EVE General Discussion

At this point the OP is not likely to accept any explanation, he just wants to moan and complain...

Ahhh now i get it, another troll. No problem Lyrrashae. I will reply once more and only once. You're and idiot, and trolling is not for you. Why you ask? Because you terrible at it. There's the only/last reply you will get.

So if you whine and stomp your feet in GD like a proper spoiled little entitled brat and make a complete ass of yourself, you get a dev response?

cool

Get caught up duck face, you're like 3 pages behind.

Not a troll, bru, read the edit.

And whilst you're at it, don't fly Zealots/AHACs if you can't afford to replace them (is that what you lost? Going by the dates on BC, anyway).

Oh, wow really???? All of your petitions get reimbursed?!?!?! that's amazing!!! Tell me more..... Just kidding. you're a moron.

Sometimes I wonder if the GMs even ******* play the game, they are so out of touch with fleet procedures and group gameplay in general that you'd think they don't even do anything in Eve except go to work and start their "support" (bullshit) programs.

I have lost MANY ships/pods due to the ******* ship or interface suddenly being unresponsive, me being unable to control my ship or press buttons because it's as if the cursor doesn't accept clicks (not a time out, I have rock solid internet), session changes taking ridiculously wrong, crap collision boxes/spheres/whatever the **** they use on stations or objects in missions that get your ship stuck 10 km away from the actual object, etc.

This game has some of the most unhelpful game masters and support that I've ever seen.

It's ridiculous when you have to wait 3 ******* months for a reply to a real issue, but when you report some douche for calling you a *** in Amarr local, they reply, take action (or usually not take action, leaving the troll to keep blurting out bullshit) and then close within 5 minutes.

Can't wait for GW 2 so I can have an excuse to drop this crap from my MMO sub list.

This is exactly the type of case I was talking about. All we see is that no commands from your client reach the server. We have no idea if the client stopped responding or you walked away from your PC. This is happening on your PC, not our server, and thus we have no idea what is going on. Our logs are not a crystal ball that allow us to see stuff that doesn't happen on our server.

I am now going to paste a reply I personally use to explain some matters here.

"Our reimbursement policies only cover server side issues. Neither connectivity issues, nor client issues are covered. While we understand that this is frustrating, we have these policies in place in order to ensure equal treatment of all our customers. Since this is a competitive game we can only take action when we can verify the cause of a loss. Since we simply do not have that kind of access to your PC we are unable to verify any client side issues, including bugs within the EVE client itself, connection issues, driver issues, hardware failures, etc.

The competitive nature of EVE, which is unique among MMO's, simply requires us to treat everyone equally. This means that when we reimburse one case without verification, we have to do so for all cases. This would open the door to abuse of our reimbursement policies, effectively making any game play consequences null and void."

We ALWAYS look for reasons to reimburse (it is the first thing we teach every new GM once we start training them in reimbursement 'always look for a reason to reimburse, any reason'), but we must do so fairly and make sure we treat everyone equally. One of the most common accusations we hear on a daily basis is "You are just lazy, you do not want to do the work and you are just brushing me off". Trust me when I say this; The easy way out is to reimburse. If we were lazy we would be reimbursing everything. Telling someone we cannot reimburse isn't easy, nor is it fun or enjoyable. It is hard to say no. It is hard to try and explain the reasons behind it while it only ends in an endless argument. It is hard try and explain incredibly complex factors that lead to certain events. It is hard to genuinely try to help and please people when you have very little room to do so and there is only a small chance that the effort will be recognized as such.

HOWEVER, in the end EVE is not the average MMO. It is extremely competitive. This means the customer is not king; the community is. This means we are not here to please people no matter what; we are here to make sure everyone is treated equally and fairly, and to make sure that all our customers are inconvenienced as little as possible in a cut throat environment. Equal treatment is more important then anything else we do. Unfortunately this means that in almost all cases where things are not completely clear we have to stay hands off.

We understand your frustration; we truly do. Most GMs have been or are very active players. All of us have felt the crack of the EVE whip any times over. All of our GMs deal with people's plights on a daily basis and, no matter who you are, that breeds a deep understanding of the frustrations people go through. We sympathize with you, we rage at the unfairness of some of these situation just like you and we get frustrated when things go wrong, just like you.

So this I am pretty sure is the loss said player is sperging over. Yes it sucks but come on man.

http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=14378118

Edit: someone already beat me to it. :(

DISCLAIMER: This is a very complicated discussion and it is very unlikely that a debate on these forums will create either consensus or a resolution of the issue. This means I am not going to actually debate the policy here. If you want to have this policy debated I can only encourage you to talk to your favorite CSM representative and see if they can bring it up (note, this has been discussed at least several times with the CSM and it is discussed in depth internally at least 3 or 4 times every year).

- Large engagements can cause the server to show some aberrant behavior (which has been largely compensated for by TiDi) that is incredibly hard to track and to reliably examine.
- Large fleet engagements can be forced; if we would step in and provide reimbursement any party can force reimbursement by simply getting enough pilots to produce lag or any other side effect of a heavy load. That means we would have to reimburse any and all losses from every fleet engagement, including changes to sovereignty or the loss of sovereignty structures.
- If we do decide to ever reimburse in these cases it would become impossible to do so fairly as it is impossible what the implication would have been for the rest of the engagement if the event that lead to the loss would not have happened. It is very likely that the loss would have taken place anyway.
- In the end it is practically impossible to act in a fair way when so many people are involved; all with conflicting wishes and opinions.

These are some of the important reason. There are more, mostly to do with back end systems, tools, conflicts with other policies, etc. However, the essence of the argument is that we have been unable to find any way to interfere with these engagements fairly and in a reliable way, or in a way that would not cause a perception of bias, unfairness, etc.

Regarding the last part of your claim that we do reimburse for losses in fleet engagements:

We do NOT reimburse losses from fleet engagements. If it did happen it was a mistake made by a GM or you simply think we did while we did not.

One of the ways our server could mess up where fleet engagements were involved is that it could place destroyed ships back in space when part of our server thought they weren't destroyed (even though they were). This has caused some ships to reappear back in the game, but since we do not interfere we normally do not remove these ships. It is not that we just don't reimburse, we don't act at all if we can help it.

This particular behavior lead to a few events that are now somewhat famous (several titans and supercarriers that reappeared this way) and caused a huge outcry of perceived bias. I repeat this again here; we did NOT reimburse those.