EVE Search - GM enforced Cease Fire?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

GM enforced Cease Fire?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Darius Shakor Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.09.17 17:54:00 - [31] Originally by: turnschuh in short what happened: 9uy 200pilots POS attack etc system crashed, all get disconnected. all log back in some POS are bugged GM cames and ask for case fire dont know the details Yes I hear it might have had something to do with our current war. The system has been bad for the last week. I was out at the time and came back to hear whispers of a GM ceasefire while they sorted something out server side. ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=3
Red Ochre	Posted - 2006.09.17 17:55:00 - [32] Originally by: Coranor Absolutely disgraceful. No GM's should be allowed to interfere in any player conflict in any way, shape or form. lolol, this is the best representation of BOB i have seen, ignorant, willfull, i will do what i want narrow minded folks, or simply put EMO'S. nice big powerful corp BOB, but a joke in eve.
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.09.17 17:59:00 - [33] Originally by: turnschuh in short what happened: 9uy 200pilots POS attack etc system crashed, all get disconnected. all log back in some POS are bugged GM cames and ask for case fire dont know the details Same scenario in D7 yesterday... ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
Swamp Ziro Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:03:00 - [34] Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 17/09/2006 18:04:05 You people just need to whine I think. Does the server have problems? - YES. Is this bad practice on CCP's part? - YES. Are they trying to fix it? - YES. Is it fixed yet? - NO. How about now? - NOPE. Now? -NOT RLY. Are we there yet? - >_____>. Do big fleet battles cause great lag and node crash often? - YES. What do you do about it? 1) Continue fleet battles, crash, continue whine, repeat till fixed. (stupid) 2) Stop fleet battles, wait for problem to resolve itself, lose some trust in CCP. (warranted) 3) Decide you don't want to play as long as the server has problems, and freeze your sub(warranted)
Guillame Herschel Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Nova Republic	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:14:00 - [35] Originally by: lofty29 So, the GMs cant interfere to STOP you crashing the server, but if YOU crash the server, it's all their fault and they need new servers? I have to disagree. A server design that is vulnerable to crash when players do perfectly legal things, to the extent that GMs have to login to order players to stop playing, is a poor design and no one's fault but the designers. -- Guile can always trump hardware --
Swamp Ziro Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:16:00 - [36] Originally by: Guillame Herschel Originally by: lofty29 So, the GMs cant interfere to STOP you crashing the server, but if YOU crash the server, it's all their fault and they need new servers? I have to disagree. A server design that is vulnerable to crash when players do perfectly legal things, to the extent that GMs have to login to order players to stop playing, is a poor design and no one's fault but the designers. And I have to say that we know that, and they 're trying to fix it, so instead of just blaming the devs for being in the wrong(they are) every single time something happens, you could just assume we know already, and wait for the problem to get fixed.
Bazman Caldari The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:29:00 - [37] People were pretty happy to abide by the Ceasefire in 9uy today, the situation was just that bad. Though your dreadnought did happen to get caught fair and square, lag or not, before the node went down ;) tbh I won't be *****ing if you get all those ships back through re-imbursement. Just means more things to shoot at :P ----- Hi TUXFORD! Blasterboat for tier 3 Gallente battleship please! Make it look cool too. Thanks. I am a Gallente Whiner. Minmatar Whining is currently in training.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:33:00 - [38] Of course when the GM's announce a cease-fire, some people take the liberty to set-up a POS without any risk, simply because the GM's will ban anyone who breaks the cease-fire. Way to go, fair ******* game eh? Support POS Overhaul - Read it NOW!
Mitten Caldari UNIVERSAL SOLDIERS Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:35:00 - [39] Quit yer *****in!
Darius Shakor Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:36:00 - [40] Originally by: Bazman People were pretty happy to abide by the Ceasefire in 9uy today, the situation was just that bad. Though your dreadnought did happen to get caught fair and square, lag or not, before the node went down ;) tbh I won't be *****ing if you get all those ships back through re-imbursement. Just means more things to shoot at :P Well I don't know because I was not online. Was busy standing in line to return a faulty microwave. So I won't comment and start a 'well from our point of view...' match here. But agreed it is terrible at the moment. If the temp ceasefire from the GM's was used to buff the server or sort some problem or whatever though I am all for it. ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=3
lofty29 Gallente Praxiteles Inc.	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:37:00 - [41] Originally by: Guillame Herschel Originally by: lofty29 So, the GMs cant interfere to STOP you crashing the server, but if YOU crash the server, it's all their fault and they need new servers? I have to disagree. A server design that is vulnerable to crash when players do perfectly legal things, to the extent that GMs have to login to order players to stop playing, is a poor design and no one's fault but the designers. They accept it's their fault, and theyre trying to fix it. Doing as they say while they attempt to fix it will only make it go faster. --------------------------- Originally by: inSpirAcy Just like a tumour, the Brutix grows on you. I pwnz0r your sig, muahaha - Tirg Noes i got beat by a girl >.< - Xorus
Discodude Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:37:00 - [42] Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: Coranor Originally by: lofty29 Alliances need to learn common sense. You cant fight with those kind of numbers, and it has been proven on many occasions. And NOW you try to do it during a horrendous period of lag. Jees, you guys are stupid Well if we all thought like you then there'd never be any fighting going on at all, ever anywhere. To take a station you need numbers there is no way around it. Lags just something that comes with those numbers. Nothing that can be done about it by the players so they just gotta go through it as best they can. If you had any sort of experience in the type of combat that can cause this type of lag you would know this. I'm not blaming ccp over it. This many people on one server its kinda unavoidable. If people are that concerned over lag then there's very little reason to log in. I have experience in this type of combat, and this is exactly why I voice my opinions against it. I know you need numbers to take a station (or, alternatively, have 20 people camping each gate in a system, and a squad of 10 - 20 dreads attack the station / POS's) but there's always a solution. For example - Fleet A is camping a gate. They have 30 sniper battleships sat at 100km from it, and 20 tacklers on the gate. Fleet B can get a covert on the BS group, thus warping in 15 Gank BS's and 20 tacklers to eliminate it. There is no need to outblob a fleet to win. yes that would be the perfect senario, but here's how it goes. Attacking force A brings in 20 bs's and 20 support ships. Defending force A notices how many ship the attack force has, and brings in 40 bs's and 40 support ships because then can, and it helps them win the fight. So Attacking force A calls in attacking force B made up of another 40 bs's and 40 support ships, resulting in a force of 60 bs's and 60 support ships so that the attacking force has the advantage. Then defending force A see's their out numbered and cant take on that many ship, and OMG they don't want to loose their station, so they bring in another 30 bs and 30 support ships bringing their total to 70 bs and 70 support ships. Total of 260 ships in the system. Vola lag. Now how dare the attackers and defenders bring in that many ships, once the ships in system reach 100 ships all ppl should stop entering the system so their's no lag (even if all 100 are attacking and no defenders) right? Or maybe both sides should get together and have a chat, and decide how many ship both side can have in this attack/defence so that they can minimize lag. Lofty -> you say you don't need a blob to win, and technically that's true, but why would a defending force who's defending a multi billion isk outpost that took months to build and put up, bring in a equal size fleet to take out a enemy fleet? Risking loosing the battle and the outpost if they don't win just so that everyone has less lag. In the end they would prob rather have the lag because it deters the attackers from attacking.
Caerleus Board of Twenty	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:44:00 - [43] The servers currently are in such a state that you can say that they are in the equivalent of an 'intensive care' unit in a hospital. The dev's are trying to do what they can to fix these issues, but as Oveur has said, they gain little at th emoment from an actual crash in the way of knowledge because the log server quits out. He also says that as one node drops, this causes errors which then causes the rest of the nodes to cascade and drop. GM's interveening and proclaiming ceasefires within systems to sort bugs out and prevent node death, whilst annoying for those there at that time should surely be seen as a proactive measure to preventing cluster wide system death. Ok, so the game is slightly tainted for the 200 odd people in that system at that time, but surely that has to be seen against the fact that if the ceasefire didnt happen and the nodes cascaded, this would affect ALL those online and for a damn sight longer than the 20-30 minutes or however long the ceasefire was in place for. When the system goes down, what else happens...petitions...hundreds of them for lost ships etc. If the GM's save a node they are decreasing in essence the petition queue by not adding to it. Surely you have to see this in a positive light also. Currently, because of the state of the software, the actions of 5% of those online can have a dramatic effect on the experience of the remaining 95%. Life must go on in Eve, Alliances and the like still have plans they wish to carry out. But, currently, the patient is by no means up to the task. Eve is like a new girlfriend - you know its going down at some point, its just when and for how long.
Isyel Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:46:00 - [44] Originally by: jbob2000 Originally by: lofty29 Alliances need to learn common sense. You cant fight with those kind of numbers, and it has been proven on many occasions. And NOW you try to do it during a horrendous period of lag. Jees, you guys are stupid You're a tool, and clearly know nothing beyong ganking empire mission *****s. You need dreadnaughts to take out a POS. You need lots of them so people dont go insane from bordem from staring at a screen for 8 hours. Since dreadnaughts can't defend themselves, you then need battleships and other support ships to help them if they are in trouble. IF you only brought 20 support ships to support your 10 dreads, then your enemy would field 40 support ships and more dreads. Thats the way it works. People aren't looking for a fair fight when they want a system. They are going to use every means nessecary to take that system. The game is designed to require massive fleets to take systems. Its been proven. There hasn't been a single system siege that has less then 100 people in it. 'ey! We have 100 in local altogether!
Rutoo Gallente Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2006.09.17 18:54:00 - [45] Originally by: Coranor Absolutely disgraceful. No GM's should be allowed to interfere in any player conflict in any way, shape or form. wrong it's thier game and they can do what they want, that have the ability to freeze everyone in the system if need be, if the game needs everyone to stop firing for a minute, or 20 and the GM's deicded it's needed to sort things out, then they can enforce it, Now what can happen when you don't listen to a GM? You get hit with a Ban Stick _________________________________________________________ My First EvE Video Club Seals Not Sandwichs
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:01:00 - [46] Originally by: lofty29 Alliances need to learn common sense. You cant fight with those kind of numbers, and it has been proven on many occasions. And NOW you try to do it during a horrendous period of lag. Jees, you guys are stupid Ugh, I may not like Alliance Warfare, but I have enough experience to tell you that to win you really need numbers. As people explained later in the thread, alliances will fight with all their power in order to win, if one side tries to keep everything "fair" then they will get overrun. Join Tharsis! - Get Sexy Sigs
lofty29 Gallente Praxiteles Inc.	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:04:00 - [47] Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: lofty29 Alliances need to learn common sense. You cant fight with those kind of numbers, and it has been proven on many occasions. And NOW you try to do it during a horrendous period of lag. Jees, you guys are stupid Ugh, I may not like Alliance Warfare, but I have enough experience to tell you that to win you really need numbers. As people explained later in the thread, alliances will fight with all their power in order to win, if one side tries to keep everything "fair" then they will get overrun. Looks like we're stuck in a catch 22 then. Alliances want to win, but to win, they cause lag, thus making them whine that CCP are crap --------------------------- Originally by: inSpirAcy Just like a tumour, the Brutix grows on you. I pwnz0r your sig, muahaha - Tirg Noes i got beat by a girl >.< - Xorus
Mitten Caldari UNIVERSAL SOLDIERS Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:13:00 - [48] Originally by: Mitten Quit yer *****in! QFT!
Infinity Ziona Privateers	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:17:00 - [49] Originally by: jbob2000 Originally by: lofty29 Alliances need to learn common sense. You cant fight with those kind of numbers, and it has been proven on many occasions. And NOW you try to do it during a horrendous period of lag. Jees, you guys are stupid You're a tool, and clearly know nothing beyong ganking empire mission *****s. You need dreadnaughts to take out a POS. You need lots of them so people dont go insane from bordem from staring at a screen for 8 hours. Since dreadnaughts can't defend themselves, you then need battleships and other support ships to help them if they are in trouble. IF you only brought 20 support ships to support your 10 dreads, then your enemy would field 40 support ships and more dreads. Thats the way it works. People aren't looking for a fair fight when they want a system. They are going to use every means nessecary to take that system. The game is designed to require massive fleets to take systems. Its been proven. There hasn't been a single system siege that has less then 100 people in it. Which kind of makes you wonder why they dont figure out a better way. Like a requirement to attack a network of system installations at the one time rather then 1 massive attack in one single system on one POS. Are Alliances Pushing You Around?
SibSpi	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:21:00 - [50] Edited by: SibSpi on 17/09/2006 19:22:15 Originally by: Coranor Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: Coranor Absolutely disgraceful. No GM's should be allowed to interfere in any player conflict in any way, shape or form. So, the GMs cant interfere to STOP you crashing the server, but if YOU crash the server, it's all their fault and they need new servers? Yeaaaah, hypocritical much? If you crash the server then you crash the server. Such is life when fighting with these kind of numbers. How would you feel though if you were kicking the crap out of someone and the GM's just dropped by and shouted "OK EVERYBODY STOP". I know i'd be rightly ***ed off. And yet, I'm pretty sure that the GM's, being 'game masters', would in the spirit of role play (or at least some degree of fairness) make sure that nobody simply goes and runs away because people are being told not to shoot at xyz. To be honest, if it's you guys that were lagging the rest of the server up, shame on you. I don't care for what one little corp wants to do, I care for the entire eve community being up in arms because YOU couldn't give a damn about the instability of the server being CAUSED by YOU. edit* 'one little corp' referring to my corp, among others, not BoB - since we all know BoB is just an 'l' short of 'BloB'
BurnHard	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:27:00 - [51] I don't understand why this is such a big deal. It was just the same 18 months ago. As long as player numbers continue to increase, the hardware is always playing catch-up and you will always have lag when you get huge numbers coming together. Blame it on the server model CCP implemented, because it's certainly not inevitable in an MMO. In short, it's a **** code-base and could do with a complete re-write .
Alberta Gallente Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:27:00 - [52] Originally by: SibSpi Originally by: Coranor Originally by: lofty29 Originally by: Coranor Absolutely disgraceful. No GM's should be allowed to interfere in any player conflict in any way, shape or form. So, the GMs cant interfere to STOP you crashing the server, but if YOU crash the server, it's all their fault and they need new servers? Yeaaaah, hypocritical much? If you crash the server then you crash the server. Such is life when fighting with these kind of numbers. How would you feel though if you were kicking the crap out of someone and the GM's just dropped by and shouted "OK EVERYBODY STOP". I know i'd be rightly ****ed off. And yet, I'm pretty sure that the GM's, being 'game masters', would in the spirit of role play (or at least some degree of fairness) make sure that nobody simply goes and runs away because people are being told not to shoot at xyz. To be honest, if it's you guys that were lagging the rest of the server up, shame on you. I don't care for what one little corp wants to do, I care for the entire eve community being up in arms because YOU couldn't give a damn about the instability of the server being CAUSED by YOU. Just have a think about what you just wrote for a minute... Now be a good chap and have a word with yourself.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:43:00 - [53] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Of course when the GM's announce a cease-fire, some people take the liberty to set-up a POS without any risk, simply because the GM's will ban anyone who breaks the cease-fire. Way to go, fair ******* game eh? Petition it under exploit? Sorry you can't afford a dev so you get me instead ^^ - Xorus I hear Xorus is only 50 isk an hour - Immy Oooh that could get Suvetar for the day! - Cathath For 50, you can have my goat:P- Tirg

Eldo Davip Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2006.09.17 19:54:00 - [54] Thread locked. I'm not removing everything but please always follow a GM enforced cease fire. Also such actions are not to be viewed as an opportunity to flame the GMs. They are doing a great job. Also we know there are server issues, dont bring them into every thread in an attempt to derail the discussion. Questions? [email protected] Email Us \| Forum Rules \| Website


Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.