| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Minny Sky
   |
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:47:00 -
[1]
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP |
Concorduck
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:51:00 -
[2]
You had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP forum policy won't be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one troll/thread
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP |
Insane Industrialist
Outlandish Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:52:00 -
[3]
yes i'm sure it was some "kid" who did it all. **** off if you don't like what happened cos that is what makes this game unique from anything else. |
Grek Forto
THE IRIS
United Freemen Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:53:00 -
[4]
Shamwow had it coming, no doubt. but..
White house cleaning policies will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one crappy product
It's just too much for one president to be able to do.
GL with damage control Vince |
nether void
Caldari
Shrapnel Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:53:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Insane Industrialist
yes i'm sure it was some "kid" who did it all. **** off if you don't like what happened cos that is what makes this game unique from anything else.
Says the person who was not affected by the disband. I'm sure if the knife was in your back you would say something different, or else maybe you'd have already rageemoquit? |
Concorduck
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:54:00 -
[6]
Originally by: nether void
Originally by: Insane Industrialist
yes i'm sure it was some "kid" who did it all. **** off if you don't like what happened cos that is what makes this game unique from anything else.
Says the person who was not affected by the disband. I'm sure if the knife was in your back you would say something different, or else maybe you'd have already rageemoquit?
or maybe you'd post on the forums
oh... |
Mazca Lopez
The Patriot Society
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:54:00 -
[7]
Maybe this will make people realize that EVE was never meant to be Giants online
play big, loose big... thats how it goes.
If this was a legit bust (and I hope it was) fair play, and GF and all that... |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:57:00 -
[8]
Somehow this is a bad thing?
Hardly. What awesome dynamics and a fantastic, rapidly changing world!
The fact that 1 person (with the appropriate authority) can disband an alliance only highlights the need for compartmentalization not game changes.
There is nothing wrong with the game dynamics. The only thing wrong is your limited vision and expectations for inherent protections.
Enjoy the change. BoB isn't dead. Far from it. If BoB is a strong as many seem to believe, they'll come out of this just fine. Although, I'm not betting on it.
|
Trevor Obrin
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 16:59:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mazca Lopez
play big, loose big... thats how it goes.
This. |
Insane Industrialist
Outlandish Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:00:00 -
[10]
Originally by: nether void
Originally by: Insane Industrialist
yes i'm sure it was some "kid" who did it all. **** off if you don't like what happened cos that is what makes this game unique from anything else.
Says the person who was not affected by the disband. I'm sure if the knife was in your back you would say something different, or else maybe you'd have already rageemoquit?
or i'd accuse the "backstabber" of illegal hacking activities, or exploits like BoB are doing. hell yer i'd be ****ed off, but who in their right mind doesn't enjoy the drama of it all? |
Krystal Demishy
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:02:00 -
[11]
Er... sorry but... what are you talkin'about? 
What happened to BoB?
Try to explain please, instead of just making anger-posts.
Thx. |
Avalira
Caldari
Pax Minor Asylum
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:04:00 -
[12]
Funny how to unlock a BPO you need votes but to disband an alliance you don't. Goons played the game mechanics fair and square just like BOB have in the past with clever use of game mechanics. Now that a huge problem is out in the open I'm sure CCP will take notice and make sure these "loop holes" are fixed. From a 3rd person perspective it is sad to see all this work gone in an instant, but that is the very nature of EVE-Online. |
Stephanie Jones
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:07:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Avalira
Funny how to unlock a BPO you need votes but to disband an alliance you don't.
This. |
nether void
Caldari
Shrapnel Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:10:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Avalira
From a 3rd person perspective it is sad to see all this work gone in an instant, but that is the very nature of EVE-Online.
Yeah. And really it's about orders of magnitude. I mean if a spy gives up a POS password or something, the POS and maybe a cap fleet might be lost. Sucks, but it's one POS right? Quite different when you get rid of the whole shooting match in one go like that. |
Aloriana Jacques
Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:12:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Mazca Lopez
play big, loose big... thats how it goes.
QFT
If you want to protect yourself, create a coalition of smaller alliances. |
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:15:00 -
[16]
Who knows, perhaps some Goon killed Haargoth in RL, sat down at his PC where EVE was running and did all that. Then he left a message saying "that's metagaming too - BoB" to lead investigators, who would later find the body, in the wrong direction.
Or maybe not.
|
Gamer4liff
Caldari
Metalworks
THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:16:00 -
[17]
yes, more threads on this topic, yep, can't get enough. |
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:16:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Stephanie Jones
Originally by: Avalira
Funny how to unlock a BPO you need votes but to disband an alliance you don't.
This.
Oh, but you can form a new alliance instantly.
Oh, but we added all this sovereignty crap in the mean time and totally forgot about how easy it is to disband an alliance.
Fail.
|
Feral Lady
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:18:00 -
[19]
In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic
|
Orivar
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:21:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Orivar on 05/02/2009 17:22:13
Originally by: Avalira
Funny how to unlock a BPO you need votes but to disband an alliance you don't. Goons played the game mechanics fair and square just like BOB have in the past with clever use of game mechanics. Now that a huge problem is out in the open I'm sure CCP will take notice and make sure these "loop holes" are fixed. From a 3rd person perspective it is sad to see all this work gone in an instant, but that is the very nature of EVE-Online.
This comment should be focused on as it is indeed entirely true & logical. Shame that's the way how BoB went (even though I don't like either party) however the overall life fact remains. It takes something big for a even bigger problem to be noticed.
On another note, can a CEO destroy an entire company? |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:30:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Feral Lady
In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic
Wrong.
Copy and paste my reply from your other post. |
Zaknussem
Caldari
Intrum Industria
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:31:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Feral Lady
In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic.
Sadly, this x2. Though actually we're entering into the realm of game mechanics here more than interface, though both fields need to be looked at. I'm hoping the whole EvE playerbase gains from this event by getting improved game mechanics. Improved interface wouldn't hurt either.
As for me, I find the OP's post hilarious. One guy loses a ship to a scam/suicide gank/gate camp/in-game thief/(ab)use of game mechanics, then comes and whines on the forums about the game being unfair, leading to everybody laughing him off the internet. <Insert EvE meme of your choice here>.
Then a whole alliance suddenly goes *POOF* due to one of the above reasons, someone comes and whines about it on the forums, and expects to be taken seriously because it's such a huge loss? |
Pesky LaRue
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:34:00 -
[23]
Originally by: GateScout
There is nothing wrong with the game dynamics. The only thing wrong is your limited vision and expectations for inherent protections.
as a non-affiliated bystander, I disagree that the game mechanics don't bear looking at - one person can't do many things in this game, in a corp, being able to disband an alliance might need to be reviewed.
that said, I think Goons have pulled a masterful stroke and it's nothing BoB wouldn't have done to them in return. |
Taylor timenenzi
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:35:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Trevor Obrin
Originally by: Mazca Lopez
play big, loose big... thats how it goes.
This.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/loose
Learn to spell FFS.
I got a laugh at what happened but it is pretty stupid that a entire alliance can be broken like that by 1 person.
Maybe there will be more restrictions and a ability to put a tighter hold on people, but the thing that will never change is when you get to the top there will always be one person with all the power. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:47:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Pesky LaRue
I disagree that the game mechanics don't bear looking at - one person can't do many things in this game, in a corp, being able to disband an alliance might need to be reviewed.
Perhaps. It is a valid argument, and I suspect, CCP is already looking into this now.
On the other hand, if an alliance director, given the authority to disband an alliance, can do so...it does make the game quite interesting. Maybe we should keep this design and ability? It sure makes you think about who you give these roles to. |
rValdez5987
Amarr
32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:57:00 -
[26]
BoB should just be allowed to go back to being CCCP |
Yashiri
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 17:58:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Taylor timenenzi
I got a laugh at what happened but it is pretty stupid that a entire alliance can be broken like that by 1 person.
stupid? the ability for one person to make such a difference in a game teeming with players? I think that's pretty ****ing brilliant, not stupid. |
Tor Anasa
Caldari
K.T.P
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:03:00 -
[28]
I agree with the op here. One person should not be able to destroy the game for thousands of other players like has been done now. Put yourself in BoB members position. If someone did this to your corporation or alliance do you not think it was a little screwed up to put it nicely.
If this had happened to Goonswarm i believe there would be just as much rejoicing as there has been for the disbanding for bob. If CCP fixed this with a rollback Goonswarm would obviously emo rage as usual.
Now bob as gone maybe people will see goonswarm for what they really are which would be a good thing for eve because they seemed to have taken the game to a whole new low in every possible way.
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar
Out of Order
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:07:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Tor Anasa
I agree with the op here. One person should not be able to destroy the game for thousands of other players like has been done now. Put yourself in BoB members position. If someone did this to your corporation or alliance do you not think it was a little screwed up to put it nicely.
If this had happened to Goonswarm i believe there would be just as much rejoicing as there has been for the disbanding for bob. If CCP fixed this with a rollback Goonswarm would obviously emo rage as usual.
Now bob as gone maybe people will see goonswarm for what they really are which would be a good thing for eve because they seemed to have taken the game to a whole new low in every possible way.
A. One player made this game even better to some. Don't assume everyone is upset over this.
B. Goons did nothing wrong.
C. BOB was defeated by it's own ignorance. (Who gives one person that much control???)
Stop, hammer time. |
mcnuggetlol
Amarr
Outlandish Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:07:00 -
[30]
If the same thing had happened to goonswarm instead would any of the people whining now be complaining?
|
Greup
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:11:00 -
[31]
I havent been affected by this in any sense so im neutral in this matter.
I just think this is a BAD design flaw. 1 person shouldnt be able to do this. If I have understood it anywhere near correctly it was the work of one Quisling/Traitor. So noone really wins. Not CCP for their designflaw. Not glory to the Goons for they were just handed a gift. Obviously not BoB, although i guess that most of the alliance will reform once they realize that little changed and they can rebuild fast under another name.
But whatever the circumstances, the effects are still the most epic thing in the history of online gaming. it will be fun to see what happens in the near future. |
HankMurphy
Minmatar
Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:16:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
C. BOB was defeated by it's own ignorance. (Who gives one person that much control???)
yeah, i mean WHO HAS DIRECTORS ANYWAYS?
seriously i dont know what is funnier. that it happened and the bob alliance is gone as we knew it or that goonswarm is gloating like they actually accomplished something other than cheering on a disgruntled director
comparing this to the GHSC scam is a joke. that took actually planning, this was just luck and saying 'hey, by the way, if your ****ed why not click that button'
lame design. lame thing to do. but hey, it's eve... ragequit or suck it up. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:18:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Greup
I just think this is a BAD design flaw. 1 person shouldnt be able to do this.
Why? Why shouldn't I be able to dissolve my alliance? Why shouldn't the person I give the authority to, not be able to do this?
It may be distasteful. It may be 'dishonorable.' But I haven't heard a good reason as to why this shouldn't be part of the game.
|
Concorduck
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:19:00 -
[34]
Originally by: GateScout
Originally by: Greup
I just think this is a BAD design flaw. 1 person shouldnt be able to do this.
Why? Why shouldn't I be able to dissolve my alliance? Why shouldn't the person I give the authority to, not be able to do this?
It may be distasteful. It may be 'dishonorable.' But I haven't heard a good reason as to why this shouldn't be part of the game.
It may be AWESOME |
Irida Mershkov
Gallente
Noir.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:20:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Trevor Obrin
Originally by: Mazca Lopez
play big, loose big... thats how it goes.
This.
loose big? he means lose big? right? loose big is... oh god. |
Golan Cinquanteneuf
Gallente
Carthage.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:25:00 -
[36]
Originally by: mcnuggetlol
If the same thing had happened to goonswarm instead would any of the people whining now be complaining?
I'm thinking that if every director in Goonswarm hasn't been kicked yet, they soon will be. |
Liz Laser
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:26:00 -
[37]
Originally by: GateScout
Originally by: Greup
I just think this is a BAD design flaw. 1 person shouldnt be able to do this.
Why? Why shouldn't I be able to dissolve my alliance? Why shouldn't the person I give the authority to, not be able to do this?
It may be distasteful. It may be 'dishonorable.' But I haven't heard a good reason as to why this shouldn't be part of the game.
Exactly. Reports are that he kicked each corp out of the alliance. It seems like a director SHOULD be able to kick a corp out of the alliance. There would be much bellyaching if they COULDN'T, as evidenced elsewhere by the complaints about not being able to kick a single undocked member out of a corp. |
Grarr Dexx
Amarr
Divinity's Edge
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:33:00 -
[38]
This can happen to any alliance, it's a feature ;)
|
Concorduck
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:34:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Golan Cinquanteneuf
Originally by: mcnuggetlol
If the same thing had happened to goonswarm instead would any of the people whining now be complaining?
I'm thinking that if every director in Goonswarm hasn't been kicked yet, they soon will be.
ANARCHY
-----------------------------------------
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Contact the CSM about it, voting themselves into disbandment wouldn't be pushing the boundaries of absurdity for them.
|
mcnuggetlol
Amarr
Outlandish Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:34:00 -
[40]
Just get T20 to bail you out no probs
|
bff Jill
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 18:34:00 -
[41]
Remove sovereignty mechanic, it's is a stupid.
|
Connen
Gallente
4 wing
Dara Cothrom
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:00:00 -
[42]
What? BOB Died? What happened?
|
Sieessenschwanz
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:07:00 -
[43]
Originally by: nether void
you'd have already rageemoquit?
aye.
Your uh....stuffs...you know the drill...
|
Nephilius
Caldari
Grey Legionaires
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:13:00 -
[44]
I imagine that GS is sitting back and chuckling to themselves over the emorage right now. I don't know, was there such an outcry over the heist GHSC pulled off? Just goes to show that you better know what you are doing when you give director status.
I ate a Carebear once...couldn't quit farting rainbows for a month. |
Ana Vyr
DB - LJ Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:18:00 -
[45]
A massive alliance gets taken down by the guile of another alliance (or a disgruntled director). I know I can speak for a lot of carebears when I say this:
Adapt and overcome. Don't fly what you can't afford to lose. Eve is a harsh mistress.
Sucks doesn't it?
|
Pikkuhukka
Caldari
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:23:00 -
[46]
just waiting for ccp to answer to this bob thing, all i want to know is:
what will ccp DO, what are their ACTIONS
WILL this kind of action taken by player be concidered as an exploit in the future? AND
WILL there be a rollback concerning sovs? what is ccps final ACTION, just want to know.
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:24:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Ana Vyr
A massive alliance gets taken down by the guile of another alliance (or a disgruntled director). I know I can speak for a lot of carebears when I say this:
Adapt and overcome. Don't fly what you can't afford to lose. Eve is a harsh mistress.
Sucks doesn't it?
/thread. Suck it up whiners.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
BrundleMeth
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:32:00 -
[48]
I have only been playing this game for a month now. From what I read I thought massive losses like this was one of the points of this game. Go big or go home and all that crap...  |
Matrix Skye
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:35:00 -
[49]
Hehe, look at it from the bright side. Now that this "trick" is out in the open it may actually stop power blocs from growing out of control like tumors. Dont want this happening in your alliance? Then keep it small and maneagable. |
mcnuggetlol
Amarr
Outlandish Operations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:39:00 -
[50]
Edited by: mcnuggetlol on 05/02/2009 19:38:59
if it had happened to goonswarm instead how many of you would still be whining |
TheG2
Gallente
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:39:00 -
[51]
If this gets rolled back and it turns out that a director in BoB legitimately disbanded the alliance (no hacks, password stealing, exploits). Then I will gladly quit EVE. |
ddr800
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:41:00 -
[52]
ThatÆs amazing, Not only did they disband bob they then took the name and corp ticker so they couldnÆt remake it, So the two largest alliances in the game just destroyed each other in one move, Goons wont last 6 months with out a bob to fight and anyone who says differnt dosent know **** about what kept the goons together.
Hurray a universe with out bob or the goons sounds like a deal. I am glad to see them both GONE |
Christopher Auir
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:49:00 -
[53]
Personaly I think its great. Not because i have any distain for BoB but just because its realistic. You give one person that much power, that person can do whatever he wants!
Just shows that if you **** ppl off or bribe them, you can get interesting results... just like in RL |
Kalos Beila
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:58:00 -
[54]
Originally by: ddr800
ThatÆs amazing, Not only did they disband bob they then took the name and corp ticker so they couldnÆt remake it, So the two largest alliances in the game just destroyed each other in one move, Goons wont last 6 months with out a bob to fight and anyone who says differnt dosent know **** about what kept the goons together.
Hurray a universe with out bob or the goons sounds like a deal. I am glad to see them both GONE
This. |
Laudicia
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 19:59:00 -
[55]
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
BlackWater.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:00:00 -
[56]
Oh yes. It's completely off-kilter that someone should or could have enough power to nuke an entire empire of corporation. I mean it's not like that would ever happen in real life.
———
“If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡…
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”
— Karath Piki |
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:00:00 -
[57]
I feel so stupid.
Here I am, screwing around with missionrunners getting them to *****, when all along the REAL carebear tears were off in 0.0
Originally by: Catharacta
My CNR runs on salvager tears.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:08:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Originally by: Tor Anasa
I agree with the op here. One person should not be able to destroy the game for thousands of other players like has been done now. Put yourself in BoB members position. If someone did this to your corporation or alliance do you not think it was a little screwed up to put it nicely.
If this had happened to Goonswarm i believe there would be just as much rejoicing as there has been for the disbanding for bob. If CCP fixed this with a rollback Goonswarm would obviously emo rage as usual.
Now bob as gone maybe people will see goonswarm for what they really are which would be a good thing for eve because they seemed to have taken the game to a whole new low in every possible way.
A. One player made this game even better to some. Don't assume everyone is upset over this.
B. Goons did nothing wrong.
C. BOB was defeated by it's own ignorance. (Who gives one person that much control???)
A. and worse for a much larger number.
B. hacking the client for example, alliance wide (the blue + and red - were a hack originally, ass CCP had no way to stop that they implemented it, but they still hacked the client, something that would cause a permaban if done by 1 player). It was not the only thing they did, but a perfect example;
C. all the alliances.
|
Kuranta
Minmatar
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:12:00 -
[59]
Game machanics revised? Why? Smaller corps have to deal with this every day. NOw it's BoB - so what?
RL money lost? Why? People paid to play, built something up. Now someone stept on the sandcastle - happens all day in eve.
Choose better directors or don't make them unhappy.
|
Ashley Sky
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:17:00 -
[60]
Some of us have known about these problems with alliance mechanics for a long time, and abused them quite readily. This is just a high profile example of something that we already knew.
I don't know if anyone here is experienced with making alliances, I'm sure there are not a lot that have really looked into the mechanics like my associates and I have, because the skills needed to create an alliance are asinine.
We've made bug reports, petitions, and even created alliances to point out some of the vulnerabilities. Does anyone remember the iMune alliance? If not, I'm not surprised as CCP has wiped out every trace of the descriptions of the original bug that made it possible, but has not yet fixed the bug.
There are still more "alliance features" that I know of that are yet to be brought to light. This isn't the last time alliance mechanics will grief the EVE community. |
KarGard
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:22:00 -
[61]
Essentially it boils down to this.
Eve player will see this and say: "wow that's awesome that one well placed person can bring down an entire army!"
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!" |
Jen Fravo
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:28:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Jen Fravo on 05/02/2009 20:27:57
Originally by: GateScout
Originally by: Greup
I just think this is a BAD design flaw. 1 person shouldnt be able to do this.
Why? Why shouldn't I be able to dissolve my alliance? Why shouldn't the person I give the authority to, not be able to do this?
It may be distasteful. It may be 'dishonorable.' But I haven't heard a good reason as to why this shouldn't be part of the game.
You said it yourself "I" "I" "I".
An Alliance is made up of a group of corps, not a single person. |
Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari
Guiding Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:28:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
The only way to defeat an entrenched enemy like BoB, is through subterfuge. They were too strong, and too wealthy to effectively suppress in space, and have been that way for years. If the sledgehammer doesn't work, you try a scalpel.
Just stop being stupid, right now, please. What the Goons pulled was a masterstroke, and I'm no Goon fanboy, so that coming from me should mean something to you. You've got a situation with two massive arch-enemies, both thoroughly dedicated to wiping out the other, and suddenly the underdog deals a lethal, irrecoverable blow to a massively secured target.
No better story has been written in Eve to date. It pretty much tops anything I've ever done. I am glad to fade into the background now, knowing that my deeds have been eclipsed by grief of such glorious magnitude. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:28:00 -
[64]
Originally by: KarGard
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!"
As usual, they would get it wrong.
The only possible player capable of doing this to an alliance did it. It's not like some random dude decided to take down an alliance.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but only the CEO (or perhaps Director?) of an Alliance's Executor Corp could have pulled this off. Not any Director in the Alliance. Not any CEO...this this one specific person...or perhaps Persons (i.e. Executor Corp Directors)?
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:28:00 -
[65]
Quote:
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!"
Good thing, too. We have enough dolts who throw tantrums when their space pixels go down the drain because they see the game as "work" |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:30:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Jen Fravo
An Alliance is made up of a group of corps, not a single person.
An Alliance is made by a single person. It may be composed of many more...but one person forms it. Try again.
You still haven't answered the question. Why shouldn't one person have this power? ...just because more than one person may be affected by a decision? That's absurd. |
Grendelsbane
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:41:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Grendelsbane on 05/02/2009 20:42:05
Originally by: Feral Lady
In the larger sense, CCP are careless game designers for constructing an interface that lets this happen. No vote, no cooling off period, nothing. Pathetic
This.
This talk about one person with the needed authority disbanding the alliance may be off target - there is a difference between someone having a button that says "disband" (obviously fine), and a number of other possible ways to do it...
There are conflicting accounts floating around as to what mechanism, exactly, this person used. If it was anything other than actually having a no-**** "disband" button, then a lot of questions need to be asked.
The question isn't "should one person have this power", but, "DID this one person have this power". If not - then why the hell can they disband it? |
Bryg Philomena
Invicta.
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:43:00 -
[68]
Originally by: GateScout
Originally by: Jen Fravo
An Alliance is made up of a group of corps, not a single person.
An Alliance is made by a single person. It may be composed of many more...but one person forms it. Try again.
You still haven't answered the question. Why shouldn't one person have this power? ...just because more than one person may be affected by a decision? That's absurd.
Building an alliance is NOT one person. Or very rarely.
I have looked into forming alliance when I was still a CEO of my own corporation. I got in contact with several othere CEO's, we talked about goals, needs, wants, etc. We divied up how we would pay the bills, who would be an executer corp.
Alliance are ALWAYS (or damn near almost always) a group effort. Stop being ignorant. One person might hit the button, but it takes a collaberate effort to make it happen. |
Gaston Navarre
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:48:00 -
[69]
Originally by: GateScout
Somehow this is a bad thing?
Hardly. What awesome dynamics and a fantastic, rapidly changing world!
The fact that 1 person (with the appropriate authority) can disband an alliance only highlights the need for compartmentalization not game changes.
There is nothing wrong with the game dynamics. The only thing wrong is your limited vision and expectations for inherent protections.
Enjoy the change. BoB isn't dead. Far from it. If BoB is a strong as many seem to believe, they'll come out of this just fine. Although, I'm not betting on it.
Originally by: Devian 666
The way you prevent this is either don't give out director roles. Or don't treat your members so badly that they'll take everything and disband your alliance.
The measures to prevent this already exist in the game. Seriously, who would trust anyone in eve?
Originally by: Devian 666
The way you prevent this is either don't give out director roles. Or don't treat your members so badly that they'll take everything and disband your alliance.
The measures to prevent this already exist in the game. Seriously, who would trust anyone in eve?
Hi, I'm just a new player and not really familiar with how corps/alliances work in these cases, could you explain what are the measures currently in place to stop espionage/heists on this scale? I think it's good to have spying and heists as a game mechanic, but Eve does give the impression currently that this tactic might be overpowered.
What is to stop that one person turning the tables out of boredom/changing sides/being drunk/bad hair day, or even their disgruntled wife/gf (or a hacker) logging in and wiping the whole account and taking the alliance with it? I don't have any alliance/corp experience but it would seem in the current system that alliances & corps are uniquely vulnerable to the human factor. Arguably there is too much power vested in each director and not enough checks & balances like you get in real world organisations, corporations and governments - what do you think?
Also, what about the in-game realism of hundreds of thousands of ships with hundred man crews, planets and systems with tens of millions of inhabitants, stations with loyal trained military personnel all suddenly changing sides or abandoning their posts just because one director says so? I find that this ruins in-game believability.
You can say "it's the game mechanics, deal with it", but if a rookie ship piloted by a 1-day old character could get a lucky hit that killed a Titan, I and 99.9% of people would say hold on, that's ridiculous and unbelievable and would correctly dismiss Eve as a joke of a game for having such absurd game mechanics. So just because something is a game mechanic does not mean it is credible/believable in the context of the in-game universe. Equally, I think spying/espionage/treachery needs to have *some* limits, otherwise it becomes equally absurd. Perhaps the rule of thumb should be, if Eve was the real world, exactly how much could a top-level spy really pull off? IMO it would be a lot of damage for sure - but being able to hand over an entire fleet, an entire solar system (let alone region), and an entire treasury in a matter of minutes is just unbelievable, ridiculous, and absurd to any rational person. And assuming an alliance of that size would auto-disband because one person says so is as likely as assuming the USA would disband because a member of Congress wrote a memo saying so.
Put simply - the current game mechanics involving espionage and treachery appear absurdly overpowered, lacking in any credibility or appropriate scale, and destroy any sense of believability in the Eve universe. For RP credibility, and whole game credibility, they are very harmful. They also destroy the competitive game balance and encourage metagaming to a degree that endangers in-game neutrality between players. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:53:00 -
[70]
Edited by: GateScout on 05/02/2009 20:53:20
Originally by: Bryg Philomena
Alliance are ALWAYS (or damn near almost always) a group effort. Stop being ignorant. One person might hit the button, but it takes a collaberate effort to make it happen.
Of course. I'm not disputing that. The point still remains: Why NOT allow one person or a group of people to have this power? Just because more than one person will be affected isn't a good enough reason...
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:54:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 05/02/2009 20:54:57
Quote:
Hi, I'm just a new player and not really familiar with how corps/alliances work in these cases, could you explain what are the measures currently in place to stop espionage/heists on this scale? I think it's good to have spying and heists as a game mechanic, but Eve does give the impression currently that this tactic might be overpowered.
What is to stop that one person turning the tables out of boredom/changing sides/being drunk/bad hair day, or even their disgruntled wife/gf (or a hacker) logging in and wiping the whole account and taking the alliance with it? I don't have any alliance/corp experience but it would seem in the current system that alliances & corps are uniquely vulnerable to the human factor. Arguably there is too much power vested in each director and not enough checks & balances like you get in real world organisations, corporations and governments - what do you think?
Also, what about the in-game realism of hundreds of thousands of ships with hundred man crews, planets and systems with tens of millions of inhabitants, stations with loyal trained military personnel all suddenly changing sides or abandoning their posts just because one director says so? I find that this ruins in-game believability.
You can say "it's the game mechanics, deal with it", but if a rookie ship piloted by a 1-day old character could get a lucky hit that killed a Titan, I and 99.9% of people would say hold on, that's ridiculous and unbelievable and would correctly dismiss Eve as a joke of a game for having such absurd game mechanics. So just because something is a game mechanic does not mean it is credible/believable in the context of the in-game universe. Equally, I think spying/espionage/treachery needs to have *some* limits, otherwise it becomes equally absurd. Perhaps the rule of thumb should be, if Eve was the real world, exactly how much could a top-level spy really pull off? IMO it would be a lot of damage for sure - but being able to hand over an entire fleet, an entire solar system (let alone region), and an entire treasury in a matter of minutes is just unbelievable, ridiculous, and absurd to any rational person. And assuming an alliance of that size would auto-disband because one person says so is as likely as assuming the USA would disband because a member of Congress wrote a memo saying so.
Put simply - the current game mechanics involving espionage and treachery appear absurdly overpowered, lacking in any credibility or appropriate scale, and destroy any sense of believability in the Eve universe. For RP credibility, and whole game credibility, they are very harmful. They also destroy the competitive game balance and encourage metagaming to a degree that endangers in-game neutrality between players.
The mechanics to stop it are "Don't give someone who you do not trust to a huge degree that amount of power".
Also, keep in mind that BOB can VERY easily reform. The real effect isn't the direct death of BOB. BOB isn't dead because they lost sov, they are dead because the other alliances are going to take advantage of their defenselessness and crush them.
If we must make real life analogies, then it's not like a nation just breaking up and the government dissolving. It's more like a leader using his influence to fuel internal strife, which weakens said nation and makes it easy for the nation's enemies to deal with it.
Someone with a lot of political pwoer
Originally by: Catharacta
My CNR runs on salvager tears.
|
Corwain
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:56:00 -
[72]
Originally by: KarGard
Essentially it boils down to this.
Eve player will see this and say: "wow that's awesome that one well placed person can bring down an entire army!"
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!"
Me 3 years ago commenting on Istvaan's GHSC scam...
Non eve player: "wow that's awesome that one smart well placed person can bring down an entire army! I'm subscribing to that right now!"
--
Distortion| Distortion 2 Preview |
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:57:00 -
[73]
In all fairness, it wasn't so much as one person being smart as the organization as a whole giving such power to a disgruntled, disloyal person.
Originally by: Catharacta
My CNR runs on salvager tears.
|
Terastra
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 20:58:00 -
[74]
Quote:
<@cflux> I just need an answer was it paid or not, if it was paid, for sure, someone gurantees his mother that it was ****ing paid, I call the batman hothline.
<Argentina> change !orders. it reads like it was done on purpose
<Argentina> no sense adding to the confusion
<@Mako> who is arkannen
<@cflux> and thats heavy duty batman hotmail. but i aint ****ing ringing if it was our screwup
<@LadyScarlet> a gm ?
not everyone has a batline like bob had/has. caught yet again with insider acceess to gms. i don't feel sorry for them at all.
|
Johli
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:02:00 -
[75]
75th in a gbc alt thread
|
Lochmar Fiendhiem
Caldari
Quicksilver Industries and Painful Effects Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:03:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Tor Anasa
I agree with the op here. One person should not be able to destroy the game for thousands of other players like has been done now. Put yourself in BoB members position. If someone did this to your corporation or alliance do you not think it was a little screwed up to put it nicely.
If this had happened to Goonswarm i believe there would be just as much rejoicing as there has been for the disbanding for bob. If CCP fixed this with a rollback Goonswarm would obviously emo rage as usual.
Now bob as gone maybe people will see goonswarm for what they really are which would be a good thing for eve because they seemed to have taken the game to a whole new low in every possible way.
you are aware that bob uses/used ever possible underhanded and dirty method to achieve victory right?
you aren't completely deft right?
right?
Originally by: Halkin
bob is dead, goons are great, cheese is cheesy, there we go no need for any more threads
|
Lochmar Fiendhiem
Caldari
Quicksilver Industries and Painful Effects Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:05:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
The only way to defeat an entrenched enemy like BoB, is through subterfuge. They were too strong, and too wealthy to effectively suppress in space, and have been that way for years. If the sledgehammer doesn't work, you try a scalpel.
Just stop being stupid, right now, please. What the Goons pulled was a masterstroke, and I'm no Goon fanboy, so that coming from me should mean something to you. You've got a situation with two massive arch-enemies, both thoroughly dedicated to wiping out the other, and suddenly the underdog deals a lethal, irrecoverable blow to a massively secured target.
No better story has been written in Eve to date. It pretty much tops anything I've ever done. I am glad to fade into the background now, knowing that my deeds have been eclipsed by grief of such glorious magnitude.
/signed.
Istvaan you should give your opinions to ISD for a news article, seeing as your heist got so many subs from back in the day. Properly done, this is a massive PR boost for eve. And right before the expansion and boxes are due to come out.
Originally by: Halkin
bob is dead, goons are great, cheese is cheesy, there we go no need for any more threads
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:06:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Avalira
Funny how to unlock a BPO you need votes but to disband an alliance you don't.
Quite funny indeed.
|
Gaston Navarre
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:36:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
The only way to defeat an entrenched enemy like BoB, is through subterfuge. They were too strong, and too wealthy to effectively suppress in space, and have been that way for years. If the sledgehammer doesn't work, you try a scalpel.
Just stop being stupid, right now, please. What the Goons pulled was a masterstroke, and I'm no Goon fanboy, so that coming from me should mean something to you. You've got a situation with two massive arch-enemies, both thoroughly dedicated to wiping out the other, and suddenly the underdog deals a lethal, irrecoverable blow to a massively secured target.
No better story has been written in Eve to date. It pretty much tops anything I've ever done. I am glad to fade into the background now, knowing that my deeds have been eclipsed by grief of such glorious magnitude.
I don't think the question of the subterfuge is the problem. If it was a planned espionage (rather than a hacked off director turning sides on his own initiative) then I agree 100% that it was great use of game mechanics to strike a crushing blow at a mortal enemy.
But you seem to be judging it purely by its success in using game mechanics. That IMO is not what the OP and others are bothered by. What bothers them and myself is *whether the game mechanics are broken* in this area. For example if there was a secret multi-stroke keyboard command that no one knew, and could wipe out an entire alliance, would it be a good idea to have this in game? No of course not. Why? Because it is totally unrealistic in terms of in-game RPG believability, and it is totally unbalanced, overpowered, and arbitrary. For the same reasons, a Titan can't be one-shotted by a lucky shot from a rookie ship. So, shouldn't similar questions be asked of the espionage game mechanics?
I think the key questions are whether the consequences are realistic in an in-game RPG sense, and whether they are too heavy-handed in a game balance sense. I.e. in a futuristic space-going society like Eve, would espionage by one person be capable of such mayhem? Comparing to our real world, if China had a top-level spy in the USA, how much damage could be done? Lots for sure, but I doubt that the entire USA would dissolve, or half their fleet and airforce defect to the other side in minutes. Basically the current Eve espionage mechanics seem lacking in credibility.
Is espionage disproportionate in its effect? In my opinion it seems so. There is just too much authority and power vested in one person, and the damage one person can do is a bit too high. Not only is this unrealistic, it IMO may damage game balance. All it takes is one person to change their mind, or just change sides for ****s & giggles, whereas a real spy - even if it is the President of the USA himself - just doesn't have such unchecked power. If I was rich and bribed the CEO of Goonswarm (and other key players) enough money in real life, could I get the alliance to disband for good? Easily. Would that be good for Eve? Should it be allowed? IMO no.
In my opinion the concept of espionage is great, but what has happened is that a game mechanic initially designed to give convenience (i.e. sweeping powers of one director) has accidentally turned into (via player creativity) a meta-gaming mechanic with disproportionately sweeping and non-credible effects. It lowers the believability and balance of the Eve universe. Good espionage should hurt significantly, but a single spy would not and should not have that power. I could accept an alliance destruction if for example their enemies persuaded 1/3 of the corps to defect and turn sides in the middle of a critical battle, or if they had dozens of spies who simultaneously shut down POS defences and then invaded with multiple fleets at once, with BoB pilots turning against each other. That would mirror real world battlefield and political treachery and is believable. What happened here, with 1 guy causing mayhem, is not.
|
Corwain
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 21:44:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
In all fairness, it wasn't so much as one person being smart as the organization as a whole giving such power to a disgruntled, disloyal person.
I was talking about the GHSC plan with my comment there.
My point is the assumption that anyone that doesn't play EVE being turned away from the game because of stuff like this is completely incorrect, as I joined solely because of reading about the GHSC operation back in the day.
--
Distortion| Distortion 2 Preview |
Gaston Navarre
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:02:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
The mechanics to stop it are "Don't give someone who you do not trust to a huge degree that amount of power".
Also, keep in mind that BOB can VERY easily reform. The real effect isn't the direct death of BOB. BOB isn't dead because they lost sov, they are dead because the other alliances are going to take advantage of their defenselessness and crush them.
If we must make real life analogies, then it's not like a nation just breaking up and the government dissolving. It's more like a leader using his influence to fuel internal strife, which weakens said nation and makes it easy for the nation's enemies to deal with it.
Someone with a lot of political pwoer
Ok, but the problem with that is that anyone can change their mind. The head of BoB or Goonswarm or any other CEO could get bored with Eve and decide to screw the alliance for the fun of it, then close his account. Someone could bribe him IRL to surrender the alliance. Is there any way for anyone, or any group, to avoid that possibility? If not then it looks like too much power vested in one person, and this would clearly be a potential flaw in corp/alliance mechanics.
IMO corps and alliances should have some protections by default. For example if the alliance made to disband, an Eve mail sent out to all directors asking for a vote to follow through with it, and a minimum cooling off period before doing it. That would be more sensible, and in keeping with in-game "realism". Nowhere in the real world, or even in sci-fi fictional universes, did any alliance of hundreds or thousands ever disband because one guy clicked a mouse. I think the idea of giving sweeping, irreversible authority of such magnitude over such large groups, without *any* failsafes, checks, or balances, is not only unrealistic in the extreme, but to some extent game-breaking. The game mechanics have failed to keep up with the creativity of the players, and that balance needs to be restored. All IMHO ofc. |
Kat Bandeis
Caldari
Virtual Rock Industries
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:07:00 -
[82]
Hardly, it's all using legal game mechanics. Might suck for BoB members, but there you are...
Props to the traitor and those members of Goon who crafted the plan. If you weren't part of that small circle, you deserve no props, so quit acting like yer stuff don't stink, goonies. |
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:11:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
Moral of the story if you don't want this happening to your corp/alliance: Don't **** of your players with a directorship.
inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan |
Shadowsword
Epsilon Lyr
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:19:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Minny Sky
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
You could argue that ANYTHING destroyed, from the mightiest alliance to the smallest ship, is lost man-hours or dollars. After all, isn't it the very purpose of destruction?
I wouldn't mind some more detailled right management, however.
------------------------------------------
|
Siriyana
Astrum Contract Services Group
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:26:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Corwain
Originally by: KarGard
Essentially it boils down to this.
Eve player will see this and say: "wow that's awesome that one well placed person can bring down an entire army!"
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!"
Me 3 years ago commenting on Istvaan's GHSC scam...
Non eve player: "wow that's awesome that one smart well placed person can bring down an entire army! I'm subscribing to that right now!"
QFT!
That's why I joined EVE. Any game that has open enough mechanics to allow for subterfuge and espionage to actually give you an advantage is something I want to play. And that's why it continues to be THE ONLY game I play.
-----
CEO, Astrum Contract Services Group
ACSG Open Recruitment- AU/NZ/AsiaPac/Late Nighters- Come kill with us. Or a |
Indus Mono
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:28:00 -
[86]
Gaston Navarre,
Your arguments are sound, logical, and well articulated.
Therefore, you will be ignored.
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:35:00 -
[87]
ahyes...
- bob does something exploit-y (remember titan/mom POS-bowling?): "ah.. well... let's see how it pans out" / "everbody can do it"
- something fail happens to bob, "zomg this needs to be changed... NAO!"
seriously... CCP can't do anything this time without loosing face and rightfully so
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari
Guiding Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:45:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Gaston Navarre
I don't think the question of the subterfuge is the problem. If it was a planned espionage (rather than a hacked off director turning sides on his own initiative) then I agree 100% that it was great use of game mechanics to strike a crushing blow at a mortal enemy.
But you seem to be judging it purely by its success in using game mechanics. That IMO is not what the OP and others are bothered by. What bothers them and myself is *whether the game mechanics are broken* in this area. For example if there was a secret multi-stroke keyboard command that no one knew, and could wipe out an entire alliance, would it be a good idea to have this in game? No of course not. Why? Because it is totally unrealistic in terms of in-game RPG believability, and it is totally unbalanced, overpowered, and arbitrary. For the same reasons, a Titan can't be one-shotted by a lucky shot from a rookie ship. So, shouldn't similar questions be asked of the espionage game mechanics?
I think the key questions are whether the consequences are realistic in an in-game RPG sense, and whether they are too heavy-handed in a game balance sense. I.e. in a futuristic space-going society like Eve, would espionage by one person be capable of such mayhem? Comparing to our real world, if China had a top-level spy in the USA, how much damage could be done? Lots for sure, but I doubt that the entire USA would dissolve, or half their fleet and airforce defect to the other side in minutes. Basically the current Eve espionage mechanics seem lacking in credibility.
Is espionage disproportionate in its effect? In my opinion it seems so. There is just too much authority and power vested in one person, and the damage one person can do is a bit too high. Not only is this unrealistic, it IMO may damage game balance. All it takes is one person to change their mind, or just change sides for ****s & giggles, whereas a real spy - even if it is the President of the USA himself - just doesn't have such unchecked power. If I was rich and bribed the CEO of Goonswarm (and other key players) enough money in real life, could I get the alliance to disband for good? Easily. Would that be good for Eve? Should it be allowed? IMO no.
In my opinion the concept of espionage is great, but what has happened is that a game mechanic initially designed to give convenience (i.e. sweeping powers of one director) has accidentally turned into (via player creativity) a meta-gaming mechanic with disproportionately sweeping and non-credible effects. It lowers the believability and balance of the Eve universe. Good espionage should hurt significantly, but a single spy would not and should not have that power. I could accept an alliance destruction if for example their enemies persuaded 1/3 of the corps to defect and turn sides in the middle of a critical battle, or if they had dozens of spies who simultaneously shut down POS defences and then invaded with multiple fleets at once, with BoB pilots turning against each other. That would mirror real world battlefield and political treachery and is believable. What happened here, with 1 guy causing mayhem, is not.
Hehe. I would like to introduce you to an exciting possibility which you haven't factored into your assumptions. You assume that what occurred, was an abuse of ill-conceived game mechanics.
What if the game mechanics aren't broken? What if those security gaps were left there precisely so that players with enough cunning could exploit them. Intentional cracks in the system, introduced with purpose; a method for the little guy to screw over the implacable monolith.
Blew your mind, didn't I.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:50:00 -
[89]
Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 05/02/2009 22:51:24
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
You fail. EVE is a game, and yes, when an entire alliance puts its trust in one looser, this happens :P. (I do not actually know thos "looser", so meh.). Just continue playing, it will even out, it always does.
GO to WoW if you want "game control" :P
|
Octavious Delance
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 22:51:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
u mad?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 23:03:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
The mechanics to stop it are "Don't give someone who you do not trust to a huge degree that amount of power".
Also, keep in mind that BOB can VERY easily reform. The real effect isn't the direct death of BOB. BOB isn't dead because they lost sov, they are dead because the other alliances are going to take advantage of their defenselessness and crush them.
If we must make real life analogies, then it's not like a nation just breaking up and the government dissolving. It's more like a leader using his influence to fuel internal strife, which weakens said nation and makes it easy for the nation's enemies to deal with it.
Someone with a lot of political pwoer
It is like the US president clicking a button and firing all the US nuclear arsenal against the moon.
Or Bill gates saying "I will disband Microsoft, the shareholders be damned, it is my corp."
No believable. |
Johli
Caldari
AWE Corporation
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 23:05:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Johli on 05/02/2009 23:05:04
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
The mechanics to stop it are "Don't give someone who you do not trust to a huge degree that amount of power".
Also, keep in mind that BOB can VERY easily reform. The real effect isn't the direct death of BOB. BOB isn't dead because they lost sov, they are dead because the other alliances are going to take advantage of their defenselessness and crush them.
If we must make real life analogies, then it's not like a nation just breaking up and the government dissolving. It's more like a leader using his influence to fuel internal strife, which weakens said nation and makes it easy for the nation's enemies to deal with it.
Someone with a lot of political pwoer
It is like the US president clicking a button and firing all the US nuclear arsenal against the moon.
Or Bill gates saying "I will disband Microsoft, the shareholders be damned, it is my corp."
No believable.
ripping off the Simpsons Movie? Really?
gb2gbc
edit: failed |
Cyb3r Thr3at
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 23:16:00 -
[93]
Goons r SCUM!!! |
Morsus Argent
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 23:29:00 -
[94]
Originally by: GateScout
The point still remains: Why NOT allow one person or a group of people to have this power? Just because more than one person will be affected isn't a good enough reason...
Firstly, it's not a bad reason. 
Secondly, while one person can initiate something, it doesn't necessarily follow that they should then be able to stop it.
In the case of an alliance, I think that it doesn't make sense for one person to be able to disband it, even if they started it. Why can't the other members say, "fine, get lost, we'll carry on without you" without the group ceasing to exist?
I mean, have you got a 'good enough' reason why one person should be able to disband an alliance?
Personally, I think it would be good for alliances to have share-based votes for kicking corporations out, disbanding, etc. That allows a dictatorship (just have 51% or more of the shares) or not. If you want one person to be able to disband the alliance, fine, they just have to have the majority vote.
I'd be much more impressed with the current events if someone had managed to sneakily buy 51% of shares without anyone noticing and then used those to force a vote disbanding the alliance. That'd require real shenanigans. |
GateScout
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 23:47:00 -
[95]
Edited by: GateScout on 05/02/2009 23:48:47
Originally by: Morsus Argent
Firstly, it's not a bad reason.
Secondly, while one person can initiate something, it doesn't necessarily follow that they should then be able to stop it.
In the case of an alliance, I think that it doesn't make sense for one person to be able to disband it, even if they started it. Why can't the other members say, "fine, get lost, we'll carry on without you" without the group ceasing to exist?
All true, and I don't disagree with any particular point. There are plenty of valid reason to change the mechanics. However....
Originally by: Morsus Argent
I mean, have you got a 'good enough' reason why one person should be able to disband an alliance?
Oh yes...look at the forums. Look at the map. It's dynamic, chaotic, a massive game changer... The ripples of this action will be felt for a long time. I foresee BoB coalescing in some fashion, Goon-NC conflicts, new alliances and conflicts. It's totally diverted the stale (at least in my view) GBC-Goon/NC conflict. God knows what it will do to the EVE economy.
In short...it shook things up.
Does this mean game mechanics shouldn't change? Not necessarily. However, I'd still like to see this possibility. Or, better yet, give Alliances / Corporation the ability to insulate and compartmentalize their operations so by pro-active action they can limit losses in this manner. That way...they can choose their own fate. However, being 100% protected from such actions by high ranking alliance members shouldn't' exist.
...and please....fix the bloody SOV system.
|
Minny Sky
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 05:17:00 -
[96]
Some good points made. I am thinking changes will be in place by March to prevent this; game mechanics changes, not common sense changes ;)
|
URUS FORGE
Caldari
THE TRUST INCORPORATED
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 05:26:00 -
[97]
To me I see this as a way for players who do not have 2389329132192sp to get a shot at the big guys. I see this as a major balancing feature of EvE.
Instead of nerfing..Why not enhance espionage and counter-esp as a profession in eve.
CCP has this tendency to equalize stuff to make it "fair" .. well eve isn't about "fair" .. it should be that some people can choose to play fair.. and others choose to play as nasty as they can.
I see nerfing as simply lowering the bar.. its much better to create a counter for actions, rather than disable the action all together.
Quote:
A tragic situation exists precisely when virtue does not triumph but when it is still felt that man is nobler than the forces which destroy him. - George Orwell
|
Relleh
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 05:31:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
I notice the thousands of dollars lost part....open admitance to the purchase of grey isk? I mean, you can't really count sub fees as the money lost, can you? If so, then i have lost thousands of dollars as well in the grief i have felt when slammed on and lost assets due steamroll events......and game sploits.....
and uhh, thousands of man hours, those weren't going to be spent in game doing stuff anyway? Or are your sweatshop isk grind farms seriously that overstaffed?(man-hour tracking is a royal pain)
its a game, funny way to have to swallow your own medicine though isn't it? |
HTI sucks
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 05:34:00 -
[99]
There's two remdies to this, CCP adds a waiting period and/or the ceo's of the corp in the Alliance need to vote Unanimously to disband the Alliance.
To anybody that wants to make a powerful Alliance should only trust people that live close enough that you can walk/drive to their house and beat the &^%$ out of them. |
Khwalik
Ghetto Kings
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 05:52:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Khwalik on 06/02/2009 05:55:46
Originally by: HTI sucks
There's two remdies to this, CCP adds a waiting period and/or the ceo's of the corp in the Alliance need to vote Unanimously to disband the Alliance.
To anybody that wants to make a powerful Alliance should only trust people that live close enough that you can walk/drive to their house and beat the &^%$ out of them.
Word. I must say I was rather taken aback when I heard what went down after DT today. But it's a game mechanic apparently....I have no love for BoB or OHGOD have found the whole thing rather amusing. I'd love to hear some of the tantrums being thrown today. |
Kaiten Cage
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 07:14:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Minny Sky
BOB had it coming, no doubt. but..
CCP game mechanics will be revised from this point in time.
There are thousands of man hours and thousands of dollars lost here to one spy/backstab
It's just too much for one person to be able to do.
GL with damage control CCP
Huh?
Thousands of dollars from what? Isk'ies you say? Maybe you're right! |
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 07:26:00 -
[102]
Where do we draw the line on saying what degree of time and subscription fee losses "one person" shouldn't be able to inflict? There is no standard for this laid down whatsoever by CCP, and the game has been around for a long enough time for them to have made a statement about it if they wanted to limit the damage a person is capable of inflicting.
Maybe some alliance mechanics need to be changed, fine. Having a 24 wait period or requiring a vote on certain things won't be the end of the world. But it's still totally within the construct of the game for one person to single-handedly monkey wrench an alliance who didn't address that person's concerns (leading to them becoming disgruntled, as apparently happend) or put decent enough security in place. That's how it should be. Even the best screening process let's the occasional General Ripper into a position of authority, and CCP shouldn't start entertaining the idea of making compensation to the victims of such people when no game rules were broken. |
Poreuomai
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 16:29:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Gaston Navarre
IMO corps and alliances should have some protections by default. For example if the alliance made to disband, an Eve mail sent out to all directors asking for a vote to follow through with it, and a minimum cooling off period before doing it.
Indeed. |
Malori Veneer
|
Posted - 2009.02.06 17:14:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Corwain
Originally by: KarGard
Essentially it boils down to this.
Eve player will see this and say: "wow that's awesome that one well placed person can bring down an entire army!"
Non eve player will see this and say: "Wow one guy wrecking the hard work of hundreds? that's exactly why I don't play eve!"
Me 3 years ago commenting on Istvaan's GHSC scam...
Non eve player: "wow that's awesome that one smart well placed person can bring down an entire army! I'm subscribing to that right now!"
This is the thing that brought me into Eve as well, the fact that ONE person could have such an impact in a virtual world was/is amazing! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |