EVE Search - Ignoring ship loss petitions is a bad move CCP

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Ignoring ship loss petitions is a bad move CCP

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
BiggHOSS Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.14 10:58:00 - [1] The gates between systems are not reliable and the rats at these gates have been getting some kills that are just ********. It used to be the case that you could put in a ship loss petition and get a response back and they were fair for the most part. Recently it seems that responses to petitions are blanket no's, or in my recent case they get deleted with no response? It may be the patch deleted all open petitions and I hope that is the case. But a lot of people are commenting on the almost blanket refusals coming out. It isn't a bad thing to listen to player petitions. Not all of us are trying to get free stuff and most of our petitions deal with legit game issues that are known.
Cipher7 Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:05:00 - [2] I agree, they should not Ignore ship loss petitions. They should deny every single one of them, after re-tuning the Insurance system.
Bloody Rabbit State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:06:00 - [3] Originally by: Cipher7 They should deny every single one of them, after re-tuning the Insurance system. This Stop crying you baby

CCP Prism X C C P	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:19:00 - [4] I understand that it sucks not getting a fair reimbursement. No argument there. But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's very true that most of you are asking for legit reimbursements. Only a handful of people file obviously fake reimbursements (that does not make the rest of them legit, the other group is unknown and, as I said, we can't reimburse those). On the flip side there is also a handful of people who would jump at the chance to accuse us of whatever they can and we can't give them fuel for their fire by reimbursing inconclusive losses. It's not 100% accurate justice but at least it's fair in it's inaccuracies as it applies to everyone. I don't think this response will make you feel any better about these blanket repsonses but I hope it clears up the reasons for them. That's better than being in the dark, no? ~ Prism X EvE Database Developer Relocating your character to a cozy, secure container since 2006

Wild Rho GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:22:00 - [5] Originally by: CCP Prism X I understand that it sucks not getting a fair reimbursement. No argument there. But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's very true that most of you are asking for legit reimbursements. Only a handful of people file obviously fake reimbursements (that does not make the rest of them legit, the other group is unknown and, as I said, we can't reimburse those). On the flip side there is also a handful of people who would jump at the chance to accuse us of whatever they can and we can't give them fuel for their fire by reimbursing inconclusive losses. It's not 100% accurate justice but at least it's fair in it's inaccuracies as it applies to everyone. I don't think this response will make you feel any better about these blanket repsonses but I hope it clears up the reasons for them. That's better than being in the dark, no? Summary, give people an inch and they take a mile. If CCP didn't stick strictly to the logs people would abuse the system.
Rawr Cristina	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:30:00 - [6] Originally by: Wild Rho Originally by: CCP Prism X I understand that it sucks not getting a fair reimbursement. No argument there. But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's very true that most of you are asking for legit reimbursements. Only a handful of people file obviously fake reimbursements (that does not make the rest of them legit, the other group is unknown and, as I said, we can't reimburse those). On the flip side there is also a handful of people who would jump at the chance to accuse us of whatever they can and we can't give them fuel for their fire by reimbursing inconclusive losses. It's not 100% accurate justice but at least it's fair in it's inaccuracies as it applies to everyone. I don't think this response will make you feel any better about these blanket repsonses but I hope it clears up the reasons for them. That's better than being in the dark, no? Summary, give people an inch and they take a mile. If CCP didn't stick strictly to the logs people would abuse the system. This is so true it isn't even funny. At one point CCP reimbursed pretty much EVERY loss. Result? Certain people (I'm not going to name names) managed to get their ships duplicated by petitioning the same loss twice. It's because of people like that, that they need to be so strict on this matter. ... Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Treelox	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:34:00 - [7] While I give CCP a lot of crap for their failings, this is one thing I am glad they have conviction on. While I hope that they can at some point improve their the data collection for their "logs", I am happy with the current situation where they are not inclined to give back ships on whim or player whining. For those that care, I have filed three loss petitions total in +2years, one was quickly approved, one was approved after 3 weeks of back and forth with the GM team because other ppl in the fleet were getting theirs back and I wasnt, and the last one was never reimbursed since the logs showed nothing, even though it was the CCP ingame popup that killed me. -- Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Bloody Rabbit State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 11:38:00 - [8] Originally by: Wild Rho Summary, give people an inch and they take a mile. If CCP didn't stick strictly to the logs people would abuse the system. My god, I agree with a Goon
Venkul Mul Vikramaditya DO JAJA Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:06:00 - [9] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: Wild Rho Summary, give people an inch and they take a mile. If CCP didn't stick strictly to the logs people would abuse the system. This is so true it isn't even funny. At one point CCP reimbursed pretty much EVERY loss. Result? Certain people (I'm not going to name names) managed to get their ships duplicated by petitioning the same loss twice. It's because of people like that, that they need to be so strict on this matter. Total agreement.
Kerala Trivum State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:11:00 - [10] You can take any thing to either extreem, Reinburse to many, or to little. I was 100% peed off when I lost a very expensive ship to a bug where my auto pilot was set to high sec and it took me to low sec. CCP felt this was not a tangible reason for a reimbursement.
Doonoo Boonoo Hedion University	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:17:00 - [11] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: Wild Rho Summary, give people an inch and they take a mile. If CCP didn't stick strictly to the logs people would abuse the system. This is so true it isn't even funny. At one point CCP reimbursed pretty much EVERY loss. Result? Certain people (I'm not going to name names) managed to get their ships duplicated by petitioning the same loss twice. It's because of people like that, that they need to be so strict on this matter. Total agreement. Then I would say it's down to CCP for processing 2 Ship loss petitions and not having 'logs' to show who was reimbursed what and when. Also,what proof do you have that 'some people' have done this on purpose and how many people simply resubmitted a petition that took a long time for CCP to resolve?
Treelox Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:19:00 - [12] Originally by: Kerala Trivum You can take any thing to either extreem, Reinburse to many, or to little. I was 100% peed off when I lost a very expensive ship to a bug where my auto pilot was set to high sec and it took me to low sec. CCP felt this was not a tangible reason for a reimbursement. What was the little slider on your AP setting set to? I hope it was set to 49 or higher, otherwise you done did it to yourself. --
Porsches Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:34:00 - [13] Edited by: Porsches on 14/03/2008 12:35:12 CCP never really cared about reeimbursement.. In Fleet battles the amount of lost ships due to lag and inability to warp out or even ask for shield/armor logistics before the ship was dead can prolly reach 90% or more. That alone would make CCP responsable to reeimburse almost all ships lost in a battle and they dont. They dont even recognize their server code is so bad that it is impossible to have a big fleet battle in 0.0 without everyone lagged out to hell. For CCP as we all know there is NO LAG ever... really never ever, so ofc they dont reeimburse ppl.
Esmenet Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:44:00 - [14] Edited by: Esmenet on 14/03/2008 12:45:31 Originally by: Porsches Edited by: Porsches on 14/03/2008 12:35:12 CCP never really cared about reeimbursement.. In Fleet battles the amount of lost ships due to lag and inability to warp out or even ask for shield/armor logistics before the ship was dead can prolly reach 90% or more. That alone would make CCP responsable to reeimburse almost all ships lost in a battle and they dont. They dont even recognize their server code is so bad that it is impossible to have a big fleet battle in 0.0 without everyone lagged out to hell. Reimbursing for lag is a stupid idea. I'm happy CCP does not do this. Engage brain if you dont understand why. Quote: You can take any thing to either extreem, Reinburse to many, or to little. I was 100% peed off when I lost a very expensive ship to a bug where my auto pilot was set to high sec and it took me to low sec. CCP felt this was not a tangible reason for a reimbursement. Dont you even check the route? Massive fail.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:44:00 - [15] Originally by: Porsches Edited by: Porsches on 14/03/2008 12:35:12 CCP never really cared about reeimbursement.. In Fleet battles the amount of lost ships due to lag and inability to warp out or even ask for shield/armor logistics before the ship was dead can prolly reach 90% or more. That alone would make CCP responsable to reeimburse almost all ships lost in a battle and they dont. They dont even recognize their server code is so bad that it is impossible to have a big fleet battle in 0.0 without everyone lagged out to hell. For CCP as we all know there is NO LAG ever... really never ever, so ofc they dont reeimburse ppl. What are you on about? CCP's policy has never to reimburse just for lag, only for things which show up in logs, all PvP'rs know that. CCP really have two fair choices open to them: 1/ To continue to look at reimbursement petitions as they do now, looking for confirmed reasons for ship losses which were their fault. or 2/ Don't reimburse at all. I'm glad they do #1, but I'd be equally happy with #2. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Treelox Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.03.14 12:50:00 - [16] Originally by: Porsches Edited by: Porsches on 14/03/2008 12:35:12 CCP never really cared about reeimbursement.. In Fleet battles the amount of lost ships due to lag and inability to warp out or even ask for shield/armor logistics before the ship was dead can prolly reach 90% or more. That alone would make CCP responsable to reeimburse almost all ships lost in a battle and they dont. They dont even recognize their server code is so bad that it is impossible to have a big fleet battle in 0.0 without everyone lagged out to hell. For CCP as we all know there is NO LAG ever... really never ever, so ofc they dont reeimburse ppl. While I do detect your sarcasim, I think you need to understand somethings. Lag is a tricky wench to control. Lag can come from many places; Lag of your machine trying to load 500ships on the grid Lag of your machine trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with your ISP Lag of your ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500 ships with the internet backbone Lag of the internet backbone trying to send/receive data for those 500ships around the world to London Lag of CCP's ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with the internet backbone Lag of CCP's Servers trying to deal with the data for those 500ships on the grid Lag of CCP's Database trying to provide the servers the data to work with. What you must understand is that the lag can come from one, a few or all of these factors at any given time. While CCP may at times be responsible for the lag, that same lag will most likely cause their "logging" software to lag behind its lag logging. The only way you can be "certain" that the lag is fully on CCP's side, is when the Node crashes. --
Dez Affinity Ore Mongers	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:06:00 - [17] Originally by: Treelox While I do detect your sarcasim, I think you need to understand somethings. Lag is a tricky wench to control. Lag can come from many places; Lag of your machine trying to load 500ships on the grid Lag of your machine trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with your ISP Lag of your ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500 ships with the internet backbone Lag of the internet backbone trying to send/receive data for those 500ships around the world to London Lag of CCP's ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with the internet backbone Lag of CCP's Servers trying to deal with the data for those 500ships on the grid Lag of CCP's Database trying to provide the servers the data to work with. What you must understand is that the lag can come from one, a few or all of these factors at any given time. While CCP may at times be responsible for the lag, that same lag will most likely cause their "logging" software to lag behind its lag logging. The only way you can be "certain" that the lag is fully on CCP's side, is when the Node crashes. If all 500 people get it at the same time, it isn't just a coincidence and that all the players computers suck, it means that its the 3rd party (being CCP). You can't dispute the fact. _______________
ArchenTheGreat D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:08:00 - [18] Originally by: CCP Prism X But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's not true. Recently I have lost ship in fleet fight. Lag was so horrible I couldn't turn on my tank modules and finally server died. I think you have in logs stated when node dies, right? Unfortunately GM reply was something like this: we have internal policy to not reimburse fleet fights (even if we know we screwed). So the most common situation when reimbursement is needed (lagged fleet fight) is ignored by you EVEN if you have proofs of YOUR failures. I can quote petition numbers if you want proofs.
Agif UnderDog Industries Total Eclipse Syndicate	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:13:00 - [19] I run what you might call a super computer and also have a super fast connection and awesome ping to EVE;s servers When ever you are faced with a petition about CCP's server being laggy thus you lost your ship and this is the pain int he arse way about it but contact your ISP and ask for load logs at that particular moment in time. (My ISP gave me mine) and then in your mail post your ping to the eves server (CMD promt or use a Prog.) and display these results in your claim and CCP really does not have a leg to stand on except mb your PC crapped out on you at that particular moment. Every loss i have claimed has been reimbursed using this method as i guess after having done my homework it seems ccp was at fault and the fact most of the time i was D"syncyed but a screenie showed i was not aided my claims. Do your job and they will do theirs. Writing "i lost my ship cuz ur stuffz is borked" is not going to get ur stuff back :P You may think im talking bollox but meh try it be honest and you should come out ok. /Agif --------------- EvEmissions - Level 5 Missions - Updated 22/01/08
Porsches Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:17:00 - [20] Originally by: Dez Affinity Originally by: Treelox While I do detect your sarcasim, I think you need to understand somethings. Lag is a tricky wench to control. Lag can come from many places; [list] Lag of your machine trying to load 500ships on the grid Lag of your machine trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with your ISP Lag of your ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500 ships with the internet backbone
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:18:00 - [21] Originally by: ArchenTheGreat Originally by: CCP Prism X But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's not true. Recently I have lost ship in fleet fight. Lag was so horrible I couldn't turn on my tank modules and finally server died. I think you have in logs stated when node dies, right? Unfortunately GM reply was something like this: we have internal policy to not reimburse fleet fights (even if we know we screwed). So the most common situation when reimbursement is needed (lagged fleet fight) is ignored by you EVEN if you have proofs of YOUR failures. I can quote petition numbers if you want proofs. because them tank mods can really save your ass in a fleet fight only ship loss I ever even felt was petitionable was on angel strike 10/10 (level 3 storyline with a bunch of battleships in the final pocket) and ended up not petitioning because I realized it was my own fault. don't get me started on losing drones to disconnects (not ccps fault disconnects at least)
Loyal Servant Viper Intel Squad	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:24:00 - [22] Problem is their 'logs' are bogus. Sorry, but this 'it does not show in our logs' argument is just... utter bs. Fail. So, why is ccp messing with my sig?
HandSoLow 05 Tiamat Ancients	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:24:00 - [23] Im giving all this nonsense up, I have complained about the downtime, and how poor I am in real life, CCP doesnt care at all. I cant afford another GTC, Im in a lot of debt...ship loses LOL..they dont care about their customers, nevermind their ships. With only 17 days left on my account, no job [in real life], no credit cards and only 2 million in my wallet...looks like due to CCP's downtime thats delaying me from getting 180mil to pay for Eve will never happen. I probably wont be able to get that ISK to pay for a GTC, so Goodbye Eve, after 17 days my account is closed and will probably have 170mil in my account..with those days taken away from me due to downtime that small additional 10mil i could have got will never happen, which means I wont be able to play Eve for a yea until I can pay my credit card bill...they have just lost a member :( And I dont want to go :( - Quick Chewy, pass me the quaffe!
Agif UnderDog Industries Total Eclipse Syndicate	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:25:00 - [24] Originally by: ArchenTheGreat Originally by: CCP Prism X But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's not true. Recently I have lost ship in fleet fight. Lag was so horrible I couldn't turn on my tank modules and finally server died. I think you have in logs stated when node dies, right? Unfortunately GM reply was something like this: we have internal policy to not reimburse fleet fights (even if we know we screwed). So the most common situation when reimbursement is needed (lagged fleet fight) is ignored by you EVEN if you have proofs of YOUR failures. I can quote petition numbers if you want proofs. Fleet is a big dif to the norm gameplay ie. in missions mobile small gangs etc where we are under the impression that lagg shud not be present. You go into a mass fleet engagement knowing damn well the outcome is going to be who can turn the modules on first... So as you decided it was necessary to fight in that manner you know what your expecting and its just a new game mechanic. (Be it crap) /Agif --------------- EvEmissions - Level 5 Missions - Updated 22/01/08
DrefsabZN SteelWolves Final Unity	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:25:00 - [25] You know what I would like to see a system that takes the logs held at CCP's end onto a sperate box that then parses them so they can be searched and viewed by the User as well as CCP. Obviously this would be account restricted so you can only view your own logs. With this and clear guidelines as to whats is reimbursable and what is not uses will be able to see clearly what is a valid and what is not a valid petition. I can already think if several ways this could be put in place but without knowing a little more about the way the logs are generated and stored its hard to come up with and definitive technical solutions to this.
Cotton Tail Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:26:00 - [26] Edited by: Cotton Tail on 14/03/2008 13:30:53 Originally by: Agif I run what you might call a super computer and also have a super fast connection and awesome ping to EVE;s servers When ever you are faced with a petition about CCP's server being laggy thus you lost your ship and this is the pain int he arse way about it but contact your ISP and ask for load logs at that particular moment in time. (My ISP gave me mine) and then in your mail post your ping to the eves server (CMD promt or use a Prog.) and display these results in your claim and CCP really does not have a leg to stand on except mb your PC crapped out on you at that particular moment. Every loss i have claimed has been reimbursed using this method as i guess after having done my homework it seems ccp was at fault and the fact most of the time i was D"syncyed but a screenie showed i was not aided my claims. Do your job and they will do theirs. Writing "i lost my ship cuz ur stuffz is borked" is not going to get ur stuff back :P You may think im talking bollox but meh try it be honest and you should come out ok. /Agif If that works then good for you, however I agree with the sentiment that CCP shouldn't be reimbursing for simple things like lag where people willingly enter into situations they know is going to be bad. Avon has the right idea though, CCP could take away ship loss petitions and there would be support for it. The biggest problem at the moment is the percieved randomness of the responses, some people get reimbursements in identical situations to others who have have been rejected. That could all be down to the tone and presentation of the petition, but it shows some uncertainty. To be honest I'd be happiest if CCP had a simple rule, if you undock and you get killed legitimately by an entity (NPC or PC) then the loss stands. In a game where you are continuously putting your isk on the line to take away someone elses, it's unfair that they can magik theirs back yet your risk still stands. It's the old EVE adage, don't fly what you cannot afford to lose, be a man and take the loss and learn from it. CCP shouldn't let people throw their rattle out of the pram and give it back to them.
Washell Olivaw Washies Corp	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:27:00 - [27] Originally by: Kerala Trivum You can take any thing to either extreem, Reinburse to many, or to little. I was 100% peed off when I lost a very expensive ship to a bug where my auto pilot was set to high sec and it took me to low sec. CCP felt this was not a tangible reason for a reimbursement. It is a preferred setting. If there is no hi-sec route from point a to b, it will include low sec systems. Always check your route. I'm sorry you had to learn this the hard way. Quote: Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.14 13:57:00 - [28] Originally by: Treelox Originally by: Porsches Edited by: Porsches on 14/03/2008 12:35:12 CCP never really cared about reeimbursement.. In Fleet battles the amount of lost ships due to lag and inability to warp out or even ask for shield/armor logistics before the ship was dead can prolly reach 90% or more. That alone would make CCP responsable to reeimburse almost all ships lost in a battle and they dont. They dont even recognize their server code is so bad that it is impossible to have a big fleet battle in 0.0 without everyone lagged out to hell. For CCP as we all know there is NO LAG ever... really never ever, so ofc they dont reeimburse ppl. While I do detect your sarcasim, I think you need to understand somethings. Lag is a tricky wench to control. Lag can come from many places; Lag of your machine trying to load 500ships on the grid Lag of your machine trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with your ISP Lag of your ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500 ships with the internet backbone Lag of the internet backbone trying to send/receive data for those 500ships around the world to London Lag of CCP's ISP trying to send/recieve data for those 500ships with the internet backbone Lag of CCP's Servers trying to deal with the data for those 500ships on the grid Lag of CCP's Database trying to provide the servers the data to work with. What you must understand is that the lag can come from one, a few or all of these factors at any given time. While CCP may at times be responsible for the lag, that same lag will most likely cause their "logging" software to lag behind its lag logging. The only way you can be "certain" that the lag is fully on CCP's side, is when the Node crashes. They Don't Reiburse Node Crashes so i have no idea what your talking about.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:00:00 - [29] Originally by: Aprudena Gist They Don't Reiburse Node Crashes so i have no idea what your talking about. orly? Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:04:00 - [30] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Aprudena Gist They Don't Reiburse Node Crashes so i have no idea what your talking about. orly? They didn't for the last three node crashes in and around delve.
Treelox Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:07:00 - [31] Edited by: Treelox on 14/03/2008 14:07:23 Originally by: Aprudena Gist Originally by: Avon Originally by: Aprudena Gist They Don't Reiburse Node Crashes so i have no idea what your talking about. orly? They didn't for the last three node crashes in and around delve. I have to agree with avon. I have had a ship reimbursed via petition for a node crash. Maybe its because I didnt write my petition request in an angry leet speak tinged way. I know that I have seen the way some people write their petitions and its no wonder that they dont get anywhere with the GM's, because their petitions are so difficult to understand with all the leet emo rage that is contained in them. --
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:08:00 - [32] Think of what would happen if CCP all reimbursed ship losses for fleet lag, say, anything longer than 1 minute activation time. 1. Fleet A brings 400 people, fleet B brings 300 2. Fleet A defeats fleet B with heavy losses and heavy lag 3. Fleet B petitions all losses claiming lag of over 1 minute, CCP confirms and replaces all losses 4. Fleet A realizes Fleet B has done this and does the same 5. Fleet battles are now meaningless, and CCP's GMs have just had to file 700 petitions ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:13:00 - [33] Originally by: Treelox Edited by: Treelox on 14/03/2008 14:07:23 Originally by: Aprudena Gist Originally by: Avon Originally by: Aprudena Gist They Don't Reiburse Node Crashes so i have no idea what your talking about. orly? They didn't for the last three node crashes in and around delve. I have to agree with avon. I have had a ship reimbursed via petition for a node crash. Maybe its because I didnt write my petition request in an angry leet speak tinged way. I know that I have seen the way some people write their petitions and its no wonder that they dont get anywhere with the GM's, because their petitions are so difficult to understand with all the leet emo rage that is contained in them. well your kinda dumb for raging in a petition.
