These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Rookie System Page Update

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#1 - 2012-08-26 20:08:36 UTC
Can we get this page updated?

Apparently the entirety of the SOE epic arc is protected for players under 1 month old now and bans are being given out but this has not been posted. Previously it was just Arnon that was protected in this manner.

I support the ruling (I haven't hung around the epic arc in a LONG time), but still feel that if a rule is being enforced, it should be made at least known.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#2 - 2012-08-26 20:12:30 UTC
Why would you want to pick on new players anyway? Sad

MinerBumping.com
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#3 - 2012-08-26 20:12:56 UTC
The SOE epic arc is protected?

Simple question: why?

If you're going to protect that arc you should also protect Angel Sound (the Angel Cartel epic arc).
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#4 - 2012-08-26 20:15:21 UTC
James 315 wrote:
Why would you want to pick on new players anyway? Sad


I don't pick on the ones in space under 1 month old, but I get convo'd about this stuff now since the last thread lol. I'm in support of rules being enforced when they're known, not bans for unknown rules.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#5 - 2012-08-26 20:16:05 UTC
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:
The SOE epic arc is protected?

Simple question: why?

If you're going to protect that arc you should also protect Angel Sound (the Angel Cartel epic arc).


From my understanding, it's only for rookie players 1 month old or younger, which is fine. Everyone else is still free game.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-08-26 20:16:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Suddenly Forums ForumKings wrote:
The SOE epic arc is protected?

Simple question: why?

If you're going to protect that arc you should also protect Angel Sound (the Angel Cartel epic arc).


New Player Experience.

CCP got tired of people that relentlessly kill new players, however this only applies in starter & SoE epic arc systems. They're still fair game everywhere else.

Edit: If you're an older character running the SoE epic arc or mining in a starter system, you aren't protected under the new rules.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#7 - 2012-08-26 20:20:42 UTC
I see nothing wrong with a game company doing it's best to retain players past their trial period, so I too am in favor of this.

As to whether they should scream this from the rooftops, I think not. I kind of like the divine justice of seeing these asshats that grief noobs getting to see the bottom of CCP's big frozen boot.

Mr Epeen Cool
Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
#8 - 2012-08-26 21:27:45 UTC
Some people need to learn the hard way. I've been in Arnon a few times where the SOE epic arc begins and ends, there are quite a few older players hanging around in their hoping to score kills from new players. If that's how they want to play they should learn to deal with the consequences.

Some seem to feel that Arnon is their little pond and they're a big shark in it. If they're whining about being banned, tough crap, deal with it.

Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method Mamma didn't raise no victims.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-08-26 21:41:19 UTC
"i need to pad my killboard with two week old players in t1 frigates that loot my cans"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#10 - 2012-08-26 22:35:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Andski wrote:
"i need to pad my killboard with two week old players in t1 frigates that loot my cans"



Socratic is that you?

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#11 - 2012-08-26 22:51:39 UTC
Tah'ris Khlador wrote:
I support the ruling (I haven't hung around the epic arc in a LONG time), but still feel that if a rule is being enforced, it should be made at least known.
Unfortunately, CCP feel that if they tell people the rules, people will have an easier time not breaking them, which would somehow be a bad thing… Ugh
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#12 - 2012-08-26 23:06:45 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tah'ris Khlador wrote:
I support the ruling (I haven't hung around the epic arc in a LONG time), but still feel that if a rule is being enforced, it should be made at least known.
Unfortunately, CCP feel that if they tell people the rules, people will have an easier time not breaking them, which would somehow be a bad thing… Ugh

I think that what CCP has actually said, over and over, is that they don't give specifics because it makes it easier for these losers to find the loopholes.

CCP has stated to leave newbies alone. That should be good enough for anyone not to argue with. Unless you are sitting on a griefer alt. Then by all means have fun niggling over the details.

Mr Epeen Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#13 - 2012-08-26 23:14:50 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I think that what CCP has actually said, over and over, is that they don't give specifics because it makes it easier for these losers to find the loopholes.
…and no matter how often they say it, it's an idiotic argument that is at complete cross-purpose to what they want to achieve. Their unwillingness to clearly state the rules they're going to enforce means they create loopholes because no-one will know what to report and what not to. So people get away with more. It's particularly idiotic when they make a very clear-cut rule and then decide to fudge certain parts of it for no good reason at all when those parts are really no different than the parts they do explain clearly.

Quote:
CCP has stated to leave newbies alone.
…and that would be fine and all if they provided a method to determine what counts as a newbie, which they're also unwilling to do. No-one is arguing with the rule. They just want to know whether or not they're breaking it.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#14 - 2012-08-26 23:21:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
I think that what CCP has actually said, over and over, is that they don't give specifics because it makes it easier for these losers to find the loopholes.
…and no matter how often they say it, it's an idiotic argument that is at complete cross-purpose to what they want to achieve. Their unwillingness to clearly state the rules they're going to enforce means they create loopholes because no-one will know what to report and what not to. So people get away with more. It's particularly idiotic when they make a very clear-cut rule and then decide to fudge certain parts of it for no good reason at all when those parts are really no different than the parts they do explain clearly.

Quote:
CCP has stated to leave newbies alone.
…and that would be fine and all if they provided a method to determine what counts as a newbie, which they're also unwilling to do. No-one is arguing with the rule. They just want to know whether or not they're breaking it.

And she starts niggling over the details.

Mr Epeen Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#15 - 2012-08-26 23:22:30 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
And she starts niggling over the details.
…such as?
Pipa Porto
#16 - 2012-08-27 01:11:04 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:

And she starts niggling over the details.

Mr Epeen Cool


Like the fact that CCP is enforcing things that aren't a rule. Those systems not listed on the "Rookie Systems" page are very clearly not "Rookie Systems," thus are clearly not subject to "Rookie System" restrictions. Oh wait... that's not a small and petty detail.

If you want to say that they are "Rookie Systems" by virtue of being frequented by rookies, then so is Jita.

There is an easy way to resolve the issue. Re-write the rule so that it is clear and enforceable.
"Do not mess* with anybody in a Rookie System. These are the Rookie Systems [List]."

If CCP wants to add rookie systems, they can do that (it's a stupid idea, but v0v). But adding them secretly is lunacy.


*As discussed in the last thread about this, nobody has a problem with the prohibited actions being vague, just with the protected class being vague.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#17 - 2012-08-27 01:20:06 UTC
As I recall, the two of you already tried white-knighting the griefers over 33 pages.

I guess you are going to take another shot at it, are you?

Mr Epeen Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#18 - 2012-08-27 01:25:32 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
As I recall, the two of you already tried white-knighting the griefers over 33 pages.
You recall incorrectly.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#19 - 2012-08-27 01:35:33 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
As I recall, the two of you already tried white-knighting the griefers over 33 pages.
You recall incorrectly.



Oh, sorry.

Did I get the page count wrong?

Mr Epeen Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#20 - 2012-08-27 01:38:00 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Oh, sorry.

Did I get the page count wrong?
Probably that too.
123Next pageLast page