These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What we grrrrgoons going to do?

First post
Author
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#601 - 2016-04-26 13:56:55 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:

I look forward to more of your mental gymnastics.


I don't.
Either there is proof, or there is none. Post the proof and be done with it, or hold your peace.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#602 - 2016-04-26 14:09:42 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:
Right right, you casually dismissed them as 'not a big deal' so you could keep up your whining.
Actually I gave in depth descriptions of why I think an application that is only available to a limited subset of players who can build it that allows you to rake in trillions of isk is more of an advantage than a slightly more configurable set of voice comms that are freely available to all. The funny thing is that the fact that you have no good counterarguments and keep spouting "but you don't want to ban teamspeak so IWI is not a problem" actually solidifies my argument. If my arguments were weak you'd have no problem finding actual counters without having to resort to strawman arguments and personal attacks.

Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
I don't.
Either there is proof, or there is none. Post the proof and be done with it, or hold your peace.
The proof is clear. Without their application IWI could not source the amount of ISK they do, and having trillions of isk rolling in is an undeniable advantage. Hell, even the people arguing against me aren't denying this, they are going down the route of "teamspeak also provides an advantage therefore IWI should not be banned unless TS is too" because they can't deny it and a desperate to find a counter.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Prt Scr
569th Freelancers
#603 - 2016-04-26 14:32:06 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
[quote=Shae Tadaruwa So CCP's director of security saying that if it were up to him all 12 bankers would have been permabanned, that's not evidence enough?


No it is not.

If you had actually meet and talked to the head of CCP's director of security you would know that the guy has a hard on for bans. If he had his way all RMT accounts would be banned (as is the applied rules), but he would also ban anyone who has done a contract or trade of any sort with a proven RMT and remove all articles made or sold by a banned RMT client no matter who now owns it or the way it was purchased.He would also remove the purchased isk no matter where it is. I personally am glad he does his job so well , but am also thankful that CCP does keep him on a short leach.

I suspect though CCP will never conferm or deny that the 12 bankers probably had isk deposits from people who used RMT to gain the isk to gamble. This in itself is a ban-able offence if ccp deem it to be them trying to hide that they bought 'illegal RMT isk' and tried to hide it. It's just the same if i bought a **** ton of isk from a RMT and then transferred it to you....when i am banned, so would you be for investigation.

With all the crap that goes on in the meta game i am surprised that it is not a tactic that is used more often.

uɐıssnɹ pɐǝɹ ʇ,uɐɔ ı ʇnq ʎɹɹos ɯ,ı

Reiisha
#604 - 2016-04-26 14:32:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Reiisha
Lucas Kell wrote:


I don;t think the Imperium have anywhere close to the ongoing ISK coming in from IWI. And I don't think IWI stopping will stop the war, I don;t even think the funding of the war was a bad thing, it's very good and has created a huge amount of content. The problem I have is that a third party application is still being used to allow an enormous amount of income that would not be possible without it. Having anyone able to source that level of income using a method that can't be countered by in-game mechanics is a bad thing.

Not to mention that IWI is almost guaranteed to be involved in RMT, which is now pretty much confirmed by CCP.



You may want to revise those thoughts. CFC has a LOT more than 3-4T a week coming in. Maybe less now, but quite a bit more before the war started. If you really think the war coffers must be empty by now... Yeah, you don't basically AFK/multibox farm 4+ regions for 4+ years straight without having something to show for it.

I know you want to play up the victim role of the CFC, but in all honesty, you seem to be looking desperately for something to hold on to that without any real reason to do so. IWI is a fly on the wall at best when considering the funding CFC and MBC forces have on their own.

Lucas Kell wrote:


Take ISBoxer or bots as examples. Those too allowed the collection of isk at a greater rate, and didn' set up logistics chains, manufacturing locations, FC's, fleet members or even competence. Yet they are deemed to be an unfair advantage because a normal player playing the game as it is would have no hope of competing with them. Just like no player using normal gameplay mechanics has any hope of competing with IWI.



Again, you're trying to make it seem like IWI is the lynchpin of why CFC is being attacked right now. They are not. They were the catalyst, as i said, but nothing more. That said, you seem to be under the delusion that the CFC was playing 'fairly' all this time. Or do you really believe no one was exploiting the **** out of being able to rat/pve however much they wanted without being interrupted *at all* all this time up north?

I also think that it's rather funny, the concept of fair play being uttered by an (ex) CFC member. You may not have been paying attention for the past few years. Suddenly the tables turn and the game becomes unfair? It's not like CFC hasn't been meta'ing the crap out of the game...

Lucas Kell wrote:


Except of course that I haven't. I specifically mentioned multiple other applications, I've answered your questions on them and explained exactly why I feel some are bigger problems than others. That's not ignoring them. If you choose to not bother reading that, your incredible failure to make a reasonable counterargument is entirely on you.



Then why are you making such a huge fuss about IWI? They don't matter squat in the grand scheme of things, especially as others (a lot of whom are CFC members) are just as 'guilty' of doing the same things.


You truly seem to believe in the victim/saint role for the CFC for some reason. Maybe you would care to explain that, rather than harp on on something completely insignificant to what's actually going on? Really think for yourself here. Are you just repeating mittens' propaganda machine here without critical thought or do you actually believe that IWI is in some way fundamental to what is going on here? Unless of course you are part of said machine.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Josef Djugashvilis
#605 - 2016-04-26 14:50:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
Lucas, have you actually made a formal complaint to CCP that IWI are heavily involved in RMT, and provided the proof thereof?

For all I know everybody in the game apart from me is involved in RMT.

But unless I could provide actionable proof to CCP I could end up like you, constantly whining in the forums to no real purpose.

If proof is given to CCP then they will take the appropriate action as they see fit.

I am sure they banned some other gambling site about a year or so ago.

Jeez, try to lose the war like a man at least.

In Eve speak - HTFU :)

This is not a signature.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#606 - 2016-04-26 15:23:29 UTC
Prt Scr wrote:
If you had actually meet and talked to the head of CCP's director of security you would know that the guy has a hard on for bans. If he had his way all RMT accounts would be banned (as is the applied rules), but he would also ban anyone who has done a contract or trade of any sort with a proven RMT and remove all articles made or sold by a banned RMT client no matter who now owns it or the way it was purchased.He would also remove the purchased isk no matter where it is. I personally am glad he does his job so well , but am also thankful that CCP does keep him on a short leach.
Except he stated that the RMT they had been involved in was serious. ther rules state that anyone selling ISK does receive a permaban, and all isk related to it is removed even if it is passed on to an unconnected third party, that's all normal every day business. Why this wasn't applied in this case is yet to be seen.

Prt Scr wrote:
I suspect though CCP will never conferm or deny that the 12 bankers probably had isk deposits from people who used RMT to gain the isk to gamble. This in itself is a ban-able offence if ccp deem it to be them trying to hide that they bought 'illegal RMT isk' and tried to hide it. It's just the same if i bought a **** ton of isk from a RMT and then transferred it to you....when i am banned, so would you be for investigation.
But that's not what anyone would be likely to classify as "serious" RMT. You're seriously trying to claim that the director of CCPs security counts unknowing third parties to RMT as involved in "serious" RMT deserving of a permaban? Gonna need you to cite a source on that one buddy.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#607 - 2016-04-26 15:30:23 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Actually I gave in depth descriptions of why I think an application that is only available to a limited subset of players who can build it that allows you to rake in trillions of isk is more of an advantage than a slightly more configurable set of voice comms that are freely available to all. The funny thing is that the fact that you have no good counterarguments and keep spouting "but you don't want to ban teamspeak so IWI is not a problem" actually solidifies my argument. If my arguments were weak you'd have no problem finding actual counters without having to resort to strawman arguments and personal attacks.


The irony of you talking about strawmen...

If what you said was anything but hypocrisy, you would be 100% against the out of game management tools that every major alliance uses. You keep focusing on teamspeak. What is that? You seem to love cherry picking parts of posts.

Lucas "I enjoy talking BS to try vainly to sound smart, even though literally no one agrees" Kell

Keep it up tiger! You're on a roll.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#608 - 2016-04-26 15:41:12 UTC
Reiisha wrote:
You may want to revise those thoughts. CFC has a LOT more than 3-4T a week coming in. Maybe less now, but quite a bit more before the war started. If you really think the war coffers must be empty by now... Yeah, you don't basically AFK/multibox farm 4+ regions for 4+ years straight without having something to show for it.
Are you talking the actual CFC itself or individual members combined income? Because I have no issue believing that most nullsec ratters make 100m/week, but if you're suggesting the Imperium itself pulls in 4T per week after losses from taxes and moon goo, you're crazy.

And bear in mind as a comparison one banker from IWI is paying out a trillion a week and most of that is being covered by his income. That's one player.

You are also missing the point that CFC income is finite ant attackable. People are able to fly around destroying goons income. It's impossible to fly around and destroy IWI, since it's a third party application, not an in-game mechanic.

At the end of the day this has nothing to do with the Imperium specifically, it's to do with a third party application allowing a small number of players to outperform thousands of players with no ability to be countered. You're happy now because it's the Imperium being hit, but they could outclass any alliance they wanted to. We may as well congratulate them on their Palatine Keepstar now.

Reiisha wrote:
Again, you're trying to make it seem like IWI is the lynchpin of why CFC is being attacked right now. They are not. They were the catalyst, as i said, but nothing more. That said, you seem to be under the delusion that the CFC was playing 'fairly' all this time. Or do you really believe no one was exploiting the **** out of being able to rat/pve however much they wanted without being interrupted *at all* all this time up north?
No, I'm not. I'm specifically avoiding that because like I said multiple times this isn't about a single conflict, this has been an issue for a long time and will continue to be long after the Imperium is dead. Your concept of what is "fair" appears to be pretty broken here, since you seem to think taking and defending space then utilising it is unfair. Strangely, you seem to have no problem with the Russian groups who have done this far far far more than Imperium groups have.

Reiisha wrote:
Then why are you making such a huge fuss about IWI? They don't matter squat in the grand scheme of things, especially as others (a lot of whom are CFC members) are just as 'guilty' of doing the same things.
Because it's a third party application being used to gain an massive advantage. And guilty of what exactly? People like you tend to do this a lot, banging on about how guilty the Imperium are, then providing absolutely no examples of what it is they are doing. Probably because when you start writing it down you suddenly realise they are just players on an opposing team. You also seem to be unaware that I'm not an Imperium member.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#609 - 2016-04-26 15:46:24 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
If proof is given to CCP then they will take the appropriate action as they see fit.
Apparently what CCP see fit is to let them slide even though they now confirm that they were involved in serious RMT. And mate, the forums are for us to voice our pinions. I get you don't agree with my opinions and you have some issues with allowing other people to have opinions you don't share, but that won't stop me voicing them as loudly as it takes for CCP to take notice.

And Isaac, shush now. If you are going to try to troll, at least get a little better at it. Unless you start bring up a valid counterpoints (which I highly doubt will happen) I'm pretty much going to skip over your posts since feeding you really is going nowhere.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Josef Djugashvilis
#610 - 2016-04-26 16:06:15 UTC
Dear Lucas, you have voiced your opinion, which is fine and dandy, but you have been repeating the same (complaint - whinge - delete as appropriate) for quite some time, to no avail.

Supply CCP with actionable proof or give it a rest.

This is not a signature.

Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#611 - 2016-04-26 16:06:34 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
And Isaac, shush now. If you are going to try to troll, at least get a little better at it. Unless you start bring up a valid counterpoints (which I highly doubt will happen) I'm pretty much going to skip over your posts since feeding you really is going nowhere.


I'm still patiently waiting for you to explain how I am a hypocrite, since you accused me of that a few times.

I can ask yet again though! What 3rd party apps did I say I don't support?

Feel free to ignore me again Mr. Kell.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#612 - 2016-04-26 17:41:40 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Dear Lucas, you have voiced your opinion, which is fine and dandy, but you have been repeating the same (complaint - whinge - delete as appropriate) for quite some time, to no avail.

Supply CCP with actionable proof or give it a rest.
They've had proof, and they've now admitted to basically ignoring it. So back to voicing opinions.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#613 - 2016-04-26 18:14:23 UTC
I think you mean:

"Someone in a blog alleges that a CCP dev said they should be banned in his opinion - but their ban was rescinded by CCP as a whole, after the proof was examined, contrary to that one particular devs opinion"

Needless to say, this is still off topic and very salty sounding in a thread about the future of goons (not the future of IWI).

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Reiisha
#614 - 2016-04-26 18:36:01 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


Are you talking the actual CFC itself or individual members combined income? Because I have no issue believing that most nullsec ratters make 100m/week, but if you're suggesting the Imperium itself pulls in 4T per week after losses from taxes and moon goo, you're crazy.

And bear in mind as a comparison one banker from IWI is paying out a trillion a week and most of that is being covered by his income. That's one player.

You are also missing the point that CFC income is finite ant attackable. People are able to fly around destroying goons income. It's impossible to fly around and destroy IWI, since it's a third party application, not an in-game mechanic.



You're veering away from the point - Again. You keep harping on about IWI, but it's crystal clear that that's not the actual problem. The CFC is being attacked, and is currently on the losing side, which is what the thread is about. IWI was brought up as a reason why it's happening, and how this is unfair. Then it was about 'how IWI is bad for the game' to divert attention away from the actual issue.

Lucas Kell wrote:


At the end of the day this has nothing to do with the Imperium specifically, it's to do with a third party application allowing a small number of players to outperform thousands of players with no ability to be countered. You're happy now because it's the Imperium being hit, but they could outclass any alliance they wanted to. We may as well congratulate them on their Palatine Keepstar now.

No, I'm not. I'm specifically avoiding that because like I said multiple times this isn't about a single conflict, this has been an issue for a long time and will continue to be long after the Imperium is dead. Your concept of what is "fair" appears to be pretty broken here, since you seem to think taking and defending space then utilising it is unfair. Strangely, you seem to have no problem with the Russian groups who have done this far far far more than Imperium groups have.



The problem is, it DOES have to do with the CFC. Otherwise you would never have brought it up in the first place. Who cares about IWI? No one was having a problem with it. Until the CFC got attacked, and then suddenly everyone in it adopted a holier-than-thou attitude about it 'because it's all IWI's fault'.

Who do you think would have gotten that keepstar otherwise, at the day of release, without anyone attacking them and giving them an ISK printing machine? IWI does not have any space you know. CFC did. CFC also still has just enough ISK and assets to deploy one if they reached deep into their pockets and got their stuff together.

Also: You are forgetting something. When someone attacks anyone, both sides are usually happy about it.. Any alliance outside of CFC LOVES being attacked. It means that they get to fight and have fun, it doesn't matter who or what is funding it. It's a videogame. It's supposed to be fun. The only people who didn't like to be attacked are the CFC, and the only times they did fight they employed bully tactics and metagaming as their weapons, because "we're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin your game".

Lucas Kell wrote:


Because it's a third party application being used to gain an massive advantage. And guilty of what exactly? People like you tend to do this a lot, banging on about how guilty the Imperium are, then providing absolutely no examples of what it is they are doing. Probably because when you start writing it down you suddenly realise they are just players on an opposing team. You also seem to be unaware that I'm not an Imperium member.



You really need to get your head out of the sand. To name just one basic example: Can you say you've never used EFT? Or are you going to try and find arguments for why 'that doesn't count'? How about the countless corp and alliance tools that help manage any massive organization in the game? POS timer tools? For crying out loud, Microsoft Excel falls in that category and should obviously be banned, right? A lot of tools exist that help you maximize your ISK earning potential, maybe this one just sits closer to the metal than most.

And no, you are not a CFC member - Not anymore, not until very recently. However, you were member of the very alliance which started this entire conflict. In fact, this whole thing started because the SMA was screwing around with IWI, to take advantage of their system and stealing their stuff. They then hid behind a CFC screen of supposed invulnerability, which turned out to be just a smoke screen.

This actually is making your entire line of reasoning all the more delicious and amusing to read, so please, go on :)

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Loucxious Leopold
Dredge Nation
#615 - 2016-04-26 18:41:21 UTC
Eli,

So what do you think the future holds, since things have changed since the initial posting?
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#616 - 2016-04-26 19:01:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
Loucxious Leopold wrote:
Eli,

So what do you think the future holds, since things have changed since the initial posting?
As it stands now, there's waaaay too much on the table to start making predictions:

- Citadel and cap changes - Will this make smaller capital fleets viable inspite of the supercap dominance of MBC?

- Are horde actually having fun or is the pressure on O1Y hurting their morale and attendance? TMC says yes, reddit says no. Will Imperium win the station timer tonight when potentially the whole MBC might show up to help Horde defend?

- Are MBC splintering and in-fighting? Or are they just having gf's because of a lack of content from Imperium?

- Does MBC need the IWI funding to continue? As it looks now, even without the funding there's enough blood in the water and enough strength from even a fraction of the MBC to keep the north secured - but - as it stands, short of bans being reinstated (rightly or wrongly), this doesn't look like happening anyways.

- DJ and the 'old goons' / Imperium morale in general - Will this cause them to keep dropping members/strength? Dotlan says yes - for the moment. Even with the huge amount of allied corps that have folded into GSF they've just started to drop below 17k... although no-one knows for sure how many of those are real, active players.

Too many questions without concrete answers... but I don't think it looks good for Imperium... I don't think they're going to completely disappear either though.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Jade Krendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#617 - 2016-04-26 19:20:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Krendraven
Reiisha wrote:
You truly seem to believe in the victim/saint role for the CFC for some reason.


You know I honestly thought the guy was just some random troll when he came to /r/eve and tried to spin Mittani into some defenseless victim of cyber-bullying. I began to suspect he might actually be a tad "off" when he tried to defend goon's past history of doxxing and trying to get people fired from their real life jobs. After reading this thread I'm convinced he is in fact full on delusional and should probably step away from the computer for a few months to get his head screwed back on straight. His blind fan-boy-ism becomes even more disturbing when you realize the guy he's spending COPIOUS amounts of time white knighting doesn't care at all about SMA.
Isaac Armer
The Soup Kitchen
#618 - 2016-04-26 19:28:07 UTC
Jade Krendraven wrote:
You know I honestly thought the guy was just some random troll when he came to /r/eve and tried to spin Mittani into some defenseless victim of cyber-bullying. I began to suspect he might actually be a tad "off" when he tried to defend goon's past history of doxxing and trying to get people fired from their real life jobs. After reading this thread I'm convinced he is in fact full on delusional and should probably step away from the computer for a few months to get his head screwed back on straight. His blind fan-boy-ism becomes even more disturbing when you realize the guy he's spending COPIOUS amounts of time white knighting doesn't care at all about SMA.


he is far from delusional. CFC has always had a strong propaganda game going, and it's fairly obvious at this point he's an alt of his CFC main characters tasked with talking them up on the forums. Not anything new for CFC, but most of their propaganda/spin team are far less blatent about it.
Jade Krendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#619 - 2016-04-26 19:38:23 UTC
Isaac Armer wrote:

he is far from delusional. CFC has always had a strong propaganda game going, and it's fairly obvious at this point he's an alt of his CFC main characters tasked with talking them up on the forums. Not anything new for CFC, but most of their propaganda/spin team are far less blatent about it.


I dunno, I think at this point you have to be pretty delusional to come to /r/eve and try to spin Mittani into some victim who deserves our sympathy but who knows...maybe he really is just terrible at propaganda. After all good propaganda is supposed to change public opinion, all he seems to do is get people to grrrgoons more.
Loucxious Leopold
Dredge Nation
#620 - 2016-04-26 19:58:28 UTC
Eli,

Thanks for the summary. I appreciate the perspective.