EVE Search - Alliance rename issue

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Alliance rename issue

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 15:51:00 - [1] In what way was their gameplay prohibited under the name Kenzoku? They chose it. They used it to their advantage as a shortcut to gain sov. They fought as Kenzoku for months. There was no need or precedent to change it, period. You are acting like this is about sov when it's not. It's about strict policy being bent for only one entity to suit their whims. By making this statement you have simply made it go from bad to worse and have undone all progress you've made since the "early scandals." If you'd have come out and said "Sorry guys our bad" this issue would've faded into the night. You still have that chance though it's harder to swallow now. I also saw no updating of the naming policy for the rest of us, I assume we are once again back into "strict policy mode" on name changes? Of course, how could it be otherwise?
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 16:41:00 - [2] Originally by: Shenko Minara 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. Shortly after? I swear I remember it as being the exact same day we got our first titan, which is pretty unbelievable. I mean wait a few days at least to make it look unrelated and all.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 16:56:00 - [3] For those that are missing the clear cut issue here, unless I'm mistaken (always possible) we ended up having to fight under sov 3 conditions (jammers) in systems that wouldn't have had sov 3 yet if BoB hadn't used the shortcut taking over the Kenzoku alliance to get sov 1 immediately. They were able to use that shortcut and then later get their name changed to what they wanted (lol beave). So it's more then just a name change, it influenced sov mechanics "on the battlefield" and also broke a strict policy with years of enforcement behind it. The first one isn't that big a deal because it came with a penalty of them having to identify themselves with a name that sets young boys all a quiver, but the fact that they could then reverse it goes against all that EVE is about. Real consequences.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:02:00 - [4] Originally by: Laura Rampart That's funny because during the weekend, I saw Goonswarm doing POS bowling. And wait, what? It's legal because they have the POS's shield password. I love uninformed people That's pretty ironic since you appear to be uninformed. Having the POS password allows us to legally get inside the shields. That means we can warp to the inside of a POS and sit there if we want. If ships get bumped out, well thats the bumping mechanic. Bowling before was exploiting a mechanic that allowed you into the shields long enough to bump ships out before being bounced out. The POS shield is meant to be a safety barrier UNLESS you have the password.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:05:00 - [5] Originally by: Zang Hoor Originally by: OldPueblo For those that are missing the clear cut issue here, unless I'm mistaken (always possible) we ended up having to fight under sov 3 conditions (jammers) in systems that wouldn't have had sov 3 yet if BoB hadn't used the shortcut taking over the Kenzoku alliance to get sov 1 immediately. They were able to use that shortcut and then later get their name changed to what they wanted (lol beave). So it's more then just a name change, it influenced sov mechanics "on the battlefield" and also broke a strict policy with years of enforcement behind it. The first one isn't that big a deal because it came with a penalty of them having to identify themselves with a name that sets young boys all a quiver, but the fact that they could then reverse it goes against all that EVE is about. Real consequences. so u leave game also now ??? if so can i have your stuff plz. I was going to but then I fell in love with your gimmick and will be staying. o/\o
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:07:00 - [6] Originally by: Corban Mah The only reason you are fighting in Delve is, beaucse you exploited poor game mechanics. So be happy that CPP didn't admit their failure and screwed over 3000 people. If by exploited you mean took advantage of an amazingly dumb alliance leadership, then yes. Yes we did.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:12:00 - [7] Originally by: Laura Rampart So tell me exactly how that's not POS bowling? Legally or illegally, bowling is pushing people out of the force field with big ships. It is POS bowling, which is now possible to do legitimately since warping to a POS without having the password stops you outside the POS, no longer rubber banding you inside to bump ships. That was not the case when BoB did it over and over for weeks. I bet that makes you happy that they got a taste of their own medicine except in a legal way right?
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:23:00 - [8] Originally by: Laura Rampart It's legal until too many people use it and CCP decide to ban the use of it. Just like the original POS bowling. When Bob used the old way of it, it was legal. No it wasn't it was deemed an exploit and the only reason they got away with it for awhile is because it was a NEW exploit.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:28:00 - [9] Originally by: Laura Rampart No it wasn't it was deemed an exploit and the only reason they got away with it for awhile is because it was a NEW exploit. oooh I'm sure the new way of POS bowling won't ever go to be an exploit after every alliance use it? You're correct, it won't because bumping ships is not an exploit and I'm pretty sure CCP isn't going to change that. Whether it takes place inside a POS or not doesn't matter.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:31:00 - [10] Edited by: OldPueblo on 24/03/2009 17:32:38 Stupid forums double post.

OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:38:00 - [11] Has that in-game mechanic been changed? Not that I'm aware of therefore it wasn't the mechanic that was lame, it was the leadership.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:44:00 - [12] Edited by: OldPueblo on 24/03/2009 17:45:20 Originally by: Laura Rampart Originally by: Popsikle When griefing goes to far, CCP changes the rules to prevent people from being griefed out of the game. Privateers: Upped the cost to wardecs Suicide Ganking: Concord wtfpwnd drones and such Moo: well, lotsa things changed because of them. Dynamic rules to prevent overgriefing is just the way it is in eve. You really should be used to it by now /winthread So help me out, how does that apply to this scenario? It doesn't. They just "didn't like it."
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:53:00 - [13] Originally by: Popsikle Dont try and pull the "we did not mean to harass them!" card now. After publicly stating that's all this was about in the first place. Ever heard of scamming?
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 18:13:00 - [14] We win regardless, BoB's new name is even stupider then the last one. But nobody gets to break the rules, I'd make the same big deal about any alliance. It's just a bonus that it gets to be BoB again.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 18:59:00 - [15] Originally by: Moonlight Express Why there was not this kind of outrage from goons when members of NC were caught exploiting moons for years that produced most of NCs Titan and capital fleet? What's worst? Name change or exploits of trillions of isk? They should take away all of those ships that were produced from those exploited founds first and then they can take away the name. Deal? Are you being serious? Because I can't really see that as a serious post.

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.