| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xolve
Epidemic.
122
   |
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:49:00 -
[91] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".
Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition.
Payment can come in many, many forms; just because you disagree with what is considered profit is just speculation.
Furthermore, you can do pretty much whatever you want in EvE, with little repurcussion. Arguing that something wasn't profitable cannot be proven. How can CCP or anyone else know if I was paid to destroy someone's ship? If your wallet and ship hangar look like mine, and you kill someone because you want to:
Couldn't the satisfaction of their ship exploding be considered profit?
Could their rage being deposited into your evemail inbox be considered profit?
Could their actions of hiring mercenaries for great justice to come after you be considered profit?
Could the removal of their ship from your system be profitable (if they are no longer mining/missioning there)?
If you disagree with this, whole or in part; then chances are this isn't the game for you. EvE has been hard on more then one person, the beauty of this game is that it quickly seperates the people that want to get better and have an adaptable playstyle from the ones that live for instant gratification. This hasn't changed, and most of us are quite happy with it.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:51:00 -
[92] - Quote
It's not that they don't enforce their rules at all, it's that they enforce them selectively.
For instance, some people say 'kill yourself irl' and similar sociopathic comments and CCP not only condones it, but gives said individual a voice in the design of the game. (And Alex's comments don't bother me personally. If that's the public image he wants to present, that's up to him. But if his comments are considered 'acceptable' by CCP then far less inflammatory comments by others should be equally 'acceptable.')
Other people call someone a nitwit or dim or terrible or an idiot and get a 3-month forum ban.
Stop playing favorites, CCP! |
Cipher Jones
152
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:54:00 -
[93] - Quote
Xolve wrote:Cipher Jones wrote:Funny you should say that, as plenty of people have come on the forum and overtly claimed they were doing it only "for the lulz".
Secondly, "attempt" is not written or implied in the definition. Payment can come in many, many forms; just because you disagree with what is considered profit is just speculation. Furthermore, you can do pretty much whatever you want in EvE, with little repurcussion. Arguing that something wasn't profitable cannot be proven. How can CCP or anyone else know if I was paid to destroy someone's ship? If your wallet and ship hangar look like mine, and you kill someone because you want to: Couldn't the satisfaction of their ship exploding be considered profit? Could their rage being deposited into your evemail inbox be considered profit? Could their actions of hiring mercenaries for great justice to come after you be considered profit? Could the removal of their ship from your system be profitable (if they are no longer mining/missioning there)? If you disagree with this, whole or in part; then chances are this isn't the game for you. EvE has been hard on more then one person, the beauty of this game is that it quickly seperates the people that want to get better and have an adaptable playstyle from the ones that live for instant gratification. This hasn't changed, and most of us are quite happy with it.
No, profit has to fall into the category of monetary or advantageous. Thats not what i think, thats the definition of the word. You can consider profit anything you wish.
See what happens when fat neckbeards try to ride little ponies? The ponies die. |
Prince Kobol
93
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 18:54:00 -
[94] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Cipher, if your goal is to try and get some decision that there should be limits of some sort for suicide ganking (such as a pilot is limited as to how many times they can gank the same miner) I think you and I both know that is never going to happen. It would open the door to thousands of petitions trying to use the statement as leverage to say that the same ruling should apply to their particular situation as well.
The intent of CCP's griefing policy is pretty clear. It is to allow them grounds to ban someone if they get carried away on a personal vendetta aimed at forcing a specific individual to quit the game via harassment. Its fairly generic language allows CCP to determine what constitutes that level of harassment at their discretion, without fear of rules lawyering.
In all sincerity, don't think you are going to get what you want out of this. And people are getting harassed out of the game. The rule does not allow CCP to constitute the level of harassment, it is already defined. The rule allows CCP to ban or not ban at their discretion.
Who, when and how?
Its all well and good saying that people are getting harassed out of the game but until I see somebody post on the forum with a detailed description on how they were harassed out the game then I call foul.
I have yet to see you give a clear cut example of grief play.
Yes we all are aware about can baiting noobs in 1.0 system but other then that I want to see another example.
|
Xolve
Epidemic.
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:01:00 -
[95] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:No, profit has to fall into the category of monetary or advantageous. Thats not what i think, thats the definition of the word. You can consider profit anything you wish.
Ok- now please explain to me how you would investigate someone's actions as not being profitable to that person.
You can't, and you know you can't.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
147
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:03:00 -
[96] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:
Who, when and how?
Its all well and good saying that people are getting harassed out of the game but until I see somebody post on the forum with a detailed description on how they were harassed out the game then I call foul.
I have yet to see you give a clear cut example of grief play.
Yes we all are aware about can baiting noobs in 1.0 system but other then that I want to see another example.
I gave an example several posts back:
Someone who legitimately destroys a ship and steals its cargo is not griefing.
Someone who, upon collecting the stolen cargo, proceeds to stalk that specific pilot from system to system and continually pod him (and nobody else) whenever he re-ships is most definitely griefing. |
Xolve
Epidemic.
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:07:00 -
[97] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote: ....stalk that specific pilot from system to system and continually pod him (and nobody else) whenever he re-ships is most definitely griefing.
...and is definitely not going to get banned for it.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Cipher Jones
152
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:10:00 -
[98] - Quote
Quote:Its all well and good saying that people are getting harassed out of the game but until I see somebody post on the forum with a detailed description on how they were harassed out the game then I call foul.
They actually changed a game mechanic. If that is not acknowledgement enough nothing is.
See what happens when fat neckbeards try to ride little ponies? The ponies die. |
ALTternate
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:12:00 -
[99] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:oxytopes at 1500, the bad thread index is spiking across the forums, it's a crisis of market democracy~
Guys, I'm relevant.
LOL |
Cipher Jones
152
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:12:00 -
[100] - Quote
Xolve wrote:Astrid Stjerna wrote: ....stalk that specific pilot from system to system and continually pod him (and nobody else) whenever he re-ships is most definitely griefing. ...and is definitely not going to get banned for it.
Which is why I started the thread, to find out why.
See what happens when fat neckbeards try to ride little ponies? The ponies die. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1858
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:12:00 -
[101] - Quote
cipher jones i already torpedoed your crappy rules lawyering shut up now tia |
Arlbash Dested
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:17:00 -
[102] - Quote
Ok, CCP, time to create two Eves - in one, anything goes. Another would have no PvP, only in special areas, like most MMO's.
Have players pick one or another.
Work on coding AI that is difficult enough to keep people on their toes. Have players work together, against the computer, not against each other.
Given the size of your space, and, from what I hear, emptiness of most of it, you can probably split your hardware into two pools.
|
Xolve
Epidemic.
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:19:00 -
[103] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Which is why I started the thread, to find out why.
Probably because CCP's definition of profitable doesn't match your Barracks Lawyer Definition of the word.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
152
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:22:00 -
[104] - Quote
Arlbash Dested wrote:Ok, CCP, time to create two Eves - in one, anything goes. Another would have no PvP, only in special areas, like most MMO's.
Have players pick one or another.
If you pick "PvP optional" the downloader installs the Hello Kitty Online client |
SmegB
Onyx Brotherhood
STR8NGE BREW
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:22:00 -
[105] - Quote
It does not seem like ccp inforces this rule because you prolly are just whining about getting killed a few times. If you die in this game suck it up plzzzz. If pvp did not exist in eve there would be no eve. Everyones play styles are not the same. some are indy. but most are PVP. so if your and indy and you dont like pvp dont do something stupid to get yourself killed. because if you die in this game and you dont want to its 100% your fault. so when you die dont send some stupid petition to ccp and waste there time. your just delaying everyone else. So dont be a baby. |
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
130
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:23:00 -
[106] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Arlbash Dested wrote:Ok, CCP, time to create two Eves - in one, anything goes. Another would have no PvP, only in special areas, like most MMO's.
Have players pick one or another. If you pick "PvP optional" the downloader installs the Hello Kitty Online client
or EVE online blue null sec only |
Xolve
Epidemic.
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:26:00 -
[107] - Quote
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:or EVE online blue null sec only
Typically, your alliance members and allies are more dangerous then the invaders..
SHOOT BLUES ERRYDAY!
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
147
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:37:00 -
[108] - Quote
Xolve wrote:Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:or EVE online blue null sec only Typically, your alliance members and allies are more dangerous then the invaders.. SHOOT BLUES ERRYDAY!
KESTREL!!! |
Killer Gandry
Shadow of the Pain
17
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:40:00 -
[109] - Quote
There are as many motivations for griefing on EVE as there are griefers, but common causes are:
 Emotional immaturity and/or instability.
Adolescent rebellion against authority. A desire to push the limits and attempt to disrupt.
Sociopathic behavior.
Boredom. Some griefers feel that they want something to do, and if they're not interested in participating in a constructive manner, they will generate their "fun" by antagonizing others. This boredom generally arises due to a lack of sufficient stimulus or creative outlets that can sometimes be the result of excessive regulation and moderation by authoritarian personalities and overly broad interpretation about what sort of activities constitute 'griefing' (see, for example, Linden Lab's definition of "broadly offensive").
Seeing no other recourse to address systemic problems which result in CCP's inability to rid itself of bad characters and drawing a fine but conclusive line as what is considered griefing and what is still acceptable gameplay.
Amusement derived from other people's reactions.
A lot of rules are just too braodly put down and nobody really dares to put the wotd down as where exactly the line is.
People value their freedom a lot, but sadly enough they seem to forget that their enjoyment of their freedom goes over the back of others and thus limiting their freedom.
As soon as freedom of speech or development comes at the cost of someone else the balance of freedom and regulation goes wrong.
Never ever the freedom of speech should be used purely to be allowed to say anything one wants without regards for others, that isn't freedom of speech anymore but freedom to act like a total verbal sociopath without running the risk of being held accountable.
Same applies within EVE's gaming world.
CCP values players freedoms a lot, they want them to create their own universe as much as possible.
However in my opinion, and with that also the opinion of many others, they let loose too much.
By allowing virtually any type of gameplay which isn't allowed at all anywhere else in the gaming world they opened Pandora's box, and now they fear to look into the depths of humanity they unleased or they are just bathing in it themselves.
It's easy to say that this is how a PvP game works, but let's not kid ourselves. There IS a clear line between playing the game and griefing. And it has been broken and got away unpunished numerous times in EVE.
Once again mainly due to CCP's inability to enforce certain rules because they set them up way way too broad to be explained.
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
147
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:51:00 -
[110] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:
Once again mainly due to CCP's inability to enforce certain rules because they set them up way way too broad to be explained.
There are thirty thousand people playing this game. CCP can't be everywhere, nor can they watch all thirty thousand people to make sure nobody's breaking the rules. |
Xolve
Epidemic.
123
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:58:00 -
[111] - Quote
Killer Gandry wrote:Completely Biased Brief Psychoanalysis of any would be malicious griefer and some abstract thought on how the game devolved into what it is now.
First and Foremost, not everyone that engages in 'PvP' or 'Griefing, Malicious Gameplay or Internet Spaceship Anti-Social Deviancy' is mentally imbalanced. Its fun, its encouraged by CCP (check out the trailers if you don't believe me) but its also a marketing stand point and also a major selling point of the game.
I was drawn to this game because you could literally track down, shadow, and destory that neckbeard smack talking in local. I thought that was a pretty great feature; this game also offers PvP in a non-linear sandbox format that isn't seen anywhere else.
Once scamming and griefing became a selling point, there was no going back; and quite honestly, fan fiction written about any PvE aspect of this game is dull and pointless, regardless of the writers literary skill. Tons of people who have never played the game follow the geo-political aspects, the down falls of alliances, and just the simple pirate stories that once upon a time flooded C&P.
All that being said, not everyone wants 'good fights' just like not everyone wants to run 'soul-crushing red boxy shoot fest'. Then applying any sort of mental apptitude to the behavioral aspects of a playerbase in a video game is just stupid. Finding false logic to define what you deem as immature game play, is equally immature and just as ridiculed.
EvE is a harsh game, there are repurcussions behind a playerbase within the very principle that we are free to decide what we want to do, and how we impact each other. Some embrace this, some shun it; and those that whine about it just havn't found a way to play the game that directly sates their happy medium of internet gaming so they resort to this forum warrioring badness that is Cipher and his baseless arguments.
Theres the Wolf; Theres the Sheep. All you do is pick one. The rest is inevitable.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
baltec1
242
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 19:59:00 -
[112] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Quote:Its all well and good saying that people are getting harassed out of the game but until I see somebody post on the forum with a detailed description on how they were harassed out the game then I call foul. They actually changed a game mechanic. If that is not acknowledgement enough nothing is.
You mean the removal of insurance for concorded ships which everyone including the suicide gankers wanted to happen because it was a daft mechanic? |
Velicitia
Open Designs
201
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:09:00 -
[113] - Quote
Arlbash Dested wrote:Ok, CCP, time to create two Eves - in one, anything goes. Another would have no PvP, only in special areas, like most MMO's.
Have players pick one or another.
You could log into Singularity ... granted there's only about 200 people on that server ever ... and you're *never* going to beat NPC price on goods... but it's PVP-free.
If they did split it though, the PvP side would flourish.
Arlbash Dested wrote:Work on coding AI that is difficult enough to keep people on their toes. Have players work together, against the computer, not against each other.
Why fight AI, when you can fight real intelligence (note: Goons excepted )? I mean, if it's really that scary for you to go up against another player, just tell yourself that it's really not another player but a really cunning AI that keeps you on your toes and encourages you to work together.
Arlbash Dested wrote:Given the size of your space, and, from what I hear, emptiness of most of it, you can probably split your hardware into two pools.
This is just hearsay, though I can't really refute or corroborate the point... so meh.
|
Krios Ahzek
Juvenis Iratus
296
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:14:00 -
[114] - Quote
Why isn't everybody in prison for underage drinking?
Do not take me for some conjurer of cheap tricks. |
Prince Kobol
93
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:16:00 -
[115] - Quote
Astrid Stjerna wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:
Who, when and how?
Its all well and good saying that people are getting harassed out of the game but until I see somebody post on the forum with a detailed description on how they were harassed out the game then I call foul.
I have yet to see you give a clear cut example of grief play.
Yes we all are aware about can baiting noobs in 1.0 system but other then that I want to see another example.
I gave an example several posts back: Someone who legitimately destroys a ship and steals its cargo is not griefing. Someone who, upon collecting the stolen cargo, proceeds to stalk that specific pilot from system to system and continually pod him (and nobody else) whenever he re-ships is most definitely griefing.
No it isn't.
If the person in said Indy ship is in a player corp then they have the option either fighting back themselves are get a few corp mates and fight back together as a group.
Even if sll they can fly is frigs, it doesn't matter, the option is still there.
Failing that.. hire somebody.
If they are in the NPC corp then get yourself in a player corp and do as I said.
Also if the person who lost said cargo ship decided to talk smack in local then as the old saying goes, if you can't take it, don't dish it out.
You always have a choice and that's what makes Eve such a great game.
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
297
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:47:00 -
[116] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Arlbash Dested wrote:Ok, CCP, time to create two Eves - in one, anything goes. Another would have no PvP, only in special areas, like most MMO's.
Have players pick one or another. If you pick "PvP optional" the downloader installs the Hello Kitty Online client
I would like to challenge all of the LEET PVPers to petition for a no-clone permanent death server. You get popped, you're done. Period.
After all, EvE is supposed to be so harsh that the LEET crowd worships at the feet of the harshness concept, and makes it the wellspring from which all of their excuses flow.
Therefore, let's put the balls where the keyboards are, and go "no clone".
Play in a game like that, then we can push the e-peen.
Otherwise, it's just a game and everybody should just shut up and play it.
|
Xolve
Epidemic.
126
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:52:00 -
[117] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Otherwise, it's just a game and everybody should just shut up and play it.
Not empty quoting.
Lady Spank for C&P Moderator.
|
Astrid Stjerna
Teraa Matar
148
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:54:00 -
[118] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:
No it isn't.
Iif I'm following someone from system to system and podding him for no other purpose than to constantly destroy his ship and disrupt his gameplay, that is griefing.
I direct you to the Terms of Service:
Quote:
You may not do anything that interferes with the ability of other EVE Online subscribers to enjoy the game or web site in accordance with its rules. This includes, but is not limited to, making inappropriate use of any public channels within the game and/or intentionally creating excessive latency (lag) by dumping cargo containers, corpses or other items in the game world.
|
Jita Alt666
650
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:55:00 -
[119] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:
And people are getting harassed out of the game. The rule does not allow CCP to constitute the level of harassment, it is already defined. The rule allows CCP to ban or not ban at their discretion.
Again with the making claims that can not be proven and stating them as fact. Who has got harassed out of the game? |
Shivus Tao
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
150
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 20:57:00 -
[120] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote:Shivus Tao wrote:Cipher Jones wrote:Lady Spank wrote:While I don't really know why I am bothering to respond to this tiresome poster...
Suicide ganking IS profitable, just because you don't know how to make ISK doing it just further shows your limited understanding of the game.
Have fun trying to troll people on the forums though. You show your own limited understanding of the game, actually. Scenario A: guy suicide ganks a badger and gets a BPO ~ not griefing. Scenario B: guy suicide ganks a badger pilot 7 times and looses money ~ griefing. The OP was about griefing. I guess for some people its a "tiresome" task to read and understand. For scenario B to be griefing you'd have to qualitatively prove that the target in question was the sole target and/or was not part of a corp or alliance subject to economic warfare and logistics interdiction and/or acted to reduce potential risk while in transit to his destination. If any of the above are false, then it's anything but griefing. By your defenition, perhaps. By CCP's definition, it meets the criteria. As I said I'm not here to debate what griefing is, I'm here to ask CCP why they allow actions that they have deemed ban-able to continue.
CCP's definition of griefing is inadequate as being repeatedly called primary every time one reships in a large fleet engagement could be considered griefing under the definition.
Repeated focused kills, check
Limited or no monetary gain, check
The likely reason ccp doesn't act on this unspecific definition of griefing is because they know it's unspecific and inadequate, but can't be bothered to retype it in a clear and concise way that covers all bases, but doesn't overstep its bounds. As such they take it on a case by case basis to determine if griefing actually happened. The appearance is that they don't act on it, even though they actually might, because the majority of complaints are frivolous and likewise going by a combination of the terrible definition and butthurt. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |