These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Open letter to CCP and the community regarding HYDRA and OB ban from ATX

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#161 - 2012-05-26 12:18:59 UTC  |  Edited by: iLLeLogicaL
Wow CCP...

First singlewindow inventory that doesn't work properly at all, in fact it's worse then it's predecessor.

AND EVERY FCUKING BODY ON SISI TOLD YOU NOT TOO.
Then you go ahead and ban last years champions from even defending their hard won 1st spot?

No rules were broken so far, and with corp bookmarks being the most awesome thing you ever did for wormholes.
I can understand why they'd rather be in one corp.

This is by far the most cocky move ever done, and I don't like it one bit.

Now PL has no competition at all....
Lemster
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#162 - 2012-05-26 12:19:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Lemster
Edenmain wrote:
alienated a vast majority of the EVE public and devalued the Alliance Tournament on it's 10th anniversay.

I think I'm losing the "who's maddest" contest.


If you believe that you speak for the vast majority of the EVE public then I think you may have pulled yourself back into the lead ;)
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#163 - 2012-05-26 12:37:55 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Edenmain wrote:


Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.


The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.


But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi.
In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality.

You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate.

But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you.
You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.

Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#164 - 2012-05-26 12:39:56 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Sreegs
iLLeLogicaL wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Edenmain wrote:


Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.


The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.


But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi.
In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality.

You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate.

But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you.
You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.

Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.


Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.

:edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#165 - 2012-05-26 12:44:23 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
iLLeLogicaL wrote:

But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you.
You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.
Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.


Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.

:edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.


Please don't ignore the bolded underline line.
Ignored problems don't magicly vanish.
Klown Walk
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2012-05-26 12:45:51 UTC
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#167 - 2012-05-26 12:46:45 UTC
iLLeLogicaL wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
iLLeLogicaL wrote:

But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you.
You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.
Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.


Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.

:edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.


Please don't ignore the bolded underline line.
Ignored problems don't magicly vanish.


Bolding and underlining don't magicly make words relevant. Read the stickies. They're not bolded and underlined but they do explain the situation!

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#168 - 2012-05-26 12:47:26 UTC
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
#169 - 2012-05-26 12:48:47 UTC
A lot of reference to the many letters sent to AT people for clarity, perhaps you should be thinking in other terms.

CCP probably got those letters and it simply reaffirmed what they thought, and all those letters were just further proof of what hydra et all had planned. Obviously we don't know the content of the letters but from what we've seen i bet CCP read them as this.

Dear CCP,

We in Hydra are blatantly breaking the rules again, you know those rules everyone knows were brought in because of us, a gm said its ok so were going to carry on anyway, thats ok right?

Hydra
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#170 - 2012-05-26 12:50:47 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.


Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned.

Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now.
Quote:
Rules

Tournament Rules

This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter.
There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day.
All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012.
All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games.
To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.


And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule.
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#171 - 2012-05-26 12:51:19 UTC
Makkz wrote:
A lot of reference to the many letters sent to AT people for clarity, perhaps you should be thinking in other terms.

CCP probably got those letters and it simply reaffirmed what they thought, and all those letters were just further proof of what hydra et all had planned. Obviously we don't know the content of the letters but from what we've seen i bet CCP read them as this.

Dear CCP,

We in Hydra are blatantly breaking the rules again, you know those rules everyone knows were brought in because of us, a gm said its ok so were going to carry on anyway, thats ok right?

Hydra


Pretty sure the letters everyone keeps harping about were posted here somewhere.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Klown Walk
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#172 - 2012-05-26 12:51:35 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.


You could have told them not to practice together at all since you made the rule after what they did last year.
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#173 - 2012-05-26 12:51:59 UTC
iLLeLogicaL wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.


Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned.

Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now.
Quote:
Rules

Tournament Rules

This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter.
There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day.
All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012.
All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games.
To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.


And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule.


You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#174 - 2012-05-26 12:52:26 UTC
Klown Walk wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.


You could have told them not to practice together at all since you made the rule after what they did last year.


Sure could have if that was illegal.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2012-05-26 12:55:11 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
iLLeLogicaL wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
Why didn´t anyone from the AT team respond to any email from them? or give them a warning instead of instantly removing them?


hi you seem to have missed the part where the email was posted but wasn't actually what was going on so responding to that email wouldn't have changed a thing I hope this helps.


Can you please refer me to the topic where the rules that are subject to change* got changed, and publicly announced that the A-team would also get banned.

Because I will quote the rules as they're on the AT community website right now.
Quote:
Rules

Tournament Rules

This is a three stage tournament, with 64 alliances allowed to enter.
There will be two pre-qualifying rounds, followed by a 32 team group stage and a 16 team final day.
All competing pilots must have been members of the alliance for which they are competing, and be a member of that Alliance by downtime on May, 05, 2012.
All alliance members are eligible to compete in any match in which their alliance is taking part, subject to all applicable rules; teams do not have to remain the same between games.
To ensure that all Alliances get a fair opportunity to participate we will be checking on team entries and will disqualify teams who we consider to be 'B' or 'C' teams for bigger Alliances.


And your post where you ban Hydra and Outbreak from entering is not a public announcement of a changed rule.


You are correct that was enforcement of the rules. So close!

You're probably the biggest troll of us all Sreegs.
But the only thing you did was crush my expectation to see how Hydra was going to fare in this new AT.

Genuinly dissappointed with CCP in general now. I can't believe how happy I was when crucible got released.
And now it's back to ye olde CCP with no regards for playerbase, unified inventory being the perfect example from that.

Thank you for ruining my viewing pleasure of ATX, and taking out what probably would have been the most fun fights to watch.
Kalvunia IV
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2012-05-26 12:57:59 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
iLLeLogicaL wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Edenmain wrote:


Fair enough, but CCP.... Don'y you dare refer to EVE as a sandbox ever again, because it's clearly not... Well at least one that's raked flat by you whenever you feel the need.


The alliance tournament has never been a sandbox and by nature never will or can be. We make rules that specifically make it not a sandbox. When those rules aren't followed we enforce them. I'm sorry if you're confusing The Alliance Tournament Rules with the overall premise of the spaceship videogame EVE Online, but the fact remains that the sandbox mentality has never applied to the tournament. Except perhaps when it is convenient to forum posters who are mad.


But sisi has it own set of rules, and nowhere in the alliance rules did you state that these rules apply on sisi.
In court here you would have nothing to stand on and this case would be dismissed on case of techniquality.

You can however still win back a few of your playerbase by making it right, by letting one of them participate.

But instead what you did, send a half assed reply and then when they can not do anything more to please you.
You say, but you did something wrong and for that you get banned from participating in ATX.

Instead of saying right from the start, It's either hydra or outbreak but not both.


Please tell me more about court I've never been in one.

:edit: As per the post you quoted sisi's rules weren't what they were banned for. The tournament rules are. I don't understand why this appears so hard to follow.


I've read the post, and it seams to me that you implying that being part of the same Alliance on SiSi is why you concluded that Hydra/OB are working as one team. But if they had stayed separate on SiSi and done the same thing that would be alright.

You are also pointing out that you can not predict the future, I agree with you that is impossible. But I also find it impossible to read minds. As the rule about A and B teams are vague at best and reading your mind as to what constitutes "working as one team" is. Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.

On the other part you were willing to open a dialog with both RvB and PL to make sure they did not get banned over some technicality but were unable to do so with Hydra and OB could be an oversight on your part and should be admitted and attempts should be made to amend this.
iLLeLogicaL
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#177 - 2012-05-26 13:03:03 UTC  |  Edited by: iLLeLogicaL
And Sreegs did you read this article: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/24/internet-spaceships-are-serious-business

It was posted on EvE Online's Facebook a few days ago.
When I read that article I thought that's exactly what eve is like and that makes it unique.

I don't know if it was your sole decision to ban Hydra/OB, or if other people were involved in the making.
But I bet you were one of the higher ups in that equasion, and choices like the one made here.

What were you thinking?

Banning both teams instead of one, such choices make noone happy but the worst of trolls (and goonplayers somehow).

I like EVE very much, because there is no other MMO out there that keeps fascinating me this much.
But sometimes I think, you guys don't know what your doing.

It just makes no sense to any logical, objective, observant.
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#178 - 2012-05-26 13:03:25 UTC
Kalvunia IV wrote:
Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.


the great thing about rules is that they leave a lot of wiggle room for interpretation

for instance, "they did the same thing last year"

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Makkz
Lamorei Prosapia Vexillum
#179 - 2012-05-26 13:07:53 UTC
They didn't need to open a dialogue, they had plenty of evidence provided by the people involved, proving they were working together.

AT isn't EVE that has been true since its conception, CCP had evidence proving that Hydra and ally were doing exactly what happened last year, all of the letters almost constantly refer to the hydra/OB group as a "we".

As put before I'm with many that ATX will miss hydra they truly are top notch pvpers, of the highest caliber, but they were clearly breaking the rules that were brought in because of there actions last year, I think this tiny pre 20 page thread shows that this is NOT that big a deal to the majority of EVE players, its definitely no threadnaught.
Kalvunia IV
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#180 - 2012-05-26 13:08:31 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Kalvunia IV wrote:
Nowhere does it state that being part of the same corp on SiSi for testing and logi purposes are deemed as working as one team.


the great thing about rules is that they leave a lot of wiggle room for interpretation

for instance, "they did the same thing last year"


True. But what is eating at me is CCP's forthcoming attitude towards open dialog with RvB but almost no approach was made by CCP to Hydra/OB even after they tried to contact the AT team.