|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 48 post(s) |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
   |
Posted - 2012.06.23 13:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
i admire someones ability to see the market and make profit.
That been said, I do hate the hypocracy of goons calling high sec nerf to incursions while at the same time runing a permanent suicide on hulks and on top of that exploiting the market!
I remember a few years back, the mitani in his speach talking about how Ev0ke in the past exploited the moons cos of some "feature" and how Ev0ke made big isk back then. He spoke with as much hatred as we have witnessed him speaking about the DRF at their height of power.
Funny how its ok for them to exploit the market because of some "feature" BUT its NOT ok when sombody else does it, like Ev0ke!!
This is why CCP should not pay attention to goons. If they cry for something, you can be sure they are are making money somehow from it. The mitani being part of the CSM in the past does not help me in anyway to trust him now even less. To be the lead of the CSM in the past and at the same time do this, its over use of position. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 13:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:i admire someones ability to see the market and make profit.
That been said, I do hate the hypocracy of goons calling high sec nerf to incursions while at the same time runing a permanent suicide on hulks and on top of that exploiting the market! what's the hypocrisy there?
read further into the post and then you see the hypocracy |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 13:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:i admire someones ability to see the market and make profit.
That been said, I do hate the hypocracy of goons calling high sec nerf to incursions while at the same time runing a permanent suicide on hulks and on top of that exploiting the market! what's the hypocrisy there? read further into the post and then you see the hypocracy because this is very much like covertly duping ferrogel for months
its funny how you are trying to ignore the second paragraph of my original post.... |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 14:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Haquer wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Benedic wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Benedic wrote:I find it quite disturbing that you can be punished by finding clever ways to profit from the rules of Eve. This was no exploit, it was using the code and systems the way they were designed. Who knows what the **** you can get punished for next considering if it benefits you in any way they may randomly yank back all your profits. I find it disturbing that you think you could exploit a system to print money and crash markets and we'd just be like "Oh haha those cards". We haven't punished anyone to date. We haven't even decided if we will but boy howdy are we well within our rights to do so and I'm just astounded that I even have to explain that. Like the other posters in goonfleet I take exception to this idea that it's 'exploiting' a system when CCP designed these systems to do -exactly- what was done. When you build a system to allow you to lower LP costs and so forth it's not really an exploitation to use those systems to profit. An exploitation is when you use a system in a way that it was not intended to be used or find a way to outright break the system and use it wrongly. None of that was done, all the systems were used in the way they were intended and combined in a way that generated profit. I will say that I'll await the results of your investigation eagerly. Maybe the people responsible have lied to us and they really 'exploited' a system but so far all they've done as best I can see is use the systems you built in ways you didn't see when designing them and that means the fault lies with CCP, not the players. THAT is the nature of a sandbox. If you can't stand by your own bad design but instead seek to punish the players for finding the flaws in your designs then you deserve to lose the playerbase. Stand by your own shoddy work, not fling blame at the players. Not once has anyone blamed any players. We're well aware of what a sandbox is. We made it. If you print isk and I take away what you printed then you're in the same state you were prior to printing. That is not punishment it is fixing the problem. You didn't give back the assets/isk that they sunk into "printing isk" (that they got from other players so they, in effect, printed no isk whatsoever). So no, they're not at the state prior to printing, and they were, in fact, punished.
when CCP nerfed the sanctums and all the billions spend per alliance of upgrades of systems, they did not give anything back either. Nothing new there, regarding investments. So this completelly destroys your argument. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Prop Wash wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:
and you're not qualified to discuss the matter because anything you type is hearsay
Ok cool so why don't you just close this thread then ugh you've called my bluff I can't close the thread :(
ROLF. i love this post. CCP Sreegs is actually trolling you. +10 !! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
I think this is far worst than the word "exploit". The word "exploit" is far too weak or linient of a word to use. I say goons "raped" the market and now are claiming no fault. This to me is helarious.
Take all their isk and assets away CCP and send a message out that the gloves are off for anyone trying to do the same!! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
106
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tomytronic wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:I think this is far worst than the word "exploit". The word "exploit" is far too weak or linient of a word to use. I say goons "raped" the market and now are claiming no fault. This to me is helarious.
Take all their isk and assets away CCP and send a message out that the gloves are off for anyone trying to do the same!! I say your hyperbole is offensive to actual victims of ****. This isn't 'helarious'.
it does not imply the meaning you intend to put. I specifically said "the market"! Dont try to make this into something else.... |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
i love this goon raging thread. Its most helerious for an alliance that is suppose to "collect much tears". My questions is when they say this, do they mean someone elses or theirs, cos this thread has so much of it that its turning into an ocean. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:39:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tomytronic wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:i love this goon raging thread. Its most helerious for an alliance that is suppose to "collect much tears". My questions is when they say this, do they mean someone elses or theirs, cos this thread has so much of it that its turning into an ocean. Are you going to apologise?
apologise for what? Its you goons thats crying not us. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:45:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Or not anymore apparently
Yeah, still. After all, if they didn't, what are all these goon tears that are up to our ankles about then?
its gone past that....i have had to learn how to swim in a very short time. Granted i am doing doggy stile to stay afloat. Looking for a land atm! Wish me luck!
|
|
|
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 15:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tomytronic wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Tomytronic wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:i love this goon raging thread. Its most helerious for an alliance that is suppose to "collect much tears". My questions is when they say this, do they mean someone elses or theirs, cos this thread has so much of it that its turning into an ocean. Are you going to apologise? apologise for what? Its you goons thats crying not us. Apologise for your use of highly inappropriate and offensive language when referring to an internet spaceship game.
i did not use any language that intended the meaning you are trying to give. I specifically said "the market". You can twist this which ever way you want, so could I give different meanings to anything you say and try and twist it around. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
112
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 16:05:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Kazanir wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:What we do with individuals is never a public matter. It never was and it never will be. The public communication will focus on what's been done to the group and the overall impact. I won't deny that nobody should have been speaking to the press and that that has been managed poorly.
This is a policy flaw. First of all, one of the people speaking to the press was CCP Manifest. His official job title is PR and he's been at CCP for like...5 years. If he is talking to the press when he shouldn't, what kind of a PR guy is he? Damn. Second, I appreciate that security teams always want to keep the results of investigations between them and the individuals. That's reasonable. But when you bungle the communication with the individuals in question (as CCP did this time) then it is going to have PR consequences when the players involved are like, "Hey, no one at CCP is talking to us and they even appear to have taken a bunch of assets that weren't connected to this! What the ****!" If you want to avoid these types of PR issues then you absolutely need to get in front of the issue in a clear way. A single e-mail to the Faction Five stating your intentions could have avoided most of this shitstorm. No matter what someone's title is if they don't have the details of investigations that haven't concluded yet they shouldn't be giving them to external parties. That was my point. Communication with the people impacted certainly could have been handled better. That is my fault.
well if the investigation is still on going, there is not much you can say really, so any communication you give then can be drastically turn on its head since investigation has not concluded! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
114
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 16:13:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Kazanir wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:What we do with individuals is never a public matter. It never was and it never will be. The public communication will focus on what's been done to the group and the overall impact. I won't deny that nobody should have been speaking to the press and that that has been managed poorly.
This is a policy flaw. First of all, one of the people speaking to the press was CCP Manifest. His official job title is PR and he's been at CCP for like...5 years. If he is talking to the press when he shouldn't, what kind of a PR guy is he? Damn. Second, I appreciate that security teams always want to keep the results of investigations between them and the individuals. That's reasonable. But when you bungle the communication with the individuals in question (as CCP did this time) then it is going to have PR consequences when the players involved are like, "Hey, no one at CCP is talking to us and they even appear to have taken a bunch of assets that weren't connected to this! What the ****!" If you want to avoid these types of PR issues then you absolutely need to get in front of the issue in a clear way. A single e-mail to the Faction Five stating your intentions could have avoided most of this shitstorm. No matter what someone's title is if they don't have the details of investigations that haven't concluded yet they shouldn't be giving them to external parties. That was my point. Communication with the people impacted certainly could have been handled better. That is my fault. well if the investigation is still on going, there is not much you can say really, so any communication you give then can be drastically turn on its head since investigation has not concluded! ugh you've found the fatal flaw in my statement :(
what i meant is you are NOT at fault. You cant speak about something you dont know specially when you dont know the facts so how goons expect you to release your findings before the facts are gathered, its beyond me!. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 16:17:00 -
[14] - Quote
Haquer wrote:Tallon Sylph wrote:Is Eve still a sandbox? I'm pretty confused right now. It is until you hit an arbitrary limit in which it's "abuse" and then get your assets seized.
you forgot something. Its not your assets, its CCP's assets! Say so in the rights which you obviously never bothered to read!
They can take it away any time they choose to, even when they need money for cookies!
Have a cookie! My treat! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 16:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
Xython wrote:Imiarr Timshae wrote:Just to save Screegs the typing:
The bottom line is you have to tolerate what we do or go make your own internet spaceship game to play.
The scary thing is, some of the BOB people that we threw out of EVE actually did that. Some mecha version of EVE. Very early in it's development but was kinda interesting.
are you talking about the blue print insident? If so, the player is long gone and banned. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
115
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 16:34:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tallon Sylph wrote:Cutter Isaacson wrote:
Just because a door is open, does not automatically mean that you should walk in.
Is the door located in an environment that is billed as being a sandbox?
is the sandbox yours or theirs? |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 17:04:00 -
[17] - Quote
Holander Switzerland wrote:Actually yeah this is a good point, if people were warning them about this before it left sisi, isn't that pretty much consent for whatever was in the patch.
actually but here is where you are wrong. CCP has always said, always ask before you do something that you are not sure if you are gonna be punished or not. I am here for many years and I must admit i came very close myself of abusing something. If its not cos I asked before, I would have been banned. If in doubt, always ask CCP is the modo! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
119
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 17:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Holander Switzerland wrote:Actually yeah this is a good point, if people were warning them about this before it left sisi, isn't that pretty much consent for whatever was in the patch. actually but here is where you are wrong. CCP has always said, always ask before you do something that you are not sure if you are gonna be punished or not. I am here for many years and I must admit i came very close myself of abusing something. If its not cos I asked before, I would have been banned. If in doubt, always ask CCP is the modo! if you ask CCP first, they will either say "no" or they will say "yes" and change their mind retroactively. alliance tournament drama demonstrated the value & reliability of GM answers quite well.
at last you got letter and you ar covered so they cant act on you. If you act without asking is the same as the law that says "just cos you did not know its a violation of the law, it does not grants you immunity!. You sill violated the law and you cant hide behind the - I did not know the law"
Always ask before acting ! Then you know and you are coverd cos you got evidence! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
120
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 18:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Ok I'm going to go watch The Footy. It's been a gas folks. go spain! but we all know de Germans will win in the end...
i love spain but i must admit thee germans are very likell to win at the end  |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
127
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:54:00 -
[20] - Quote
Salient Soldier wrote:I like how Goons can admit to breaking EvE, and they dont even get a slap on the wrist.
CCP, grow some balls and empty all Goon wallets to 0.
Then perma ban all accounts of those who admitted to being involved.
Then Fix EvE, k thx bai.
i would say put their wallets to negative! That would be a nice punishment instead of ban! |
|
|
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
130
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:56:00 -
[21] - Quote
Xutech wrote:Cygnet Lythanea wrote:What's funny is Goons forgot this line in the lyrics: "You best watch out ***** if you're an exploiting scammer Guard will gank you in the face with his big ban hammer" The definition of exploiting is also redefined daily.
well you forgot CCPs golden rule.
"If in doubt always ask prior acting, that way you are always covered!" |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 22:19:00 -
[22] - Quote
Enaris Kerle wrote:Xen Solarus wrote:The key question for me is would something similar to this be allowed to happen in "the real world". The answer is a definate no. Market manipulation is definately not allowed. It so happens that the same applies in EvE. Yeah, starting two days ago.
actually no. You just forgot the game regulations aka
"EULA exploiting game mechanics is a bannable offence"
Also you forgot CCPs golden rule aka
"If in doubt always ask to get cover before you act or be banned" |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 22:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
Enaris Kerle wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:actually no. You just forgot the game regulations aka
"EULA exploiting game mechanics is a bannable offence" We're going in circles here. Why is X not allowed? Because it's an exploit. Why is it an exploit? Because it isn't allowed. Up until two days ago, market manipulation was a perfectly legitimate tactics in the game, albeit not in real life. So that comparison falls flat on its face.
"You" (dont exactly mean you personally) did not ask if it was ok for to exploit the game mechanic this way.
And so you did not get cover. Something in the back of your head would have said "beware". Ignore the message and get punished.
Back again to golden rule: Always ask before you act! I came close to be ban myself but the difference is i acted on the "beware" message and so i did not get banned. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 22:55:00 -
[24] - Quote
Mechaet wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Enaris Kerle wrote:Xen Solarus wrote:The key question for me is would something similar to this be allowed to happen in "the real world". The answer is a definate no. Market manipulation is definately not allowed. It so happens that the same applies in EvE. Yeah, starting two days ago. actually no. You just forgot the game regulations aka "EULA exploiting game mechanics is a bannable offence" Also you forgot CCPs golden rule aka "If in doubt always ask to get cover before you act or be banned" Ask Hydra and 0utbreak about how that works.
are you refering match fixing? cos they never asked about match fixing and they did get punished for it, or have we forgoten? |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 23:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
Mechaet wrote:
They never got punished for match fixing. They asked if they could train together on SiSi for the upcoming alliance tournament, were given the OK, and when they did what they said they got kicked out of the alliance tournament.
i remember it was something else. It wasnt just cos trained togther. I cant remember exactly the whole explanation given but i do "think" it had to do with match fixing and having entring two teams instead of one. It wasnt just one thing as you make it look like.
|
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 23:15:00 -
[26] - Quote
Isphirel wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Also you forgot CCPs golden rule aka
"If in doubt always ask to get cover before you act or be banned" Yo that has never been any sort of "rule", golden or not. I don't have to ask CCP for permission before I buy a pile of minerals and sell them for more money the next day, I don't have to ask CCP before I buy all the Maelstroms in VFK and relist them at markup right before a fleet operation, and the OP doesn't have to ask for permission before he uses documented game mechanics to play the market either. The fact that CCP neither thought their FW changes through nor listened to the community when they were on the test server, and are now having some sudden regrets about the whole thing, doesn't make it suddenly sleazy to not play games of "mother, may I" every time you log into the game.
you know damn perfectly well that this is nothing like buying a maelstrom and reseling it. This is nothing compared to that. We are talking of 3 trillions of isk and market manipulation based on a vulnerability (exploit of mechanic). If you are gonna exploit a mechanic then you ask if its within the rules so that you are covered. Dont try to down play 3 trillions of isk and market manipulation of a game mechanic. Once again if you did not read the EULA go and do so again. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 23:20:00 -
[27] - Quote
Shai 'Hulud wrote:Isphirel wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Also you forgot CCPs golden rule aka
"If in doubt always ask to get cover before you act or be banned" Yo that has never been any sort of "rule", golden or not. I don't have to ask CCP for permission before I buy a pile of minerals and sell them for more money the next day, I don't have to ask CCP before I buy all the Maelstroms in VFK and relist them at markup right before a fleet operation, and the OP doesn't have to ask for permission before he uses documented game mechanics to play the market either. The fact that CCP neither thought their FW changes through nor listened to the community when they were on the test server, and are now having some sudden regrets about the whole thing, doesn't make it suddenly sleazy to not play games of "mother, may I" every time you log into the game. It seems the new "golden rule" is: If an activity is profitable you should check with CCP to make sure it's not considered an exploit.
Its not. EULA says that if exploting game mechanic = ban
That includes also "design flaw" since at the end of all its all written in code and exploting a game mechanic is also exploiting a game flaw. All this means : goons exploited a game mechanic by exploiting a design flaw |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
137
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 12:21:00 -
[28] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Powers Sa wrote:[quote=Frying Doom]This was finding a hole in the game mechanic (an obviously broken one) and exploiting it. So you're for the players getting to keep the loot? The ferrogel exploit, which you keep referring to, was a pure software bug, the design was sound.
What are you talking about. A bug means the design was not completed correctly. If the design is poor. If the design was correct then you have no bugs! You cannot claim a good desing and have bugs. Its does not work that way!
Now a design thats poor, will have flaws. In this case the heart of the issue is a design flaw.
So Goons took advatange of a design flaw which all it really means is that they exploited a game mechanic.
By exploiting a game mechanic based on a design flaw you are in violation of CCP rules.
Its that simple. You cannot say game mechanic and design flaw is different thing cos they are a meachnic.
You cannot claim good design and say it has bugs. You cannot have good design with bugs. Its simply called bad software design! Infact one of the reasons you do a design is to avoid bugs/flaws! |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
137
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 13:14:00 -
[29] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:You cannot claim a good design and have bugs. Its does not work that way! You can have an awesome design, but the guys doing the programming ****** up their implementation somewhere. That's a pure software bug right there. Andrea Roche wrote:Now a design thats poor, will have flaws. In this case the heart of the issue is a design flaw. A bad design which is implemented properly is not a software bug, it's a design with issues. Andrea Roche wrote:So Goons took advatange of a design flaw which all it really means is that they exploited a game mechanic.
By exploiting a game mechanic based on a design flaw you are in violation of CCP rules. And this is different from insurance fraud, the PI debacle and the PA/nocx debacle how? Andrea Roche wrote:You cannot claim good design and say it has bugs. You cannot have good design with bugs. Its simply called bad software design! Infact one of the reasons you do a design is to avoid bugs/flaws! Yes, you can have good design with bugs, it's called a bad implementation. And no, the reason you do design is to develop a system design. The software bugs come during the implementation phase, where the design is implemented into actual code, which comes after the design phase.
gush.
ok let me put it simple...
Every time you make a change to the system, you have to do some sort of desing. The design could be small or a broad design depending on the change required. Sometimes it required a complete new redesign of a system.
Would you agree that you cannot have good design and have bugs since the design has to be implemented every time you make a change to the code? If yes, then all of the above ostd by you is incorrect.
If no then "you" obviously dont do design everytime you implemente code, so its viable to bugs/features/run time errors etc.
PS: by "you" i did not target you but this is a generalisation. Dont take it personal |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
138
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 13:18:00 -
[30] - Quote
Oisin Sandovar wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:
gush.
ok let me put it simple...
Every time you make a change to the system, you have to do some sort of desing. The design could be small or a broad design depending on the change required. Sometimes it required a complete new redesign of a system.
Would you agree that you cannot have good design and have bugs since the design has to be implemented every time you make a change to the code? If yes, then all of the above posted by you is incorrect.
If no then "you" obviously dont do design everytime you implemente code, so its viable to bugs/features/run time errors etc.
PS: by "you" i did not target you but this is a generalisation. Dont take it personal
Heh, nice try. Lord Tim is either trolling, or he doesn't have the capacity to understand the issue and what's happened. Basically, ignore him.
i think its both. |
|
|
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
138
|
Posted - 2012.06.24 13:52:00 -
[31] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Andrea Roche wrote:Would you agree that you cannot have good design and have bugs since the design has to be implemented every time you make a change to the code? If yes, then all of the above posted by you is incorrect. A design just lays out what something should do, when it should do what, and how it should react to certain situations. The programmer then sets out to implement that design. It doesn't matter how awesome the req spec, tech spec and design doc is for a feature, if the programmer sucks, just like it doesn't matter how awesome the programmer is, if the req spec, tech spec and design doc's content contain a flawed design. You can have an awesome design and a suckass implementation, or a ****** design but an awesome implementation. It's not an if x is good, then y is good kind of situation. Andrea Roche wrote:If no then "you" obviously dont do design everytime you implemente code, so its viable to bugs/features/run time errors etc. No design document has any impact on programmer mistakes, inability to implement certain features or lack of input parameter checks.
You did not agree with
"Would you agree that you cannot have good design and have bugs since the design has to be implemented every time you make a change to the code? If yes, then all of the above posted by you is incorrect."
Bugs/features are part of bad design. Even run time errors are part of bad design.
If the design is correct then we got no errors or bugs.
Design is a continuous thing and not just a one time thing. Everytime you make a change you need to produce a desing.
The desing maybe wrong or the implementation of the design maybe wrong or both.
If the design is wrong then the implementation will aso be wrong!
If the design was good but the implementation of the design by the devloper was wrong then the implemented code is wrong and does not comply with the initial design and therefire the design coded is wrong!
In either case you will get flaws and bugs.
Since you did not agree to the above, we have nothing else to talk about. Just gonna go in circles.
Too stuburn. With no disrect.
You simply cant argue that.
In the end, the owners disagree with you and happens to agree with me.
This is a lost case! Unless all you want is to troll someone to death  ! |
|
|
| |
|