EVE Search - No More GM's, please

All Channels

EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion

No More GM's, please

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Scrubologist	Posted - 2007.09.03 23:15:00 - [1] I've been watching the matches and had a chance to talk with several participants in matches where GM's were forced to make point deduction decisions or disqualifications. Just like last year, things are not going well for some teams and much of it is due to a bad combination of factors. In short, GM's and CCP should not referee the matches. They should only enable the matches to be played. Their sole function is to enable the mechanics for the matches. Who are the referees then? The players! CCP/GM's are in a bad spot. They have to appear neutral. But they also have to look like good little CCP Corporation members, which means they can't say anything about how they come to their decisions - can't look bad to the brass now, can we? Each alliance names a referee candidate. That candidate can be a referee in any match which does not include his alliance or that of any alliance who's territory is adjacent to his alliance's territory. Honor system is an important part of this setup. How do they referee? They become the cameramen. Three cameramen to each match; four cameramen in the finals. Matches are recorded by them. It is their call if there are any infractions. Should a competitor file a protest, the referees have 15 minutes to discuss the issue and make a decision, which then becomes final. Can we have a civil discussion about this idea without any flaming, trolling, etc? It appears to be an equitable way of getting CCP out of a situation that keeps biting them in the arse and puts the control of the game into the hands of those best able to judge infractions. Regards, Scrubby
Nice Guy	Posted - 2007.09.03 23:48:00 - [2] Edited by: Nice Guy on 03/09/2007 23:50:32 Yeay, no rule forcing! Now somebody get a cyno and jump in a titan! Also. Alliances will only pick their own spies, spie corps, or whatever to judge for them. Making them more biassed then the devs will ever be. No, bad idea. CCP has the means and the people to judge for them. Also, all the point deductions have been explained. No one has tried to fight those yet?
Slow Joe I can't believe it's not a noob corp	Posted - 2007.09.04 03:37:00 - [3] I think the OP might have had a good idea. The present tournament is very exciting, the only flaw I see in it are the dubious dq's and the lack of a fight coming from it. It may be, at least in part, result of the necessity of CCP to look "neutral" and the apparent impossibility to do so to the eyes of the forum warriors. There could be the condition the nominated referee had to be accepted by both alliances taking part on the match. That would block eventual "spies" and let the real well-know pvp'ers decide on a subject they know best. Originally by: Dungar Loghoth BoB have no one to blame but themselves for removing the complexes and giving RA so much free time
Big Pick Caldari Task Force Ranger	Posted - 2007.09.04 03:58:00 - [4] I find the entire premise of this thread to be asinine. CCP is doing a wonderful job so far, and I have enjoyed the tournament immensely. ===============================
Quincy TawHarr Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.09.04 04:48:00 - [5] Actually not a terrible idea, however from what I've seen thus far the GM's look to be pretty decent officials. The trouble is that you'll get just as much bias accusations with this system. Getting people to agree to the official means nothing to a sore loser, or someone who feels that their complaint is justified (rightly or wrongly). It looks like anyone who moves early is getting a 10 point penalty. Anyone who comes in with to many points is forfeiting. Although the 50 point dock was pretty harsh. The whole MC raven thing is debatable, but from a points perspective it was the "most correct call". This one was sadly a can of worms regardless of the way it went. Personally I think it's certainly something to consider, but more importantly the next tourney must have the penalties explictly laid out. The whining and moaning that's resulted has cast a shadow over what has been an otherwise fantastic event. Overall, everyone involved should enjoy a nice tall pint for it. Scrapheap fun on Bombs: Takahashi: Atm you're essentially "firing the equivalent of a Ferox" Dixon: Letting people fire actual Ferox's would be nice... it'd make them almost useful.
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.09.04 05:11:00 - [6] The GMs in this tourney haven't been doing a very good job but I really doubt giving that role to players would go any better at all. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Big Pick Caldari Task Force Ranger	Posted - 2007.09.04 05:30:00 - [7] Originally by: Frug The GMs in this tourney haven't been doing a very good job but I really doubt giving that role to players would go any better at all. Quite to the contrary I have found the conduct of the GMs to be very professional. Despite the cries of the cretinous trolls and paranoid conspiracy theorists, I cannot find fault with any of the rulings thus far. ===============================
Darius Shakor Minmatar Re-Awakened Technologies Inc Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.09.04 10:43:00 - [8] Originally by: Scrubologist Who are the referees then? The players! .... Honor system is an important part of this setup. Honour is overrated I am sorry to say. I understand where you are coming from here in terms of CCP getting out of the firing line of all the whiners but this would not solve the issues and simply place the whine and allegations of bad conduct onto the player refs instead of the GM's. And even less chance of the rules being enforced equally meaning the tourney could become an unmitigated disaster. One thing is sure about life and that is that you cannot please everyone. There will always be whining and always be perception of unfair rule enforcement. It is life. ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal
Fivetide Amarr Crimson Strike The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.09.04 11:13:00 - [9] Sorry I disagree, rules are set and no matter who referees the match the rules have to abided by. So if it was a nominated referee would they in some way interpret the rules differently or are you saying they would have some kind of insight that the GMÆs donÆt have and therefore make a decision not based on the rules ? All post are made with the aid of alcohol and without the use of a spell checker Quote: [center]Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning \|E
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.09.04 11:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Big Pick Originally by: Frug The GMs in this tourney haven't been doing a very good job but I really doubt giving that role to players would go any better at all. Quite to the contrary I have found the conduct of the GMs to be very professional. Despite the cries of the cretinous trolls and paranoid conspiracy theorists, I cannot find fault with any of the rulings thus far. If you're in the tourney you have more direct information than me. I can just go by what people have pasted in here. I didn't like what I saw, specifically the incidents involving MC. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles

EVETV Sapateiro	Posted - 2007.09.04 12:37:00 - [11] Edited by: EVETV Sapateiro on 04/09/2007 12:37:02 Originally by: Scrubologist I've been watching the matches and had a chance to talk with several participants in matches where GM's were forced to make point deduction decisions or disqualifications. Just like last year, things are not going well for some teams and much of it is due to a bad combination of factors. In short, GM's and CCP should not referee the matches. They should only enable the matches to be played. Their sole function is to enable the mechanics for the matches. Who are the referees then? The players! CCP/GM's are in a bad spot. They have to appear neutral. But they also have to look like good little CCP Corporation members, which means they can't say anything about how they come to their decisions - can't look bad to the brass now, can we? Each alliance names a referee candidate. That candidate can be a referee in any match which does not include his alliance or that of any alliance who's territory is adjacent to his alliance's territory. Honor system is an important part of this setup. How do they referee? They become the cameramen. Three cameramen to each match; four cameramen in the finals. Matches are recorded by them. It is their call if there are any infractions. Should a competitor file a protest, the referees have 15 minutes to discuss the issue and make a decision, which then becomes final. Can we have a civil discussion about this idea without any flaming, trolling, etc? It appears to be an equitable way of getting CCP out of a situation that keeps biting them in the arse and puts the control of the game into the hands of those best able to judge infractions. Regards, Scrubby The problem with your idea is that players would have to have access to GM tools/client/spellbook in order to officiate - at least until CCP could find the time to code in tournament tools. That aside, I think the concept is sound, so long as teams have an avenue to officially dispute decisions - which although may not result in the overturning of a decision, may at least see the ref quietly dropped for a few matches, as happens in football (which, to the uneducated, is a game often enlivened and enriched by refs being human, rather than the automatons you get in other sports). The problem then becomes, given the unholy slagging off they would receive, who would want to referee, apart from the GMs? - Z --------------- <<< Internet Spaceship Television >>>

Vando Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.09.04 12:45:00 - [12] I'd referee, and I guarantee that I'd be so unbiased that EVERYONE would end up hating me. That's the telltale sign of a good official
Big Pick Caldari Task Force Ranger	Posted - 2007.09.04 14:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Vando I'd referee, and I guarantee that I'd be so unbiased that EVERYONE would end up hating me. That's the telltale sign of a good official If that is indeed the case, then judging by the forum response to the GM's officiating thus far, I'd say the GMs are perfect referees. =============================== Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Kreul Intentions ([email protected])
Masu'di Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2007.09.04 14:43:00 - [14] I'd suggest that perhaps in cases where there have been some rule infringements before the match, that the referee convos the two respective team captains. Explains the situation, and asks the non offending team captain whether they wish to fight the match as normal or take the disqualification result. The majority of team captains I think would choose to fight. It would make the situation a lot more gentlemanly, remove a lot of tension, and I think keep everyone happier all round, including the viewers. Es and Whizz is recruiting
Fivetide Amarr Crimson Strike The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:02:00 - [15] Quote: The majority of team captains I think would choose to fight. It would make the situation a lot more gentlemanly I think you are being a little nanve there, if I was the captain and I was offered a forfeit I would take the forfeit every single time. (a) I didnÆt break the rules (b) If I lost after being offered a forfeit IÆd have to leave the game from shear embarrassment. ¬ and I would expect any on the opposing captains to do exactly the same. Give no quarter and expect none.. IÆve never paid a ransomed so donÆt ask for one! Just kill me so I can get to my clone and hunt you downà :P All post are made with the aid of alcohol and without the use of a spell checker Quote: [center]Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning \|E
Weeka Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:39:00 - [16] What exactly would be the consequences of not doing your job, not appearing, or prolonging the time inbetween fights unnecessarily?
Masu'di Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:52:00 - [17] Originally by: Fivetide Quote: The majority of team captains I think would choose to fight. It would make the situation a lot more gentlemanly I think you are being a little nanve there, if I was the captain and I was offered a forfeit I would take the forfeit every single time. (a) I didnÆt break the rules (b) If I lost after being offered a forfeit IÆd have to leave the game from shear embarrassment. ¬ and I would expect any on the opposing captains to do exactly the same. Give no quarter and expect none.. IÆve never paid a ransomed so donÆt ask for one! Just kill me so I can get to my clone and hunt you downà :P maybe you right, but I think it would tarnish their reputation somewhat. depends if you care about that or not. some do, some don't. Es and Whizz is recruiting
Helison Gallente Times of Ancar Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.04 16:03:00 - [18] Originally by: Scrubologist Who are the referees then? The players! Worst idea ever.
Mitchman Omniscient Order Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.09.04 16:15:00 - [19] I think it's fine that GMs or devs handle the matches. However, there should be an official and documented way of appealing a decision, and the appeal should be handled by someone else than the person first making the decision. This is common with all sport competitions and leagues, and makes sure the decisions are more objective and fair. New video: Pride, Honor & Retribution
Raivi Explosion Matrix Derek Knows Us	Posted - 2007.09.04 16:17:00 - [20] What I would like to see is every match have 1 dev overseeing the GMs. That way the GMs could still do what they do now, but decisions about how to apply penalties can be made by someone with more authority. Hopefully that would avoid some of the controversy that has come from GM decisions this tournament. Explosion Matrix: Nostrum Nomen est Ridiculum
Scrubologist	Posted - 2007.09.04 16:56:00 - [21] Originally by: Fivetide Sorry I disagree, rules are set and no matter who referees the match the rules have to abided by. So if it was a nominated referee would they in some way interpret the rules differently or are you saying they would have some kind of insight that the GMÆs donÆt have and therefore make a decision not based on the rules ? Ahhhh, your on to my idea. Because the GM's are so tightly bound by corporate culture and CCP's fear of showing any favortism, a player/ref would be bound by honor, common sense, and experience in his/her own experience in similar situations. Because of that, the player/ref will interpret the rules with less concern about how the decision will look, and hopefully make a more reasonable decision. I was involved in professional paintball in its infancy. Early on, matches were judged by non-paintball playing sponsors who felt like they had no latitude in rules interpretation. The professional teams got together and developed a program where non-competing teams would take on the refereeing task. Things went much more smoothly thereafter. I feel that the same conditions could be created in the tourney matches. Regards, Scrubby
Scrubologist	Posted - 2007.09.04 17:05:00 - [22] Originally by: EVETV Sapateiro Edited by: EVETV Sapateiro on 04/09/2007 12:37:02 Originally by: Scrubologist I've been watching the matches and had a chance to talk with several participants in matches where GM's were forced to make point deduction decisions or disqualifications. Just like last year, things are not going well for some teams and much of it is due to a bad combination of factors. In short, GM's and CCP should not referee the matches. They should only enable the matches to be played. Their sole function is to enable the mechanics for the matches. Who are the referees then? The players! CCP/GM's are in a bad spot. They have to appear neutral. But they also have to look like good little CCP Corporation members, which means they can't say anything about how they come to their decisions - can't look bad to the brass now, can we? Each alliance names a referee candidate. That candidate can be a referee in any match which does not include his alliance or that of any alliance who's territory is adjacent to his alliance's territory. Honor system is an important part of this setup. How do they referee? They become the cameramen. Three cameramen to each match; four cameramen in the finals. Matches are recorded by them. It is their call if there are any infractions. Should a competitor file a protest, the referees have 15 minutes to discuss the issue and make a decision, which then becomes final. Can we have a civil discussion about this idea without any flaming, trolling, etc? It appears to be an equitable way of getting CCP out of a situation that keeps biting them in the arse and puts the control of the game into the hands of those best able to judge infractions. Regards, Scrubby The problem with your idea is that players would have to have access to GM tools/client/spellbook in order to officiate - at least until CCP could find the time to code in tournament tools. That aside, I think the concept is sound, so long as teams have an avenue to officially dispute decisions - which although may not result in the overturning of a decision, may at least see the ref quietly dropped for a few matches, as happens in football (which, to the uneducated, is a game often enlivened and enriched by refs being human, rather than the automatons you get in other sports). The problem then becomes, given the unholy slagging off they would receive, who would want to referee, apart from the GMs? - Z Point well taken, Sapateiro. I'm thinking that tools, etc. wouldn't be necessary if the ref's were able to join the tourney GM's on a Teamspeak/Vent server. That way, ref's could request that the GM's execute whatever game mechanics they need in order to proceed with a match or decision. Sorry, I don't know the inner workings of a GM's online world. So this may be an unworkable idea. But I think it would help both the CCP and the tourney.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.09.04 18:00:00 - [23] Now this is a dumb idea posted by anther disposable alt. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Segge Bolled Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.09.05 13:50:00 - [24] I agree with the boss, if only because we have to pay them (CCP) for something, after all. * ducks and runs *
Seke Faewyn Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.09.05 14:50:00 - [25] I have a possible solution on what could happen to give some structure to matches. Keep the system as it is for now with one GM refereeing the match, before the match is started the GM add's the ship points up of each team to make sure they comply with the 100point max rule. If not they can sort it then and there before the match starts. Once the match is underway any infringement is monitored and noted by either the GM currently referring or another panel of GM's watching video feed (or both) but the match is not stopped the match plays out to the end. After the match is finished a review is made and any deductions in points are handed out. Secondly a permanent set of rules must be drafted up for point deductions so that things like moving before the match starts or locking someone before the match starts have fixed penatly points. Other things like warping off in the match or if your connection drops should also have penalty points, the person who warps off should be allowed back into the fight but be docked points for doing so. Alright it might not be there fault for the loss in connection but at least it stops all the forum flamage afterwards if the players are aware of the rules.
Vodun Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.09.05 15:18:00 - [26] I see the need for something along these lines, but I believe any normal player will be more biased. I also believe with all the meta gaming and espionage that goes on in this game, that it would be only a matter of time before an alliance with a big bank roll buys some favor. It sounds nice having the players in control, but I just can't see it working the way you'd like. ---

Pages: [1] :: 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.