These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Rookie System Page Update

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#321 - 2012-08-30 15:58:43 UTC
What? Internet spaceship seppuku?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#322 - 2012-08-30 16:05:40 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
What? Internet spaceship seppuku?
In a way… in both cases, it's the second that does the actual killing so it's more like assisted (account) suicide.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#323 - 2012-08-30 16:06:06 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Mr Epeen wrote:
If it's quoted
…and unaltered, then I said it


Post #274 unaltered:

Tippia wrote:
Veldpar might be ok to mine right now, but it's not that desirable.


You did indeed belittle my beloved Veldspar.

Mr Epeen Cool
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#324 - 2012-08-30 16:08:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
What? Internet spaceship seppuku?
In a way… in both cases, it's the second that does the actual killing so it's more like assisted (account) suicide.


What makes you think that the one who breaks the rules commits suicide?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#325 - 2012-08-30 16:11:05 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Post #274 unaltered:
Nope. Still altered.
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
What makes you think that the one who breaks the rules commits suicide?
To continue your parable, he just takes the first cut — the second (CCP) gets the kill by lopping his head off for breaking the rules.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#326 - 2012-08-30 16:13:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Post #274 unaltered:
Nope. Still altered.


LOL!

Mr Epeen Cool
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#327 - 2012-08-30 16:13:47 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
What makes you think that the one who breaks the rules commits suicide?
To continue your parable, he just takes the first cut — the second (CCP) gets the kill by lopping his head off for breaking the rules.


And you have solution ready for possible trial exploit?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#328 - 2012-08-30 16:15:36 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
And you have solution ready for possible trial exploit?
…such as?
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#329 - 2012-08-30 16:20:06 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
And you have solution ready for possible trial exploit?
…such as?


Well, why would people do something that breaks the rules with their main account?

1) create trial account
2) kill rookies
3) CCP bans that account
4) go to 1
5) end
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#330 - 2012-08-30 16:22:36 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
1) create trial account
2) kill rookies
3) CCP bans that account
4) go to 1
5) end
You mean much like now, meaning it cannot change the safety of newbies in a negative way?
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#331 - 2012-08-30 16:24:15 UTC
Tippia wrote:
You mean much like now, meaning it cannot change the safety of newbies in a negative way?


So, your prop(vp)osal can be exploited.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#332 - 2012-08-30 16:36:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
So, your prop(vp)osal can be exploited.
…and here's the thing: I've never claimed that it couldn't be. That's just one of your straw men that you've clung to in the hopes that it will expose some kind of nasty ebil agenda on my part. Unfortunately for you, as with most fallacies, this one mainly manages to prove the opposite of what you're hoping it will prove. What you just showed only illustrates that if I were after newbies, I wouldn't care either way since I'd be able to get them regardless.

All I've ever claimed is that it's a better system because the clarity removes the vagueness that griefers can appeal to in (not so) “good faith” and that older players can hide behind because it creates uncertainty as to whether they are legit targets or not. Recycling alts never fell into either of those to begin with and is against the rules regardless — being used against newbies actually makes no difference.

What I have said is that you have been unable to come up with any kind of exploits to support your claim that I only want the change so I can exploit it, and that those exploits meant that the change would be a bad one — you kept lowing about aaaall these nasty exploits but you were never able to name one. This example does not really change that: you still haven't come up with an exploit that would be enabled by such a change. You still haven't explained how it would be worse than the current deliberate lack of clarity.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#333 - 2012-08-30 17:03:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Recycling alts never fell into either of those to begin with and is against the rules regardless — being used against newbies actually makes no difference.


Care to explain why your system is better if it's not better...
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#334 - 2012-08-30 17:04:48 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Recycling alts never fell into either of those to begin with and is against the rules regardless — being used against newbies actually makes no difference.


Care to explain why your system is better if it's not better...

Dear god, go back and read the thread. At least put some effort into your argument, instead of repeating the same hackneyed ****.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#335 - 2012-08-30 17:09:40 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Dear god, go back and read the thread. At least put some effort into your argument, instead of repeating the same hackneyed ****.


Do you have link to that other proposal you are talking about? Only "decent" proposal I've seen in this thread is Drop's "no pvp zone".
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#336 - 2012-08-30 17:11:09 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Recycling alts never fell into either of those to begin with and is against the rules regardless — being used against newbies actually makes no difference.


Care to explain why your system is better if it's not better...


Only argue with Tippia in short bursts. His Veldhate might be contagious. Don't ever be a Veldhater.

Mr Epeen Cool
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#337 - 2012-08-30 17:20:33 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Care to explain why your system is better if it's not better...
Only if you explain why it's not better.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#338 - 2012-08-30 17:23:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Care to explain why your system is better if it's not better...
Only if you explain why it's not better.


Because it doesn't solve the main problem: older players killing rookies in rookie systems.

Unless you have a solution to track down these people... It's not going to happen.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#339 - 2012-08-30 17:29:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Because it doesn't solve the main problem: older players killing rookies in rookie systems.
Sure it does. It addresses it by outlawing any and all tactics, interpretations, evasions, pleadings, wordplay or other method they could think of employing to cover their asses and not get thrown out.

It does this by being absolutely, unquestionably, crystal clear about what you can and cannot do, unlike the current system and does it to such a degree that it is trivially taught to everyone, new and old.

Quote:
Unless you have a solution to track down these people... It's not going to happen.
…and that's the bonus: it does. If you have killed another player in a newbie system, you are guilty. Period. It's such an easy solution that even the players can monitor it with existing in-game means, never mind the additional information the GMs have access to.

So, care to explain how it is not better than the current system?
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#340 - 2012-08-30 17:32:25 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Because it doesn't solve the main problem: older players killing rookies in rookie systems.
Sure it does. It addresses it by outlawing any and all tactics, interpretations, evasions, pleadings, wordplay or other method they could think of employing to cover their asses and not get thrown out.

It does this by being absolutely, unquestionably, crystal clear about what you can and cannot do, unlike the current system and does it to such a degree that it is trivially taught to everyone, new and old.


And you think these people would still get banned if they use trial accounts?

If they know what they are doing there's no way to stop it with current system or with your proposed system.