Dramund Atonement Arms	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:14:00 - [34] Edited by: Dramund on 14/03/2008 14:13:58 When I was running UT servers and someone demanded to reimburse their negative frag from their plummet into toxic goo cause of lag, I woulda kicked em from the server.
ArchenTheGreat D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:27:00 - [35] Originally by: Dramund Edited by: Dramund on 14/03/2008 14:13:58 When I was running UT servers and someone demanded to reimburse their negative frag from their plummet into toxic goo cause of lag, I woulda kicked em from the server. In UT you dont work for frag for couple of months. And it doesn't involve hundreds of people's work to score this frag. In EVE some things you can only get by hard work of many players. If you lose a lot of your work because of game bug you will probably expect reimbursement. I got reimbursed ships from fleet fights before. Granted it was in 2006, when node crashed during fleet figth with 600 people in local. I don't petition every fleet loss, even if there was a lag because I know it's hard to prove it. But in this particular case (node crashes) I am really ****ed CCP refused my petition. And it wasn't petition with insults etc.
Dramund Atonement Arms	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:29:00 - [36] Edited by: Dramund on 14/03/2008 14:29:35 Originally by: ArchenTheGreat In UT you dont work for frag for couple of months. And it doesn't involve hundreds of people's work to score this frag. In EVE some things you can only get by hard work of many players. If you lose a lot of your work because of game bug you will probably expect reimbursement. I got reimbursed ships from fleet fights before. Granted it was in 2006, when node crashed during fleet figth with 600 people in local. I don't petition every fleet loss, even if there was a lag because I know it's hard to prove it. But in this particular case (node crashes) I am really ***ed CCP refused my petition. And it wasn't petition with insults etc. Here is another fun fact: If you think of anything in a game as work*, quit now.
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:31:00 - [37] CCP, what you don't realize is that you don't just have a responsibility to prove that an actual reimbursement is deserved under any given circumstances. The burden of proof should be on the developer to prove that the reimbursement was NOT deserved, and a woefully inadequate logging system is not a viable excuse. I.e. If an insured ship vanishes from my hangar and I do not recieve an insurance payout, the onus should be on CCP to prove what happened to it. Not just simply state that you cannot take action because you don't know what happened..... if the logs need to reflect the data needed to make these decisions then perhaps the breadth of data the logs record should be increased. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:34:00 - [38] Originally by: CCP Prism X I understand that it sucks not getting a fair reimbursement. No argument there. But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's very true that most of you are asking for legit reimbursements. Only a handful of people file obviously fake reimbursements (that does not make the rest of them legit, the other group is unknown and, as I said, we can't reimburse those). On the flip side there is also a handful of people who would jump at the chance to accuse us of whatever they can and we can't give them fuel for their fire by reimbursing inconclusive losses. It's not 100% accurate justice but at least it's fair in it's inaccuracies as it applies to everyone. I don't think this response will make you feel any better about these blanket repsonses but I hope it clears up the reasons for them. That's better than being in the dark, no? Considering the private nature of GM responces and petitions.. who would know about unfair reimbursement petitions? It's not like the guy who got his ship back is going to tell everybody on the forums and in game about how he screwed CCP for a free ship. It's not like any other player has any tools available of checking how the other player got his ship. The threat to CCP seems minimal. And there comes a point where a little accusation of CCP is less harmful than 100s or 1000s of upset customers. It's not right to push all the suffering on players just to avoid any hint of pain yourself.
Malken Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:36:00 - [39] Originally by: CCP Prism X But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". what logs? you never had any logs showing anything before. an example here, several members of our alliance have been popped by a friendly pos set up properly and all of them got the "our logs dont show any bugs doing that" and a few days after it is patchday and lo and behold that bug is listed and fixed. you are deliberatly screwing over lots of your customers.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:36:00 - [40] Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 14:36:56 Originally by: Haradgrim CCP, what you don't realize is that you don't just have a responsibility to prove that an actual reimbursement is deserved under any given circumstances. The burden of proof should be on the developer to prove that the reimbursement was NOT deserved, and a woefully inadequate logging system is not a viable excuse. So CCP should now be investigating the internet and popping around your house for a quick peek at your PC? Posts like this are why CCP should scrap the petition system tbh. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:39:00 - [41] Edited by: Tarminic on 14/03/2008 14:39:57 Originally by: Ephemeron It's not like the guy who got his ship back is going to tell everybody on the forums and in game about how he screwed CCP for a free ship. It's not like any other player has any tools available of checking how the other player got his ship. No, but I bet that he'd tell his corp or his alliance. Quote: And there comes a point where a little accusation of CCP is less harmful than 100s or 1000s of upset customers. It's not right to push all the suffering on players just to avoid any hint of pain yourself. Are you sure about that? CCP's credibility is lacking in the minds of some players following the T20 incident. Regardless of whether said suspicion is justified or not, Goonswarm has proven that it can be used against them. Originally by: Haradgrim CCP, what you don't realize is that you don't just have a responsibility to prove that an actual reimbursement is deserved under any given circumstances. The burden of proof should be on the developer to prove that the reimbursement was NOT deserved, and a woefully inadequate logging system is not a viable excuse. And how are they supposed to find out if your router was having issues instead of their server? It's a nice thought, but simply not possible in many cases. ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
W3370Pi4 Lords Of Kaos Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:40:00 - [42] had the same problem in an ice field when warping out to flee from Rats i was still taking damage even while warping out to Safe spot :S i got some answer like " we didnt find anything in the database" well im pretty sure if you look 5 minutes u don't find anything . but whatever all good now , no hard feelings just give me "ambulation" and u can still have my money
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:45:00 - [43] Originally by: W3370Pi4 had the same problem in an ice field when warping out to flee from Rats i was still taking damage even while warping out to Safe spot :S i got some answer like " we didnt find anything in the database" well im pretty sure if you look 5 minutes u don't find anything . but whatever all good now , no hard feelings just give me "ambulation" and u can still have my money That is a classic lag death / desync, and it is exatly that sort of thing that can't be reimbursed. You died because, as far as the server was concerned, you were still at the ice belt and never warped away. The logs aren't going to show anything other than that, otherwise you wouldn't have died. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Treelox Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:45:00 - [44] Originally by: Aprudena Gist well your kinda dumb for raging in a petition. I think a lot of people do it without even knowing that is what they are doing. --
Dramund Atonement Arms	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:46:00 - [45] Originally by: Tarminic And how are they supposed to find out if your router was having issues instead of their server? It's a nice thought, but simply not possible in many cases. Not to mention anyone who knows what a standby button does can get all the free ships they want if the log doesn't need proof.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:48:00 - [46] Originally by: Treelox Originally by: Aprudena Gist well your kinda dumb for raging in a petition. I think a lot of people do it without even knowing that is what they are doing. Indeed - perhaps there should be some kind of petition help that states how to write a good (well-worded, non-angry) petition if there isn't already. ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:48:00 - [47] Originally by: Avon Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 14:36:56 Originally by: Haradgrim CCP, what you don't realize is that you don't just have a responsibility to prove that an actual reimbursement is deserved under any given circumstances. The burden of proof should be on the developer to prove that the reimbursement was NOT deserved, and a woefully inadequate logging system is not a viable excuse. So CCP should now be investigating the internet and popping around your house for a quick peek at your PC? Posts like this are why CCP should scrap the petition system tbh. Whoah there! I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Just pointing out its a pretty failed policy if you have an insurance program and one of the insured ships disappears without the payout occuring and they claim they can't tell anything is amiss! I'm not even sure what you think I meant. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
BiggHOSS Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:48:00 - [48] Originally by: CCP Prism X I understand that it sucks not getting a fair reimbursement. No argument there. But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". It's very true that most of you are asking for legit reimbursements. Only a handful of people file obviously fake reimbursements (that does not make the rest of them legit, the other group is unknown and, as I said, we can't reimburse those). On the flip side there is also a handful of people who would jump at the chance to accuse us of whatever they can and we can't give them fuel for their fire by reimbursing inconclusive losses. It's not 100% accurate justice but at least it's fair in it's inaccuracies as it applies to everyone. I don't think this response will make you feel any better about these blanket repsonses but I hope it clears up the reasons for them. That's better than being in the dark, no? If you are lookins still then how about clicking on a gate, getting the session change in progress message, and not jumping through the gate and dying? Insurance dosn't pay for rigs, which are the only real expense on Haulers.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:54:00 - [49] Originally by: Avon That is a classic lag death / desync, and it is exatly that sort of thing that can't be reimbursed. You died because, as far as the server was concerned, you were still at the ice belt and never warped away. The logs aren't going to show anything other than that, otherwise you wouldn't have died. Why would he stay at the ice belt long enough for belt rats to kill him? Did the rats scramble him? Did other players scramble him? What sane person would suicide a ship to belt rats and then petition it back? I know that logs don't show everything, but there is also such a thing as common sense.
Kerala Trivum State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:55:00 - [50] Originally by: Treelox Originally by: Kerala Trivum You can take any thing to either extreem, Reinburse to many, or to little. I was 100% peed off when I lost a very expensive ship to a bug where my auto pilot was set to high sec and it took me to low sec. CCP felt this was not a tangible reason for a reimbursement. What was the little slider on your AP setting set to? I hope it was set to 49 or higher, otherwise you done did it to yourself. Yes it was set correctly and the computer that is used has never had the settings changed on it as I use seperate computers for sperate accounts. I was told that they had no logs so no reimbursement.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:56:00 - [51] Originally by: Haradgrim [ Whoah there! I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Just pointing out its a pretty failed policy if you have an insurance program and one of the insured ships disappears without the payout occuring and they claim they can't tell anything is amiss! I'm not even sure what you think I meant. Maybe someone took it from your hangar? The point is, unless there is a bug or problem their end involved, and CCP can verify it, then nothing should be reimbursed. It should not come down to a judgement call, it should be baised only on what facts are to hand (even if you feel more logs should be available). The only alternative to a policy like that would be one of no reimbursement petitions at all. Putting CCP in a position where they need to make a judgement call is potentially worse than someone not getting their stuff back. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:59:00 - [52] Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 14:59:59 Originally by: Ephemeron Why would he stay at the ice belt long enough for belt rats to kill him? Did the rats scramble him? Did other players scramble him? What sane person would suicide a ship to belt rats and then petition it back? I know that logs don't show everything, but there is also such a thing as common sense. He could have fallen asleep, or gone to buy a pizza, or had a power-cut, or his internet may have dropped, or a router between him and the server may have been stolen by aliens as part of a sinister invasion plan. The point is, none of those things are under CCP's control, and nor can they investigate them. With that in mind, they can not reimburse the loss because it is not their fault - the server shows the guy's ship dying at an ice-belt to npcs, nothing more. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 14:59:00 - [53] Originally by: Haradgrim Whoah there! I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Just pointing out its a pretty failed policy if you have an insurance program and one of the insured ships disappears without the payout occuring and they claim they can't tell anything is amiss! Ah, that's more clear now. However there still the issue of proving that it happened, which isn't always easy. Originally by: BiggHOSS If you are lookins still then how about clicking on a gate, getting the session change in progress message, and not jumping through the gate and dying? Insurance dosn't pay for rigs, which are the only real expense on Haulers. Read above - if CCP can't prove it, they can't reimburse you. What if an error like that occurred because the server thought you jumped through but the client didn't? Yes, you'll respond with "i can send them my logs/screenshots," but they can't be used in any kind of reimbursements because CCP has no way to tell whether you altered the logs or screenshots you submitted. I could jump through a gate, get killed in a gatecamp, and then photoshop a screenshot of me taking damage on the wrong side of the gate otherwise. ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
Lucia Warbler Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:01:00 - [54] On my time in Eve, only once I have asked for reimbursement due to a buy order expiring and me not getting my ISK back. My petition was answered after 6 months in a form of a shiny new ship (the same I wanted to buy via buy order). Of course, having waiting 6 months, I had already bought that particular ship and would've preferred ISK, but I don't complain. I wasn't exactly expecting any kind of reimbursement at that point. The moral story here is that it's just pixels. Pixels on your screen. Pixels in CCP's database. You'll do fine without these pixels, trust me on this one.
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:16:00 - [55] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Haradgrim [ Whoah there! I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. Just pointing out its a pretty failed policy if you have an insurance program and one of the insured ships disappears without the payout occuring and they claim they can't tell anything is amiss! I'm not even sure what you think I meant. Maybe someone took it from your hangar? The point is, unless there is a bug or problem their end involved, and CCP can verify it, then nothing should be reimbursed. It should not come down to a judgement call, it should be baised only on what facts are to hand (even if you feel more logs should be available). The only alternative to a policy like that would be one of no reimbursement petitions at all. Putting CCP in a position where they need to make a judgement call is potentially worse than someone not getting their stuff back. If the ship is taken from a hangar then CCP can see that its still in existence, not to mention its insurance should still be valid. My point was; in cases where there is a serious logical fallacy in assuming nothing has gone wrong, especially in circumstances like I described previously, CCP should have an obligation to at the very least provide an explanation if not reimburse. And with respect to situation like that, I'm not suggesting that anyone make a judgment call. What I am asking for is that CCP provide their CS people with the adequate tools to do their job. There are situation that "should" be logged (like friendly pos's firing on you) but clearly aren't at this point in time and this needs to be fixed. As far as reimbursement due to things like disconnects, computer failure, etc, etc, I am in complete agreement with you, but there are alot of situations that arise that are not as black and white. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Kolmogorow Freedom Resources	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:19:00 - [56] Originally by: Porsches For CCP as we all know there is NO LAG ever... really never ever, so ofc they dont reeimburse ppl. Originally by: Esmenet Reimbursing for lag is a stupid idea. I'm happy CCP does not do this. That's wrong. I made all my reimbursement petition (3 or 4) due to (extreme) lag. They were always accepted by CCP. It was always in missions with a load of rats attacking me at the same time at server peak times. Just at the moment I have an open petition for being killed in a huge gate camp. Regarding lag and frozen client there was no difference to the ship loss in missions. I am curious how they will decide. I expect a reimbursement because they know that their game doesn't really work as it should with more than x shooting objects at the time and at the same place.
Vanessa Vasquez planet eyeQ Ultio Animi Causa	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:22:00 - [57] Well, i understand CCPs argument here, but from my point of view, it's not very logical. Lemme explain: In my early days, a lost my shiny rigged Ferox on a lvl3 massive attack, after doing lvl3s for about a month without a single loss. I always aligned to a station/stargate and hit the warp to button when shields dropped below 25%. This time, i did the same thing, and my ship also got into warp. At least, visually. I got the warp sequence, i got the warp sound etc., but i still got hit for more than 10 seconds while enganged in warp. I dunno what caused this, but i did not get reimbursted. Well, i did not get any reimburstments nor help of all my 5 or 6 petitions so far, but thats another story. The point here is, that this attitude made me really want to quit EvE, though i absolutely love the game itself. And I think its easy to understand why, as one spend a lot amount of time gathering stuff/wealth and then loosing it completely without fault is nothing that makes you shout out a load hurray. Imo CCP/GM's have to handle this by visual adjustment. Lets take my case for example. GM sees, its a new player. GM sees, he doesn't loose ships for a long period of time.GM sees it's the first petition. If GM doesn't reimburst at all, the player will of course be ****ed. And what would be so bad if he gets at least a partialy reimburstment, even it showed nothing unusual on the logs (as always...)? The ship definitely got destroyed, so there's no more ISK here added to eve. Showing some "goodwill" in some cases would be a smart descicion in my opinion - having much more good effects than bad. just my 2 cents
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:26:00 - [58] Originally by: Avon ..With that in mind, they can not reimburse the loss because it is not their fault - the server shows the guy's ship dying at an ice-belt to npcs, nothing more. This is the type of mindset I want to try change. It's the difference between defensive help and assertive help. For example, if you see a car accident happen right in front of you, and there aren't many people nearby, would you stop and help the injured get out of the car? Or would you say "those people were stupid, good thing I had nothing to do with it" and keep driving? You have the right to do that. But what if you were a member of police force, but currently off duty? GMs have a job of helping people, they are not just random CCP employees. They more than anyone should want to be assertive in helping those who are hurt, even if they don't feel like it.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:26:00 - [59] Originally by: Vanessa Vasquez Well, i understand CCPs argument here, but from my point of view, it's not very logical. Lemme explain: In my early days, a lost my shiny rigged Ferox on a lvl3 massive attack, after doing lvl3s for about a month without a single loss. I always aligned to a station/stargate and hit the warp to button when shields dropped below 25%. This time, i did the same thing, and my ship also got into warp. At least, visually. I got the warp sequence, i got the warp sound etc., but i still got hit for more than 10 seconds while enganged in warp. I dunno what caused this, but i did not get reimbursted. Well, i did not get any reimburstments nor help of all my 5 or 6 petitions so far, but thats another story. The point here is, that this attitude made me really want to quit EvE, though i absolutely love the game itself. And I think its easy to understand why, as one spend a lot amount of time gathering stuff/wealth and then loosing it completely without fault is nothing that makes you shout out a load hurray. Imo CCP/GM's have to handle this by visual adjustment. Lets take my case for example. GM sees, its a new player. GM sees, he doesn't loose ships for a long period of time.GM sees it's the first petition. If GM doesn't reimburst at all, the player will of course be ****ed. And what would be so bad if he gets at least a partialy reimburstment, even it showed nothing unusual on the logs (as always...)? The ship definitely got destroyed, so there's no more ISK here added to eve. Showing some "goodwill" in some cases would be a smart descicion in my opinion - having much more good effects than bad. just my 2 cents I'm pretty good with words, but I am struggling to pick ones which would convey quite how strongly I disagree with you without being insulting, so I'll just leave it at that. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:30:00 - [60] Originally by: Vanessa Vasquez Lets take my case for example. GM sees, its a new player. GM sees, he doesn't loose ships for a long period of time.GM sees it's the first petition. If GM doesn't reimburst at all, the player will of course be **ed. And what would be so bad if he gets at least a partialy reimburstment, even it showed nothing unusual on the logs (as always...)? The ship definitely got destroyed, so there's no more ISK here added to eve. Showing some "goodwill" in some cases would be a smart descicion in my opinion - having much more good effects than bad. CCP should treat all customers - no matter their age - exactly the same. It wouldn't be fair otherwise. Originally by:** Ephemeron GMs have a job of helping people, they are not just random CCP employees. They more than anyone should want to be assertive in helping those who are hurt, even if they don't feel like it. But how can you do that without opening up the system to abuse? ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:43:00 - [61] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Ephemeron GMs have a job of helping people, they are not just random CCP employees. They more than anyone should want to be assertive in helping those who are hurt, even if they don't feel like it. But how can you do that without opening up the system to abuse? Use common sense and logical reasoning. I wish GMs were more like police investigators. They should take clues, think about what they mean, and then pass a judegement based on the evidence. Logs and petition history of the person should be considered. Someone who is caught abusing the system would get temporary ban, like they would if they tried to use exploits in game or break EULA. Certainly not all cases can be solved by applying logical reasoning to the facts in log files. Some cases would be unanswered. But the amount of postitive outcomes would greatly increase. It's definitely worth doing. If current GMs aren't known for making good judgements, CCP should find some people who can do it. There are people who can do it.
Tarminic Forsaken Resistance The Last Stand	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:45:00 - [62] Originally by: Ephemeron Use common sense and logical reasoning. I wish GMs were more like police investigators. They should take clues, think about what they mean, and then pass a judegement based on the evidence. Logs and petition history of the person should be considered. Someone who is caught abusing the system would get temporary ban, like they would if they tried to use exploits in game or break EULA. Certainly not all cases can be solved by applying logical reasoning to the facts in log files. Some cases would be unanswered. But the amount of postitive outcomes would greatly increase. It's definitely worth doing. If current GMs aren't known for making good judgements, CCP should find some people who can do it. There are people who can do it. That would be nice, but would it be possible without CCP having to hugely expand their GM department? Unless they doubled or tripled the number of petition-handlers, petition time would skyrocket. It would be nice though. ---------------- Tarminic - 33 Million SP in Forum Warfare Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.79.2
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:47:00 - [63] Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 15:51:02 Originally by: Tarminic That would be nice, but would it be possible without CCP having to hugely expand their GM department? Unless they doubled or tripled the number of petition-handlers, petition time would skyrocket. It would be nice though. No, it wouldn't be nice. It still comes down to judgement and opinion, and that just isn't acceptable. Petitions should be decided on the available information only, and if that isn't enough to reimburse, don't. Added for clarity: The value that one GM would give to a peice of subjective evidence, for example petition history, could be different to the weight given to it by another GM - leading to accusations of favouritism. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Eventy One Magellan Exploration and Survey	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:52:00 - [64] Edited by: Eventy One on 14/03/2008 15:54:50 Edited by: Eventy One on 14/03/2008 15:52:55 Originally by: CCP Prism X But I hope I can get you to understand that we must be able to defend ourself against accusations of unfair reimbursement. Hence the logs must show something which we can use to say "This was not CCP preference but a clear case of the logs showing a reimbursement in order". I rarely ask for compensation, and so this thread doesn't apply to me a whole lot; however I saw your point here Prism and I had to bring up something that happened to me when I did ask for compensation in a particular instance. There was a previous patch deployment that resulted in unexpected downtime after the patch deployment itself which was made worse by a planned hardware upgrade on the cluster. I put in petition when the outage ran into the hardware upgrade causing me to lose a particular mission which was part of a set. I only wanted the mission reset, nothing more. My request was initially denied on the grounds the logs showed nothing. There was no downtime when I claimed that there was! The GM's response was that the logs did not show anything surprised me, and so my petition could not be honoured. I pointed out in response, that logs or no logs, the cluster uptime graph that use to be shown on this very site showed the downtime for hours, as well as a news item that explained the outage and stated clearly how long the cluster was down and for what reason. How could the logs show nothing? I found it humorous that the GM that replied to my petition couldn't find evidence in the logs, and yet the news and the uptime graph provided evidence enough. After I pointed these bits of evidence out, the ticket was elevated and eventually my petition granted. I believe that this poster here is confirming an observation that I suspect; basically some who reply to petitions do not do the foot work to confirm a users claim and simply use lack of evidence in the logs as an excuse to close the ticket. I mean, how could a GM possibly try to deny that logs did not show hours of down time? All in all, I'm not sure this is completely broken, but I think that petition review, needs to be a bit more active to ensure tickets are not slipping by the wayside.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:52:00 - [65] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Ephemeron Use common sense and logical reasoning. I wish GMs were more like police investigators. They should take clues, think about what they mean, and then pass a judegement based on the evidence. Logs and petition history of the person should be considered. Someone who is caught abusing the system would get temporary ban, like they would if they tried to use exploits in game or break EULA. Certainly not all cases can be solved by applying logical reasoning to the facts in log files. Some cases would be unanswered. But the amount of postitive outcomes would greatly increase. It's definitely worth doing. If current GMs aren't known for making good judgements, CCP should find some people who can do it. There are people who can do it. That would be nice, but would it be possible without CCP having to hugely expand their GM department? Unless they doubled or tripled the number of petition-handlers, petition time would skyrocket. It would be nice though. I understand that putting petitions thru that process would increase amount of work. But it shouldn't be that much. Right now the GMs have to review all the log data associated with the case. I imaging this is the part that takes most of the time. Furthermore, GMs could prioritize cases. For example, petitions with reimbursement value of under 100 million isk would get standard "our logs don't show anything". But petitions with value over 100 mil could get some analysis of the log data. It may sound a little unfair, but we realize the resources are limited and in real life it works pretty much same way.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:57:00 - [66] Originally by: Eventy One I believe that this poster here is confirming an observation that I suspect; basically some who reply to petitions do not do the foot work to confirm a users claim and simply use lack of evidence in the logs as an excuse to close the ticket. I mean, how could a GM possibly try to deny that logs did not show hours of down time? All in all, I'm not sure this is completely broken, but I think that petition review, needs to be a bit more active to ensure tickets are not slipping by the wayside. This isn't a reason to change the system in general though, spending that much time evaluating every single claim. It is good that you can esculate a petition which has come to the wrong conclusion where facts (ie, evidence directly available to CCP) have been overlooked, but I think it is more important the resolution of the majority of petitions are handled as quickly as possible and leave the more detailed investigations to esculations. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:57:00 - [67] Originally by: Avon No, it wouldn't be nice. It still comes down to judgement and opinion, and that just isn't acceptable. Petitions should be decided on the available information only, and if that isn't enough to reimburse, don't. Added for clarity: The value that one GM would give to a peice of subjective evidence, for example petition history, could be different to the weight given to it by another GM - leading to accusations of favouritism. I also understand that. But that's the nature of their work. Man has not come up with a better system yet. There is the judge, there is a jury. Those people have to bear the burden of making a decision. It is hard sometimes to put yourself in situation where your decision influence other people in negative way. But somebody has to do it for the greater good of community. We need people like that. Those who can't handle this responsibility should never be forced to have it. But I know we can find people who would do it. They can never be perfect, we understand that, there is no better system. Current system is much worse.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 15:59:00 - [68] Originally by: Ephemeron Current system is much worse. No, the current system is fair. It may not be optimal, but it is not open to interpretation - and that is more important than a few extra people getting their stuff back, especially if some of them didn't really deserve it. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Eventy One Magellan Exploration and Survey	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:00:00 - [69] Originally by: Avon This isn't a reason to change the system in general though, spending that much time evaluating every single claim. It is good that you can esculate a petition which has come to the wrong conclusion where facts (ie, evidence directly available to CCP) have been overlooked, but I think it is more important the resolution of the majority of petitions are handled as quickly as possible and leave the more detailed investigations to esculations. Yes - you're right; it has to be a balance - thats a given, and every dollar CCP spends on support staff, and support issues, is one less dollar spend on game development or what ever.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:12:00 - [70] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Ephemeron Current system is much worse. No, the current system is fair. It may not be optimal, but it is not open to interpretation - and that is more important than a few extra people getting their stuff back, especially if some of them didn't really deserve it. Lets take a look at this issue from a new perspective: CCP are a company that sells a product. There is a community of loyal customers (people paying monthly as opposed to single 1 time purchase) The issues we discussing now relate to customer satisfaction. The effects are 2 fold: 1) keeping a loyal customer from quitting 2) word of mouth advertisement for new potential customers - can be good or bad The current reimbursement system may be fair in some way toward CCP, but it is definitely not fair to many customers. Customer satisfaction goes down - more people quit, EVE reputation gets negative impact - negative advertizing to potential customers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying that EVE is going down the toilet, I am just explaining the forces that exist behind the scenes, however subtle they may be, they are there. Because these forces exist, CCP should have additional interest in having a help system that is more fair to the customer. Being helpful is a good thing in general. The positives usually outweigh the negatives - accusations of favoritism and such. And don't use the slippery slope arguement that being more helpful would lead to everyone abusing the system and getting free stuff. There's a way to balance things, not asking for a huge change here.
Esmenet Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:22:00 - [71] I'd rather have them stop reimbursing anything at all, instead of a timeconsuming jury system open "judgement" calls.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:32:00 - [72] Originally by: Esmenet I'd rather have them stop reimbursing anything at all, instead of a timeconsuming jury system open "judgement" calls. You'd think different if you lost 4 billion isk to software/hardware issues that logs don't show anything. If it was just 100 mil isk, I wouldn't care either. Even 500 mil is hurting not so bad. But when it's more than that, someone should help.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:40:00 - [73] Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 16:40:16 Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Esmenet I'd rather have them stop reimbursing anything at all, instead of a timeconsuming jury system open "judgement" calls. You'd think different if you lost 4 billion isk to software/hardware issues that logs don't show anything. If it was just 100 mil isk, I wouldn't care either. Even 500 mil is hurting not so bad. But when it's more than that, someone should help. How would you feel if someone was given 4 billion they claimed to have lost, even if there was no evidence? Happy? Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Dramund Atonement Arms	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:41:00 - [74] Originally by: Avon How would you feel if someone was given 4 billion they claimed to have lost, even if there was no evidence? Happy? I would certainly cancel my account with the knowledge that too many resources were being passed out on a silver platter to whiners. I think the proper petition response would be "What the hell were you doing undocking with a ship you can't afford to lose anyway?"
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 16:53:00 - [75] Originally by: Avon Edited by: Avon on 14/03/2008 16:40:16 Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Esmenet I'd rather have them stop reimbursing anything at all, instead of a timeconsuming jury system open "judgement" calls. You'd think different if you lost 4 billion isk to software/hardware issues that logs don't show anything. If it was just 100 mil isk, I wouldn't care either. Even 500 mil is hurting not so bad. But when it's more than that, someone should help. How would you feel if someone was given 4 billion they claimed to have lost, even if there was no evidence? Happy? No, I would just as actively condemn such a decision. I don't stand for "free stuff for all". I want fairness to the people who are really hurting.
Avon Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:00:00 - [76] Originally by: Ephemeron No, I would just as actively condemn such a decision. I don't stand for "free stuff for all". I want fairness to the people who are really hurting. So, how do you tell the difference between the legitimate 4 bil payout and the free ride? Either you have enough evidence to support reimbursement or you don't; there is no place for reimbursement without proof. The only acceptable proof is that which CCP control, otherwise that evidence could be tampered with. So my point remains, reimburse when the evidence supports it, and only when the evidence supports it. Even if you think the player might be right, and you feel sorry for his plight, they are not valid grounds for reimbursement .. no matter how much you may want to help him out, or how much you empathise with his situation. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:00:00 - [77] Originally by: Dramund "What the hell were you doing undocking with a ship you can't afford to lose anyway?" That idea is often overused in situations it doesn't apply to. It's not logical. For example, lets say you say money to buy 2 battleships with identical fittings. Now you buy one battleship and undock. You play for a while and then you die. Now you can replace that battleship, but you don't have the money to buy a 3rd battleship. Do you undock? You see the inconsistency? Another example: motherships and titans. Corps and alliances have to work hard to be able to buy one, when they do, can they fly one without having another one ready in case the first one dies? Is it logical not to fly one even tho you worked to hard to get it? No. The idea of "don't fly what you can't afford to replace" is logically inconsistent.
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:07:00 - [78] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Ephemeron No, I would just as actively condemn such a decision. I don't stand for "free stuff for all". I want fairness to the people who are really hurting. So, how do you tell the difference between the legitimate 4 bil payout and the free ride? Either you have enough evidence to support reimbursement or you don't; there is no place for reimbursement without proof. The only acceptable proof is that which CCP control, otherwise that evidence could be tampered with. So my point remains, reimburse when the evidence supports it, and only when the evidence supports it. Even if you think the player might be right, and you feel sorry for his plight, they are not valid grounds for reimbursement .. no matter how much you may want to help him out, or how much you empathise with his situation. I doubt that CCP have logs that say something like "[14:30] Bug #3456 activated [14:32] Player ship destoyed due to bug #3465" That's silly, right? Logs are good at tracking valid data. People who examine those logs are looking for logical insonsistencies in the pattern of valid game events. For example, lets say that events A and C are valid game events. But event A can never be followed by event C, there has to be event B between them. All logged events are valid, but GM has to make logical deduction that an error has occured between event A and event B. Now this is an overly simplified case. In reality things are much more complex and so are the decisions made by person examining the data. There is no way to avoid that decision making. Somebody has to take responsibility for passing judgement.
Dramund Atonement Arms	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:10:00 - [79] Originally by: Ephemeron That idea is often overused in situations it doesn't apply to. It's not logical. For example, lets say you say money to buy 2 battleships with identical fittings. Now you buy one battleship and undock. You play for a while and then you die. Now you can replace that battleship, but you don't have the money to buy a 3rd battleship. Do you undock? You see the inconsistency? Another example: motherships and titans. Corps and alliances have to work hard to be able to buy one, when they do, can they fly one without having another one ready in case the first one dies? Is it logical not to fly one even tho you worked to hard to get it? No. The idea of "don't fly what you can't afford to replace" is logically inconsistent. You twisted the words to make it illogical. No one says "don't fly what you can't afford to replace," they say "Don't undock with what you can't afford to lose." Affording the loss means many things but the shortest way to put it is "have a backup plan - no matter what"
Ki Tarra Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:15:00 - [80] Edited by: Ki Tarra on 14/03/2008 17:15:49 The problem is that players expect that lag is a valid reason for reimbursement. I think that CCP need to be more forceful in establishing that players need to be responsible for putting them selfs in harms way. If you go to Jita and lose your ship because you were ganked while lagged out. Too bad. If you lose a ship in a mission because you lag out. Too bad. If you lose a ship in fleet combat because of lag. Too bad. Instead of responding to petitions those with "our logs show nothing", they should respond to those petitions with something to the effect of "You have cited latancy/desync/disconnection as the reason for your loss. Lag related issues are not valid reasons for reimbursement. If your loss was the result of some other issue or defect, please clarify the nature of that issue." Optionally they could add some text about how they try to minimize those issues, but that nothing can ever prevent them completely. If there is a legitimate defect in the game that causes lag that should not be there, reimbursements could be granted, if and only if a bug report was filed and a defect registered for fixing. In those cases, the bug report would need to be cited and the GM would need to be able to verify that bug was relevant to the situation.
Esmenet Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:21:00 - [81] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Esmenet I'd rather have them stop reimbursing anything at all, instead of a timeconsuming jury system open "judgement" calls. You'd think different if you lost 4 billion isk to software/hardware issues that logs don't show anything. If it was just 100 mil isk, I wouldn't care either. Even 500 mil is hurting not so bad. But when it's more than that, someone should help. The game revolves around shiploss. I dont care if its a 100.000 isk frigate or a titan. If you cant handle loosing ships then i'd say maybe EVE is not the game for you. Sure it sucks if you loose something to lag but get over it. Unless ccp is incredibly stupid i dont think they will ever start reimbursing ships for "lag".
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2008.03.14 17:25:00 - [82] Completely ignoring ship loss petitions would actually be a big improvement, I think. It would hurt, but I believe it would do more good than harm in the long run. It's the perception of inconsistency that sucks, and if ship loss petitions were just categorically denied, everybody would know where they stand. I might still have a very few exceptions, for instance for very new players. Anything more than a few weeks, and anything outside of hisec though, and the exceptions would be rarer than chicken teeth. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Vanessa Vasquez planet eyeQ Ultio Animi Causa	Posted - 2008.03.15 11:15:00 - [83] For me it's not only about reimburstment. I find the whole customer care very very unsatisfying! Maybe i should tell you the outcome of my few petitions so far? Simple questions about corp management (rights management)or the buggy LP store (couldn't buy items but had all the LP+ISK) don't get a response for some days, and after that the GM's repley goes like this: "Since some time passed, i want to ask if the problem still occures". Happend twice! A petition about the behaviour of heavy drones (2 of 5 kept ignoring my commands all the time) was answered after a week, stating that the GM is not for forum issues, i should consult a webmaster ... After mission looting my bookmark was moved to another system. 100% sure, as i deleted all bookmarks the day before and named this one specific. "Nothing on our logs" ... When we had setup our corp the first time, there was stuff missing out of deliveries. 2 days after the petition it was back, another day later it was gone again! And that's what i mean with visual judgement. The GM's response was, that someone took it, but he couldn't tell us who. Even if i doubt that, it would have helped so much to know who to properly configury members rights as we thought only 2 ppl had access to that. As far as i'm concerned, customer support is the worst thing in EVE. And i know for sure, if i loose stuff cause of bug/lag whatever, wich i worked months for to obtain it, i'll quit.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.