These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP - Rookie System Rules Clarification

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#601 - 2012-06-22 05:53:27 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Wouldn't you agree the best thing to do, is just leave them alone? Or else. That's how I red this. Probably a good thing not to mess with it. Just saying.

IN case your messing the point, I really really don't think we need more Rookie systems. Do you?


Good Personal Policy != Official Policy

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#602 - 2012-06-22 05:54:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Mrr Woodcock
Trust me on this. Ban Hammer starts dropping. They will be left alone, players will get the message. Trust me on this will ya.

Ruby, I didn't make the GD policy. lol

What I got from all that is if you can't figure it out and stop doing it. Your $hit is going to hit the fan. lol

But don't listen to me, just keep rocking that boat. lol
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#603 - 2012-06-22 05:57:22 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Trust me on this. Ban Hammer starts dropping. They will be left alone, players will get the message. Trust me on this will ya.

Ruby, I didn't make the GD policy. lol


The Policy of "Don't mess with Rookies in Rookie systems" has always been in place. Or are you so dense that that's news to you.

It hasn't been working all that well.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#604 - 2012-06-22 06:04:32 UTC
Well, I have to admit, a few things do get by me, my bad, stupid, thick, however you want to say. I'm guilty.
But, I can say I get the message here, at least I think I do.

Now for you. I gotta say, regardless of what I think or do. I do see slight glimmers of reason in some of your posts. Kinda respect ya. well sort of.

But that thread you were mouthing of in yesterday, with that ******. I think the thread got removed. Guy saying he was glad he run off a husband & wife mining team and all. Well ya got me wondering again.
Domono
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#605 - 2012-06-22 06:41:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Domono
In Eve there is no such thing as character level. We have dates join and SP. Sp collects whether or not you are actually sitting at the computer or not. This makes it impossible to pinpoint exactly what a rookie is. So if my account is 2 months old but I really only --played-- for 1 day a week for an hour. Then more than like still don't know jack about Eve. Rookies are impossible to define in Eve from our end. Maybe a GM can look at your total hours played, see a small list of transactions in your wallet history. A quick glance at your list of contacts? Who knows how they evaluate a rookie. Or cares.

Guy carrying a cargo full of dead space gear? Gank him. Who cares if he is 2 weeks old. Common sense tells me that is no rookie, even if so do you think CCP would blame you? Really?

Guy ratting in high sec belt in his crap fit t1 frigate? Not a war target? Honestly why are you bothering at this point? Still want to mess with him? Check him! Is he under a month old? If yes you should just leave him be. Same goes for scanning down mission runners to ninja salvage/loot/gank. Or bad fit industrials with low end minerals, poor value loot

So your at war and you find one of the enemy is a week old? Go ahead and take him down if he pops up everytime. If your feeling nice tell him to go to another system far away and he won't be bothered. Or simply don't actively hunt him down. Tell him to leave the corp for for the duration of the war. Or just ignore all of that and just not make it seem in ANY fashion you are specifically targeting the rookie/s IE: "We are going to slaughter your noobs all week!" The entire corp is rookies? Perhaps you should reconsider why you wardeced them.

If they wardeced you well shame on them. Rough them up some sure, but do you really need to make it complete hell on them? Probably not. Would you get in trouble for it? More than likely not.

Edit: Unless they find you baited them into it somehow.

People are making a simple rule more complicated than it needs to be. If it looks like a rookie. If it smells like a rookie. It's a rookie. Anything questionable is not a rookie.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#606 - 2012-06-22 07:13:07 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Well, I have to admit, a few things do get by me, my bad, stupid, thick, however you want to say. I'm guilty.
But, I can say I get the message here, at least I think I do.

Now for you. I gotta say, regardless of what I think or do. I do see slight glimmers of reason in some of your posts. Kinda respect ya. well sort of.

But that thread you were mouthing of in yesterday, with that ******. I think the thread got removed. Guy saying he was glad he run off a husband & wife mining team and all. Well ya got me wondering again.



I fail to see how people realizing that the game isn't a good fit for their preferences is a bad thing; either for the game or for them. The sad thing is people taking so long to realize it. If the game's not a good fit for them, they will be happier once they find a game that does suit them.

That said, you do have to protect people (and do so effectively) for long enough that they have the opportunity to learn about the game and thus the opportunity to make an informed decision.

Should they fail to use that opportunity, thus robbing themselves of the opportunity to make an informed decision (as that mining team did), the time they waste on a game they don't enjoy is on them. People refusing to inform themselves while making the decision to continue playing is not a reason to change the game.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#607 - 2012-06-22 07:14:14 UTC
Domono wrote:
Anything questionable is not a rookie.


Should you have to stake your account on that bet?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Domono
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#608 - 2012-06-22 07:37:34 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
Anything questionable is not a rookie.


Should you have to stake your account on that bet?


On this matter I don't consider it a gamble.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#609 - 2012-06-22 07:39:16 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Domono wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
Anything questionable is not a rookie.


Should you have to stake your account on that bet?


On this matter I don't consider it a gamble.


Rookie is not defined. That means that it is a gamble, no matter how you consider it.

Besides that, should the stakes automatically be your account?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Domono
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#610 - 2012-06-22 08:10:17 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
Anything questionable is not a rookie.


Should you have to stake your account on that bet?


On this matter I don't consider it a gamble.


Rookie is not defined. That means that it is a gamble, no matter how you consider it.

Besides that, should the stakes automatically be your account?


Unfortunately Ruby it seems you just don't get it. That's fine. My suggestion would be to simply avoid all rookie systems while considering any hostile or aggressive action. Also, if the thought crosses your mind that you wish to hunt or harm newbies or your corp or alliance wants to cause harm to them any way your better off just avoiding it all together. Log off or go rat or mine. Or move out to low/null sec avoid the problem all together? Finally, remove words like noob, newb, nub, from your in game vocabulary. See anyone under 6-12 months then turn tail and run, zero interaction. Oh and if they tackle you just sit there and let them kill you. Then you will be all good.

OR trust your better judgement.
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#611 - 2012-06-22 14:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Mrr Woodcock
RubyPorto wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Well, I have to admit, a few things do get by me, my bad, stupid, thick, however you want to say. I'm guilty.
But, I can say I get the message here, at least I think I do.

Now for you. I gotta say, regardless of what I think or do. I do see slight glimmers of reason in some of your posts. Kinda respect ya. well sort of.

But that thread you were mouthing of in yesterday, with that ******. I think the thread got removed. Guy saying he was glad he run off a husband & wife mining team and all. Well ya got me wondering again.



I fail to see how people realizing that the game isn't a good fit for their preferences is a bad thing; either for the game or for them. The sad thing is people taking so long to realize it. If the game's not a good fit for them, they will be happier once they find a game that does suit them.

That said, you do have to protect people (and do so effectively) for long enough that they have the opportunity to learn about the game and thus the opportunity to make an informed decision.

Should they fail to use that opportunity, thus robbing themselves of the opportunity to make an informed decision (as that mining team did), the time they waste on a game they don't enjoy is on them. People refusing to inform themselves while making the decision to continue playing is not a reason to change the game.


I think I would like to hear CCP's prospective on this. Since they did remove the thread. CCP how do you feel offically about this situation? Why do you think they locked, and removed the thread Ruby?
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#612 - 2012-06-22 15:17:18 UTC
Domono wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Domono wrote:
Anything questionable is not a rookie.


Should you have to stake your account on that bet?


On this matter I don't consider it a gamble.


Rookie is not defined. That means that it is a gamble, no matter how you consider it.

Besides that, should the stakes automatically be your account?


Unfortunately Ruby it seems you just don't get it. That's fine. My suggestion would be to simply avoid all rookie systems while considering any hostile or aggressive action. Also, if the thought crosses your mind that you wish to hunt or harm newbies or your corp or alliance wants to cause harm to them any way your better off just avoiding it all together. Log off or go rat or mine. Or move out to low/null sec avoid the problem all together? Finally, remove words like noob, newb, nub, from your in game vocabulary. See anyone under 6-12 months then turn tail and run, zero interaction. Oh and if they tackle you just sit there and let them kill you. Then you will be all good.

OR trust your better judgement.


Christ. That is the godamned rule that I've been suggesting, you nit. We are talking about helping CCP make official policy. Your personal policy, my personal policy, etc, is irrelevant.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#613 - 2012-06-22 15:18:34 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Well, I have to admit, a few things do get by me, my bad, stupid, thick, however you want to say. I'm guilty.
But, I can say I get the message here, at least I think I do.

Now for you. I gotta say, regardless of what I think or do. I do see slight glimmers of reason in some of your posts. Kinda respect ya. well sort of.

But that thread you were mouthing of in yesterday, with that ******. I think the thread got removed. Guy saying he was glad he run off a husband & wife mining team and all. Well ya got me wondering again.



I fail to see how people realizing that the game isn't a good fit for their preferences is a bad thing; either for the game or for them. The sad thing is people taking so long to realize it. If the game's not a good fit for them, they will be happier once they find a game that does suit them.

That said, you do have to protect people (and do so effectively) for long enough that they have the opportunity to learn about the game and thus the opportunity to make an informed decision.

Should they fail to use that opportunity, thus robbing themselves of the opportunity to make an informed decision (as that mining team did), the time they waste on a game they don't enjoy is on them. People refusing to inform themselves while making the decision to continue playing is not a reason to change the game.


I think I would like to hear CCP's prospective on this. Since they did remove the thread. CCP how do you feel offically about this situation? Why do you think they locked, and removed the thread Ruby?


If I remember right, the thread was full of off topic discussions. Otherwise, it's no different from any number of C&P storytime threads.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#614 - 2012-06-22 15:30:59 UTC
GM Homonoia wrote:
I shall make this real simple: Do not mess with rookies in rookie systems in any way. They are still trying to figure out how to read the overview and how to right click; messing with them at that point in their career is something for bullies who have something to compensate for and only dare to pick on the smallest, weakest boy in kindergarten.



HAHAHAHA
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#615 - 2012-06-22 17:32:18 UTC
OR trust your better judgement.[/quote]

Christ. That is the godamned rule that I've been suggesting, you nit. We are talking about helping CCP make official policy. Your personal policy, my personal policy, etc, is irrelevant.[/quote]

My point exactly, unless you happen to have s suggestions in regarding to how to word it.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#616 - 2012-06-22 22:16:13 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:

My point exactly, unless you happen to have s suggestions in regarding to how to word it.


And I have suggested how to word it. Several times. But each time I point out that the current wording sucks elephant balls, you lot pounce on that and declare that I hate newbies. Same goes for expanding on why I suggest that wording (and why the actual policy has to change to fit the wording).

For those who are only semi-literate, I'll go ahead and put my suggested wording here, again:

"Do NOT mess with ANYONE in Rookie Systems"

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Worn Xeno
One over Zero
#617 - 2012-06-22 22:29:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Worn Xeno
The rule is simple. Don't mess with rookies in rookie systems.

NO, we will not get a clear cut definition of what "mess" and "rookies" means.
We get some examples (e.g. mess = can-baiting, killing and more), but the rest - is COMMON SENSE (Ya know, that little voice in your head that tells you "No, don't take your officer-fit mission-spanker CNR into lowsec to go shopping, use your Covert Ops instead".)

Why? Simple reason, say "Rookie" would be defined as "Character younger than 20 days and worth less than 500000 ISK".
Because then some smartass rules lawyers would start shooting some poor beginners who happen to be 20 days and 1 minute (while they only played a total of 2 hours or so) or create some awesome rookie-protected characters (age 18 days, valued 498594 ISK) for whatever weird exploit they find.

So, for this simple reason the rule is "Don't mess with rookies in rookie systems."
If you feel for any reason the need to mess with someone in a rookie system, be sure it is not a rookie.
* That Tengu Pilot and that Hulk mining fleet with Orca are probably are not rookies... Gank away!
* That Crap-Fit Badger that just stole your can with 7536 units of Veldspar? Maybe rookie, maybe not.
* That mining frigate that just shot at you for crushing 2.3 damage, because you are red-flashy? Yup, rookie.

Use your brain. In any case: if the Banhammer hits you for messing with anyone in a rookie system, it is on your head.
Domono
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#618 - 2012-06-23 00:13:27 UTC
The rule also extends to extreme cases OUTSIDE a rookie systems as well. Like don't join a corp full of rookies and say your teaching them how hard eve is by slaughtering them all. Your not going to get in trouble for killing a rookie outside a rookie system unless all your doing is hunting them down, or specifically targeting them with a scam of some sort. Like getting a bunch to join your corp just to kill them or convince them to come out to low sec to kill them, or convince them to come into a worm hole, then trapping or killing them. Flipping the objective on a Sisters of Eve missions is probably a bad idea, so on so forth.

My best attempt at wording it would be: Do not interact with Rookies in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#619 - 2012-06-23 00:23:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Mrr Woodcock
Domono wrote:


My best attempt at wording it would be: Do not interact with Rookies in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.


Works for me. I can here it now, O May Gawd, we just gotta have rookie defined, this just cant work if we don't get what a rookie is defined. LMFAO

Oh yea, I would change the wording to this.

Do not interact with anyone in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#620 - 2012-06-23 00:37:34 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Domono wrote:


My best attempt at wording it would be: Do not interact with Rookies in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.


Works for me. I can here it now, O May Gawd, we just gotta have rookie defined, this just cant work if we don't get what a rookie is defined. LMFAO

Oh yea, I would change the wording to this.

Do not interact with anyone in any deceitful, aggressive, or harmful manner inside Rookie systems, and do not specifically target Rookies outside said systems.


First part of yours works. Second part requires you to define your protected class.

Writing your rule recursively is idiotic. It is idiotic because it completely fails to achieve the stated goals of the policy. The way that it fails to do so has been explained several times. Because of that, I have to wonder if your actual goals and your stated goals don't line up.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon