These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#321 - 2012-06-15 05:40:41 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
And no you don't, it can be implied


Not if you want the prohibition to be effective.

"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
#322 - 2012-06-15 05:43:29 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Mara Rinn wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Say I want to protect whatsits from harm. You have no idea what a whatsit is, so you go and shoot something. Would it be fair if I told you after you shot the thing that it was a whatsit and now you must be punished for shooting the protected whatsit?


On the flip side, getting concrete definitions is what you hire lawyers for. Does CCP want to get into space lawyering and trying to nail that slab of jelly to the wall?

How about this: if you want to gank people risk-free, stay out of rookie systems. The definition of rookie needs to be vague otherwise the wannabe gankers will attempt to game the system at the rookie's expense.


As I already posted, If CCP wants to define everyone in a Rookie system as a Rookie, and is willing to enforce that ruling, THAT'S OK BY ME.

It will have a number of bad effects, mostly harming real rookies, but it's a definition, and that's all we want. A Definition of a Rookie.

If you want to protect whatsits, you have to tell the whosit hunters the difference between a whosit and a whatsit.


EDIT:
To put it another way, the Endangered Species act says it's illegal to cause annoyance* to a Species on the Endangered Species List**.


*Intentionally vaguely defined in the act.
**Specifically Designated protected class.



The Rookie Protection rule says it's illegal to mess with* Rookies**

*intentionally vaguely defined.
**Needs to be defined.


The protection from loopholes is in the "mess with" part. The protection from confusion is in the definition of "rookie"

"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
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#323 - 2012-06-15 05:47:28 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Kara Books wrote:
Lets look at it from a whole different perspective, People who pray on 1 day old players, WISH have or may do this in real life, Im talking about Killers rapists bad people who go after kids... These people are BAD and they REALLY do exist!, pretty much any one who has family, loves some one or has kids understands, these individuals need to be kept away from the temporally defenseless who just started exploring the basics of the new world around them.

1.
Yes this is eve online, this is a world with no rules, but Chasing away new players makes it worse for you, in fact, why fight the wave, join it, help these new players leave the systems and stay with eve for years to come.

2.
Instead of forcing people to leave, make new friends, go with the wave, help this game grow from 50K active online weekends to 500K.

That concludes my personal Opinion on the matter.


We agree. But you have to tell those players who want to shoot other players which players they're not allowed to shoot.


Badman gets punished on a case by case basis, guy with no record, fumbling around gets first positive intervention in the game, be it from a Dev, another player GM...

Mostly, I agree, but I wouldn't like to see this become some kind of a medical institution with white walls and barred windows meant to punish or somehow remove aspects of the game from the new player, they should be protected in every way possible.

for the particularly hard headed Cell mates with an internet connection out there, once they are flagged as newbie griefers, the rules should be mailed to them, they should sign it and no one else needs to shoulder the blame or grief, this is both private and humane.
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#324 - 2012-06-15 05:49:10 UTC
Fortunately for everyone Ruby, you don't establish game policy. I'm glad you don't. I trust CCP in this matter way more than you.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#325 - 2012-06-15 05:50:55 UTC
Kara Books wrote:


Badman gets punished on a case by case basis, guy with no record, fumbling around gets first positive intervention in the game, be it from a Dev, another player GM...

Mostly, I agree, but I wouldn't like to see this become some kind of a medical institution with white walls and barred windows meant to punish or somehow remove aspects of the game from the new player, they should be protected in every way possible.

for the particularly hard headed Cell mates with an internet connection out there, once they are flagged as newbie griefers, the rules should be mailed to them, they should sign it and no one else needs to shoulder the blame or grief, this is both private and humane.


You're skipping right over the issue. The issue is "How do we bloody tell who we're not allowed to shoot when you won't tell us who's protected?"

"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
#326 - 2012-06-15 05:52:21 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
Fortunately for everyone Ruby, you don't establish game policy. I'm glad you don't. I trust CCP in this matter way more than you.


And they asked us for help in creating a policy that protects Newbies* and doesn't smack people down by surprise. That "by surprise" thing is problematic when you want to protect newbies* in the first place.

*term yet to be defined.

"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
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#327 - 2012-06-15 05:55:41 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Kara Books wrote:


Badman gets punished on a case by case basis, guy with no record, fumbling around gets first positive intervention in the game, be it from a Dev, another player GM...

Mostly, I agree, but I wouldn't like to see this become some kind of a medical institution with white walls and barred windows meant to punish or somehow remove aspects of the game from the new player, they should be protected in every way possible.

for the particularly hard headed Cell mates with an internet connection out there, once they are flagged as newbie griefers, the rules should be mailed to them, they should sign it and no one else needs to shoulder the blame or grief, this is both private and humane.


You're skipping right over the issue. The issue is "How do we bloody tell who we're not allowed to shoot when you won't tell us who's protected?"


Well, lets say we had the first rule, a Trial account. being a rule, How would a griefer be able to tell without exposing information the newbie may want to keep private?

I believe its not the rules themselves, its protecting the Sovriety and game experience of both the Griefer and the Newbie.
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#328 - 2012-06-15 06:01:30 UTC
You know you must feel very strongly about this. I'm impressed, I almost think your some kind of lawyer. Wow. You know I'm very impressed at how hard your trying.

Let me try this just one more time, just leave the rookies alone.

Now just so there isn't any confusion, I'm actually going to define Rookie for you. You've been wanting for it all day, we've been implying what it is all day. I told my self I wasn't going to give you the satisfaction, but here it is.

Rookie:

An inexperienced person; a novice.

Ok, now please go on, and tell us all why that isn't good enough. It's good enough for Websters, and basically the whole English speaking world. But I just have a feeling, lol. It's not good enough for you.
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#329 - 2012-06-15 06:08:06 UTC
Kara Books wrote:
Lets look at it from a whole different perspective, People who pray on 1 day old players, WISH have or may do this in real life, Im talking about Killers rapists bad people who go after kids... These people are BAD and they REALLY do exist!, pretty much any one who has family, loves some one or has kids understands, these individuals need to be kept away from the temporally defenseless who just started exploring the basics of the new world around them.

1.
Yes this is eve online, this is a world with no rules, but Chasing away new players makes it worse for you, in fact, why fight the wave, join it, help these new players leave the systems and stay with eve for years to come.

2.
Instead of forcing people to leave, make new friends, go with the wave, help this game grow from 50K active online weekends to 500K.

That concludes my personal Opinion on the matter.


That's all fine, and I'm all for protecting rookies while they figure out the game.

But this is still a pvp game, and I don't want to get banned for attacking someone still considered a rookie when there isn't even a clear definition of what a rookie is. Just look at goonswarm. Our day old rookies are tackling supercapitals 30 minutes after joining. It really would be nice to have a clear definition of who we can and can't attack. I agree that in most situations, it'll be pretty obvious, but there will be situations where it really isn't.

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.
Mrr Woodcock
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#330 - 2012-06-15 06:14:38 UTC
InternetSpaceship wrote:
[quote=Kara Books]

Just look at goonswarm. Our day old rookies are tackling supercapitals 30 minutes after joining.


LMFAO, really? You seriously suggesting these guys are rookies? Honestly?
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#331 - 2012-06-15 06:19:46 UTC
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Kara Books wrote:
Lets look at it from a whole different perspective, People who pray on 1 day old players, WISH have or may do this in real life, Im talking about Killers rapists bad people who go after kids... These people are BAD and they REALLY do exist!, pretty much any one who has family, loves some one or has kids understands, these individuals need to be kept away from the temporally defenseless who just started exploring the basics of the new world around them.

1.
Yes this is eve online, this is a world with no rules, but Chasing away new players makes it worse for you, in fact, why fight the wave, join it, help these new players leave the systems and stay with eve for years to come.

2.
Instead of forcing people to leave, make new friends, go with the wave, help this game grow from 50K active online weekends to 500K.

That concludes my personal Opinion on the matter.


That's all fine, and I'm all for protecting rookies while they figure out the game.

But this is still a pvp game, and I don't want to get banned for attacking someone still considered a rookie when there isn't even a clear definition of what a rookie is. Just look at goonswarm. Our day old rookies are tackling supercapitals 30 minutes after joining. It really would be nice to have a clear definition of who we can and can't attack. I agree that in most situations, it'll be pretty obvious, but there will be situations where it really isn't.


Indeed, I can see your point, but a supercap isnt suposto be involved in a hostile engagement in highsec, Newbie protected system of all things.
Newbie+Newb system = the only place these rules should apply.

Perhaps CCP should rename these systems, like some kind of super highsec training grounds or something along those lines.

People entering or leaving the training grounds should get a warning, and some fast facts/rules etc.
Herr Hammer Draken
#332 - 2012-06-15 06:41:42 UTC
Gorki Andropov wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
Sephira Galamore wrote:
Sentinel Smith wrote:
Honestly.. I don't understand people who think knowing the rules is a bad thing.. Imagine if life was like that at home, school, and otherwise in the world..

"Don't speed on this road." "What's the speed limit ?" " Get on a different road." .. o_0

See, there are different kind of rules. The hard ones and the vague ones and each have a purpose.
If you state a rule somewhat vague you purposefully leave a grey area. Within this area, it is up to the police/judge/GM to decide whether you broke the rule or not.
The effect of this is a certain uncertainty, which may appear as a bad thing but often really isn't. Since the goal here is to avoid people walking the line, to push the limits, to find loopholes. On the other hand, it allows GM to show leniance, too. (Also, vague rules are used, when it's very difficult to actually define the limits objectively).

And you have these kind of rules/laws in real life, too.
"Don't drive in a way that recklessly endangers other traffic participants" - "Wait, what classifies as reckless driving?" - "Don't push it, man!"
If you would define "recklessly" by setting limits for speed, acceleration, deviation from the road center, and whatsnot, you'd leave loopholes. Of course, hard rules have a purpose aswell, as they make it easy to deal with obvious cases and are less prone to subjective judgement.

So back to topic:
If you are in a rookie system and in a situation where you wonder "Is this a rookie now or not?", it should be clear that as soon as you have valid cause to even ask this question, the safe course of action is to leave it be. It's a about common sense, really.
Of course you can still ask that question, answer it for yourself as good as you can, but when acting accordingly, you willingly accept the risk that goes along with that. Eve, consequences and stuff ;)


I cannot quote this person enough. Some rules are vague on purpose and they will remain vague. This is the 'reckless driving' equivalent. If I define the rules to the last dot someone will simply find a loop hole and use it. The rule is "do not mess with rookies", and if you are in doubt the answer is ALWAYS 'do not do it'.



A quick question - what if rookies take the can, fully aware and armed with the knowledge of what will happen? In other words, if you label the can 'IF YOU TAKE FROM THIS CAN, OTHER PLAYERS WILL ATTACK YOU'?


So here we have a prime example of a griefer. What part of do not do it, don't you understand?

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#333 - 2012-06-15 06:53:57 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
The Rookie Protection rule says it's illegal to mess with Rookies* in starter systems**.

*intentionally vaguely defined.
**Needs to be defined.


The protection from loopholes is in the "mess with Rookies" part. The protection from confusion is in the definition of "starter system"


Fixed that for you.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Herr Hammer Draken
#334 - 2012-06-15 06:54:18 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
You know I understand you need your baby's to bash. So now were trying to decide, can't bash a 1 or 2 week old in the head with a base ball bat, but we need to make it clear that 6 month old baby's are ok for head bashing. Then it's oh my goodness, we can't do that to any baby's, but 2 year old's are ok to head bash. I'm simply not going to give this to you, no matter what
stupid logic you keep pitching. What I'm certain of though, is there will still be easy targets for you to bash, you can rest assured of that. Don't Panic, they will still be there.


You want to protect a class, define it. You've skipped right over what Tippia and I have said and gone right to impugning our motives.

Here's my set of premises.
1) EvE is a place that allows non-consensual PvP without restrictions
2) Because newbies are new, they should be protected
3) 2 should not compromise 1

This means that it must be made crystal clear WHO is protected and WHERE. The WHAT that they are protected from can be somewhat vague.

Say I want to protect whatsits from harm. You have no idea what a whatsit is, so you go and shoot something. Would it be fair if I told you after you shot the thing that it was a whatsit and now you must be punished for shooting the protected whatsit?


You have one solid known for a fact piece of the puzzle. They are only protected in the starter systems. So if I were you I would just make that short list of systems off limits for any kind of PvP agression. Problem fixed. Of course any and every single law ever written was made to be broken. And all the people posting problems with this are those that so want to test this limit.
Well then by all means test the limits and find out first hand where they are then report back. This is not rocket science people.
EVE is a huge place. Are the people posting here really not going to have any fun because a few systems are off limits?
If that is the case you might as well rage quit right now.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#335 - 2012-06-15 06:56:01 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
You know you must feel very strongly about this. I'm impressed, I almost think your some kind of lawyer. Wow. You know I'm very impressed at how hard your trying.

Let me try this just one more time, just leave the rookies alone.

Now just so there isn't any confusion, I'm actually going to define Rookie for you. You've been wanting for it all day, we've been implying what it is all day. I told my self I wasn't going to give you the satisfaction, but here it is.

Rookie:

An inexperienced person; a novice.

Ok, now please go on, and tell us all why that isn't good enough. It's good enough for Websters, and basically the whole English speaking world. But I just have a feeling, lol. It's not good enough for you.


So just how can we identify these rookies on sight alone? Skill points? Reg date? How many skill points does a rookie have?

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.
Herr Hammer Draken
#336 - 2012-06-15 07:12:30 UTC
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
You know you must feel very strongly about this. I'm impressed, I almost think your some kind of lawyer. Wow. You know I'm very impressed at how hard your trying.

Let me try this just one more time, just leave the rookies alone.

Now just so there isn't any confusion, I'm actually going to define Rookie for you. You've been wanting for it all day, we've been implying what it is all day. I told my self I wasn't going to give you the satisfaction, but here it is.

Rookie:

An inexperienced person; a novice.

Ok, now please go on, and tell us all why that isn't good enough. It's good enough for Websters, and basically the whole English speaking world. But I just have a feeling, lol. It's not good enough for you.


So just how can we identify these rookies on sight alone? Skill points? Reg date? How many skill points does a rookie have?


You can not and that is what all the whinning is about. The rookies hold all of the cards in the starter systems. You are totally free to go into those starter systems and cause problems stir the pot all you want. Take all the chances you want and push the line til it breaks. But when a rookie calls you on it you lose. So why take that chance and for what possible reason would you want to anyway? The GM's will protect the rookies. They made that clear in the starter systems.

Or you can do the smart thing and just make the starter systems off limits. How many are there anyway? What will it kill you to do this?

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#337 - 2012-06-15 08:11:20 UTC
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
InternetSpaceship wrote:
[quote=Kara Books]

Just look at goonswarm. Our day old rookies are tackling supercapitals 30 minutes after joining.


LMFAO, really? You seriously suggesting these guys are rookies? Honestly?




Yes? When I started Eve, I literally knew nothing about it. Joining GW didn't just magically bestow me with knowledge of Eve.

Although the previous response regarding starter areas answered my question a lot better than yours did.

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.
InternetSpaceship
State War Academy
Caldari State
#338 - 2012-06-15 08:16:31 UTC  |  Edited by: InternetSpaceship
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
You know you must feel very strongly about this. I'm impressed, I almost think your some kind of lawyer. Wow. You know I'm very impressed at how hard your trying.

Let me try this just one more time, just leave the rookies alone.

Now just so there isn't any confusion, I'm actually going to define Rookie for you. You've been wanting for it all day, we've been implying what it is all day. I told my self I wasn't going to give you the satisfaction, but here it is.

Rookie:

An inexperienced person; a novice.

Ok, now please go on, and tell us all why that isn't good enough. It's good enough for Websters, and basically the whole English speaking world. But I just have a feeling, lol. It's not good enough for you.


So just how can we identify these rookies on sight alone? Skill points? Reg date? How many skill points does a rookie have?


You can not and that is what all the whinning is about. The rookies hold all of the cards in the starter systems. You are totally free to go into those starter systems and cause problems stir the pot all you want. Take all the chances you want and push the line til it breaks. But when a rookie calls you on it you lose. So why take that chance and for what possible reason would you want to anyway? The GM's will protect the rookies. They made that clear in the starter systems.

Or you can do the smart thing and just make the starter systems off limits. How many are there anyway? What will it kill you to do this?


Well, as I said earlier, I don't really gank anyone at all, and I'm all for protecting brand new players. Even GW doesn't typically target brand new players (and if you're in a hulk, you're not brand new). But I still agree it is a mistake to give us a group of players that we aren't allowed to attack, and then provide no means for us to identify that group by.

What if some hisec veteran carebear is mining and some day old rookie decides to steal from his can? He just has to sit there and take it because he has no way of knowing if this guy is just some new player or an older player in a newbie ship?

Guess I know where I"m getting all my veld now (you know, if I actually mined veld).

Seriously, what is the harm in the mods actually letting us know who it is we aren't supposed to be shooting? PvP happens even in those starter zones. What if a day old newbie joins a corp that is wardecced? If someone blows him up, they get banned, even though they had no clue they weren't allowed to shoot him, even though he was red to them. There really is no harm in making it clear who we aren't allowed to shoot if we are expressly not allowed to shoot them.

I suppose the next step is to beg ccp to make empire a no-pvp zone entirely. And that's really all your argument is. A thinly veiled excuse to argue that Empire should be entirely pvp-free. Rather than deal with gankers yourself, you want CCP to come in and play the game for you.

Official Recruiter for GoonSwarm Corporation.

If you paid isk to get into GoonSwarm, you were probably scammed.  If you had the foresight to save the name of your scammer, let me know and I'll do what I can to help you.
Alison McCarty
Kenter Production Inc.
#339 - 2012-06-15 09:03:03 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.


You are talking about 80% of the Eve players and 90% of some big null sec alliances. You may think about your policie Big smile
Herr Hammer Draken
#340 - 2012-06-15 09:32:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Hammer Draken
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Herr Hammer Draken wrote:
InternetSpaceship wrote:
Mrr Woodcock wrote:
You know you must feel very strongly about this. I'm impressed, I almost think your some kind of lawyer. Wow. You know I'm very impressed at how hard your trying.

Let me try this just one more time, just leave the rookies alone.

Now just so there isn't any confusion, I'm actually going to define Rookie for you. You've been wanting for it all day, we've been implying what it is all day. I told my self I wasn't going to give you the satisfaction, but here it is.

Rookie:

An inexperienced person; a novice.

Ok, now please go on, and tell us all why that isn't good enough. It's good enough for Websters, and basically the whole English speaking world. But I just have a feeling, lol. It's not good enough for you.


So just how can we identify these rookies on sight alone? Skill points? Reg date? How many skill points does a rookie have?


You can not and that is what all the whinning is about. The rookies hold all of the cards in the starter systems. You are totally free to go into those starter systems and cause problems stir the pot all you want. Take all the chances you want and push the line til it breaks. But when a rookie calls you on it you lose. So why take that chance and for what possible reason would you want to anyway? The GM's will protect the rookies. They made that clear in the starter systems.

Or you can do the smart thing and just make the starter systems off limits. How many are there anyway? What will it kill you to do this?


Well, as I said earlier, I don't really gank anyone at all, and I'm all for protecting brand new players. Even GW doesn't typically target brand new players (and if you're in a hulk, you're not brand new). But I still agree it is a mistake to give us a group of players that we aren't allowed to attack, and then provide no means for us to identify that group by.

What if some hisec veteran carebear is mining and some day old rookie decides to steal from his can? He just has to sit there and take it because he has no way of knowing if this guy is just some new player or an older player in a newbie ship?

Guess I know where I"m getting all my veld now (you know, if I actually mined veld).

Seriously, what is the harm in the mods actually letting us know who it is we aren't supposed to be shooting? PvP happens even in those starter zones. What if a day old newbie joins a corp that is wardecced? If someone blows him up, they get banned, even though they had no clue they weren't allowed to shoot him, even though he was red to them. There really is no harm in making it clear who we aren't allowed to shoot if we are expressly not allowed to shoot them.

I suppose the next step is to beg ccp to make empire a no-pvp zone entirely. And that's really all your argument is. A thinly veiled excuse to argue that Empire should be entirely pvp-free. Rather than deal with gankers yourself, you want CCP to come in and play the game for you.


The GM's will rule on each case based upon each individual merits. No blanket rule. They already said as much.
So yes their is risk in the starter systems only this time the rookies hold the cards. So it is sort of a reverse risk.
IE. The starter systems may not be the safe haven to mine in because the rookies can grief you. So basically the starter systems are only safe if you are a rookie.

I think your example is poor anyway because miners just sit and take can stealing everywhere. Why should the starter system be any different? So just because these guys are noobs you want to be able to stand up to them as a miner? And with what, are you going to throw stones at them? So yes you have to just sit there and take it like you do anywhere else. Now if you are part of a defensive fleet protecting your miners then why are you hiding in starter systems? It would seem to me that you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. That does not happen in EVE anywhere. But if you really must get revenge well as soon as that pilot leaves the starter system he is fair game go get him.

If you want an answer to the day old war dec rookie in a starter system then ask. Make a petition to a GM in game. Get an answer to that specific example then use it to defend your actions should you ever need it. I am trying to understand why this would ever be a problem in the first place. About the only thing you will be doing is mining. If he is war dec to you and one day old it is not too likely he will even know about fitting scams or webs or even the propper way to use them. He might web you and allow you to warp out that much faster. If he is an alt one day old he could be trouble, he holds all the cards. You hold all the risk.

But again I say why take the chance anyway just stay clear. Problem solved.

Herr Hammer Draken "The Amarr Prophet"