| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
   |
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:36:00 -
[1]
Okay Im no great fan of TEST, or IT/BOB/T20.
The issue that has me worried is the inconsistant and quite frankly blatantly biased descision making of the GM's in this issue.
We know that GM's are basically free to do as they wish citing the "interpritation" get out clause. However when bias is as clear as this and the GM wagon train is circling for all its worth (No public discussion of this decision?? Are you serious??)it is time to call in a 3rd party to investigate what exactly happened and why. While I understand that many feel the CSM is a talking shop for CCP to fill with hot air, it is instances like this that they SHOULD be investigating.
CCP you want to regain the credibility you have lost YET AGAIN by a biased decision? Open your doors to the CSM and let them investigate.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Green-Core
The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:38:00 -
[2]
Oddly enough, isn't that what the CCP Internal Affairs division already does?
--Vel
|
Lady Spank
Amarr
Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:39:00 -
[3]
IT were the only ones initially to petition it.
The use of extended downtime to take sov is blatantly wrong.
Everyone else has got in on the act and all downtime actions have been dealt with.
CRY LESS, the sensationalism only makes you look more stupid.
~_~
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:41:00 -
[4]
With CCP's previous history of internal inquires (T20, Ferrogel et al), I would be safe in saying that any result that a CCP employee came out with would be biased towards the company.
This needs a nominally neutral party, one that is not paid by the very people who made the decision.
|
WhiteSavage
Gallente
Ever Flow
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:42:00 -
[5]
Wow yes lets waste everyones time with something non-controversial at all. Goons/test are making fools of themselves all over eve, the correct response is to ignore the ******s.
|
Orion GUardian
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:42:00 -
[6]
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:44:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Lady Spank
IT were the only ones initially to petition it.
*troll*
To be honest its a simple matter that this has never been punished before, the original punishment was to offline the TCU's and then *shock horror* they "accidently" get destroyed, and then rather than respawning the TCU's offline in the systems the GMs just shrug their shoulders and walk away from it.
It has never before been called an exploit (see previous instances of this being done) and the actions of the GMs are suspect in the least.
|
Buck Marui
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:45:00 -
[8]
Since when was the CSM capable of running investigations, I think you have misjudged there purpose and there reach to be honest, they don't have access to the resources they need to do what you are suggesting, they bring the issues we raise as the playerbase to CCP that's all. |
Joe SMASH
You Got A Purty Mouth
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:45:00 -
[9]
Originally by: WhiteSavage
Wow yes lets waste everyones time with something non-controversial at all. Goons/test are making fools of themselves all over eve, the correct response is to ignore the ******s.
This.
TEST is acting like a toddler that did not get his binky and is now throwing a tantrum. Grow the **** up. **** happens that you may not like over the course of your life. Throwing a tantrum like a 3 year old is not going to help your cause at all.
-----------------------------------
Originally by: Kali Zero
Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:46:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Orion GUardian
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
Again the point remains that the other TCU's were only removed AFTER petitions.
I am happily awaiting the banning of Market Trading exploitation, contract scammers and anyone who is using in game mechanics to gain an advantage.
Do you think this will happen? well only if its a ITBOB petition
|
|
|
Joe SMASH
You Got A Purty Mouth
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:47:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Juan Sezole
well only if its a ITBOB petition
And thus proving OP is a ******. 
-----------------------------------
Originally by: Kali Zero
Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
|
WhiteSavage
Gallente
Ever Flow
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:49:00 -
[12]
...Ok Test alt. Please attempt to waste everyone's time more. In fact you should send an angry letter. Because nobody cares.
|
Nyhlus
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:50:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Orion GUardian
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
TESTs were removed hours before the others. The others were removed after TEST petitioned for fair treatment. This tactic has been used for years and it wasn't a problem until it happened to an alliance that CCP has shown favoritism before.
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:51:00 -
[14]
Originally by: WhiteSavage
...Ok Test alt. Please attempt to waste everyone's time more. In fact you should send an angry letter. Because nobody cares.
Coming from Sys-Fail, no wait thats too easy im sure theres some kittens to drown around here, it would be more challenging
|
Lost Hamster
Hamster Holding Corp
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:53:00 -
[15]
CMS has nothing to do with this.
Test was using unfair advantage, and they got punished. End of story. Live with that, or stop posting and quit the game.
Goons/Test always tried to **** up the game, they tired numerous times to use exploits etc.
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:55:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Lost Hamster
CMS has nothing to do with this.
Test was using unfair advantage, and they got punished. End of story. Live with that, or stop posting and quit the game.
Goons/Test always tried to **** up the game, they tired numerous times to use exploits etc.
Why BOB Alts are the best
|
Aessoroz
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:56:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Lost Hamster
CMS has nothing to do with this.
Test was using unfair advantage, and they got punished. End of story. Live with that, or stop posting and quit the game.
Goons/Test always tried to **** up the game, they tired numerous times to use exploits etc.
Hey, IT had a unfair advantage when the Delve sov fell, we demand a rollback!
|
Xercodo
Amarr
INESTO Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:56:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Juan Sezole
Originally by: Orion GUardian
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
Again the point remains that the other TCU's were only removed AFTER petitions.
I am happily awaiting the banning of Market Trading exploitation, contract scammers and anyone who is using in game mechanics to gain an advantage.
Do you think this will happen? well only if its a ITBOB petition
i would like to point out that contract scams are a built in mechanic and is works as intended, however this whole TCU thing was not intended to be possible, hence the onlining timer that allows counter attack
when people find a way around that built in vulnerability then it sure as hell is an exploit
--------------------------------------------------
The drake is a lie
|
Nyhlus
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:56:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Nyhlus on 03/11/2010 15:59:17
Originally by: Lost Hamster
CMS has nothing to do with this.
Test was using unfair advantage, and they got punished. End of story. Live with that, or stop posting and quit the game.
Goons/Test always tried to **** up the game, they tired numerous times to use exploits etc.
We used a game mechanic that every 0.0 alliance has used, including IT.
|
WhiteSavage
Gallente
Ever Flow
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:58:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Juan Sezole
Coming from Sys-Fail, no wait thats too easy im sure theres some kittens to drown around here, it would be more challenging
Wow really? YOu mad?
Dude nobody cares about your temper-tantrum... bashing someone's alliance has NOTHING to do with it. (Coming from someone who hides behind an alt) If you'd like I'll post with a different alt... is this what you want? Keep your thread on topic... or keep flailing that seems to be working for ya.
To flail; Def: to beat or thrash about, uncontrollably
|
|
|
Joe SMASH
You Got A Purty Mouth
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 15:59:00 -
[21]
Until TEST crawls out from under Goon's skirt and survives on it's own, no one will care about them except the members. Your alliance is a joke. Your leadership is a joke. Your membership is a joke. You are a scar on the face of Eve and I hope each and every one of you who spam petitioned gets perma-banned for wasting GM's time from other legit petitions.
And before you say it: YES, I AM MAD that I have to shift through one alliances **** posts all over the forums. I KNOW IT IS A COOL STORY, BRO!
-----------------------------------
Originally by: Kali Zero
Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 16:00:00 -
[22]
Originally by: WhiteSavage
Originally by: Juan Sezole
Coming from Sys-Fail, no wait thats too easy im sure theres some kittens to drown around here, it would be more challenging
Wow really? YOu mad?
Dude nobody cares about your temper-tantrum... bashing someone's alliance has NOTHING to do with it. (Coming from someone who hides behind an alt) If you'd like I'll post with a different alt... is this what you want? Keep your thread on topic... or keep flailing that seems to be working for ya.
To flail; Def: to beat or thrash about, uncontrollably
:Sigh:
No im not an alt, I am an honest to goodness main, dont beleive me check on BC.
Paranoia - Def you
|
Cailais
Amarr
Atomic Heroes
The G0dfathers
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 16:05:00 -
[23]
This is such a non-event.
Despite the best efforts of TEST frankly nobody cares. I certainly don't want the CSM wasting its time poking about CCPs cupboards.
C.
the hydrostatic capsule blog
|
Factor Fett
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 16:15:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Juan Sezole
...it is time to call in a 3rd party to investigate what exactly happened and why. ...
People afraid of losing ships ... decided to put the TCUs up shortly before an extended downtime for patch maintenance. Knowing this was going to happen, they circumvented a massive mechanic for claiming sovereignty, and in-so-doing used an exploit to capture multiple systems without needing to field the appropriate fleets to defend their TCUs.
