Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mickey Simon
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 05:08:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Mickey Simon on 05/02/2009 05:10:06
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Is that what metagaming is? I thought it was out-of-game activities, not in-game spying/thievery.
No, you're correct.
Using a spy (especially in this way, as there weren't any alts involved afaik) isn't metagaming, it's part of normal gameplay. Creating an alt and using that to spy however would be metagaming.
edit: In either case, it's legitimate. I don't support either side, but people who are crying about how unfair it is and that CCP should do something need to remember that this is EVE, not some other carebear MMO. Meanwhile, on the other side of town . . . |
Ami Nia
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 07:26:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Minny Sky CCP gonna have a tough choice to make.
The only thing bob have going for them is an admission that gs logged in to another members account to verify that it was legit director account
If they really have that admission, then there's no choice: CCP will ban both accounts.
But AFAIK there's no such an admission.
Some people say that the mp3 recording of The Mittani is such, but it only say they got the user name and password for the BoB directors site (and Mittani himself posted they have mirrored it and will publish it).
Military experts call it a Templar, a fighter drone used by Amarr carriers. -- Sheriff Jones
|
Ehn Roh
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 07:35:00 -
[33]
They'll want to watch out about that, because with the number of pilots on BoB, the odds of them having at least a couple of lawyers in the ranks is pretty high... and unauthorized access to private websites is an actual (real, no ****) crime in most jurisdictions around here ... and no, having someone with the pw hand it to you doesn't cover your ass.
|
Achar Losa
Caldari logMASter
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 07:38:00 -
[34]
Originally by: EnslaverOfMinmatar CCP coming out HARD!!
this |
Etria Issen
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 07:41:00 -
[35]
I think with this knowledge in the highly unlikely event I made a Corp I'd only give any positions of power to people I know I can trust. As in I've known them off EvE for years. They'd be trustworthy then... I'd sure hope so anyway. |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 09:02:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Gierling Edited by: Gierling on 05/02/2009 02:24:22 What do you guys think would happen if CCP came out hard against spying and thievery...
Cus I have the sneaking suspicion they are about to do so.
The game would be much poorer for it.
|
DeODokktor
Dark Templars The Fonz Presidium
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 10:24:00 -
[37]
Topic should be changed as it has no relation to metagaming. Tho I support the idea that metagaming may have play'd a role in what took place, there is no sign that OOG resources (ebay, account theft, bribery, death threats) were used. |
Rhatar Khurin
Minmatar Free Ammatar Aid Organisation
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 10:29:00 -
[38]
Look how much interest EVE got after the legendary GHSC heist. if this causes even half as much hullabaloo as that then CCP is gonna make a lorra cash soon. |
Kuranta
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 10:57:00 -
[39]
Originally by: DeODokktor Topic should be changed as it has no relation to metagaming. Tho I support the idea that metagaming may have play'd a role in what took place, there is no sign that OOG resources (ebay, account theft, bribery, death threats) were used.
This. Normal alt-spy gameplay. Just like BoB did itself. If an entity gets too big, stuff like that can happen more easily. |
Malcanis
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:05:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Ehn Roh They'll want to watch out about that, because with the number of pilots on BoB, the odds of them having at least a couple of lawyers in the ranks is pretty high... and unauthorized access to private websites is an actual (real, no ****) crime in most jurisdictions around here ... and no, having someone with the pw hand it to you doesn't cover your ass.
BoB, of course, never did anything like this c/d? |
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr Clinical Experiment
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:06:00 -
[41]
Meta gaming is EVE now?
I CAN understand "it's not gonna change". I might understand "It's not like it's ruining the game."
But i will not sit here and take you guys saying "EVE is metagaming"
This whole "EVE iz hardcorez" has gone WAY too far. |
SkaffenAmtiskaw
Caldari Black Nova Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:07:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Ehn Roh They'll want to watch out about that, because with the number of pilots on BoB, the odds of them having at least a couple of lawyers in the ranks is pretty high... and unauthorized access to private websites is an actual (real, no ****) crime in most jurisdictions around here ... and no, having someone with the pw hand it to you doesn't cover your ass.
Legal action? Over an internet spaceship forum? Sounds like a waste of time, effort and money to me. |
Clenis
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:11:00 -
[43]
I don't see a problem with what happened. Assuming it was done legitimately, who cares? The game has room for serious and casual players. The whines I see about "metagaming" sound a lot like the lowsec pirates who want to force all the empire carebears into their areas. Just play your game and don't worry about this. This is not game breaking in the least. Yes, a lot of people just lost a bunch of pixels. That's all they lost. To pretend otherwise is to really take this game too seriously. |
Wingshard
Ikazuchi and Raikou Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:19:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden Even if CCP wanted to, they couldn't due to the PR disaster. That stupid incident that I'm sure everyone's referencing was a CCP employee, not CCP themselves.
tl;dr BOB is dead, gg no re
yeah just like with ghosttraiing "feature".
seriously its more about cutting their income weather they decide something serious changing or not |
Vania ColeDart
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:47:00 -
[45]
To me this is just yet another chapter in a loooong history of Eve drama. CCP has stated more than once that spying and theft are legitimate game mechanics. GET OVER IT!If mittens did log into a directors account its because that director gave him access.which btw is a eula violation. A clear indication that not all is well in BoB uber leadership land.Think of it.A trusted member sells out BoB.regardless of the method by which it was done..reality check. |
Spurty
Caldari Amok. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:50:00 -
[46]
posting in an EPIC battle where no one fired a shot, but an entire alliance esploded thread.
Hi mum, send money!
I find it a good lesson. Alas, not many will learn from it.
|
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente Revelation Space
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 11:54:00 -
[47]
Firstly, I am no fan of Goonswarm... that said:
Originally by: Speaker Dead If this is a Meta-gaming exploit,
Taking an Alliance down from the inside after being given the Rights and Roles to do so by said Alliance is not meta gaming . It's called infiltration! I must correct you on your use of the term "meta-gaming".
Originally by: Minny Sky CCP gonna have a tough choice to make.
The only thing bob have going for them is an admission that gs logged in to another members account to verify that it was legit director account
Last time I checked, CCP were not responsible for policing non CCP EVE forums I don't know why people are spreading the rumour that EVE accounts were hacked or EVE logins shared.
|
Rotnac
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 13:55:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Ehn Roh They'll want to watch out about that, because with the number of pilots on BoB, the odds of them having at least a couple of lawyers in the ranks is pretty high... and unauthorized access to private websites is an actual (real, no ****) crime in most jurisdictions around here ... and no, having someone with the pw hand it to you doesn't cover your ass.
Somehow I seriously doubt a judge will hear a case about a game forum getting copied via an archiver. I mean, there have been some ridiculous cases before, but this would take the cake. Not to mention that unauthorized access can be a tricky thing to define. He was a director - you could probably argue that he had authority to give others access to the forums! |
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Endemic Aggression Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 14:02:00 -
[49]
When some random non-bob alliance is hit by thief or spy it's normal game mechanics. When it happens to bob it's metagaming c/d? |
Element 22
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 14:35:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Element 22 on 05/02/2009 14:36:00
Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn
When some random non-bob alliance is hit by thief or spy it's normal game mechanics. When it happens to bob it's metagaming c/d?
I think the issue is it wasn't a simple *spy-sneaks-in-and-drinks-all-the-milkshake*, it was that a single player who wasn't the CEO managed to, single handedly might I add, completely dismantle an ALLIANCE of hundreds of players. I think what most people were expecting was at best he could kick out corps but somehow not shut down the alliance. Even I would have expected there to be some kind of mechanic that would prevent anyone but the CEO from dismantling the corp, even if that means that the corp he belongs to couldn't leave without his consent or something (i.e, the CEO of an alliance must be the CEO of the beginning corp or a corp inside the alliance).
Also I think that people are confusing meta-gaming with political maneuvers inside the game. Meta-gaming would be threatening to break the knee caps of a corp CEO outside of the game unless he transfers the isk. A crude example, but meta-gaming means gaming the game or having access to information and tactics not shown in the game. One might successfully argue that switching accounts is meta-gaming because in-game our characters have no 'concept' of our logins. The same might be said with alts, but that is walking the fine blurry line between in game information and gaming the system.
And while this might seem frivolous, if the owner of the account was in America then this may very well fall under the purview of the DMCA. Because the issue isn't so much that the director willingly gave the sign in information to a 3rd party with the express intension of this happening, but rather the loss of the in game money valued at 'x' amount (I believe Bellum was stating $300K) which is most definitely covered by the DMCA. Now what this would mean for EVE if they even go to court is rather more disconcerting, imagine the GHSC being sued because they stole 'y' amount of isk which is valued at 'x' dollars. If BoB does sue over the monetary grounds, which I believe is the only ground where they have valid cause (at least under U.S. law) then EVE will be irrevocably changed, and changed for the worst in my opinion. Because it will mean either the end of PLEXs on legal liability grounds or that if someone steals a Titan corps will go to court over the alleged 10K theft (ships being blown up however would be considered as part of the game and thus well within the understood agreement when one joins the game). Or possibly the worst possible outcome: EVE is denoted as a gambling site and has a 21 years old minimum with proof of some sort.
On a personal note I officially have no feelings on the dismemberment of BoB. I do however feel some resentment that an Alliance that people have put thousands of man-hours into can be brought down like this. But I must tip my hat to the goons for this coup, even if it was handed to them by an insider and not engendered. I don't wish to see this kind of gaming (regarding spies and theft) gone from EVE, however this smacks of exploiting in some manner. Perhaps the issue is that like the large companies caught in turmoil in RL, BoB was simply too big to fail in our minds.
So is it ding dong the Witch is dead? Or did Dorthy have no right to bring a house into the game?
EDIT: put director and meant to put CEO Signatures are annoying...kinda like me. |
|
Navtiqes
Englebarna
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 14:39:00 -
[51]
EVE without metagaming would be like bikes without pedals.
They'd look all shiny and nice, but you'd ride one trip downhill with them and that's all the fun you'd get. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 14:52:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Gierling Edited by: Gierling on 05/02/2009 02:24:22 What do you guys think would happen if CCP came out hard against spying and thievery...
Cus I have the sneaking suspicion they are about to do so.
What can they do? All they can enforce is stuff in game by game mechanics. Baning for exploit use is abut the only thing they can do. If they want something not to happen in game, then they can code it not to be possible. Trying to enforce anti metagame policies would be a rather difficult thing to do. It's just not worth it to ccp or any company. |
Mustha Valeak
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:10:00 -
[53]
As CCP have added the security measures that allow a corp to protect say a BPO by having a directors vote to put it under "Lockdown" surely having similar measures preventing a single player from disbanding or changing certain major aspects of an Aliance or Corp is of obvious importance, vital and dare it a "No Brainer"
|
xxxak
Caldari O.W.N. Corp OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:59:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Rotnac
Originally by: Ehn Roh They'll want to watch out about that, because with the number of pilots on BoB, the odds of them having at least a couple of lawyers in the ranks is pretty high... and unauthorized access to private websites is an actual (real, no ****) crime in most jurisdictions around here ... and no, having someone with the pw hand it to you doesn't cover your ass.
Somehow I seriously doubt a judge will hear a case about a game forum getting copied via an archiver. I mean, there have been some ridiculous cases before, but this would take the cake. Not to mention that unauthorized access can be a tricky thing to define. He was a director - you could probably argue that he had authority to give others access to the forums!
Directors in real life have a FIDUCIARY DUTY to their corporation and shareholders.
VERY interesting to see how it would play out actually. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:11:00 -
[55]
Edited by: GateScout on 05/02/2009 18:11:35
Originally by: xxxak Directors in real life have a FIDUCIARY DUTY to their corporation and shareholders.
Which is based on trust and confidence. There is nothing (in EVE or real life) that prevents this arrangement from ending.
You want real life? Look at the current US financial institutions. Fiduciary duty....that's a good one. |
Irida Mershkov
Gallente Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:16:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Irida Mershkov on 05/02/2009 18:16:36
Originally by: Sheriff Jones This whole "EVE iz hardcorez" has gone WAY too far.
I generally find people think they're the ones who are hardcore because they play EVE. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |