| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
LadyScarlet
   |
Posted - 2005.03.21 05:51:00 -
[61]
How about having imput from people who actuly play the game not forum trolls who only insite arguments and really have nothing to offer but insults as we seen in other post S3vyn you have a hate for BOB so your opioion is bias there is no room in that for anything offical....Now please go delete your acount since you said yourself you dont play anymore so we dont have to read your nonsense.....
legit data base dump from ccp good graphic designer to make the map its really that simple....
|
Revolution
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 05:58:00 -
[62]
this whole fa getting the map shutdown episode reminds me of trikky ninja oog stuff tti used to pull
|
Hyey
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 06:16:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: Nez Perces
Unless CCP code a map that is tied in some way to in-game mechanics this problem will not go away. This problem is directly a result of the fact that there is no way of actually claiming ownership of regions with npc stations.
Previously Quarath had managed to paper over the lack of game mechanics to portray ownership by delaying changes of ownership as much as was humanly possible.
Unfortunately the mapmaker that was chosen was unable to chose this course of action, be it by bias, lack of foresight or simply a lack of understanding of the underlying game mechanics of territorial ownership.
An example of this would be the CA territiories. Throughout the existance of CA not once were its territories given a cross-hatched appearance (not that I can recall), however by RF's reckoning it should have been cross-hatched throughout most of its existance, and by the same token so should have huge swathes of the Eve map as CA attacked entities with cyclic frequency for extended periods of time.
A sensible mapmaker would have continued with such a tradition of papering over the lack of in-game mechanics. Alas it was not to be and we arrived at the situation where the map in the way it was chosen to be depicted, exposed some basic in-game mechanic flaws.
I proposed a solution which would allow for the map to once again paper over the in-game mechanic flaws, but it seems that nobody likes it or nobody looked at it properly, which of these is the case I cannot tell...... map solution 1a
The proposal where alliance leaders get together to discuss the shape and format of the map on a regular basis with the mapmaker, might work, but would depend entirely on the character of the alliance leaders chosen..... for it could just turn into a micro-cosm of the flames that we have seen here.
Numerous maps might be the only way forward if we cannot agree before hand on some guidlines for assigning cross-hatching.
... ... ...
Pass me that bowl please
Yes, Quarath held out on contested ownership changes for too long actually. It was like reading a 3 year old newspaper. His maps werent up to date enough with contestation. We arent talking here that fountain was completely whiped from the map, it was a CROSS HATCH change. A hostile force has made its intent clear that it wants to remove the inhabitants from said space and stayed there for an extended period of time. Does that not warrant a contested look?
Your example of CA territories is fundamentally flawd, the only time I can remember CA actively trying to take space was immensea. Otherwise it was just random going out and killing people without intent to claim the region. Likewise I cant remember stain saying that they were fighting Curse with an intent to take scalding pass away from them...
So now we go on to how RF is a biased fool that seemed to hate FA's guts from deep down inside. Please... just stop. You yourself simply hate this guy so the point is moot, you seem to find ANY reason to dislike the way this guy carried on with his work so its just a bit hypocritical. Saying that someone is whining and by far the most annoying group of moaning people doesnt indicate bias, it indicates frusteration at the fact that you can never have everyone happy.
The only people that seemed to hate the map change was... FA... my god, that seems just a bit biased in itself right there, for some reason the line of logic seemed to fail. By their logic they cant even claim their own region. Now why the cried bloody murder is on a marginal way understandable, they went about it the entirely wrong way. Their incredable capacity to whine overshadowed the majority and the mods... caved in. GG CCP :/ Be constructive next time, the light being shed is not good.
Your arguements indicate that RF removed FA completely from the map and put BOB there or something. He did not, it was just contested, and they should have not overreacted like they did. So it shifts back and forth from change of ownership to crosshatching like its some devil's cry of ravaish when its changed to cross hatch scheme.
In the end RF needs the map sticky back, the last thing we need is a win for the whiners in this place over the mods. It was a complete overreaction. If Quarath had changed the map as quick as RF does now, do you think there would have been an outcry like there is now? There wouldnt be, people just seem to hate change.
You guys elected him, now if you would please live with your decision and stfu so we can move on from this.
~~
Hyey
I just payed 15 dollars this month just to be able to respond on the forums... stupid cancellation error.
|
S3VYN
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 06:17:00 -
[64]
Edited by: S3VYN on 21/03/2005 06:28:25
Originally by: LadyScarlet
How about having imput from people who actuly play the game not forum trolls who only insite arguments and really have nothing to offer but insults as we seen in other post S3vyn you have a hate for BOB so your opioion is bias there is no room in that for anything offical....Now please go delete your acount since you said yourself you dont play anymore so we dont have to read your nonsense.....
legit data base dump from ccp good graphic designer to make the map its really that simple....
I don't dislike BoB... I have some friends in BoB... BoB is just the most obvious example of an "alliance" which hasn't formed an official, in-game "alliance" in order to function differently than the political machines which are official alliances. I have high opinions of all but one of the BoB corporations.
The idea is... If you can't declare war on the group as a whole, then the group shouldn't carry representation. EVE already provides an advantage to those not forming alliances in an environment which already heavily favors the attacker.
Thanks for the personal insults and flames, though... Spot on for why you shouldn't be included in the process.
------------------------------------- //
The views expressed by this poster are not the views of the poster's corporation, alliance, planet or television network... but they should be. |
LadyScarlet
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 06:31:00 -
[65]
Edited by: LadyScarlet on 21/03/2005 06:34:55
sorry if you find the facts i pointed out insulting
you have admitedly in other thread pointed out you do not like atuk = we are part of BOB you dotn want \bob part of the map making process because you dont reconise us as a intity.... you said you quit eve so i ask why dose the map matter to you or how it is made ? you post as if you play the game activly which admitdly you said you dont anymore,
so there for you should obstain from posting unless it effects you and by self admitance you dont, since you dont play... which means you are only here to stirr the dirt which is not productive to anyone...again im sorry if you find this insulting i find it annoying and unproductive...
|
S3VYN
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 06:39:00 -
[66]
Originally by: LadyScarlet
sorry if you find the facts i pointed out insulting
you have admitedly in other thread pointed out you do not like atuk = we are part of BOB you dotn want \bob part of the map making process because you dont reconise us as a intity.... you said you quit eve so i ask why dose the map matter to you or how it is made ? you post as if you play the game activly which admitdly you said you dont anymore
so there for you should obstain from posting unless it effects you and by self admitance you dont since you dont play... which means you are only here to stirr the dirt which is not productive to anyone...again im sorry if you find this insulting i find it annoying and unproductive...
I wasn't stirring anything... ATUK is part of BoB/SE/whatever else benefits them, I wasn't pointing an insult at anyone and ATUK was never mentioned. BoB _IS_ an alliance which never formed an in-game, official alliance. That's just fact. I don't know of any other groups doing the same thing on as large of a scale.
The fact of the matter is that my opinion is an informed one with an honorable motive, there's no need to bash someone for trying to help.
Just because I don't play with ATUK any more doesn't mean I'm not involved elsewhere. I'm still part of this community, otherwise I wouldn't be able to post.
------------------------------------- //
The views expressed by this poster are not the views of the poster's corporation, alliance, planet or television network... but they should be. |
fugazii
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 07:30:00 -
[67]
so what if ppl disagree, they should make their OWN map saying how they think it is. you guys hav been running this game for a long time and u damn well know you cant cater to everyones needs.
just do what WERE PAYING YOU TO DO and delete flames, only once 51% of the ppl paying your salary wants something differant do you change it. which isnt obviously the case here.
thxs.
|
Torvus Jay
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 08:54:00 -
[68]
The problem here is that by running that vote zhuge basically put a ccp stamp of approval on that map. I dont care how many disclaimers they put on it, its endorsed by the men with the purple corp name and thats all anyone sees.
