These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Spying on the test server

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Karbox Delacroix
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-05-26 02:50:08 UTC
Faffywaffy wrote:
What is CCPs opinion on alliances actively interfering with the training of other alliances on the test server? We're having Hydra Reloaded actively locate and scan the wormholes we're trying to run practices in.


You made a decision to train in a worm hole. That was your decision and now you must suffer the consequences for that decision. Wait, I am not Sreegs. The meta is fine so long as their is no meta in your meta as you meta. Meta.
Kaleesa
Pathogen Inc.
#22 - 2012-05-26 03:14:46 UTC
Faffywaffy wrote:
What is CCPs opinion on alliances actively interfering with the training of other alliances on the test server? We're having Hydra Reloaded actively locate and scan the wormholes we're trying to run practices in.


Cmon bro you already know CCP are not gonna stop this. Would the tourney be better if ppl didn't spy and meta game? Absolutely, then we'd see truly fair matchups, but eve's never been that way. Also, life isn't fair either in case you were wondering. I look forward to seeing DS in the tourney though, you guys are always fun to watch.
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
#23 - 2012-05-26 05:48:55 UTC
Step 1. Move into wormhole system with POS and scanners
Step 2. Cycle the kspace exit
Step 3. Profit $$
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#24 - 2012-05-26 09:59:45 UTC
Faffywaffy wrote:
What is CCPs opinion on alliances actively interfering with the training of other alliances on the test server? We're having Hydra Reloaded actively locate and scan the wormholes we're trying to run practices in.


Spying is part of both EVE and the alliance tournament. I don't see us sticking our noses in this at all unless they're interfering. If they interfere they will all be banned.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#25 - 2012-05-26 10:04:41 UTC
And then it matters ofcourse who does the spying / interfering and who get's spied upon / interfered with.

The latests rulings make very clear that there are differences between the teams and some get tackled / ignored harder than others.
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#26 - 2012-05-26 10:19:57 UTC
Killer Gandry wrote:
And then it matters ofcourse who does the spying / interfering and who get's spied upon / interfered with.

The latests rulings make very clear that there are differences between the teams and some get tackled / ignored harder than others.


Explain. Do a good job please.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch
Evasive Maneuvering.
#27 - 2012-05-26 10:26:58 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Faffywaffy wrote:
What is CCPs opinion on alliances actively interfering with the training of other alliances on the test server? We're having Hydra Reloaded actively locate and scan the wormholes we're trying to run practices in.


Spying is part of both EVE and the alliance tournament. I don't see us sticking our noses in this at all unless they're interfering. If they interfere they will all be banned.


Ok, thank you.
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#28 - 2012-05-26 10:29:51 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
CCP Sreegs wrote:

Explain. Do a good job please.


Ok, let's get banned then for breaking ToS 1.

You Sir,break rules whenever it pleases you. You post conversations or snipets of a conversation between player and GM and keep the thread locked making the whole discussion one sided. YOUR side ofcourse being the only one that matters.

The blatant favouritism is shown by the fact that Hydra and Outbreak are kicked from ATX whereas PL can continue. The situation might have a different taste to it but we still can speak about A and B teams, Yet Hydra and Outbreak get stomped harder. How befitting to call in the old cows from the well which is called AT9.
Not one of you has even bothered to communicate after even several mails / petitions of them and just assumed and took action. Because it was easier.

Edit: Personal attacks and forum moderation discussion removed, CCP Phantom
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#29 - 2012-05-26 10:39:02 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Killer Gandry wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:

Explain. Do a good job please.


Ok, let's get banned then for breaking ToS 1.

You Sir,break rules whenever it pleases you. You post conversations or snipets of a conversation between player and GM and keep the thread locked making the whole discussion one sided. YOUR side ofcourse being the only one that matters.

The blatant favouritism is shown by the fact that Hydra and Outbreak are kicked from ATX whereas PL can continue. The situation might have a different taste to it but we still can speak about A and B teams, Yet Hydra and Outbreak get stomped harder. How befitting to call in the old cows from the well which is called AT9.
Not one of you has even bothered to communicate after even several mails / petitions of them and just assumed and took action. Because it was easier.



I didn't post the logs. A player did. That means I get to repost them to give context. Even if the player hadn't we are STILL well within our right to do so.

I think I've explained the Hydra thing sufficiently and if "We will not discuss the issue further" wasn't clear enough for you on that I'll say um.... we will not discuss the issue further.

You're not implying anything. You appear aware at least that these posts shouldn't exist on the forum because you know that if you have an allegation to make IA is the one and only place to make it but it seems forum suicide by posting is what you're going for. IA has plenty to do with misconduct whether it come in the form of moderation or not. I encourage you to contact them rather than spewing all over every thread in the alliance tournament subforum.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Intigo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2012-05-26 11:04:55 UTC
Hey Sreegs, who checks the Alliance Tournament email inbox? So we know who ignored all our emails to it.

hydra provail
Raimo
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#31 - 2012-05-26 11:08:02 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:


I think I've explained the Hydra thing sufficiently


Intigo wrote:
Hey Sreegs, who checks the Alliance Tournament email inbox? So we know who ignored all our emails to it.


Indeed, nobody has mentioned this or the emails officially. Maybe not quite sufficiently afterall.
Anna Katarr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-05-26 11:15:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Anna Katarr
Intigo wrote:
Hey Sreegs, who checks the Alliance Tournament email inbox? So we know who ignored all our emails to it.


i bet my ibis in the end its the same person who will ignore your question
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#33 - 2012-05-26 11:22:44 UTC
Intigo wrote:
Hey Sreegs, who checks the Alliance Tournament email inbox? So we know who ignored all our emails to it.


The emails were just as purposely obtuse as the petition. I'll mea culpa that we should have responded but to be honest it wouldn't have changed anything because you got booted for doing what you did, not doing what you sent in emails and petitions. You can continue to flood every forum you can find with your noise generation as if the emails are really what matters but in case you're not getting it from everyone else I'll spell it out for you.

You were booted for the reasons outlined in our two posts on the subject. What you sent in the emails and the petition was virtually identical in content regardless of if one had more words and I know it's convenient to pretend that's a major issue, but the fact is that it isn't and no response to the question that was posed would have changed the outcome. Posting over and over again about it won't change that and our annoyance with said childish behavior has reached its limit.

We have a tournament to run. You are not going to be in it. If you cannot prevent yourself from spamming our subforum specifically created to aid in the running of the tournament then we will prevent you from doing so.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Killer Gandry
The Concilium Enterprises
#34 - 2012-05-26 11:28:06 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:

I didn't post the logs. A player did. That means I get to repost them to give context. Even if the player hadn't we are STILL well within our right to do so.


So let's get this straight. Someone did something not allowed and as a result you are suddenly allowed to do it. Even though if a player does it ofcourse he get's burned. Because let's face it. We are all equal, just that some are more equal.
It's so darn convenient and pleasant to hide behind the Dev ticker now so you can huff and puff however you want and nobody can do a thing about it.
Do you put your thumbs in your ears after each post and wiggle your fingers while singing nana nana na na?

CCP Sreegs wrote:

I think I've explained the Hydra thing sufficiently and if "We will not discuss the issue further" wasn't clear enough for you on that I'll say um.... we will not discuss the issue further.


If your explenation would have been satisfying then there wouldn't have been a discussion in the first place.
You screwed up and that ends the discussion.
Great move.

CCP Sreegs wrote:

You're not implying anything. You appear aware at least that these posts shouldn't exist on the forum because you know that if you have an allegation to make IA is the one and only place to make it but it seems forum suicide by posting is what you're going for. IA has plenty to do with misconduct whether it come in the form of moderation or not. I encourage you to contact them rather than spewing all over every thread in the alliance tournament subforum.


And yet again you assume things without verifying them.
-You assume I don't imply anything yet a major part of the readers here can see exactly what I imply.
-You assume I am aware of what should and shouldn't exsist on these forums. Seeing you don't even seem to know it then how should a humble player like me be aware of it.
-You assume I haven't contacted IA in the passt already yet IA already told me they mainly wotk on Dev and GM behaviour ingame and that for forum moderation I should contact the same people I am petitioning about.

And am not allowed to express my personal opinion in thread which have any sort of impact on me? Odd.....
I think I need a new definition as what forums are.
Are you this harsh and forthcomming towards people like Andski aswel?
Kadesh Priestess
Goryn Clade
#35 - 2012-05-26 11:37:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadesh Priestess
CCP Sreegs wrote:
The emails were just as purposely obtuse as the petition.
We both know that this is not true. Petition was written by OB member without caring much about wording, while emails were far more detailed and described what we were doing.

Look at this paragraph (i'm omitting other ones which elaborated at9 background):
Quote:
However for this year, even before the rules were announced, we have wanted to do things differently. Hydra and 0utbreak have been different groups on TQ for the past year and will have different people leading the teams this year. We do not intend to work together or colaborate in any way in the tournament matches starting on June 30th. We only intend to test together in the preparation through the medium of testing on SiSi. Even this we wouldn't do if getting 24 people on the test server wasn't difficult as a result of our alliances being much smaller than the large ones.

Assuming that there's no collaboration between our alliances in any way in the actual tournament, apart from testing, are we classed in the A/B team criteria?


This is exactly what we planned to do and what we were doing (and as security guy with access to everything you know this is true), and we got banned without even seeing reply to this (far from vague/ambiguous) email. If you still think that quoted part is obtuse and/or ambiguous, i really can't help.

I think you would look a way better if you just said Hydra/OB are banned @ 2nd may, instead of doing what you did.
Raimo
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#36 - 2012-05-26 11:37:45 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:

You were booted for the reasons outlined in our two posts on the subject. What you sent in the emails and the petition was virtually identical in content regardless of if one had more words and I know it's convenient to pretend that's a major issue, but the fact is that it isn't and no response to the question that was posed would have changed the outcome. Posting over and over again about it won't change that and our annoyance with said childish behavior has reached its limit.


How can you say that, if the emails were answered and the courtesy of a 2 way dialogue would have been possible none of this would have needed to happen. Like the emails state the intention was to not break any rules, afterall... Would it be hard to give the banned teams the benefit of the doubt that if they had received the clarification they asked for they would have acted differently?

"Mea Culpa" yet you don't feel that the ruling was unjust? Fascinating.

Just for reference

Garmon wrote:
Exactly 3 weeks ago to this day, I declared hydra + outbreak's intention for this year in an e-mail, asking for clarification, and for permission if we were allowed to test with each other when numbers were scarce. I'd like to emphasize the only reason we are in the same corporation, is because when we test, it's in a wormhole, and we need to be able to give roles to people so they can fit their ships. Many alliances have been testing with each other for ATX, and it has been like that for years. I thought we were in the clear after being very open to you, here is the e-mail I sent to evetv@ccpgames.com on the 03/05, 3 weeks ago

Quote:

Regarding Hydra and 0utbreak, our only intention this year in terms of working together is to test with each other on Singularity for times when more numbers are needed.

Last year, the relationship between the two of us was much closer than what we intend for this year. Last year, both teams acted as one entity. We created two teams for the primary purpose of having enough to practice and the secondary purpose of winning first and second together so that PL could not. Once we got to the final we made several mistakes and against our intentions the finals as a spectator event were ruined.

However for this year, even before the rules were announced, we have wanted to do things differently. Hydra and 0utbreak have been different groups on TQ for the past year and will have different people leading the teams this year. We do not intend to work together or colaborate in any way in the tournament matches starting on June 30th. We only intend to test together in the preparation through the medium of testing on SiSi. Even this we wouldn't do if getting 24 people on the test server wasn't difficult as a result of our alliances being much smaller than the large ones.

Assuming that there's no collaboration between our alliances in any way in the actual tournament, apart from testing, are we classed in the A/B team criteria?

Thanks for your time


On the 12th, 9 days later, I sent a follow up e-mail after receiving no response ;

Quote:

Hello CCP Loxy,

We are putting a lot of effort in our tournament run this year. However we are very concerned that we might be breaking CCP's interpretations of certain rules without being aware of it. We want to follow the rules completely and contribute to making it an event that the Eve community appreciates and looks forward to.

We have described our intentions to CCP in our previous e-mail and we would like to know as soon as possible if what we are doing is alright. Specifically the rules are vague about how much collaboration constitues an A and B team situation. We suspect that there is no issue with testing against another team since multiple other hopeful entrants have been practicing together on SiSi this year. Again, however, we want to be sure.

If we could get a response as soon as possible it would put all of our minds at ease.

Thanks,
Hydra Reloaded
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#37 - 2012-05-26 11:37:47 UTC
Killer Gandry wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:

I didn't post the logs. A player did. That means I get to repost them to give context. Even if the player hadn't we are STILL well within our right to do so.


So let's get this straight. Someone did something not allowed and as a result you are suddenly allowed to do it. Even though if a player does it ofcourse he get's burned. Because let's face it. We are all equal, just that some are more equal.
It's so darn convenient and pleasant to hide behind the Dev ticker now so you can huff and puff however you want and nobody can do a thing about it.
Do you put your thumbs in your ears after each post and wiggle your fingers while singing nana nana na na?

CCP Sreegs wrote:

I think I've explained the Hydra thing sufficiently and if "We will not discuss the issue further" wasn't clear enough for you on that I'll say um.... we will not discuss the issue further.


If your explenation would have been satisfying then there wouldn't have been a discussion in the first place.
You screwed up and that ends the discussion.
Great move.

CCP Sreegs wrote:

You're not implying anything. You appear aware at least that these posts shouldn't exist on the forum because you know that if you have an allegation to make IA is the one and only place to make it but it seems forum suicide by posting is what you're going for. IA has plenty to do with misconduct whether it come in the form of moderation or not. I encourage you to contact them rather than spewing all over every thread in the alliance tournament subforum.


And yet again you assume things without verifying them.
-You assume I don't imply anything yet a major part of the readers here can see exactly what I imply.
-You assume I am aware of what should and shouldn't exsist on these forums. Seeing you don't even seem to know it then how should a humble player like me be aware of it.
-You assume I haven't contacted IA in the passt already yet IA already told me they mainly wotk on Dev and GM behaviour ingame and that for forum moderation I should contact the same people I am petitioning about.

And am not allowed to express my personal opinion in thread which have any sort of impact on me? Odd.....
I think I need a new definition as what forums are.
Are you this harsh and forthcomming towards people like Andski aswel?


It's hard to follow you because your posts are in a lot of threads so I have to assume you're reading at least one of them since you quoted me here. You make a good point about the GM communication and given that the rules should be followed and all things being equal we should probably ban the person who did so.

You are allowed to express whatever opinion you want within the rules regarding these forums. You seem to be unable to follow them and I find that quite unfortunate. Ad hominem statements of "you're wrong" don't change the content of your message.

I apologize for assuming that you know what shouldn't be in this subforum or the forums in general and I submit to you as an example every single post you've made here in the last 24 hours.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#38 - 2012-05-26 11:44:17 UTC
Kadesh Priestess wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
The emails were just as purposely obtuse as the petition.
We both know that this is not true. Petition was written by OB member without caring much about wording, while emails were far more detailed and described what we were doing.

Look:
Quote:
However for this year, even before the rules were announced, we have wanted to do things differently. Hydra and 0utbreak have been different groups on TQ for the past year and will have different people leading the teams this year. We do not intend to work together or colaborate in any way in the tournament matches starting on June 30th. We only intend to test together in the preparation through the medium of testing on SiSi. Even this we wouldn't do if getting 24 people on the test server wasn't difficult as a result of our alliances being much smaller than the large ones.

Assuming that there's no collaboration between our alliances in any way in the actual tournament, apart from testing, are we classed in the A/B team criteria?


This is exactly what we planned to do and what we were doing, and we got banned without even seeing reply to this (far from vague/ambiguous) email. If you still think that quoted part is obtuse and/or ambiguous, i really can't help.

I think you would look a way better if you just said Hydra/OB are banned @ 2nd may, instead of doing what you did.


Thank you for posting the email. My statement hasn't changed. I do find it amusing that you want to paint this as some giant conspiracy as if we needed some event to occur to remove you. If we truly wanted you out it as you suggest, it would have been easier and just as possible to do so up front or even last year. The fact is that we said "fair game" last year and gave you your trillions of isk worth of prizes, then gave you a shot at not breaking the rules this year. You proceeded to do so and in the best interests of the tournament were removed. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit within the confines of your conspiratorial worldview.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Kadesh Priestess
Goryn Clade
#39 - 2012-05-26 11:54:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadesh Priestess
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Thank you for posting the email. My statement hasn't changed. I do find it amusing that you want to paint this as some giant conspiracy as if we needed some event to occur to remove you. If we truly wanted you out it as you suggest, it would have been easier and just as possible to do so up front or even last year. The fact is that we said "fair game" last year and gave you your trillions of isk worth of prizes, then gave you a shot at not breaking the rules this year. You proceeded to do so and in the best interests of the tournament were removed. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit within the confines of your conspiratorial worldview.
You replied to the conspiracy part of my post, thanks. however, it's not something i want to discuss because it is my personal opinion.

The other part: you say, petition message was ambiguous and we didn't follow reply closely. It may be true, okay. You say, email is the same as petition, but in other words, okay.

If it's similar and ambiguous, i want you to point at the statement of email which we didn't follow and broke. I'll even split them so you can mark them with "true" or "false":

1) Hydra and 0utbreak have been different groups on TQ for the past year
2) will have different people leading the teams this year
3) We do not intend to work together or colaborate in any way in the tournament matches starting on June 30th
4) We only intend to test together in the preparation through the medium of testing on SiSi.

And the final question "Assuming that there's no collaboration between our alliances in any way in the actual tournament, apart from testing, are we classed in the A/B team criteria?" is not a statement, it just a summary with the request for your opinion, so i'm not including it.

I don't want you to write blabbing post, just statement numbers and "true" and "false", with the reasoning behind "false" if possible.
Qlfon
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-05-26 11:57:11 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
It's hard to follow you because your posts are in a lot of threads so I have to assume you're reading at least one of them since you quoted me here. You make a good point about the GM communication and given that the rules should be followed and all things being equal we should probably ban the person who did so.


Just for claryfication, now you are considering ban those guys who quoted GM communication?
Even if they done it to defend himself, and all GMs names are xxxxx-ed there, this will only prove us that ALL those quotes were true.
Really, regardless of finale of this case, Outbreak./Hydra Reloaded guys looks more sincerely in any way, then you.