Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Kay Han
Caldari Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:24:00 -
[91]
Lol u shouldnt have posted Grimmi...
They had a ****ed director who disbanded them... They joined their alt alliance in order to keep souv in a few systems. No big deal till then... everythings legal.
But having u guys jump up and down like Molle says isnt an Option, tbh...
There were NO, ABSOLUTLY NO reason for u guys to change the name of Kenzoku to band of Brothers Reloaded (which is even more worse then Kenzoku tbh)
U just screwed a lot of Players... A lot.
But yeahhh i think just another scandal of this dimension is what the game really really and very badly needed...
Originally by: CCP Atropos Personally I think Amarr ships should consume slaves in a similar way that other ships consume ammunition.
|
Sunglasses InSpace
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:24:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Originally by: thelung187
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
But remember perspective. CCP could have 'cheated' a lot more in the past few months for BoB. But they didn't.
You're not seriously giving this as a rationalization are you?
I'm just saying you all need to step back and look at the big picture.
I really don't think this is a big deal since CCP could have rolled back sov had they wanted to.
So they changed the name of some alliance that holds a handful of systems. How does this effect the game?
You still know who to hate. Now get off this forum and go blow something up.
Aside from BoBR not losing sov when the name was changed, it doesn't affect the game directly. However, it shows that CCP doesn't much care for their own rules when compared to other incidents of alliances that want a new name.
|
Firdevsi
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:26:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Firdevsi on 24/03/2009 16:26:21 I posted this in CSM thread and I'll post it here. IMO, it is pretty clear the reasons provided by GM Grimmi are just "damage control" excuses for a decision that should not have been taken.
Quote: provided a petition was created within a reasonable timeframe
KenZoku was not an alliance created after BoB was disbanded. And, the name choice of "Kenzoku" was certainly not due to the unavailability of the name "Band of Brothers". It was an industrial-alt alliance used by Reikoku.
Alliance creation date: 2008.12.08 23:42
Ex-BoB corps joined Kenzoku to get sov back asap. CCP says that the petition for name change came when BoB was disbanded, which means the name change petition dates almost 3 months after the creation of Kenzoku alliance. 3 months is not a petition made within a reasonable timeframe. GM's logic and rationalization of the decision fail.
|
Zang Hoor
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:26:00 -
[94]
Originally by: clone 1 Edited by: clone 1 on 24/03/2009 16:03:12
Originally by: ry ry
it's a non-issue. the only people who care what bob are called are bob and, predictably, goons.
Sorry but you are wrong. I don't like goons, I don't like them more than I don't like BOB/.BOB. .
It affects me because I was denied a 'name change' (all I wanted was a capital 'C') and was denied due to the rules by which everybody in the game are governed, and it applies to me because our old alliance was denied a change of 'U' to 'u' (within the first hours of creating the alliance) based on the rules by which everybody in the game are governed. Everybody it seems except BOB.
Rules are rules until a BOB incident changes them.
"Please keep in mind that the names cannot be changed after you have created the account, character or corporation so please take care what you name them."
"Player-run corporations, factions, organizations and player-owned items within the EVE Online game world are also subject to these rules and policies."
http://www.eveonline.com/pnp/namepolicy.asp
That's why I am ****ed off. THAT'S WHY.
can i have your stuff ? whining ?
|
Proxay
Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:26:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Originally by: thelung187
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
But remember perspective. CCP could have 'cheated' a lot more in the past few months for BoB. But they didn't.
You're not seriously giving this as a rationalization are you?
I'm just saying you all need to step back and look at the big picture.
I really don't think this is a big deal since CCP could have rolled back sov had they wanted to.
So they changed the name of some alliance that holds a handful of systems. How does this effect the game?
You still know who to hate. Now get off this forum and go blow something up.
PRECISELY.
Genius, you're a visionary.
We don't recruit anyone, go away. |
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:27:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: ry ry rules are not being broken
You've kind of missed the point here, haven't you?
Originally by: ry ry sadly in this case it's a name change and no matter how much you try to blow it out of perspective, or imply that it is proof of some greater level of shadowy cheating, it's essentially meaningless.
The 'greater level of shadowy cheating' has come and gone, all people are looking for is proof that it has the potential to occur again. Are you new here or what?
perhaps they would do better looking for a sense of perspective?
|
Mathin Storm
Amarr MEK Enterprises Mjolnir Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:27:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Originally by: thelung187
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
But remember perspective. CCP could have 'cheated' a lot more in the past few months for BoB. But they didn't.
You're not seriously giving this as a rationalization are you?
I'm just saying you all need to step back and look at the big picture.
and the big picture is that they changed BoB's name and not any of the other alliances that petitioned for it. so why BoB and not the others? "DISCLAIMER" /shrug, guess its time for the obligatory "disclaimer" here...
My posts on these here boards are MY views and only mine. in NO way should they be associated with my corp and/or allian |
Zang Hoor
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:28:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Kay Han Lol u shouldnt have posted Grimmi...
They had a ****ed director who disbanded them... They joined their alt alliance in order to keep souv in a few systems. No big deal till then... everythings legal.
But having u guys jump up and down like Molle says isnt an Option, tbh...
There were NO, ABSOLUTLY NO reason for u guys to change the name of Kenzoku to band of Brothers Reloaded (which is even more worse then Kenzoku tbh)
U just screwed a lot of Players... A lot.
But yeahhh i think just another scandal of this dimension is what the game really really and very badly needed...
so u leave too ??? can i have your stuff too.. ????
|
Gefunkt
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:28:00 -
[99]
Originally by: ry ry sadly in this case it's a name change and no matter how much you try to blow it out of perspective, or imply that it is proof of some greater level of shadowy cheating, it's essentially meaningless.
Given the proven history of of cheating between the two entities in question, we are 100% correct in demanding a greater level of transparency.
On one side, we have BOBR. On the other, we have several examples of alliances that requested a renaming due to typos and were denied. What makes the case of BOBR different from the case of, say, Stain Allaince?
|
Shenko Minara
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:28:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Greme
Actually, on this note: Wasn't POS Bowling only really changed after a BoB precedent aswell?
POS Bowling: using the bumping mechanics, extreme size of capitals/supercapitals, and ability to land ships at any point in space, in order to bump ships out of the protective POS shield.
BoB and allied forced took to this with their Titans and Motherships. Shortly after Goonswarm built a Titan and joined in, it was deemed to be an exploit.
Take that as you will. -- 99% of Eve-o posters should stop posting. This probably includes me, but definitely includes you. |
|
Igus
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:29:00 -
[101]
this is really just another step (and probably the most effective as of yet) in theit"need for speed" changes. what better way to reduce lag than to **** off players enough to leave the game. its brilliant ccp! oh please oh please will you lend me someone to manage my company i really need customer suport like only you can give! -- Uhg, I think I need a flux capacitor
|
Montasque
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:30:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Originally by: thelung187
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
But remember perspective. CCP could have 'cheated' a lot more in the past few months for BoB. But they didn't.
You're not seriously giving this as a rationalization are you?
I'm just saying you all need to step back and look at the big picture.
I really don't think this is a big deal since CCP could have rolled back sov had they wanted to.
So they changed the name of some alliance that holds a handful of systems. How does this effect the game?
You still know who to hate. Now get off this forum and go blow something up.
Corruption is a slippery slope. This time it's a name change, next time it will be something bigger that has large in-game ramifications. It's not acceptable and showing favoritism one way or another has to stop.
|
Kuar Z'thain
Fraser's Finest
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:31:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Mathin Storm
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Originally by: thelung187
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
But remember perspective. CCP could have 'cheated' a lot more in the past few months for BoB. But they didn't.
You're not seriously giving this as a rationalization are you?
I'm just saying you all need to step back and look at the big picture.
and the big picture is that they changed BoB's name and not any of the other alliances that petitioned for it. so why BoB and not the others?
Look back at page #1. I agree they need to show us the precident and that this incident is not a 'new policy' for CCP.
Until then, innocent until proven guilty (regarding this issue at least).
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:31:00 -
[104]
Originally by: ry ry perhaps they would do better looking for a sense of perspective?
Another proponent of "this is a minor issue and we can safely say that CCP would never do anything significant to help BoB"?
You've convinced me. CCP would certainly never do anything that actually made a material difference, like say spawning BPOs. That would never happen. -
DesuSigs |
TheGunslinger42
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:31:00 -
[105]
What a complete joke. Theres no reason they deserved to get special treatment and have their alliance renamed. What happened was well within game mechanics and "fair" gameplay, so their petition should have failed.
Complete. Bloody. Joke.
|
Corban Mah
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:32:00 -
[106]
Considering 3000 people got screwed over because of poor game mechanics, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't be allowed to change at least their name.
Goonfail needs to stfu and everyone else complaining too.
|
Tyger Maul
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:32:00 -
[107]
Pretty dang funny that all the controversies always involve BoB.
The new Eve slogan:
Eve..Where you control your destiny.*
*Unless game mechanics negatively affect the corporations we favor, in which case CCP reserves the right to break all rules and throw all sense of fairness out the window.
Grimmi for United States Treasury Secretary! |
Leellu Multipass
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:32:00 -
[108]
As a long time player who's been a player since the days of beta I find this unacceptable.
It is blatant favoritism. And after everything CCP has went trough because of the favoritism towards the alliance formerly known as BoB doing this just tells us that you don't care about maintaining a game that has a fair playing field for all the players.
I spoke with my wallet when the t20 incident came out and I quit the game for 2 years. Only to come back and see that nothing changed.
If you're going to have a GM/Developer alliance then please come out publicly and stop deceiving the player base.
|
Nimue Medb
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:33:00 -
[109]
Hell if you don't like it, can't stomach it, feel let down or feel your e-peen is suddenly smaller than it was when you woke up, take a stand and leave instead of whining in these forums. It's doing my head in.
I'm new. Can I have your stuff?
|
rValdez5987
Amarr PROGENITOR CORPORATION
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:33:00 -
[110]
Well now that goons arent blue I can really speak my mind a bit better.
Stop crying goons. You have their space so why do you care about what they call themselves?
The truth to that is you will never be satisfied until Band of Brothers ceases to exist in any form, a goal which you will NEVER reach. |
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:34:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Until then, innocent until proven guilty (regarding this issue at least).
They've already been proven guilty in the past. This is not an isolated issue. It is up to them to prove that they haven't been up to the same kind of crap again this time. -
DesuSigs |
Sertan Deras
Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:34:00 -
[112]
I'm still waiting for CCP to show us some precedent here, as they claim was set at some point. Again, we've provided plenty of examples where you wouldn't do a completely harmless name changes. Why are you afraid, or incapable, of providing a single example where you have?
|
Kuar Z'thain
Fraser's Finest
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:34:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Montasque Corruption is a slippery slope. This time it's a name change, next time it will be something bigger that has large in-game ramifications. It's not acceptable and showing favoritism one way or another has to stop.
I completly agree. So CCP, when have you done this before? Inquiring minds want to know.
Precident proves me right, lack of it proves me wrong.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:34:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Gefunkt
Originally by: ry ry sadly in this case it's a name change and no matter how much you try to blow it out of perspective, or imply that it is proof of some greater level of shadowy cheating, it's essentially meaningless.
Given the proven history of of cheating between the two entities in question, we are 100% correct in demanding a greater level of transparency.
On one side, we have BOBR. On the other, we have several examples of alliances that requested a renaming due to typos and were denied. What makes the case of BOBR different from the case of, say, Stain Allaince?
At the very least, I think that a clarification on the precise rule from CCP would be very useful here.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
clone 1
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation Lotto Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:35:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Zang Hoor
Originally by: clone 1 [stuff
can i have your stuff ? whining ?
Sure, let me apply some force of evil and my euphoria will be released.
-------------------------------------------------- The Angels Have the Phone Box |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:35:00 -
[116]
Edited by: Crumplecorn on 24/03/2009 16:36:53
Originally by: Nimue Medb Hell if you don't like it, can't stomach it, feel let down or feel your e-peen is suddenly smaller than it was when you woke up, take a stand and leave instead of whining in these forums. It's doing my head in.
Giving up instead of trying to fix problems is always the better solution.
Also, +5 for continuing to read a forum that 'does your head in'. -
DesuSigs |
Captain ULTIMATE
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:36:00 -
[117]
Originally by: ry ry hey, i don't care what they're called or if CCP changed their name for them. i also don't think the issue warrants the sort of tedious FAUX INTERNET OUTRAGE it's going to illicit.
sadly in this case it's inconsequential (beyond the additional load on the servers) and no matter how much you try to blow it out of perspective, or imply that it is proof of some greater level of shadowy cheating, it's essentially meaningless.
if you really want to show CCP how angry you are, vote with your feet. once all those canceled subs start hitting them in the bank-account they'll be forced to reconsider their evil cheating ways.
Yes I agree, you don't appear to think much at all. Rules are being broken... by CCP. Let's do a test, go ahead and petition that amazing name you have, see if they'll even capitalize it for you without actually changing your name at all. They won't. They will say their name policy does not allow it. This has been their policy for years now without exception other then offensive terms. So basically, get out?
|
Drunk Driver
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:36:00 -
[118]
Ever try to puke out of a porthole underneath the forward part of the flight deck on an aircraft carrier?
The updraft provides some interesting effects on airborne fluids.
Oh, wait..... Were we talking about something important?
|
ry ry
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:36:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: ry ry perhaps they would do better looking for a sense of perspective?
Another proponent of "this is a minor issue and we can safely say that CCP would never do anything significant to help BoB"?
You've convinced me. CCP would certainly never do anything that actually made a material difference, like say spawning BPOs. That would never happen.
T20 giving hims player-character a ****load of RPs on the sly is very different to Bob successfully petitioning their own name following a 2 month (!) investigation by CCP, you big drama lama you.
|
Kuar Z'thain
Fraser's Finest
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 16:36:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Until then, innocent until proven guilty (regarding this issue at least).
They've already been proven guilty in the past. This is not an isolated issue. It is up to them to prove that they haven't been up to the same kind of crap again this time.
Wow, remind me to never have you in a Jury.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |