EVE Search - Alliance rename issue

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Alliance rename issue

» 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 .. 28 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Xrak Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:32:00 - [211] More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it.
Tobruk Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:32:00 - [212] Edited by: Tobruk on 24/03/2009 17:32:46 Originally by: clone 1 Originally by: Rodj Blake Originally by: Tobruk Only character* names that are deemed as inappropriate are eligible for a possible name change. Names will not be changed for any other reason.* it took me 1.2 seconds to read the above... If after 2 month of deliberation you still concluded that it was OK to rename kenzoku... the Grimmi, you are ***ing hopeless Bolded the important part for you. Player-run corporations, factions, organizations and player-owned items within the EVE Online game world are also subject to these rules and policies.* Added the important part for you. http://www.eveonline.com/pnp/namepolicy.asp DESTROYED ---------------------------------------------- Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:33:00 - [213] 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 Then why 2 months (supposedly) to decide? Where is the statement of a change to the rules? - DesuSigs
Jay Dilla	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:33:00 - [214] Dear CCP, fail is this way ------>> I think CCP needs moar damage control! But seriously what are you guys smoking? Failing at your own game is way to go!
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:34:00 - [215] Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. Dev alt spotted. - DesuSigs
Cendaliaa	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:34:00 - [216] Edited by: Cendaliaa on 24/03/2009 17:34:59 Originally by: Laura Rampart I'm sure it wasn't favoritism from CCP letting you goons go away with stealing the whole alliance with very, very lame game mechanics which shouldn't have been there to start with. BoB director disbanded BoB, you sure dont know anything do you? And ergo BoB was free to take, all within the game mechanics.
Montasque GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:35:00 - [217] Originally by: Popsikle Originally by: Montasque Originally by: Professor Impossible I am glad CCP doesn't allow Goonswarm to run roughshod over this game, implicitly condoning their griefing by ignoring it. Goonswarm just has sour grapes that their juvenile antics aren't allowed to run rampant. I get it, you hate goons. We do some pretty crappy things, but we do it within the rules of the game. The fact is, this isnt about goons, so framing it as such is silly. This is about how there should be one set of rules for everyone in EvE, and that favoritism has to stop if CCP want any credibility in the eyes of the player base. 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 The difference is that those examples were shown to be a broken game mechanic that affected EVERYONE in game. This change is only targeted to one group, that is, unless, CCP will now allow every alliance a free name change.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:35:00 - [218] Edited by: Kuar Z''thain on 24/03/2009 17:35:15 Originally by: Tobruk well at least you are willing to admit it might be more than just goon whine and an actual issue. Sorry for flaming you but cheating makes my blood boil, kudos for at least keeping an open mind. No problem, I prefer an actual discussion over flaming some days. To page 8 and no clarification from CCP yet. Don't think I'm going to win this one. Come on CCP, why did you really do this? If there is no precident there is favoritism. edit: damn this thread is just flying by...
Jay Dilla	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:36:00 - [219] Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. You forgot to mention sov too since you are not loosing it. And stop being ignorant this thread is not about you failing, its about CCP failing.
Cendaliaa	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:36:00 - [220] Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. even the peons have no clue what its about, just shows the quality of its members
Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:37:00 - [221] Originally by: Laura Rampart Originally by: Montasque The fact is, this isnt about goons, so framing it as such is silly. This is about how there should be one set of rules for everyone in EvE, and that favoritism has to stop if CCP want any credibility in the eyes of the player base. I'm sure it wasn't favoritism from CCP letting you goons go away with stealing the whole alliance with very, very lame game mechanics which shouldn't have been there to start with. Now you're just being stupid, seriously. They didn't let us "get away" with anything, we used an in-game mechanic that CCP wrote, and exploited the laziness of BoB's directorate.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:38:00 - [222] 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.
Popsikle Minmatar Caffeine Commodities Company	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:39:00 - [223] Originally by: Montasque The difference is that those examples were shown to be a broken game mechanic that affected EVERYONE in game. This change is only targeted to one group, that is, unless, CCP will now allow every alliance a free name change. Suicide ganking is the only one I can think of that was broken. War decs were fine for years until the privateers came around, and when m00 was around, well there was no precedence for game mechanics and therefore nothing was "broken". Over-Harassment of any other player in eve is against the TOS/AUP and the judge of that has always been CCP. Yes eve is a game where 99% of the time harassment is OK and allowed, but that 1% of the time it goes overboard CCP fixes it, regardless of who the target was. ____ <t20> i want to be in a manager potition at Hooters <SaraDawn> Garthagk, do you have it up ? <Garthagk> I can get it up anytime.
Laura Rampart	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:39:00 - [224] 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
Cragen o'mass Caldari Fallen Nova FREELANCER ALLIANCE	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:40:00 - [225] can i petition against BoBR, as a parody of bob? Band Of Brothers where an unstoppable space holding alliance. Band of brothers Reloaded are well the opposite of that really --------------------------------------- I R Tard
Amiable Quinn Minmatar Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:40:00 - [226] Originally by: AndrewNardella P.S. Goon: Could you please finish off bob so your members can become even more insane with power so the EVE-O community can form a coalition against you for lots of fun? "They've gone mad with power!!! Just like that Albert Schwietzer fellow..."
Xrak Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:40:00 - [227] Originally by: Jay Dilla Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. You forgot to mention sov too since you are not loosing it. And stop being ignorant this thread is not about you failing, its about CCP failing. Oh but it is all about us. If this were some small alliance that was claiming 2 systems in some crap region, no one would give a crap, but it's the big bad BoB so everyone has to cry and whine a bit to make themselves feel like the ebil man at CCP is actively working against them.
Kuar Z'thain Fraser's Finest	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:41:00 - [228] Originally by: Popsikle Over-Harassment of any other player in eve is against the TOS/AUP and the judge of that has always been CCP. Yes eve is a game where 99% of the time harassment is OK and allowed, but that 1% of the time it goes overboard CCP fixes it, regardless of who the target was. Then CCP needs to say that this was their reasoning. At this point they have given almost no reason at all other than "the situation warranted such action". More transparency please.
Ironnight Caldari x13 X13 Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:42:00 - [229] Originally by: Sertan Deras Originally by: Ironnight Wow the system works and people whine? What is it with you people? Explain to me how the "system works"? For that matter, what system? The system that stops CCP from acting favorably toward a friendly alliance? Obviously that system doesn't work, making what you just said basically BS. Well, they wrote a petiton, notice that a petition, is not a bunch of whinning posts all over the forums, also make sure to write it in a calm manner, dont cry like a goon, act like an adult as best you can and wait, sometimes you win sometimes you loose. It took BOBR two months to get their name back, they did not get any space or anything else back, so whinning about favortism is just silly. They're like 'oh **** son, its a trap Doomsday
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:44:00 - [230] 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."
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:44:00 - [231] Originally by: Xrak Oh but it is all about us. If this were some small alliance that was claiming 2 systems in some crap region, no one would give a crap, but it's the big bad BoB so everyone has to cry and whine a bit to make themselves feel like the ebil man at CCP is actively working against them. But if CCP were willing to change the name of some nobody alliance, that would imply that they would do it for any alliance, and thus there would be no issue in the first place. - DesuSigs
Montasque GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:45:00 - [232] Originally by: Popsikle Originally by: Montasque The difference is that those examples were shown to be a broken game mechanic that affected EVERYONE in game. This change is only targeted to one group, that is, unless, CCP will now allow every alliance a free name change. Suicide ganking is the only one I can think of that was broken. War decs were fine for years until the privateers came around, and when m00 was around, well there was no precedence for game mechanics and therefore nothing was "broken". Over-Harassment of any other player in eve is against the TOS/AUP and the judge of that has always been CCP. Yes eve is a game where 99% of the time harassment is OK and allowed, but that 1% of the time it goes overboard CCP fixes it, regardless of who the target was. 1.) Privateers used and abused the mechanic, people complained, it was changed. Since the privateers actions affected almost everyone in JITA, and highlighted a bad game mechanic it was changed. I have no idea about MOO because that's ancient history. 2.)How is what we did harassment? If this is harassment then I'd like reparations for the BoB camp of Syndicate in 2006. Also if you cant see the difference between fixing a game mechanic and this instance of GM favoritism then I dont know what I can say, or argue, that will change your mind.
Aetec Raa	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:45:00 - [233] Originally by: Xrak Originally by: Jay Dilla Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. You forgot to mention sov too since you are not loosing it. And stop being ignorant this thread is not about you failing, its about CCP failing. Oh but it is all about us. If this were some small alliance that was claiming 2 systems in some crap region, no one would give a crap, but it's the big bad BoB so everyone has to cry and whine a bit to make themselves feel like the ebil man at CCP is actively working against them. I can't help but wonder how "big & bad" BoB would have been without T20...Seriously, everytime I hear the name BoB I automatically think "cheat".
damgood85 Gallente Excelsior Solar Management Stargate Experiment 626	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:47:00 - [234] Originally by: GM Grimmi While we worked on the petition for about two months we do not feel that they should suffer because of that. Having them disband and lose sovereignty again was not deemed appropriate in this case. This line makes me think it should read more like "because we took too long to say no we were forced to say yes." Tell us, what took so long? Someone falling down on the job? Too many petitions due to the patch? BOB/Kenny/beaver stalling and escalating till it was too late? Originally by: CCP Whisper Boo hoo. Cry some more.
Serj Darek Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:48:00 - [235] Originally by: Jay Dilla Originally by: Xrak More tears please, they taste positively delicious. It's only a name change, really just get over it. You forgot to mention sov too since you are not loosing it. And stop being ignorant this thread is not about you failing, its about CCP failing. No offense mate, but I think the loss of SOV was well hashed out on the forums for two months. I simply like to kill stuff and have to admit I really don't think a name change shifts the balance of power. Based on prior incidents CCP has taken away the name of a corp that was created to block the recreation of an alliance. Personally I think they allowed the name change since everyone in Eve knew that our sov was reset. Goonies made it obvious they formed the BOB corp to block the recreation of the alliance. If CCP took it from Goonies and allowed us to recreate under BoB again, then the Goonies would have cried wolf and the tears would have rained more heavily than the current state. CCP has to walk on eggshells since everything is a sinister plot against the playerbase if a rational decision is made. I can only imagine what it must be to be a first level support person at CCP that has to deal with the dregs of this game on the forums. Our SOV was reset and they allowed a name change, so pick a stone and throw it at my ship. Kill me in game, but please keep the tears here since CAOD is actually somewhat refreshing now.
Popsikle Minmatar Caffeine Commodities Company	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:49:00 - [236] Originally by: Montasque Originally by: Popsikle Originally by: Montasque The difference is that those examples were shown to be a broken game mechanic that affected EVERYONE in game. This change is only targeted to one group, that is, unless, CCP will now allow every alliance a free name change. Suicide ganking is the only one I can think of that was broken. War decs were fine for years until the privateers came around, and when m00 was around, well there was no precedence for game mechanics and therefore nothing was "broken". Over-Harassment of any other player in eve is against the TOS/AUP and the judge of that has always been CCP. Yes eve is a game where 99% of the time harassment is OK and allowed, but that 1% of the time it goes overboard CCP fixes it, regardless of who the target was. 1.) Privateers used and abused the mechanic, people complained, it was changed. Since the privateers actions affected almost everyone in JITA, and highlighted a bad game mechanic it was changed. I have no idea about MOO because that's ancient history. 2.)How is what we did harassment? If this is harassment then I'd like reparations for the BoB camp of Syndicate in 2006. Also if you cant see the difference between fixing a game mechanic and this instance of GM favoritism then I dont know what I can say, or argue, that will change your mind. 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. ____ <t20> i want to be in a manager potition at Hooters <SaraDawn> Garthagk, do you have it up ? <Garthagk> I can get it up anytime.
Tobruk Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:49:00 - [237] 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 NONE OF THOES CHANGES WERE RETROACTIVE TO BENEFIT SPECIFIC CORPS/ALLIANCES. the people who were killed by privateers didnt get their ships back and a sorry about that game mechanic its not what we meant to have happen. if you cant see the difference between the above and the sepcial favor done for bob then your simply being difficult. ---------------------------------------------- Sig removed. Elmo Pug removed my sig because he hates me
Billy Sastard Amarr	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:49:00 - [238] Originally by: Xrak If this were some small alliance that was claiming 2 systems in some crap region... THEY WOULD HAVE HAD THEIR PETITION REJECTED OUT OF HAND... The precedent stands in which alliances/corps/characters have been denied name changes over and over... <-------------------------------------------------> "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:51:00 - [239] Quote: This action was limited to changing their name... ...Any other corporation or alliance finding themselves in the same situation would get the same treatment. GM Grimmi Lead Game Master Sorry, don't believe you. Any other Corporation or Alliance would have been told they were at fault for not being careful who made they as a director etc. Here is the problem, bolded for your understand CCP. BOB gave themselves a serious advantage by using their pre setup alt corp to get back on their feet a lot faster then they ever could have by remaking a new corp with a preferred name Your announcement is an insult to our intelligence, how long were you with your agents to spin up that pile of tosh? if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature.
OldPueblo DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 17:53:00 - [240] 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?

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

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.