Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Lovey Dovey
Great Game Mechanic GoonSwarm
0
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 18:54:08 -
[91] - Quote
Midori Neko-chan wrote:Pandemic (Sore) Losers best losers.
PL have the most AT ships available from this tournament as a result of whats happening. I'm sure any soreness from taking 3rd is being addressed with the increased value in the ships they're selling. |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
1057
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 19:00:57 -
[92] - Quote
Captain Thunk wrote:Troll or not, it only works because there's plenty of scope for this to *maybe* have happened, which means CCP are almost certainly going to have to tighten up on collusion and team sharing rules because it jeopardises the integrity of the tournament. I agree completely.
But CCP have been in many positions where all logic and sense dictates they should go one way and still they go the other.
Captain Thunk wrote:Even if found not guilty, which in the absence of verifiable evidence is a certainty, CCP can't ignore the fact the rules do need to change No argument there either. I also think it was only a matter of time before this occurred, if not this year then in the next few ATs it had to come to this, because of the poor ruleset CCP is currently using.
Captain Thunk wrote:So the days of taking 1st and 2nd places are over. 50 Ships instead of 75. I'm not sure that actually follows, but I can completely see why you think so.
Captain Thunk wrote:If it's a troll then it cost them at least 2.5 tril to do and that's best case scenario. That should make it particularly tough for people to top then.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
1057
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 19:03:28 -
[93] - Quote
Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
the problem is that we have a bunch of cheating scumbags here. |
Cobat Marland
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
17
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 19:06:13 -
[94] - Quote
Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
They were the two best teams it doesn't even matter. Seems like a bunch of jealous babies crying about it.
I am an outsider though this is just my perspective looking from outside in and these posts. Because they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
1057
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 19:08:17 -
[95] - Quote
Cobat Marland wrote:they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. No it isn't. If it was, this thread wouldn't exist.
|
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
101
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 19:34:06 -
[96] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:Cobat Marland wrote:they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. No it isn't. If it was, this thread wouldn't exist.
If you're not a hydra alt, you're rather daft.
If you ARE a hydra alt, then you're trying to justify ruining the tournament. How does it make you feel to be the bad guy? |
umaya
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 21:01:06 -
[97] - Quote
ITT: people who don't know who bad bobby is.
Also ITT people who should separate the fact that they don't like certain rules vs what is actually being investigated.
The collusion rule isn't actually about how close teams work together, go read the thread, go read fozzies answers. The only thing under question is whether camel and hydra have fixed a match or not. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
300
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 21:08:06 -
[98] - Quote
Cobat Marland wrote:Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
They were the two best teams it doesn't even matter. Seems like a bunch of jealous babies crying about it.
I am an outsider though this is just my perspective looking from outside in and these posts. Because they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team.
A and B team is fine, A and B team colluding on the outcome is where **** hits the fan |
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
151
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 21:09:30 -
[99] - Quote
umaya wrote:ITT: people who don't know who bad bobby is.
Also ITT people who should separate the fact that they don't like certain rules vs what is actually being investigated.
The collusion rule isn't actually about how close teams work together, go read the thread, go read fozzies answers. The only thing under question is whether camel and hydra have fixed a match or not.
The point is you can't have two teams working closely together and not worry about collusion with fixed matches.
If you haven't learnt that yet then there's no hope for you. |
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
296
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 21:42:05 -
[100] - Quote
#BansOrRiot |
|
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
101
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 22:10:53 -
[101] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Cobat Marland wrote:Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
They were the two best teams it doesn't even matter. Seems like a bunch of jealous babies crying about it.
I am an outsider though this is just my perspective looking from outside in and these posts. Because they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. A and B team is fine, A and B team colluding on the outcome is where **** hits the fan
its not fine, its within the rules. That doesnt mean its a good rule, just that they cant exactly change the rules halfway through the tournament.
The rules should be changed after this, there is no justifying b teams now. There's a reason we didn't do it. |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1866
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 22:23:14 -
[102] - Quote
Mr Rive wrote:This is all daft. I dont care whether the accusations are true or not. It makes no difference to the tournament in the future. Everyone knows what went on. Everyone knows something unethical went on. What matters is the rules get changed for next year so all of this stupid behaviour and using the tournament as a profit machine gets blocked out. Someone or some people did something which damaged the tournament to make a quick buck. It doesnt matter what that thing is, what matters is they knew they were doing it, they knew it was wrong, and they didnt care about the consequences for the tournament. If there is proof, they need to be banned from ever participating again, because they have done it before and you bet your ass they will try and do it again, they dont care. If there is no concrete evidence for CCP to use, then the people resnponsible need to have it as difficult as possible for them to break the rules again.
If neither of these things happen, next year is going to be a farce, and there will be no point in continuing the alliance tournament at all. Instead of treating it as a bit of fun, and as a tool for prestige, you can bet more alliances will make the tournament into a profit machine, it will be part of their yearly income, just like moon mining used to be.
I do NOT want to be a part in a tournament where this is the case.
How quickly you have come to my side eh.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra Gallente Federation
304
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 22:41:30 -
[103] - Quote
Mr Rive wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:Cobat Marland wrote:Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
They were the two best teams it doesn't even matter. Seems like a bunch of jealous babies crying about it.
I am an outsider though this is just my perspective looking from outside in and these posts. Because they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. A and B team is fine, A and B team colluding on the outcome is where **** hits the fan its not fine, its within the rules.
So A team from one alliance and B team from another enter the field (although working together, so same team really), A team opens fire as B team sits idly while their ships are destroyed...outcome predetermined by leaders of the two alliances...is within the rules? Or is it only perceived to be within the rules because it was made to seem like an actual fight sort of took place?
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
"Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied."
EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
|
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
155
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 22:53:55 -
[104] - Quote
Hiply Rustic wrote:
So A team from one alliance and B team from another enter the field (although working together, so same team really), A team opens fire as B team sits idly while their ships are destroyed...outcome predetermined by leaders of the two alliances...is within the rules? Or is it only perceived to be within the rules because it was made to seem like an actual fight sort of took place?
It's only perceived within the rules if you 'fight'. Sitting stationary is illegal.
Under current rules you can share tactics, ships and setups with each other so you could just arrange beforehand that A-team flies a comp that beats what the B-team is flying easily - A's Rock to B's Scissors. This allows you to predetermine who will win without having broken any of CCPs rules.
I think this demonstrates how absurd the situation really is.
Considering the numerous ways Hydramel could have done what they've done legitimately, but didn't, I can only conclude that the team captains just wanted to cheat. That's unless DHB made it all up. In which case they didn't cheat but yeah....comedic set of rules.
|
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:07:01 -
[105] - Quote
Hiply Rustic wrote:Mr Rive wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:Cobat Marland wrote:Selene Mikabosh wrote:I really am struggling to see the problem here.
They were the two best teams it doesn't even matter. Seems like a bunch of jealous babies crying about it.
I am an outsider though this is just my perspective looking from outside in and these posts. Because they had a 65% chance of finishing better than everyone else by running two teams, which is forbidden, to have A team and B team. A and B team is fine, A and B team colluding on the outcome is where **** hits the fan its not fine, its within the rules. So A team from one alliance and B team from another enter the field (although working together, so same team really), A team opens fire as B team sits idly while their ships are destroyed...outcome predetermined by leaders of the two alliances...is within the rules? Or is it only perceived to be within the rules because it was made to seem like an actual fight sort of took place?
does thunk's post answer your question? I think he said it better than I could have. |
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:20:35 -
[106] - Quote
Captain Thunk wrote:Hiply Rustic wrote:
So A team from one alliance and B team from another enter the field (although working together, so same team really), A team opens fire as B team sits idly while their ships are destroyed...outcome predetermined by leaders of the two alliances...is within the rules? Or is it only perceived to be within the rules because it was made to seem like an actual fight sort of took place?
It's only perceived within the rules if you 'fight'. Sitting stationary is illegal. Under current rules you can share tactics, ships and setups with each other so you could just arrange beforehand that A-team flies a comp that beats what the B-team is flying easily - A's Rock to B's Scissors. This allows you to predetermine who will win without having broken any of CCPs rules. I think this demonstrates how absurd the situation really is. Considering the numerous ways Hydramel could have done what they've done legitimately, but didn't, I can only conclude that the team captains just wanted to cheat. That's unless DHB made it all up. In which case they didn't cheat but yeah....comedic set of rules.
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
156
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:22:42 -
[107] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
That only works when the 3 teams have already agreed to pool the prizes and split evenly.
As that hasn't happened, your logic has failed.
|
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:24:30 -
[108] - Quote
I think CCP should investigate if there wasnt any foul play involved in the PL losses, losing againts both teams is pretty fishy since PL cant possibly be worse than Hydras.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:27:12 -
[109] - Quote
Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
That only works when the 3 teams have already agreed to pool the prizes and split evenly. As that hasn't happened, your logic has failed.
How is it a requirement to share prices to collude?
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
158
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:30:22 -
[110] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
That only works when the 3 teams have already agreed to pool the prizes and split evenly. As that hasn't happened, your logic has failed. How is it a requirement to share prices to collude?
Because you need to gain something from it, not demonstrate stupidity like you're doing.
I've had to deal with some pretty weak arguments in my time, but come on man, did you fall out of a 3rd storey window and feel the urgent need to start poasting?
|
|
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra Gallente Federation
304
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:34:16 -
[111] - Quote
Mr Rive wrote:Hiply Rustic wrote:
its not fine, its within the rules.
So A team from one alliance and B team from another enter the field (although working together, so same team really), A team opens fire as B team sits idly while their ships are destroyed...outcome predetermined by leaders of the two alliances...is within the rules? Or is it only perceived to be within the rules because it was made to seem like an actual fight sort of took place?
does thunk's post answer your question? I think he said it better than I could have. [/quote]
It both answered the question and highlighted the absurdity of the rule as implemented.
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
"Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied."
EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
|
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:36:50 -
[112] - Quote
Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
That only works when the 3 teams have already agreed to pool the prizes and split evenly. As that hasn't happened, your logic has failed. How is it a requirement to share prices to collude? Because you need to gain something from it, not demonstrate stupidity like you're doing. I've had to deal with some pretty weak arguments in my time, but come on man, did you fall out of a 3rd storey window and feel the urgent need to start poasting?
I dont really see how any of the teams ~gains~ something from dropping to losers bracket and having to fight an additional series +disedvantage in finals.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra Gallente Federation
304
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:37:26 -
[113] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:I think CCP should investigate if there wasnt any foul play involved in the PL losses, losing againts both teams is pretty fishy since PL cant possibly be worse than Hydras.
Much edgy, very angst.
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
"Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied."
EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
|
Ryu Chaos
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
16
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:53:55 -
[114] - Quote
Quote:I dont really see how any of the teams ~gains~ something from dropping to losers bracket and having to fight an additional series +disedvantage in finals.
apparently you didnt see the "so-called" logs. the tldr logs of kadesh said this:
"In our semifinal vs Camel, we would fight the first match legitimately and whoever lost would give up his second match as well, so we would have more time to prepare for the BO1 vs the Tuskers. this way we will have 40-60 min compared to the 20 that either of the team would have."
if you see the second match the reaction times are stupidly slower as shown by blast X in another thread.
Also CCP's schedule was fixed, if the BO3 finish in 2 matches, the time would still be kept and they would just go to jita cam or whatever.
The funny part is that they could simply drop the second match for various reasons (not show more setups etc) which i think is also in the rule, the illegal part was that the teams reached an agreement for either to concede their second match.
@RyuChaos_
|
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:55:54 -
[115] - Quote
Some people seem to forget that at no point was it set in stone that both teams reach the finals, putting yourself intentionally at a disedvantage for possibly just 14 price ships and shame of lose is pretty stupid. Especially considering hoe much time each of the teams put into this. Until investigation comes to conclusion give them benefit of the doubt, until now we seen only some pasted chat lines and many claims.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2015.09.16 23:58:55 -
[116] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:Captain Thunk wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:
At this point we have to assume that u colluded with both teams aswell since your setups lost.
That only works when the 3 teams have already agreed to pool the prizes and split evenly. As that hasn't happened, your logic has failed. How is it a requirement to share prices to collude? Because you need to gain something from it, not demonstrate stupidity like you're doing. I've had to deal with some pretty weak arguments in my time, but come on man, did you fall out of a 3rd storey window and feel the urgent need to start poasting? I dont really see how any of the teams ~gains~ something from dropping to losers bracket and having to fight an additional series +disedvantage in finals.
The best teams get into the winner's bracket. They betted on getting one team through in the winner's bracket with skill, they better on getting one through in the losers bracket with effort.
They also did it because they wanted to ensure they didnt have to do any fishy buisness until the finals when they would face each other and the matches were irrelevant. The sooner one team goes down to the loser's bracket, the less chance they have of facing bigger teams until later on. This means they dont have to show any more setups than they have to against the smaller teams.
This isnt some kind of conspiracy theory, they did almost the exact same thing last year. And guess what, when they got banned for colluding with outbreak, they did the exact same thing too. |
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
103
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 00:01:35 -
[117] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:Some people seem to forget that at no point was it set in stone that both teams reach the finals, putting yourself intentionally at a disedvantage for possibly just 14 price ships and shame of lose is pretty stupid. Especially considering hoe much time each of the teams put into this. Until investigation comes to conclusion give them benefit of the doubt, until now we seen only some pasted chat lines and many claims.
they're not claims, they did the same thing with outbreak and got banned for it. This time they were just less obvious, to no offense, put people like you in doubt. I hate to keep saying it, but everyone knows something went on. As I say, whether CCP can prove it is irrelevant for next year, they need to change the rules regardless, or its only a matter of time before another match fix that got the original hydra team banned happens again, and everyone gets so sick of the tournament being so obviously rigged that no one wants to participate. |
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
903
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 00:35:29 -
[118] - Quote
Mr Rive wrote:Baali Tekitsu wrote:
I dont really see how any of the teams ~gains~ something from dropping to losers bracket and having to fight an additional series +disedvantage in finals.
The best teams get into the winner's bracket. They betted on getting one team through in the winner's bracket with skill, they better on getting one through in the losers bracket with effort. They also did it because they wanted to ensure they didnt have to do any fishy buisness until the finals when they would face each other and the matches were irrelevant. The sooner one team goes down to the loser's bracket, the less chance they have of facing bigger teams until later on. This means they dont have to show any more setups than they have to against the smaller teams. This isnt some kind of conspiracy theory, they did almost the exact same thing last year. And guess what, when they got banned for colluding with outbreak, they did the exact same thing too.
Except there is no pattern there, actually. Outbreak dropped to losers bracket after their third match in AT IX, last year HYDRA dropped to losers after their fourth match, this year they dropped to losers after their fifth match. If at all they try to remain as long as possible in winners and not drop to losers.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
296
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 03:17:25 -
[119] - Quote
#BansOrRiot is trending on twitter atm |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
1057
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 04:32:26 -
[120] - Quote
Mr Rive wrote:If you're not a hydra alt, you're rather daft. I'm surprised that you don't already know that I'm a long standing HYDRA member, as well as an ex-member of your own corp in PL. But we can put that surprise down to my ego and narcissism and move on.
Mr Rive wrote:If you ARE a hydra alt, then you're trying to justify ruining the tournament. I'm not trying to justify ruining the tournament. I'm debating whether the tournament has been ruined and if so, who by.
Mr Rive wrote:How does it make you feel to be the bad guy? I've been the bad guy for a long time. Just the same as you have. I don't find it feels like anything much, since it's chiefly in the perception of others. Being the object of such vehement hatred over space pixels and forum wars has always caused me to smile. So maybe that answers your question?
With that out of the way, maybe we can get back to the real subject?
You and I appear to disagree as to whether there is evidence of an offense being committed under the current AT ruleset. You appear to think that Warlords and Camel have effectively poured petrol over themselves and run into a burning building. I think it's much more likely that they've just trolled the **** out of you, your alliance, CCP and a fair section of the playerbase.
Neither of us really knows at this point. Maybe we'll find out when CCP complete their investigation and publish their findings.
You and I appear to agree that the current AT ruleset is poor and invites this kind of troublesome metagaming and controversy that probably isn't healthy for the future of the burgeoning e-sport that (I assume) both of us love.
We also appear to agree that regardless of the results of CCP's investigation those rules need to be improved.
Have I got all that right?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |