These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What we grrrrgoons going to do?

First post
Author
Johnny ReeRee
The ReeRee Brigade
#361 - 2016-04-14 17:20:38 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
They aren't fighting against a third party application. They are fighting, in reality, against thousands upon thousands of players who used a gambling service that they enjoy. There is a way to fight against IWI, and that's to discourage the playerbase from using it in the first place.

Is that hard? Hell yes it is, but complaining about it is akin to grr goons. Don't complain about not being able to fight someone just because you haven't figured out how to do it successfully yet.
By hard you really mean impossible. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I'm pretty sure convincing the entire EVE playerbase to not do something isn't actually possible. I'm not complaining about IWI just because of this war, feel free to check my posting history on IWI in the past.

The fact remains that ignoring the parties involved, looking at this objectively, having one side using a third party application to gain isk with no counter and the other using legitimate game mechanics that can be countered, there's a clear balance issue there. One that evidently shouldn't exist, since gaining an unfair benefit through the use of a third party application is already against the EULA.

I haven't read this thread or played Eve in...well..years, but are Goons seriously making the argument that zomg this is so unfair because someone is using out of game resources? Goons, led by a guy who hasn't logged in in...well..years, who supports his activities with a gaming website? Who tried (and failed) to create a gambling site? Who has made every possible effort to monetize his Eve notoriety and use that a position to lead an in-game coalition? Goons, who had a client hack which gave them access to very useful tools long before they existed in the official client?

Never change Goons!

But thank you for this post which is extremely interesting and insightful and from which I learned so much!
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#362 - 2016-04-14 17:24:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ridiculous in what what? Yes, IWI found a way to gain isk from players using a third party application. That is undeniable. You can't claim that the IWI site is not a third party application nor can you deny that without that application he'd not have been able to get all of the isk. If he were sitting around in game saying "if you give me isk I'll pay to kill the goons" there's absolutely no way he'd make trillions, and you know that full well.

I love how you're calling me ridiculous then you're going off to deny basic facts about how he makes his isk. Further you're then going down the "the tears" route. I'm not whining or crying about the breaches of the EULA, I'm calmly, rationally and logically pointing out the very real breaches of the EULA that exists and questioning why CCP chooses to ignore it.


And the fact that a third party application is used matters...why?

Could the imperium (or ANY alliance) exist and make the ISK it does without third party applications to organize(voice comms, forums, etc.)? Could any of us play this game without zkillboard, tripwire, EFT, dotlan, etc.? No. Third party applications aren't a breach of the EULA. You're selectively picking one single 3rd party application because you don't like it. That's being nothing but ridiculous. Stop whining and find a way to beat him at his game.

Very little of your line of thought is rational or logical.
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#363 - 2016-04-14 18:02:38 UTC
Lucas-

I admire your loyalty to your group, that's awesome. I think it's blinding you to what I'm trying to tell you though. I can't fight against spin nor do I wish to try. The prism of how you are viewing this is causing the distortion of what I'm trying to get across to you.

You are looking for mechanisms or mechanics to fight against IWI, that's not the approach I'm telling you about, it's the wrong approach entirely. As long as you keep looking there, you will not stand a chance.

My advice to you is simple, stop trying to attack IWI - regardless of their propaganda vs. Imperium propaganda - on that level. It's not a Propaganda fight other than the impact it has on player perception, which given how jaded and desperate for information (yes, normally two opposing forces) most of the player populace is, can be significant or worthless.

I don't know the Imperium leadership personally, I can't comment on what they put out, say they leak out, or otherwise say is true or not and THAT is their problem. They have so much past that is easily researched to show they can't be trusted. It's so bad that even loyal alliance mates appear to have left because of duplicity and lack of appropriate relationship reasons. The entire player base is WATCHING this unfold. It doesn't matter if it is TRUE or not, it is the prevailing perception they are fighting! That negative view cannot be countered by traditional propaganda techniques that the Imperium is currently employing.

You keep pointing out that people are buying IWI prop and ignoring Imperium prop. I'm telling you there is a reason for that. I am not a consumer of it either way, I don't really have a dog in the fight.

If you want the Imperium to go down fighting, not with ships, but to actually fight on the real war front of this war, you will find a way to smack the leadership across the face and tell them they need a 'Come to Jesus' moment, repent, repair and rebuild. Their other option would be to pack up, give everything to people that can DO that and leave the game. If that happens, Goonswarm could live on and rebuild/repair fences, and become part of the future. Their legacy would live on and such, but really, the Imperium problem is their own leadership... regardless if the propaganda about them is true or not. The perception is everything in this fight.
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#364 - 2016-04-14 19:35:51 UTC
Pandora, that's asking The Mittani not to be an egotistical *******. That is something he is incapable of.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#365 - 2016-04-14 19:39:13 UTC
Johnny ReeRee wrote:
I haven't read this thread or played Eve in...well..years, but are Goons seriously making the argument that zomg this is so unfair because someone is using out of game resources? Goons, led by a guy who hasn't logged in in...well..years, who supports his activities with a gaming website? Who tried (and failed) to create a gambling site? Who has made every possible effort to monetize his Eve notoriety and use that a position to lead an in-game coalition? Goons, who had a client hack which gave them access to very useful tools long before they existed in the official client?

Never change Goons!

But thank you for this post which is extremely interesting and insightful and from which I learned so much!


Lucas' rants are about as relevant to 'goon opinion' as visiting Louisiana and asking the locals about US foreign policy.
The closest you'll get to any understanding on it, is that we tried to make our own gambling site and got it badly wrong.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#366 - 2016-04-14 19:47:06 UTC
Johnny ReeRee wrote:
I haven't read this thread or played Eve in...well..years, but are Goons seriously making the argument that zomg this is so unfair because someone is using out of game resources? Goons, led by a guy who hasn't logged in in...well..years, who supports his activities with a gaming website? Who tried (and failed) to create a gambling site? Who has made every possible effort to monetize his Eve notoriety and use that a position to lead an in-game coalition? Goons, who had a client hack which gave them access to very useful tools long before they existed in the official client?
No, I as a non-goon and speaking as an individual with an opinion I've held for years am stating that having a third party application - that cannot be countered in any way by players in game - providing income to a player conveys an unfair benefit and as such should be covered by the EULA clause against exactly that. Whether it's used against goons is irrelevant, no group could fight against it because regular players are playing by regular rules and the game is designed in such a way that regular mechanics have counters.

Cidanel Afuran wrote:
And the fact that a third party application is used matters...why?
Uhh, because the EULA explicitly disallows the use of third party application with give an unfair benefit to players? That's like saying "but why does it matter if I use a bot".

Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Could the imperium (or ANY alliance) exist and make the ISK it does without third party applications to organize(voice comms, forums, etc.)? Could any of us play this game without zkillboard, tripwire, EFT, dotlan, etc.? No. Third party applications aren't a breach of the EULA. You're selectively picking one single 3rd party application because you don't like it. That's being nothing but ridiculous.
No, I'm not singling out the 3rd party application because I don;t like it, I'm singling it out because it conveys and unfair in-game benefit while the others do not. Here, let me highlight the EULA clause for you.

Cidanel Afuran wrote:
You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play.
Kindly explain to me how his third party application allowing him to accumulate trillions of isk - in a way that has no in-game counter no less - is not facilitating the acquisition of currency at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary game play.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#367 - 2016-04-14 19:54:00 UTC
Pandora Carrollon wrote:
I admire your loyalty to your group, that's awesome. I think it's blinding you to what I'm trying to tell you though. I can't fight against spin nor do I wish to try. The prism of how you are viewing this is causing the distortion of what I'm trying to get across to you.

You are looking for mechanisms or mechanics to fight against IWI, that's not the approach I'm telling you about, it's the wrong approach entirely. As long as you keep looking there, you will not stand a chance.
Nope, you're just judging my opinions based on why you think I have them. This has nothing to do with the existing war and you are free to go back along my posting history to determine that this is in fact he same opinion I've always held. I'm not looking for any way to fight IWI, in this war, I have fully accepted the fact that an application that should have been banned long ago which has allowed a character to accrue game breaking levels of income will win any war since there's no way to counter it. Hell, I'm not even in the Imperium.

Pandora Carrollon wrote:
You keep pointing out that people are buying IWI prop and ignoring Imperium prop. I'm telling you there is a reason for that. I am not a consumer of it either way, I don't really have a dog in the fight.
I don't keep posting it, I told you once that the two examples you provided, which you claimed gave an overview of both sides were both from the same side of the war. What I'm saying is that if you are neutral you're really really bad at it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#368 - 2016-04-14 20:12:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
In-game counter to IWI:

Create an in-game competitor.

The richest coalition in the game could easily have subsidised their own gambling website variant - offering massively increased percentages to win for their clients and thus stealing away his playerbase and income*

But they didn't. RIP.


Alternatively, create a Gamblers Anonymous and RP the hell out of it with the Emperor's decree etc....


*well I know they tried

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#369 - 2016-04-14 20:13:31 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Kindly explain to me how his third party application allowing him to accumulate trillions of isk - in a way that has no in-game counter no less - is not facilitating the acquisition of currency at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary game play.




Because the out of game app isn't acquiring the isk. Players are. Which is why IWI has bankers, they log into the game and move money around AS PLAYERS, because an automated system doing that would break the rules. The gambling site isn't gathering any isk, players are literally sending it to IWI. Do you want to remove the isk donation option from EVE? Pull a runescape and require all trades be "equal" in value?

Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#370 - 2016-04-14 20:21:41 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
In-game counter to IWI:

Create an in-game competitor.

The richest coalition in the game could easily have subsidised their own gambling website variant - offering massively increased percentages to win for their clients and thus stealing away his playerbase and income*

But they didn't. RIP.
Well that's not an in-game counter, that's an out of game counter.

Aiwha wrote:
Because the out of game app isn't acquiring the isk. Players are. Which is why IWI has bankers, they log into the game and move money around AS PLAYERS, because an automated system doing that would break the rules. The gambling site isn't gathering any isk, players are literally sending it to IWI. Do you want to remove the isk donation option from EVE? Pull a runescape and require all trades be "equal" in value?
Oh OK, so a market bot is fine too then is it? I can go ahead and set up market bots in every region because it's not the application making me isk, it's all the players buying and selling goods while I maintain constant market dominance?

The thing is the fact that one player is throwing trillions of isk made from a third party application into a war and outclassing a 40,000 character coalitions income solo is categoric proof that it's allowing income at a rate far beyond what can be achieved by "ordinary gameplay".

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#371 - 2016-04-14 20:38:46 UTC
Comparing IWI to a Market bot (or any bot) is laughable. Bots automate gameplay, if you think IWI is automating anything in game then you would have a case for it breaking the EULA.

IWI does the same thing as all the isk doublers you see in the trade hubs, its just on a larger scale and with a fancy website. They make their isk by persuading gullible players to donate them isk on a promise that they might get more isk back.

Whilst personally I would ban all gambling, fake or real everywhere on the planet if I could. It doesn't break the EULA (as long as they don't go all RMT like most of them seem to)

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#372 - 2016-04-14 20:49:49 UTC
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Comparing IWI to a Market bot (or any bot) is laughable. Bots automate gameplay, if you think IWI is automating anything in game then you would have a case for it breaking the EULA.
Sure I would but that doesn't mean I don't still have a point. I made that comparison because supposedly if it's not actually generating isk and it's coming from players, using a third party application to make loads of isk is fine, right?

Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
IWI does the same thing as all the isk doublers you see in the trade hubs, its just on a larger scale and with a fancy website. They make their isk by persuading gullible players to donate them isk on a promise that they might get more isk back.
Then you agree, the third party application allows him to do this at a rate unachievable by "ordinary gameplay"?

Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Whilst personally I would ban all gambling, fake or real everywhere on the planet if I could. It doesn't break the EULA (as long as they don't go all RMT like most of them seem to)
Nosy had some good stats on that showing how unlikely it is that the's no institutional RMT at IWI. There's no way for CCP to track if there is either. It's funny though, because if you make a site for a bank, and allow players to put money in and transfer it to other players within the bank who then draw it out, you'll get your site (and/or accounts) shut down because you're allowing ISK transactions that don't show up on CCPs logs. Strangely that too is a rule that seems to not apply to gambling sites.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#373 - 2016-04-14 20:53:40 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
In-game counter to IWI:

Create an in-game competitor.

The richest coalition in the game could easily have subsidised their own gambling website variant - offering massively increased percentages to win for their clients and thus stealing away his playerbase and income*

But they didn't. RIP.
Well that's not an in-game counter, that's an out of game counter.

Aiwha wrote:
Because the out of game app isn't acquiring the isk. Players are. Which is why IWI has bankers, they log into the game and move money around AS PLAYERS, because an automated system doing that would break the rules. The gambling site isn't gathering any isk, players are literally sending it to IWI. Do you want to remove the isk donation option from EVE? Pull a runescape and require all trades be "equal" in value?
Oh OK, so a market bot is fine too then is it? I can go ahead and set up market bots in every region because it's not the application making me isk, it's all the players buying and selling goods while I maintain constant market dominance?

The thing is the fact that one player is throwing trillions of isk made from a third party application into a war and outclassing a 40,000 character coalitions income solo is categoric proof that it's allowing income at a rate far beyond what can be achieved by "ordinary gameplay".




Which the site does not do. IWI has players who setup all the in-game transactions. Contracts, payouts, ect. All done by hand. All ingame transactions are between players, not bots ore third party programs.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#374 - 2016-04-14 21:08:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Archibald Thistlewaite III
Lucas Kell wrote:
Sure I would but that doesn't mean I don't still have a point. I made that comparison because supposedly if it's not actually generating isk and it's coming from players, using a third party application to make loads of isk is fine, right?
You have no point. IWI is not comparable with any bot programs.

Lucas Kell wrote:
Then you agree, the third party application allows him to do this at a rate unachievable by "ordinary gameplay"?
Players donating isk to the in game corp of IWI is ordinary gameplay. If SMA mailled all its members to ask for a donation to assist with it's move to a new home no-one would think SMA was breaking the EULA. Donations of isk between player/corps and alliances is an in game option.

As far as I'm aware there is no cap on the amount of isk donations any entity can receive in Eve and since isk donations are coded into the game, its a huge leap to think isk donations are going to break the EULA.

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'

Trudeaux Margaret
University of Caille
#375 - 2016-04-14 21:14:41 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Aiwha wrote:
Because the out of game app isn't acquiring the isk. Players are. Which is why IWI has bankers, they log into the game and move money around AS PLAYERS, because an automated system doing that would break the rules. The gambling site isn't gathering any isk, players are literally sending it to IWI. Do you want to remove the isk donation option from EVE? Pull a runescape and require all trades be "equal" in value?
Oh OK, so a market bot is fine too then is it? I can go ahead and set up market bots in every region because it's not the application making me isk, it's all the players buying and selling goods while I maintain constant market dominance?


Did you literally just not read any of the paragraph you quoted? I'm getting the sense that you didn't, because if you had, you wouldn't have persisted in comparing IWI (or any in-game casino) to a market bot.

Quote:
The thing is the fact that one player is throwing trillions of isk made from a third party application into a war and outclassing a 40,000 character coalitions income solo is categoric proof that it's allowing income at a rate far beyond what can be achieved by "ordinary gameplay".


You keep repeating this in such a way that you seem to be hoping you're going to shout down everyone else. Let me suggest something to you. File a formal petition to CCP to get to get casinos shut down. State your case, laying out your reading of their EULA. See what kind of answer you get, if any. Because in the end, it's not what any of us think about the issue; it's what CCP thinks. They've already investigated IWI for RMT and apparently did not find any wrongdoing, but if you believe so fervently that the situation with casinos as a whole is so unfair, it can't hurt to take a wider approach.

> anyone willing to give me like a 5 min politics crash course?

> grr goons, lowsec is full of elitist sh*s, all roads lead to the bittervet pl

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#376 - 2016-04-14 21:16:41 UTC
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
You have no point. IWI is not comparable with any bot programs.
And yet both facilitate the acquisition of isk at a faster rate than normal gameplay.

Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Players donating isk to the in game corp of IWI is ordinary gameplay. If SMA mailled all its members to ask for a donation to assist with it's move to a new home no-one would think SMA was breaking the EULA. Donations of isk between player/corps and alliances is an in game option.

As far as I'm aware there is no cap on the amount of isk donations any entity can receive in Eve and since isk donations are coded into the game, its a huge leap to think isk donations are going to break the EULA.
Except it's not just donations is it. If he were sitting around in game with no third party application asking people to send him isk, he'd not be earning trillions. The thing that allows him to gain isk at an accelerated rate when compared to normal gameplay is the site. To clarify, if CCP choose to block gambling sites from existing, I have no problem with him or anyone else sitting in Jita asking people to donate to them, since that is in fact normal gameplay.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#377 - 2016-04-14 21:34:02 UTC
Surely all the IWI thing has showed is that goons, for all their blustering, didn't have the finances to fight a reasonable defence. One guy with a website was able to make enough to outclass you guys. It shows that ISK is more powerful in eve than people had thought, a sensible alliance might use it's reputation to create a investment programme that would let it skim profit from many players. It seems that to defend against these types of things properly alliances need to be focused on having the isk in their coffers to buy the allies they need.

Also the whole tactic of, let them capture whole regions in days, was not very clever. I don't know who thought that one up, all it did was build momentum and now many more people think there's a chance of wiping out goons. If you'd just formed a solid defend initially you'd have out off a lot of the people who jumped on the bandwagon

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#378 - 2016-04-14 21:58:34 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nope, you're just judging my opinions based on why you think I have them. This has nothing to do with the existing war and you are free to go back along my posting history to determine that this is in fact he same opinion I've always held. I'm not looking for any way to fight IWI, in this war, I have fully accepted the fact that an application that should have been banned long ago which has allowed a character to accrue game breaking levels of income will win any war since there's no way to counter it. Hell, I'm not even in the Imperium.


Okay, I'll take you at your word then. Perhaps it is me misinterpreting you but I'm not seeing what I missed.

Lucas Kell wrote:
I don't keep posting it, I told you once that the two examples you provided, which you claimed gave an overview of both sides were both from the same side of the war. What I'm saying is that if you are neutral you're really really bad at it.


No, being critical of the Imperium and not criticizing IWI does NOT mean I am not neutral. I don't really have any criticisms of IWI as they have been doing their side of the fight mostly correctly. I am not seeing ANY posts by Imperium Leadership hinting that they even understand or comprehend the reason they are losing the perception war to the degree necessary to stop the negative perception and reverse the tide. If they do understand it and are just not taking the proper actions, then that speaks volumes as well.

If that *IS* your analysis as well, then you and I are on the same page and we can agree to agree and I apologize for misinterpreting your posts. If you disagree, then telling me I am misinterpreting you isn't helping explain your point(s), I am just not seeing how your POV has changed from it being hopeless and impossible to 'attack' IWI to 'yeah, there is a way but it will never happen' (which is at this point almost moot).

If I am biased, it would be toward helping The Imperium (or what's left of it) put up a fight on the right front in the right avenue of attack. I kind of hate seeing an institution like the Goons/SMA etc. go down so hard without realizing what's choking them to death. I suppose if we are past that point and all of this is moot, I apologize for the Monday morning analysis if that is the case and the war is over.

I strictly state that I am not attacking you or the SMA or Goons or anyone. I'm sorry if it came across that way, it was not intended.
Chloe 'Eris' Morgan
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#379 - 2016-04-14 22:00:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Chloe 'Eris' Morgan
Lucas Kell wrote:
By hard you really mean impossible. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I'm pretty sure convincing the entire EVE playerbase to not do something isn't actually possible.


Not impossible at all, if anything you guys have proven the opposite. The CFC and it's leadership has convinced thousands of past and present players to hate them, hence the grrrgoons!

How does it go again..... Oh that's right, "We're not here to ruin the game, we're here to ruin your game".

It's like a Burn Jita event but instead it's Deklein, it's great and I for one will continue to use IWI just to contribute to it. The sooner the Goons are gone the better. It's sooooo exciting. Big smileBig smileBig smile

btw, Imperium tears are delicious to see on the forums, mmmmm scrummy.
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#380 - 2016-04-14 22:16:17 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
Pandora, that's asking The Mittani not to be an egotistical *******. That is something he is incapable of.


Honestly, I have never met him I don't know if he is or isn't what others say he is. I have read many of his comments and posts. Some seem fair and even handed, other actions... well, don't look so great on him. Then again, I don't know what was going on in his life or all the circumstances leading up to the given comment.

People are creatures of context, we live in the context of the moment. Our decisions, what we say or do is in that moment.

Good people can have tendencies to be jerks. They can fight with it on a daily basis. It doesn't mean they don't have consciences or aren't truly good people inside. It can mean, at the moment they open their mouths, do something, or react, the 'jerk inside' won out. I could quantify myself as such a person, many if not most could. We all have our personal demons.

Now, some people don't fight it, don't care and don't even see other people as mattering at all in their lives other than to provide them with self esteem. They don't care how they are perceived and just live for the moment and blow off any criticism of others, finding excuses in everything they do, especially for failures. I'm not going to call such a person 'bad' as that is more of a function of actions not words, but I will say that very few of them end up with good, enduring legacies that others want to emulate.

I think it is possible for any intelligent person to find a better path in life. They are only truly lost when they lose the ability to self critique. If that happens, it's pretty much over for them.

I have no idea where the person in question is on the path of life, what matters is how much he wants to turn this conflict around and claw out some form of victory even if small or if it's all just going to be blamed on others.