The vote only took into account the looks of it without any of us knowing how the map maker would behave politically.
We picked the previous mapmakers by respecting there work not just how pretty it is.
The best way to do this is to make a map sticky and allow anyone to post a map too it(within reason). The playerbase will then choose which map they go by. This makes it impossible for the mapmaker to use the resource as a semi-ccp approved propaganda tool.
So wrangler just let anyone who wants to make a map make one. We will decide which one we like the best by our own experiences of its accuracy.
______________
Aim careful, and look the devil in the eye. |
Vince Draken
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 08:55:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Skape Gote
Is it just me or has anyone else found this whole charade completely pathetic.
I'd rather have RF and his maps back and lets lose a few mods.
Best post so far.
|
pHASE 11
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 09:21:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Heliodor Mordureau
If anything, ISD should give him some tools that will help him in checking station control or overall population. At very least, a legatus frigate so he can check the area and have a chance at getting out alive... 
Totally agree. Give him some tool to do his work! He needs to spend a lot of hours into this and listen to a lot of retards.
Decide on the larger policies about how to show regions.
This policy decision in a one-time meeting with alliance representatives and ISD (as you now have started meddling in this you need to finish it). None of these weekly or bi-weekly crappy meeting.
Publish these policies in the map thread and as long as the mapmaker follows them let him do his work.
Sticky it and roll like before. Moderate, lock and ban any whining flamers.
Could we have a sticky at top of all forums: "whiners are the winners"?
|
James Baker
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 10:19:00 -
[71]
We've lived for 20 months without riots about the map, and there is just a single thing that caused it. Not that it was made official, Kalsrith's old maps used to get stickies all the time and noone complained too much.
What caused it was the introduction of Contested Regions. Since there is NO official way of checking who owns a region there's a good point in arguing what defines a contested region. And there is no simple answer to that.
However, a simple solution would be to remove the "Contested Region" feature in the map and simply revert to War Zones with lots of red dots.
I am sure that once a region changes hands people will come arguing about it, but there are a few things about this:
Regular stations - All regions with regular stations are occupied by very old alliances and you can't really drive those out with force, they need to implode to give up a region.
Conquerable stations - As has been the standard for such a long time, if an alliance or corp holds them for an extended period of time and indeed use it as a base control of the region is handed over. Best current example is Shinra in Period Basis. They've lived there since leaving CA and have held the stations for a long time, hence control was passed to them.
To me, the simple solution is the removal of contested regions 
|
Eris Discordia
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 10:23:00 -
[72]
To have some ISD tools it would mean the mapmaker is part of ISD, then all accusations of bias could mean he would be fired for breaking a contract.
Would the nametag ISD change so much, it is stil the same person doing the same job, only when there is an accusation of bias the consequences would be more sever.
The map was only used as a tool and I doubt it demands a completly new branch of volunteers, mapmakers. If you want to argue that ISD should take up mapmaking you'll need a very convincing argument.
I ♥ my pink dreadnought of pwnage
Mail [email protected] if you have any questions. |
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 10:30:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Eris Discordia
If you want to argue that ISD should take up mapmaking you'll need a very convincing argument.
I think youll find there will be very few who would want to see that.
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 11:16:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Eris Discordia
To have some ISD tools it would mean the mapmaker is part of ISD, then all accusations of bias could mean he would be fired for breaking a contract.
Would the nametag ISD change so much, it is stil the same person doing the same job, only when there is an accusation of bias the consequences would be more sever.
The map was only used as a tool and I doubt it demands a completly new branch of volunteers, mapmakers. If you want to argue that ISD should take up mapmaking you'll need a very convincing argument.
Eris, thats actually the main problem here.
Ccp (ISD) want an objective Mapsource for the whole community without sticking up for it or taking responsibilities for it.
Surely you will find a person who can be "official" but we both know and have seen how much hassel it would be to back such a person up in every little discussion of bias or missjudgement.
Thats why we elected some poor "dork" (RF) in this case who gets all the abuse and can be easy to get rid off without damaging ccp/isd's image incase things go down the drain.
The whole thing is a pure drama, good intentions but no guts to stick up for it.
Regarding the current situation, the mods should have used their fancy isd ships and checked the situation unannounced themself to either back up or put rf in line again. Surely taking 30 mins in a cov op frig on 2-3 days (prolly even less with bh powers or gm powers for ccp officials) would have helped to prevent this whole farce. Afterall RF didnt change ownership of the region but just marked it as contested. Something purely from reading the killboards and from analyzing the blobs and locals someone could do.
In the end it doesnt matter for me if we have a map or if its official i personally think its just a weak show of ccp to elect someone and then let him down because a minority cries foul on something they dont like (which doesnt make their claim true). The lack of respect for the hard work and time invested is just hillarious and would atleast in my book prevent me ever from cooperating with ccp "inofficially". Beeing sacrified on the first glimpse of a rough time shouldnt be the way to go.
|
DB Preacher
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 11:24:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Kcel Chim
Afterall RF didnt change ownership of the region but just marked it as contested. Something purely from reading the killboards and from analyzing the blobs and locals someone could do.
And this was over a constant 3 month period, not like ATUK/SHINRA just turned up one day and demanded it to be contested.
They fought for 3 months for before it was considered a contested region.
The map should be re-stickied and the mods should take more control of the map thread.
Previously ALL comments that weren't agreed upon with Quarath were deleted very quickly.
Personally, I think the mods dropped the ball on this one by not getting the whole situation under control from the start when FA start thread-bombing with mass alts after the map changed.
dbp
Current RKK Ranking: (CAL4) Soldier
Drop by and say hi in Reikoku Forums.
|
Zhuge Liang
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 11:36:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Kcel Chim
Eris, thats actually the main problem here.
Ccp (ISD) want an objective Mapsource for the whole community without sticking up for it or taking responsibilities for it.
Again you need to know the history of the map project before making such a comment. CCP did not ask for a map. ISD did not ask for a map, it is therefore neither of thier responsibilities. I started the organisation of the map project and stickies to improve this particular forum for all of you. So enough with the 'blame ccp/isd' they have nothing to do with it.
Having and maintaining the map sticky was never a part of my forum moderator job, so for the last 18 months or so it has been purely a volunteered feature I was doing for you guys.
Then the quite frankly unnescessary behavior of a couple of days ago which resulted in the map thread lock. So what I now propose is that those that feel they can do better, and those that are very quick to criticise and whine can go and manage thier own maps offsite. You can then all choose whoose map you want to follow and boycott or complain them directly to them if you are unhappy.
ZhuuÀ gheyÀleeÀyan (Kongming) |
LNX Flocki
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 11:44:00 -
[77]
Ban the trolls, then unlock the thread. Problem solved. No need to kill the best resource this forum has to offer.
|
pHASE 11
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:04:00 -
[78]
Vision:
1) CCP/ISD provides raw data. Raw data could be monthly reports of podkills in regions and conquerable station ownership. Reports posted here on forum. (I remember ccp posted data like this for conquerable stations soon after they were released)
2) Eve community interprets data as they see fit. The voted on mapmaker updates his map in a sticky post like before.
3) Mapmaker follows agreed upon _high level_ policies. The _only ones_ I can think of is:
* # of podkills / period in region for it to be considered contested.
* # of station ownership changes / period in region for it to be considered contested.
* # expected map updates / month.
* Mapmaker should not make any answer regarding the map to someone who's not a CEO of a corporation.
4) Have your kickoff meeting to agree upon policies above.
5) Sticky the map and continue like before.
Until all above points are met do this other solution:
Originally by: LNX Flocki
Ban the trolls, then unlock the thread. Problem solved. No need to kill the best resource this forum has to offer.
|
w0rmy
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:05:00 -
[79]
Edited by: w0rmy on 21/03/2005 12:05:12
Originally by: Zhuge Liang
Having and maintaining the map sticky was never a part of my forum moderator job, so for the last 18 months or so it has been purely a volunteered feature I was doing for you guys.
I wouldnt think leaving a topic stuck would require much work, as for moderating it, isnt moderating threads part of your job?
Originally by: LNX Flocki
Ban the trolls, then unlock the thread. Problem solved. No need to kill the best resource this forum has to offer.
Spot on!
|
DB Preacher
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:32:00 -
[80]
Edited by: DB Preacher on 21/03/2005 12:32:23
Cool.
Wrangler has cleaned up the other thread.
RF: I suggest you keep out of arguing with peeps about any changes you make.
Just make the changes YOU think are correct considering the information you get and the information you find out in-game.
When you update the map, put the stated changes and if peeps start arguing about the changes, just mail the mods and ask them to remove anything that is arguing with your changes.
Seems pretty damn simple to me, no?
dbp
Current RKK Ranking: (CAL4) Soldier
Drop by and say hi in Reikoku Forums.
|
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:36:00 -
[81]
/me shouts
feckin drink !!!
I always thought the maps were for a "general" overview of the political map, not hard fact or up to the minute.
I didn't pay for them and as the time and effort was put in freely then respect was given to inderviduals putting something back into the Eve community.
For the people complaining ...... feck.
Mongo speaks !!
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:42:00 -
[82]
Possibly the best solution would be to code a program with strict rules on how the map is built. For instance:
* Only in-game alliances may claim regions
* Only IGA executors may file claims to regions
* Claims can be supported by other IGA executors
* IGA have a designated center of power, you may not support claims too far from these centers
* You may not claim empire owned reions, but you may claim pirate owned regions.
* A new alliance laying claim must be supported by old alliances.
* POS and claimed systems from POS count towards who is claiming a region strongest.
Similary, ISD could do it, too. But if so, they'll need a completely new ruleset for how they make the map.
In the end, is it really worth it?
Players will remain partial and/or clueless and, given how extensive the forum wars have been, I'd not be surprised would even a simplistic tool such as the program describe above be exploited to gain imaginary advantages.
The old maps will be deeply missed.
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. |
Techie Zero
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 12:50:00 -
[83]
What I don't understand is why there was a perceived problem to begin with
So what if people ranted in a forum about something that was in game. Let them rant. It only hurts the ranters image to the rest of the community and we know how to use the page down key.
If they get abusive shoot them a warning, edit the post and move on. If they persist to be abusive then ban them for a duration.
Am I missing something?
EVE-I.com~THE Info source |
Sky Hunter
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 13:24:00 -
[84]
My 2 cents:
1. Region/territory contested only when opposoning force fully controls territory/region more then 12 out of 24 hours. Fully means, the ones who own the territory/region, dont show any resistance. Even if owners kill 3 people a day from opposing force, its still not fully controlled.
2. To decide of region/territory contested/warzone/controlled i suggest a JOINT team of 3-4 -=neutrals=- scouting the territory/region of question for 5-7 days. No flying with anyone of the fighters. Only watching things.
Neutrals means people who never were in corp/alliance opposed to questionable alliance and his territory. Neutral team arent stable, and grouped from volunteers that were checked and dont havy any connection to any of fighters in questionable region/territory. (of course no NPC corp or alts). Then neutral team passes info to map-maker and depending on their info he changes map.
I think this will protect both, defenders and attackers from mistakes.
-=-
|
Nuala Reece
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 13:34:00 -
[85]
The ranting, I guess, comes from the sources it always does - bruised egos and the desire for someone to make everything easy for them. But here's some breaking news - the map doesn't make anything easier for anyone - it just helps to make people better informed so long as it's used with a few caveats.
The map is not the territory - no matter how good a job RF or anyone else makes of a map (and I was happy with RF's ones) it will never accurately reflect the current state of affairs anywhere in Eve. Anyone who sets out thinking that any map they have is 'accurate' is a fool. What maps do best is form a part of the sum of information that can be gained from many sources - other discussions and reports on this forum, propaganda from corp videos, conversation with local people in game, filters in the ingame map, and what your own eyes tell you as you move through space.
For this reason maps are fantastically useful resources, but best used in conjunction with other sources of information combined with (here's the kicker) seeing for yourself and making up your own goddamn mind
For my part, I'd like to see maps back on a sticky. Don't need it myself because (more breaking news ) you can bookmark important pages on your own browser, but for new players it means there readily available.
I'd like to see one thread where anyone can post a map and have it listed at in the first post. Flames and trolling (including 'joke' maps) should be routinely, and quickly, deleted from any ongoing discussion because ... if you disagree with the way a map looks there are 2 simple ways to approach it - either make your own map depicting the galaxy the way you, or your alliance, sees it or raise your objections with the mapmakers
including reasoned arguments and/or evidenceto back up your claim that it should be changed.
More maps may be more confusing in some ways, but only when you want someone to tell you which one is right - which is really only asking for someone else to do your work for you. With a choice, pilots can look at many maps and decide for themsleves.
If nothing else, a discussion cleared of flames would pretty soon make it clear which mapmakers seem to be pushing their own agenda and which are trying to be as impartial as they can be. And a sticky is also at least one small way of recognising the work people put in on our behalf to amke the maps in the first place.
Be Free
Freelancing Corp |
Techie Zero
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 15:08:00 -
[86]
Exactly.
As usual this has been too much drama about NOTHING and in a few days the drama will be buried and forgotten.
Move along...nothing to see here...
EVE-I.com~THE Info source |
Saladin
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 15:25:00 -
[87]
I have a great idea. Create a sticky thread and say if anyone is hosting their version of the EvE Map, they can post the URL in that thread. Alarmists will say it will lead to 100's of links, but the reality is that serious map makers are few and far between |
Saladin
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 15:31:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Fabster
Why did the map had to go? It's a big loss for the eve population. Just keep the map threat stickied and let it be regulary update. Just like it was. Can't see that harm in that.
Only that one Allaince can't control their region for a relative long time. Unlike they claim they do, but they don't show it by force and are hiding.
The only thing RF did was make the space contested and that was just like it is. One big war zone where both parts not really can claim the area.
Now the Alliance can't win it ingame so they attack the map maker.
I find this very weak. That Alliances can pressure map makers in making maps they like to see and those map won't show whats happening ingame. They will only the alliance propaganda.
Map makers must be neutral to both sides true, but can't you blame FA for acting pathetic? It's only a map and if you don't like it then show it by facts you own that region. By presence and by killboard stats. RF did check the regions out for presence and they weren't in Fa favor. Ok, but then didn't he check it mutiple times? For making sure if he was correct.
So bring the map back for the good of eve population. It even don't have to be RF's map.(saw some other good ones as well)
One could claim that ATUK is equally pathetic when they do not live in any of the regions indicated to be 'under their control' on the map.
---------------------------
(c) Copyright Saladin, 2005.
Any editing of this post by a third party will be in violation United States Internet Copyright law 46525 of 2003. |
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 15:54:00 -
[89]
Great. Thanks to idiots on all sides we have no more map. Why is this a problem all the sudden? When Quarth was doing the maps there was much less complaining. Why don't you guys grow the **** up. The map in a novelty that many people enjoyed. FA, what, does the map hurt your forum propaganda machine? How about you guys play the game? Oh, I guess you don't need to sign in often to research Tech 2 BPOs.
And Righteous Fury, you just had to go and change the map that has worked for over a year. Why? Were you trying to push the limits of what people would put up with?
Grow up. Get lives.
Raven 4TW! Rank(1) SP: 243745/256000 |
Sky Hunter
|
Posted - 2005.03.21 16:04:00 -
[90]
I would really love to see old map, just with changes. Not completly new map, with new icons and stuff.
Its a good work, its gotta be respected, but thing is...people used to old things
-=-
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |