These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Notice: Investgation and Prize Item Freeze for Teams in ATXIII

First post First post
Author
Captain Thunk
Explode. Now. Please.
Alliance. Now. Please.
#121 - 2015-09-17 06:48:50 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
I'm surprised that you don't already know that I'm a long standing HYDRA member, as well as an ex-member of your own corp in PL. But we can put that surprise down to my ego and narcissism and move on.


Bad Bobby wrote:

You and I appear to disagree as to whether there is evidence of an offense being committed under the current AT ruleset. You appear to think that Warlords and Camel have effectively poured petrol over themselves and run into a burning building. I think it's much more likely that they've just trolled the **** out of you, your alliance, CCP and a fair section of the playerbase.


This says it all, you simultaneously claim to be a member of Hydra yet can only suggest it might be an elaborate troll that backfired.

You can't say for sure because you don't actually know and while you think it's more likely it's a troll, you're not prepared to risk your credibility with a definitive answer because you accept that you could well be wrong as it is something the higher ups might have done and not clued you in on.

Interesting insight into Hydra and your position in it.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#122 - 2015-09-17 07:07:08 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
This says it all, you simultaneously claim to be a member of Hydra yet can only suggest it might be an elaborate troll that backfired.

No, I claim to be a member of HYDRA and suggest this might be a pretty straightforward troll that has succeeded.

Captain Thunk wrote:
You can't say for sure because you don't actually know and while you think it's more likely it's a troll, you're not prepared to risk your credibility with a definitive answer because you accept that you could well be wrong as it is something the higher ups might have done and not clued you in on.

Yes.

That's essentially what I've already said reworded in such a way as to make it sound like making wild guesses is somehow more noble and wise than accepting the limits of your knowledge.

Captain Thunk wrote:
Interesting insight into Hydra and your position in it.

I didn't claim to be anything more than a long standing member of HYDRA and only that after being accused of being a HYDRA alt. I've not claimed to be one of the Warlords or Camel AT teams. The last time I was in an AT team it was under the HYDRA ticker and nowdays my questionable past, PL affiliations and distinct lack of talent prevent me from competing alongside Warlords in the AT.

I've also made it abundantly clear that my knowledge is insufficient to make a determination about this controversy. I'm advocating we discuss the things we can actually discuss and leave the wild conjectures out of it.
Lovey Dovey
Doomheim
#123 - 2015-09-17 07:08:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Lovey Dovey
Bad Bobby wrote:

If you want to value everyone by the number of AT ships they currently hold, maybe.

I don't personally subscribe to that method of valuation.


It's valuing who is in a better situation in tangible and provable terms. You can screech all you want about the community being trolled, but at the moment the people doing the trolling have lost more than anyone.

Bad Bobby wrote:

No, I claim to be a member of HYDRA and suggest this might be a pretty straightforward troll that has succeeded.



Succeeded in your alliance/group losing all your gains from the tournament and putting your rivals in a better position monetarily. Seems like a pretty dumb way to measure success.
Captain Thunk
Explode. Now. Please.
Alliance. Now. Please.
#124 - 2015-09-17 07:12:07 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:

I didn't claim to be anything more than a long standing member of HYDRA and only that after being accused of being a HYDRA alt.


My apologies, I admit the limits to my knowledge, I wasn't aware that HYDRA was anything but an AT team.

I admire your loyalty to your alliance and your sterling attempts to white knight it during this thread. You've had little to work with and some large logic holes to skirt around.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#125 - 2015-09-17 07:26:52 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
My apologies, I admit the limits to my knowledge, I wasn't aware that HYDRA was anything but an AT team.

Apology accepted.

HYDRA has always been more than just an AT team. Obviously the high profile of the AT team has a tendency to eclipse everything else.

Now, can we stop slinging **** at eachother and actually have a discussion about the subject at hand?

Captain Thunk
Explode. Now. Please.
Alliance. Now. Please.
#126 - 2015-09-17 07:40:34 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Captain Thunk wrote:
My apologies, I admit the limits to my knowledge, I wasn't aware that HYDRA was anything but an AT team.

Apology accepted.

HYDRA has always been more than just an AT team. Obviously the high profile of the AT team has a tendency to eclipse everything else.

Now, can we stop slinging **** at eachother and actually have a discussion about the subject at hand?



Yeah, so back to the troll that backfired.

CCP opened an investigation into the matter which would only have happened if someone had submitted evidence via support ticket to warrant an investigation. This, I think we can agree, would be a ticket from DHB Wildcat because no-one else could submit the ticket on his behalf as they can't claim veracity over logs they've actually copied of a random website. No-one else has the insight into what really went on that he had.

A ticket he would never have submitted in the first place according to DHB had his team Captain not delivered an angry post aimed at him in response to his actions.

So this is why, assuming it's a troll at all, it's backfired. Hydramel had not intention of giving up their scheme, they've used it for 4 years and an elaborate troll isn't the way to get rules changes. It's detrimental to their income and makes no logical sense as to why this would all be a method to force CCP into 'fixing' the tournament from being fixed.

Not to mention, people who know DHB think he's too e-honoure to go in for this kind of thing.

I mean, your attempts are valiant, but you're relying on no tangible evidence being left in the client and none of the 24+ members of the Hydramel team folding out of self-preservation - from CCPs point of view it will only take 1.

Even if that does happen, Hydramel forfeits 2.5 Tril at least annual income, with rules changes that only affect Hydramel.

So yeah, it's a backfire if it's a troll.
GROUND XERO
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#127 - 2015-09-17 07:48:15 UTC
Before PL is screaming for bans...i wanna ask why they are still allowed to join AT after throwing a match with dual tanked vagas... because everyone knows this must have been a thrown match...Shocked

NCPL (Necromonger of new Eden) will make EVE great again!

Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#128 - 2015-09-17 07:49:40 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Now, can we stop slinging **** at eachother and actually have a discussion about the subject at hand?
Yeah, so back to the troll that backfired.
Apparently not.
Captain Thunk
Explode. Now. Please.
Alliance. Now. Please.
#129 - 2015-09-17 07:51:53 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Captain Thunk wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Now, can we stop slinging **** at eachother and actually have a discussion about the subject at hand?
Yeah, so back to the troll that backfired.
Apparently not.


There's not much else we can discuss.

It's either an elaborate troll that backired, in which case Big smile


-or-

It's true, in which case Big smile
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#130 - 2015-09-17 08:01:04 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
There's not much else we can discuss.
We can't discuss the current AT rules and what improvements need to be made to them?

We can't discuss the current AT tournament structure and how that can be improved?

We can't discuss the place that AT ships play in the AT meta and the overall EVE economy?

We can't discuss the unstable nature of the EVE community and it's horrendous groupthink?

You feel that there is nothing constructive or valuable to add to this thread? Only more trolling, insults, rage, ignorance and hysterics?

Ok. I suppose it's just /thread then.
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#131 - 2015-09-17 08:52:14 UTC
GROUND XERO wrote:
Before PL is screaming for bans...i wanna ask why they are still allowed to join AT after throwing a match with dual tanked vagas... because everyone knows this must have been a thrown match...Shocked


what on earth would we have to gain from kicking ourselves out of the tournament?
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#132 - 2015-09-17 09:23:38 UTC
Mr Rive wrote:
GROUND XERO wrote:
Before PL is screaming for bans...i wanna ask why they are still allowed to join AT after throwing a match with dual tanked vagas... because everyone knows this must have been a thrown match...Shocked


what on earth would we have to gain from kicking ourselves out of the tournament?


Stop making sense ! Lol
Mr Rive
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#133 - 2015-09-17 11:18:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Rive
Bad Bobby wrote:
Captain Thunk wrote:
There's not much else we can discuss.
We can't discuss the current AT rules and what improvements need to be made to them?

We can't discuss the current AT tournament structure and how that can be improved?

We can't discuss the place that AT ships play in the AT meta and the overall EVE economy?

We can't discuss the unstable nature of the EVE community and it's horrendous groupthink?

You feel that there is nothing constructive or valuable to add to this thread? Only more trolling, insults, rage, ignorance and hysterics?

Ok. I suppose it's just /thread then.


none of these things can be reasonably discussed while the question of hydra's cheating hangs in the air. What went wrong was a symptom of the problem with the current ruleset. We're talking about cures, but everyone keeps dragging it back into whether they think hydra did/didnt cheat.

Frankly, that question, as i keep saying, is irrelevant to next year. We all know something fishy went on, thats not groupthink its fact. If PL had done something like this, everyone would be tearing us apart too. The fact hydra have been banned for it in the past only shows that they're clearly interested in flaunting the rules as much as possible.

You were caught with your hand in the cookie jar again. The question is whether someone took a picture of you doing it, not whether you were manipulating the rules and pushing the boundaries. 'But nobody can prove we stole a cookie! Its just everyone hates us! It's not OUR fault there's one less cookie in the jar and no one else was in the house! what if it was rats????'

It derails the topic, and I think you actually want to fix the cause of these problems, you just dont want to admit hydra did anything illegal or unethical, again. You sound like one of the good guys, I wouldn't be surprised if like many of the hydra team you didnt really 'care' why you kept winning as long as you got your payout at the end. That's fine, I might have done the same in your position, but dont keep pulling this back on to whether hydra is guilty or not, that's not the real problem with the tournament.
Captain Thunk
Explode. Now. Please.
Alliance. Now. Please.
#134 - 2015-09-17 11:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Thunk
Bad Bobby wrote:
We can't discuss the current AT tournament structure and how that can be improved?

I think we're in agreement that it should be a competition between teams, this was highlighted by PL before the tournament started and as it progressed. This led to rules clarifications CCP made as best they could. Ultimately, it seems it wasn't enough. It's not like CCP hasn't been liberal, in this thread alone I've highlighted several other ways that Hydramel could have achieved exactly the same effect without actually breaking any rules, but it seems to some this is no fun unless you break a few of the rules. This is where the danger is for Hydramel, CCP have given them scope to do what they've been doing for years now so this is more of an insult to CCP than anything else. We've already all agreed that Hydramel would have won just as easily without cheating. So I think this removes CCPs choice, they will clamp down on all forms of collusion. Which isn't a bad thing, afterall it's an Alliance Tournament, if you can't get 24 people in your own alliance to run tests then guess what, you're not an alliance.

Bad Bobby wrote:
We can't discuss the place that AT ships play in the AT meta and the overall EVE economy?

It's a question of balance. It's undeniable AT ships are crowd pleasers, people like to see them on the line and 'sploding, but they are inbalanced and the points cost should start to reflect this. Great if you have them and want to use them, but they should never be the same points cost as the same class of hull. I don't see many people arguing with this.

Bad Bobby wrote:
We can't discuss the unstable nature of the EVE community and it's horrendous groupthink?

Personally, I hate the 'community' endless whining and personal attacks made directly at CCP employees. Yet they're expected to sit there and endure it endlessly with only perfectly polite responses, they can't ignore it because it would offend the delicate little flowers and they can't give an emotional response because of expectations of 'professional behaviour'. I think the situation is stupid and an indictment on modern humanity. It's not an Eve thing, it's not a gaming thing, it's a moronic culture that breeds entitlement. I rarely get involved, I don't often read eve-o, reddit or any of the others. I saw it in 2006 it hasn't changed any since.

Bad Bobby wrote:

You feel that there is nothing constructive or valuable to add to this thread? Only more trolling, insults, rage, ignorance and hysterics?


Basically no, we're all waiting for the outcome of CCPs Investigation and killing time until it's complete. Sure, I enjoy posting and it's made me smile with various defences of Hydramel and what appears to be one guy cycling alts to post implications that PL somehow cheated by losing - ignoring the fact that PL doesn't profit in doing this.

I just like to argue and this makes a change from baiting Americans on pl.com
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#135 - 2015-09-17 12:23:45 UTC
Mr Rive wrote:
none of these things can be reasonably discussed while the question of hydra's cheating hangs in the air. What went wrong was a symptom of the problem with the current ruleset. We're talking about cures, but everyone keeps dragging it back into whether they think hydra did/didnt cheat.

Whether Warlords and Camel cheated or not, or whether this whole thing is a troll or not, will come out soon enough... or not. So I don't see much need to discuss it further than we already have.

Mr Rive wrote:
Frankly, that question, as i keep saying, is irrelevant to next year.

Which is why I think we can happily discuss the future, regardless of the verdict of the investigation, because the fact there is need for an investigation at all is the actual problem.

Mr Rive wrote:
I think you actually want to fix the cause of these problems

I do, because I want EVE and the AT to survive and flourish. However, I would rather it remains the classic sandbox EVE where anything goes and the weak just have to HTFU. The idea that EVE should be turned into a muted version of itself for some reason just doesn't work for me.

Mr Rive wrote:
you just dont want to admit hydra did anything illegal or unethical, again.

I'll admit it as soon as I know it to be true. In fact, I'll be laughing with the rest of you.

Mr Rive wrote:
You sound like one of the good guys, I wouldn't be surprised if like many of the hydra team you didnt really 'care' why you kept winning as long as you got your payout at the end. That's fine, I might have done the same in your position, but dont keep pulling this back on to whether hydra is guilty or not, that's not the real problem with the tournament.

I'm not one of the good guys by any stretch, but I'm also not an exploiter or rulebreaker, because I value my continued existence and prosperity within this game.

I very much did care about why we kept winning and I think that it's spurious to suggest our wins were all predicated on cheating.

I'm also not the one that keeps pulling this discussion back to the "did they / didn't they" question because I don't see the point in pure speculation.
Taraas Enko
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#136 - 2015-09-17 12:40:02 UTC
IF the guys running the AT from CCP fail to resolve this then yous may as well get a job at FIFA
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#137 - 2015-09-17 12:40:41 UTC
Captain Thunk wrote:
I think we're in agreement that it should be a competition between teams, this was highlighted by PL before the tournament started and as it progressed. This led to rules clarifications CCP made as best they could. Ultimately, it seems it wasn't enough. It's not like CCP hasn't been liberal, in this thread alone I've highlighted several other ways that Hydramel could have achieved exactly the same effect without actually breaking any rules, but it seems to some this is no fun unless you break a few of the rules. This is where the danger is for Hydramel, CCP have given them scope to do what they've been doing for years now so this is more of an insult to CCP than anything else. We've already all agreed that Hydramel would have won just as easily without cheating. So I think this removes CCPs choice, they will clamp down on all forms of collusion. Which isn't a bad thing, afterall it's an Alliance Tournament, if you can't get 24 people in your own alliance to run tests then guess what, you're not an alliance.
Yeah, I feel the current collusion rules are far too permissive and leave it so open to abuse. It also appears to me that the rules are very difficult to police and enforce. But we'll see the truth of that soon enough, I expect.

Captain Thunk wrote:
It's a question of balance. It's undeniable AT ships are crowd pleasers, people like to see them on the line and 'sploding, but they are inbalanced and the points cost should start to reflect this. Great if you have them and want to use them, but they should never be the same points cost as the same class of hull. I don't see many people arguing with this.
I think a better points balance is certainly possible. But do you think that the number, value and tournament viability of the AT prizes is right? I'm not sure we need prizes so valuable when the bragging rights alone would be sufficient to drive the best of us to compete. I'm not sure having the tournament prizes perpetuate an advantage over those that do not have them is really the right dynamic either.

Captain Thunk wrote:
Personally, I hate the 'community' endless whining and personal attacks made directly at CCP employees. Yet they're expected to sit there and endure it endlessly with only perfectly polite responses, they can't ignore it because it would offend the delicate little flowers and they can't give an emotional response because of expectations of 'professional behaviour'. I think the situation is stupid and an indictment on modern humanity. It's not an Eve thing, it's not a gaming thing, it's a moronic culture that breeds entitlement. I rarely get involved, I don't often read eve-o, reddit or any of the others. I saw it in 2006 it hasn't changed any since.
People on the internet. So often magical and so often down right disgusting. It's an insoluble problem in my mind, so I've always gone for the classic approach of killing them all and let "god" sort them out.

Captain Thunk wrote:
Basically no, we're all waiting for the outcome of CCPs Investigation and killing time until it's complete.
I think there needs to be more reading material in this waiting room.

Anyway, thanks for engaging me on the actual issues. Snigg #1.
MissBolyai
ElitistOps
Deepwater Hooligans
#138 - 2015-09-17 13:27:48 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
HYDRA has always been more than just an AT team. Obviously the high profile of the AT team has a tendency to eclipse everything else.


You mean Warlords of the Deep, right? Or are you talking about mother Hydra and her offspring Camel and Warlords?

Hydra doesn't have an AT team. I understand the confusion though, and I think that's at the heart of CCP's inquiry.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#139 - 2015-09-17 13:33:26 UTC
Literally all you pl people are on about is camel and warlords/hydra beeing 1 team, that isnt the issue, never was the issue and is totally legal. Its all about if they turned their bo3 into a bo1 or not and if the finals were legit.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#140 - 2015-09-17 13:46:22 UTC
MissBolyai wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
HYDRA has always been more than just an AT team. Obviously the high profile of the AT team has a tendency to eclipse everything else.
You mean Warlords of the Deep, right?
No, I mean HYDRA RELOADED.

But following your lead and taking this all completely out of context, you can call me a Warlords Of The Deep member instead, I was only a member of Warlords for the blink of an eye, but nbd.

MissBolyai wrote:
Or are you talking about mother Hydra and her offspring Camel and Warlords?
It's somewhat harsh on Camel to claim that they are merely the offspring of HYDRA RELOADED when they in fact originated as an entirely separate entity and have their own independent tournament pedigree. Indeed, it was that independent tournament pedigree along with their small gang focus that led HYDRA in to a training partnership with them in the first place.

MissBolyai wrote:
Hydra doesn't have an AT team.
If you say so.