---Quendishir
|
Totally Rafiki
Amarr
Crimson Nation
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 16:18:00 -
[25]
Test is really making themselves look stupid.
And consistently demanding that everyone care/respond positively to their personal struggles would be entertaining if it wasn't SO annoying. If any of this was legitimate TEST/goons wouldn't be running around spamming/trolling our dead, boring, broken forums.
.........
Verba Non Facta |
Zeke Mobius
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:07:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Totally Rafiki
Test is really making themselves look stupid.
And consistently demanding that everyone care/respond positively to their personal struggles would be entertaining if it wasn't SO annoying. If any of this was legitimate TEST/goons wouldn't be running around spamming/trolling our dead, boring, broken forums.
obvious it/bob/kenzoku/gm/dev alt trying to spin their crap
|
Sphit Ker
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:09:00 -
[27]
haha im no CSM but hereÆs my thought anyway. YOU ARE BOTH WRONG
Altho dropping the TCUs before the extended downtime was kind of lame, the systems were UNCLAIMED, there was nothing to defend per se. IT had no horse in this race. IT had no business crying fool over some systems they donÆt even fracking own.
The following statement is not my signature.
The preceding statement is my signature. |
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:10:00 -
[28]
It was a nice try from TEST, but dont whine when it doesnt work out as planned. Even my pet hamster understands that this is a reasonable decission from GMs since normal gameplay limitations were evaded, and my pet hamster is dead.
|
Joe SMASH
You Got A Purty Mouth
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:11:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Zeke Mobius
Originally by: Totally Rafiki
Test is really making themselves look stupid.
And consistently demanding that everyone care/respond positively to their personal struggles would be entertaining if it wasn't SO annoying. If any of this was legitimate TEST/goons wouldn't be running around spamming/trolling our dead, boring, broken forums.
obvious it/bob/kenzoku/gm/dev alt trying to spin their crap
obvious test/goon/nc alt trying to spin their crap
-----------------------------------
Originally by: Kali Zero
Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
|
Dead Jesus
Gallente
PeaceMakers.
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:11:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Juan Sezole
Originally by: Orion GUardian
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
Again the point remains that the other TCU's were only removed AFTER petitions.
I am happily awaiting the banning of Market Trading exploitation, contract scammers and anyone who is using in game mechanics to gain an advantage.
Do you think this will happen? well only if its a ITBOB petition
The point is ALL the TCU's that were removed, were removed after petitions. So where is the inconsistency?
|
|
|
BinaryIdiot
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:13:00 -
[31]
Wow, many of you folks are really stupid.
The TCUs were destroyed during the downtime. The TCUs setup by others in the same period were not destroyed until enough folks petitioned them AND it was done two hours after the downtime ended (so they were able to take advantage of them for a bit).
CCP claims that this new rule is also retroactive. Do you have ANY IDEA how many alliances have used this in the past? If CCP was truly going to apply this retroactively, there would be thousands of systems lost as this was a huge game mechanic when patch downtime occurs.
Not only that, but CCP keeps iterating that this is only TCU related. I'm not sure why using timers and patch downtime in other situations (like, timing a POS to come out of reinforcement during downtime or dropping many other types of structures) is perfectly acceptable but, as of the past few days, TCUs are not allowed.
This is even more ridiculous because a GM actually has an ALT in IT (the same GM that destroyed all of the TCUs). Very suspicious that these TCUs were immediately destroyed by a GM who has an IT in the space where they were dropped and yet nothing happened to anyone else who dropped TCUs at the same-time until a few hours after downtime.
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:19:00 -
[32]
Every alliance that has deployed sov stuff has used DT (normal or extended) to minimise the risks.
If putting an outpost up coincided with an extended DT then if you don't think that was used then I got a bridge for you.
They'd have been dumb not to.
I'd be willing to bet that if TEST had put up maybe 2 or 3 TCUs then this wouldn't have been any sort of issue at all. Fourteen is the problem. Anyone with half a brain can see TEST did it just to take the p*ss out of IT and/or CCP.
TL;DR if you're going to use dodgy but accepted mechanics then don't rub CCPs face in it by taking the p*ss. If you do then this is what happens.
|
|
CCP Adida
C C P
C C P Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 17:21:00 -
[33]
Locked as there's already a proposal in the appropriate forum. For all matters you would like to bring to the CSM please use the Assembly hall. This would have been moved if there wasn't already a thread in there regarding this matter.
Adida
Community Rep
CCP Hf, EVE Online
|
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
C C P
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 20:35:00 -
[34]
Moved from General Discussion.
Zymurgist
Community Representative
CCP Hf, EVE Online
Contact Us |
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 20:50:00 -
[35]
All the TCU that were petitioned and found to have most of their onlining time fall in the extended DT have been taken care of. The TEST ones destroyed were replaced by GMs as were the funds for the sov fees.
The argument, if there should be one at all, is whether CCP should allow (or continue to allow if you want to look at it that way) the anchoring during extended DT or if this policy is fine. Either way, there's no scandel here.
---
|
Agent Known
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 20:55:00 -
[36]
Originally by: BinaryIdiot
Wow, many of you folks are really stupid.
The TCUs were destroyed during the downtime. The TCUs setup by others in the same period were not destroyed until enough folks petitioned them AND it was done two hours after the downtime ended (so they were able to take advantage of them for a bit).
CCP claims that this new rule is also retroactive. Do you have ANY IDEA how many alliances have used this in the past? If CCP was truly going to apply this retroactively, there would be thousands of systems lost as this was a huge game mechanic when patch downtime occurs.
Not only that, but CCP keeps iterating that this is only TCU related. I'm not sure why using timers and patch downtime in other situations (like, timing a POS to come out of reinforcement during downtime or dropping many other types of structures) is perfectly acceptable but, as of the past few days, TCUs are not allowed.
This is even more ridiculous because a GM actually has an ALT in IT (the same GM that destroyed all of the TCUs). Very suspicious that these TCUs were immediately destroyed by a GM who has an IT in the space where they were dropped and yet nothing happened to anyone else who dropped TCUs at the same-time until a few hours after downtime.
So basically, they're at fault for not seeing the others when dotlan was flooded with 14 new systems? I doubt CCP would have done anything if 1-2 systems were claimed after downtime. Yes, downtime was abused pre-Dominion for POS timing and that sort of thing, but you could still do something about it when the server came back up. With 14 systems to SBU and shoot at for hours...that's a different story.
I think what crossed the line was what I highlighted in my previous point. There is a difference between timing reinforce timers for downtime and a TCU onlining. Abusing the extended downtime so there was nothing anyone could do about the onlining TCUS (unclaimed systems or not) was what CCP saw and thus took action against.
As for the other TCUs...they were likely taken down later because it went unnoticed. Yours would have as well if you grabbed maybe 2 systems. But hey, let's all whine about an obvious flaw in the game mechanics that provide unfair advantages shall we?
On another note, I also have an annoying sig. |
Selma Body
Amarr
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 21:08:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Joe SMASH
Until TEST crawls out from under Goon's skirt and survives on it's own, no one will care about them except the members. Your alliance is a joke. Your leadership is a joke. Your membership is a joke. You are a scar on the face of Eve and I hope each and every one of you who spam petitioned gets perma-banned for wasting GM's time from other legit petitions.
And before you say it: YES, I AM MAD that I have to shift through one alliances **** posts all over the forums. I KNOW IT IS A COOL STORY, BRO!
You sir have hurt my feelings, I demand a apology immediately. I'm crying at the keyboard and I think I may quit Eve. 
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 22:15:00 -
[38]
More TESTy emo tears, please. Makes EVE somewhat interesting again. 
And yeah, epic idea to have the CSM launch a full-scale investigation and demand from CCP to disclose all relevant facts related to this. Because we all know that is so gonna happen... GL with that TESTy/Goons/Shrubberies/pubbies.
|
BiggerDangDude
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 22:23:00 -
[39]
You guys wanna know how I know you don't care? Everyone keeps posting about how they don't care.
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.11.04 03:51:00 -
[40]
insert signature here
|
|
|
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.11.04 11:14:00 -
[41]
CSM are discussing this with CCP. Nothing to report yet.
TeaDaze.net Blog | CSM Database |
Cyprus Black
Caldari
Ministry of Destruction
SCUM.
|
Posted - 2010.11.04 14:12:00 -
[42]
It does seem like a double standard for players. Some alliances are allowed to do this while others are not.
__________________________________________________
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/2084/lolveur2.gif |
Cyrus Doul
Infinite Covenant
|
Posted - 2010.11.04 17:44:00 -
[43]
This is all based on the assumption of point 1 being true
1) Anything that happens over a regular DT is allowed
2) TCU / SBU: This is where my idea is unfounded until now I guess. IIRC you are not able to wardec anyone before an extended dt as they count doing that to rundown the warmup timer as an exploit as it denies the opponent the chance to become prepared. I assume CCP is following the same thing here. TEST did not allow it the chance to fight back. The reason that TEST got their stuff moved and the others didn't is because until now people may not have gamed the extended dt and had their stuff petitioned. CCP looked at it and said its a valid argument and removed test's then when they cried ccp went and took out other TCU/SBUs (These probabally were petitioned too after exact precident was set)
3) Stations: Petition away, CCP will tell you to run away. Stations work by you putting the station up, throwing all the crap in and clicking build. If you were to press the build button at 2 seconds after dt you get to wait til the next dt, if you press it 2 seconds before dt in two seconds your station egg is going to morph. This is due to the fact that one of the scripts that runs at any dt has its sole purpose of looking for any ItemID's registered to eggs and morph them into a station
4) POS's You can anchor these and start their online timer during a standard dt and have it come out done. so doing this during an extended dt does not matter other then you anchor guns at a time different then before. Having them come out of ref during a sov timer is valid too IIRC. Granted it may not be valid to time them to come out at the very beginning of a 15 hour DT as I am not sure if that is enough time for the tower to passively rep its shields back over fifty from twentyfive. Then again this crime could be committed by having the tower set to whatever the dt is going to start at (In this case 500 game time) and your plan is to never even bother during the fight to reinforce so you wouldnt be penilized for passively exploiting due to when you got attacked.
|
Juan Sezole
Darth Marvin's Shrubberies
|
Posted - 2010.11.04 18:10:00 -
[44]
Originally by: TeaDaze
CSM are discussing this with CCP. Nothing to report yet.
TeaDaze
Thank you for at least taking a look at this, despite the troll/anti-troll background noise going on there is a fundamental point that seems to be either ignored or not understood by many who have trolled this thread.
|
Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2010.11.06 02:08:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Mortimer Civeri on 06/11/2010 02:14:48
It had never been an issue before, when alliances have used this. Now all of a sudden it is an exploit, and people who do that are bad bad people? Please, the gross incompitance of CCP to provide propper documentation for their game, as to what is and is not allowed, is enough. Let's not tarnish their good name by dragging accusations of GM involvement in helping an alliance, (especially BoB/KENZOKU/IT) get rid of a "problem" for them.
|
Lallante
Reikoku
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 03:41:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Lallante on 11/11/2010 03:43:14
Originally by: Nyhlus
Originally by: Orion GUardian
afaik the other TCUs form other alliances were removed as well so it is no real favourism per se. Because the DT TCU onlining is kind of an exploit
TESTs were removed hours before the others. The others were removed after TEST petitioned for fair treatment. This tactic has been used for years and it wasn't a problem until it happened to an alliance that CCP has shown favoritism before.
I'm impressed that the tactic has been used for years given that TCUs/SBUs have only existed for 6 months and this is the first long downtime.
No other element of eve has ever revolved around the mechanic of a lengthy online time you need to defend them for.
Lol at all the people saying "Its never been an issue before" -> It -couldn't- have been, this is literally the first DT over 5 hours since the mechanic was introduced!
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
Reikoku
|
ectweak
Amarr
1st Steps Academy
Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 17:25:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Lallante
Lol at all the people saying "Its never been an issue before" -> It -couldn't- have been, this is literally the first DT over 5 hours since the mechanic was introduced!
except for that huge DT a few months ago when everyone got those bonus skillpoints.
|
Juan Sezole
Foxridge
|
Posted - 2010.11.16 00:55:00 -
[48]
Updated title and general aim.
In the past few weeks GM activity has raised all sorts of questions regarding their competance and neutrality.
CCP IA is basically "our logs show nothing" to the Nth power, and are not independant.
Some form of non CCP investigation is needed
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |