant you are. "Like BoB does" Too bad, CCP shouldnt be choosing favorites over others. A failed alliance is a failed alliance, we can't just bail you out because your too big of a company to fail. /wink wink Oh snap, bailout reference. IT'S ON! Yup thats right, I went there.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 70 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.