These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Making deals in ATX
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#81 - 2012-07-10 14:28:34 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Capqu wrote:
However everything you claim is based on the absolute fact that CCP is non bias, despite no evidence to support the fact

False. I claim no such thing. Specifically, I do not state "CCP are wholly non-bias" anywhere, and do not claim it as fact.

I stated (and will again) that if you want your statement to the opposite of this to be true, you need to show at least *some* evidence of it.

All you are saying is CCP are bias because they are bias and the reasoning is self-contained.

You have failed, utterly, to demonstrate why "hard and fast" rules are needed when I have cited repeat precedence (without reply from you) on perfect examples where this works in both legal systems and competitions of a similar nature.

I gave you a simple sentence to complete last time and you failed, merely flapping your arms and claiming you are right. Therefore, I will do it again and see if your argument has developed any:

CCP would have acted differently in a Hydra/0utbreak match because _____________________________ - an example of the same thing happening before would be when CCP _____________________________________ to ______________ .

Unless you can actually state a position, you do not have one.

Unless "angry and throwing around baseless accusations" is really a position you want to take. If it is, state it as such and we can move on.


More selective reading and reiterations, yawn.

Ophey Won wrote:
I could care less ...


Just wow, America.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Ophey Won
Inviolable
Omnivores
#82 - 2012-07-10 14:56:56 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Capqu wrote:
However everything you claim is based on the absolute fact that CCP is non bias, despite no evidence to support the fact

False. I claim no such thing. Specifically, I do not state "CCP are wholly non-bias" anywhere, and do not claim it as fact.

I stated (and will again) that if you want your statement to the opposite of this to be true, you need to show at least *some* evidence of it.

All you are saying is CCP are bias because they are bias and the reasoning is self-contained.

You have failed, utterly, to demonstrate why "hard and fast" rules are needed when I have cited repeat precedence (without reply from you) on perfect examples where this works in both legal systems and competitions of a similar nature.

I gave you a simple sentence to complete last time and you failed, merely flapping your arms and claiming you are right. Therefore, I will do it again and see if your argument has developed any:

CCP would have acted differently in a Hydra/0utbreak match because _____________________________ - an example of the same thing happening before would be when CCP _____________________________________ to ______________ .

Unless you can actually state a position, you do not have one.

Unless "angry and throwing around baseless accusations" is really a position you want to take. If it is, state it as such and we can move on.


More selective reading and reiterations, yawn.

Ophey Won wrote:
I could care less ...


Just wow, America.




I figured I would get more out of you. I get the feeling you don't really care other then to be a troll. Well have fun with that then.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#83 - 2012-07-10 15:56:37 UTC
Capqu wrote:
More selective reading

Can you demonstrate where? I replied in full to your post and offered you (for the 5th time) to state your position.

I am, therefore, assuming you have no position other than one of a rambling agitator.

"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,

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#84 - 2012-07-10 15:58:10 UTC
Ophey Won wrote:
I would like to welcome you all to Internet space ships. Where its serious business. And I would also like to welcome you to internet space ships alliance tournament ten. Where is really super serious business.

Meta-gaming is part of Eve. CCP wants it to be part of Eve. How do I know this, they make commercials about it. They go to gaming conferences like E3 and talk about it. CCP wants meta-gaming in their alliance tournament. I know this because they auction off spots for the tournament. What real sporting event would ever do that. The world cup would become a joke if they auctioned off spots to countries to participate. The Intentional handicap rule is another way they inject meta-gaming into the tournament.

What CCP doesn't want is bad tv. All sporting events want drama. It makes for better tv. Why do you think they shove microphones in front of athletes. Test buying those two points is exactly what CCP want in their tournament. It makes it more dramatic, it makes for good tv. As soon as the meta-gaming is no longer entertaining CCP will step in and fix it.

You may think my motive is to help Test Alliance. You would be wrong. I am not part of Fatal Ascensions leadership. I could care less if Test or Goons make it into the Tournament. In fact if you look at the prediction forum you would see I picked them to lose. The only team I truly care about is the Fatal team.

Too many People are taking this Internet space ship tournament too seriously. Its entertainment at its best. Its compelling fights with drama thrown in. I do love the alliance tournament, but don't make it into more then what it is.


When the action stops for 30 seconds while people make offers in local, and then the remaining ships on one team suicide... well I consider that an awful excuse for a "tournament" performance, it is the "bad tv" you speak of.
Ophey Won
Inviolable
Omnivores
#85 - 2012-07-10 16:56:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ophey Won
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ophey Won wrote:
I would like to welcome you all to Internet space ships. Where its serious business. And I would also like to welcome you to internet space ships alliance tournament ten. Where is really super serious business.

Meta-gaming is part of Eve. CCP wants it to be part of Eve. How do I know this, they make commercials about it. They go to gaming conferences like E3 and talk about it. CCP wants meta-gaming in their alliance tournament. I know this because they auction off spots for the tournament. What real sporting event would ever do that. The world cup would become a joke if they auctioned off spots to countries to participate. The Intentional handicap rule is another way they inject meta-gaming into the tournament.

What CCP doesn't want is bad tv. All sporting events want drama. It makes for better tv. Why do you think they shove microphones in front of athletes. Test buying those two points is exactly what CCP want in their tournament. It makes it more dramatic, it makes for good tv. As soon as the meta-gaming is no longer entertaining CCP will step in and fix it.

You may think my motive is to help Test Alliance. You would be wrong. I am not part of Fatal Ascensions leadership. I could care less if Test or Goons make it into the Tournament. In fact if you look at the prediction forum you would see I picked them to lose. The only team I truly care about is the Fatal team.

Too many People are taking this Internet space ship tournament too seriously. Its entertainment at its best. Its compelling fights with drama thrown in. I do love the alliance tournament, but don't make it into more then what it is.


When the action stops for 30 seconds while people make offers in local, and then the remaining ships on one team suicide... well I consider that an awful excuse for a "tournament" performance, it is the "bad tv" you speak of.



Well what really happened was this. Junky FO's jag blew up with 2:19 left in the match. Then at 1:59 20 seconds latter they agreed to blow up SINDRERO's keres. SINDRERO's keres blows up at :21 sec left in the match. Now watching a keres fly around for 2:19 is not real entertainment. How ever the whole deal making, and wondering if they would go threw with it was very exciting. But according to you watching a frig circle around a BS for 2:19 would of been more fun. Great logic there.
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#86 - 2012-07-10 17:44:05 UTC
They already had the win, and they bought more points to move on to the Group Stage. That seems far different from the ATIX finals of last year. I don't really see what the problem is.
Captain Jack Geary
Doomheim
#87 - 2012-07-10 19:10:57 UTC
Rer Eirikr wrote:
They already had the win, and they bought more points to move on to the Group Stage. That seems far different from the ATIX finals of last year. I don't really see what the problem is.


Who cares about the win? It points that counts.

They bought 4 points - they cheated.

Come on people, wake up! Remember what fair play is.
Ophey Won
Inviolable
Omnivores
#88 - 2012-07-10 19:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ophey Won
Captain Jack Geary wrote:
Rer Eirikr wrote:
They already had the win, and they bought more points to move on to the Group Stage. That seems far different from the ATIX finals of last year. I don't really see what the problem is.


Who cares about the win? It points that counts.

They bought 4 points - they cheated.

Come on people, wake up! Remember what fair play is.



Actually they bought 5 Points for 2 billion isk. But at the time they had no idea if those 5 point would get them in the tournament or not. They could of paid 2 billion for nothing. As it turn out it made all the difference in the world. Just think how everyone would be flaming them if they did not get in.

Eve is not fair. Meta-gaming is allowed in the alliance tournament as long as it dose not make for a bad show. CCP auctions off spots for the tournament. How is that "fair"?

If you want nice, easy and fair maybe you should play another game. Eve is not any of those things.
Captain Jack Geary
Doomheim
#89 - 2012-07-10 19:43:34 UTC
Ophey Won wrote:
Captain Jack Geary wrote:
Rer Eirikr wrote:
They already had the win, and they bought more points to move on to the Group Stage. That seems far different from the ATIX finals of last year. I don't really see what the problem is.


Who cares about the win? It points that counts.

They bought 4 points - they cheated.

Come on people, wake up! Remember what fair play is.



Actually they bought 5 Points for 2 billion isk. But at the time they had no idea if those 5 point would get them in the tournament or not. They could of paid 2 billion for nothing. As it turn out it made all the difference in the world. Just think how everyone would be flaming them if they did not get in.

Eve is not fair. Meta-gaming is allowed in the alliance tournament as long as it dose not make for a bad show. CCP auctions off spots for the tournament. How is that "fair"?

If you want nice, easy and fair maybe you should play another game. Eve is not any of those things.


Cheating in EvE is like breathing.

Cheating in Tournaments makes a bad show.
Ophey Won
Inviolable
Omnivores
#90 - 2012-07-10 19:48:36 UTC
Captain Jack Geary wrote:
Ophey Won wrote:
Captain Jack Geary wrote:
Rer Eirikr wrote:
They already had the win, and they bought more points to move on to the Group Stage. That seems far different from the ATIX finals of last year. I don't really see what the problem is.


Who cares about the win? It points that counts.

They bought 4 points - they cheated.

Come on people, wake up! Remember what fair play is.



Actually they bought 5 Points for 2 billion isk. But at the time they had no idea if those 5 point would get them in the tournament or not. They could of paid 2 billion for nothing. As it turn out it made all the difference in the world. Just think how everyone would be flaming them if they did not get in.

Eve is not fair. Meta-gaming is allowed in the alliance tournament as long as it dose not make for a bad show. CCP auctions off spots for the tournament. How is that "fair"?

If you want nice, easy and fair maybe you should play another game. Eve is not any of those things.


Cheating in EvE is like breathing.

Cheating in Tournaments makes a bad show.


Your the judge of cheating now. You decide. Well then why are we all debating this. What punishment did you hand down to test. Well now that Captain Jack Geary has made his ruling on this mater we can all go on our marry way.

p.s. I never said cheating was part of the game.
Captain Jack Geary
Doomheim
#91 - 2012-07-10 19:53:45 UTC
Ophey Won wrote:

Your the judge of cheating now. You decide. Well then why are we all debating this. What punishment did you hand down to test. Well now that Captain Jack Geary has made his ruling on this mater we can all go on our marry way.

p.s. I never said cheating was part of the game.


Call it common sense.
Ophey Won
Inviolable
Omnivores
#92 - 2012-07-10 21:33:03 UTC
What I find funny is that if this had happened last year we would not be talking about it. Last year the qualifiers where not broadcasted. I also find it funny that if Test did not get into the group stage this would be a dead subject by now. Test got in by the hair of the Amarr gods. Hell if the R.E.V.O.L.U.T.I.O.N had kill one more frig they would be in, hell if the Red. OverLords had killed one ship there second match Revolution would be in.

Well we can keep discussing this all we want, but untie CCP tells us something different Test are in.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#93 - 2012-07-11 06:28:35 UTC
Ophey Won wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ophey Won wrote:
I would like to welcome you all to Internet space ships. Where its serious business. And I would also like to welcome you to internet space ships alliance tournament ten. Where is really super serious business.

Meta-gaming is part of Eve. CCP wants it to be part of Eve. How do I know this, they make commercials about it. They go to gaming conferences like E3 and talk about it. CCP wants meta-gaming in their alliance tournament. I know this because they auction off spots for the tournament. What real sporting event would ever do that. The world cup would become a joke if they auctioned off spots to countries to participate. The Intentional handicap rule is another way they inject meta-gaming into the tournament.

What CCP doesn't want is bad tv. All sporting events want drama. It makes for better tv. Why do you think they shove microphones in front of athletes. Test buying those two points is exactly what CCP want in their tournament. It makes it more dramatic, it makes for good tv. As soon as the meta-gaming is no longer entertaining CCP will step in and fix it.

You may think my motive is to help Test Alliance. You would be wrong. I am not part of Fatal Ascensions leadership. I could care less if Test or Goons make it into the Tournament. In fact if you look at the prediction forum you would see I picked them to lose. The only team I truly care about is the Fatal team.

Too many People are taking this Internet space ship tournament too seriously. Its entertainment at its best. Its compelling fights with drama thrown in. I do love the alliance tournament, but don't make it into more then what it is.


When the action stops for 30 seconds while people make offers in local, and then the remaining ships on one team suicide... well I consider that an awful excuse for a "tournament" performance, it is the "bad tv" you speak of.



Well what really happened was this. Junky FO's jag blew up with 2:19 left in the match. Then at 1:59 20 seconds latter they agreed to blow up SINDRERO's keres. SINDRERO's keres blows up at :21 sec left in the match. Now watching a keres fly around for 2:19 is not real entertainment. How ever the whole deal making, and wondering if they would go threw with it was very exciting. But according to you watching a frig circle around a BS for 2:19 would of been more fun. Great logic there.


I'd rather watch a ship kite an enemy, knowing that by doing so it knocks them out of (or much further down the rankings in) the tournament then have people be allowed to suicide and give the other team illegitimate advantages. Like I said, just because a team has already "lost" does not mean they should be just completely stop doing anything or allow the other team to go mental and score as much as possible.

And look at the timings you listed: It was still two minutes of bloody nothing happening as far as pew pew goes. The extra 20 seconds wouldn't matter at all. And I'd trade those precious precious 20 seconds for proper non-bought rankings/progression
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#94 - 2012-07-11 08:29:29 UTC
Captain Jack Geary wrote:
Cheating in EvE is like breathing.

Cheating in Tournaments makes a bad show.

It's not cheating because it's not against the rules. Your argument has no merit, here.

From beginning to end every action they took was allowable within the scope of the rules.

"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,

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#95 - 2012-07-11 08:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I'd rather watch a ship kite an enemy, knowing that by doing so it knocks them out of (or much further down the rankings in) the tournament then have people be allowed to suicide and give the other team illegitimate advantages. Like I said, just because a team has already "lost" does not mean they should be just completely stop doing anything or allow the other team to go mental and score as much as possible.

And look at the timings you listed: It was still two minutes of bloody nothing happening as far as pew pew goes. The extra 20 seconds wouldn't matter at all. And I'd trade those precious precious 20 seconds for proper non-bought rankings/progression

I can appreciate you do not "like" seeing this type of match, but it is not against the rules. Your argument is no more valid than me saying any ECM based team should be removed from the tournament because expecting to win based on chance-based mechanics is unfair, and seeing ships unable to fire is boring.

Knowing the importance of the other team accepting those 2bil for the loss of a Keres had me (and people I was talking to at the time) on the edge of their seat. It was highly entertaining.

"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,

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#96 - 2012-07-11 09:33:25 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
Khanh'rhh wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I'd rather watch a ship kite an enemy, knowing that by doing so it knocks them out of (or much further down the rankings in) the tournament then have people be allowed to suicide and give the other team illegitimate advantages. Like I said, just because a team has already "lost" does not mean they should be just completely stop doing anything or allow the other team to go mental and score as much as possible.

And look at the timings you listed: It was still two minutes of bloody nothing happening as far as pew pew goes. The extra 20 seconds wouldn't matter at all. And I'd trade those precious precious 20 seconds for proper non-bought rankings/progression

I can appreciate you do not "like" seeing this type of match, but it is not against the rules. Your argument is no more valid than me saying any ECM based team should be removed from the tournament because expecting to win based on chance-based mechanics is unfair, and seeing ships unable to fire is boring.

Knowing the importance of the other team accepting those 2bil for the loss of a Keres had me (and people I was talking to at the time) on the edge of their seat. It was highly entertaining.


I never said it WAS against the rules, I'm not asking for anyone to be 'banned' or anything. Just arguing that it's another type of collusion that alters the progression/results of the tournament - which I think defeats the point of a competitive tournament, and something I'd like to not see in future events. CCP agree to some extent regarding collusion undermining the tournaments, which is why they've banned most forms of it - I just think they should follow that line of reasoning to the end and ban *all* collusion. Comparing my sentiments with the example of removing ECM because someone may not "like it" is utterly ridiculous - use of ECM or other "chance based" modules is in no way comparable to teams flat out buying/selling progression in the tournament. Don't muddy the waters by coming up with completely irrelevant things that are not similar in the slightest, and which no one was arguing for/against anyway.
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#97 - 2012-07-11 09:44:18 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I'd rather watch a ship kite an enemy, knowing that by doing so it knocks them out of (or much further down the rankings in) the tournament then have people be allowed to suicide and give the other team illegitimate advantages. Like I said, just because a team has already "lost" does not mean they should be just completely stop doing anything or allow the other team to go mental and score as much as possible.

And look at the timings you listed: It was still two minutes of bloody nothing happening as far as pew pew goes. The extra 20 seconds wouldn't matter at all. And I'd trade those precious precious 20 seconds for proper non-bought rankings/progression

I can appreciate you do not "like" seeing this type of match, but it is not against the rules. Your argument is no more valid than me saying any ECM based team should be removed from the tournament because expecting to win based on chance-based mechanics is unfair, and seeing ships unable to fire is boring.

Knowing the importance of the other team accepting those 2bil for the loss of a Keres had me (and people I was talking to at the time) on the edge of their seat. It was highly entertaining.


I never said it WAS against the rules, I'm not asking for anyone to be 'banned' or anything. Just arguing that it's another type of collusion that alters the progression/results of the tournament - which I think defeats the point of a competitive tournament, and something I'd like to not see in future events. CCP agree to some extent regarding collusion undermining the tournaments, which is why they've banned most forms of it - I just think they should follow that line of reasoning to the end and ban *all* collusion. Comparing my sentiments with the example of removing ECM because someone may not "like it" is utterly ridiculous - use of ECM or other "chance based" modules is in no way comparable to teams flat out buying/selling progression in the tournament. Don't muddy the waters by coming up with completely irrelevant things that are not similar in the slightest, and which no one was arguing for/against anyway.


The problem with that viewpoint is that for many viewers half the fun of the AT is watching for the bribery or the dealmaking in the middle of a match. I think CCP have learned from what happened last year and basically said 'ok you can do it but if we think it makes a match boring or unentertaining there will be consequences' and I'm sure teams took this into account when the offers were made. Remember that at the time TEST made the offer they had no idea wether they had qualified or not or wether those two points would have made the difference, the fact they ended up being that important is pure chance and nothing to do with the arguement.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Cat Casidy
Percussive Diplomacy
Sedition.
#98 - 2012-07-11 09:58:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Cat Casidy
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
From this thread I have learned:

There appears to be more pizza than I had ever imagined!

-edit- people take this internet spaceships thing way to seriously, go swing around on some monkey bars or something before you post.

.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#99 - 2012-07-11 13:16:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I never said it WAS against the rules, I'm not asking for anyone to be 'banned' or anything. Just arguing that it's another type of collusion that alters the progression/results of the tournament - which I think defeats the point of a competitive tournament, and something I'd like to not see in future events. CCP agree to some extent regarding collusion undermining the tournaments, which is why they've banned most forms of it - I just think they should follow that line of reasoning to the end and ban *all* collusion. Comparing my sentiments with the example of removing ECM because someone may not "like it" is utterly ridiculous - use of ECM or other "chance based" modules is in no way comparable to teams flat out buying/selling progression in the tournament. Don't muddy the waters by coming up with completely irrelevant things that are not similar in the slightest, and which no one was arguing for/against anyway.

CCP have always been FOR this kind of behaviour in tournaments. The rules they bought in are were done to stop farcical matches where no-one competed from beginning to end, not to ban people from eeking out a couple of extra points from a match that is, by now, a foregone conclusion.

I do appreciate you may want to see just the ship-on-ship combat, but please respect EvE combat will always exist within the meta-game and some of us like to see that on screen as much as another Sleip based team.

"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,

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#100 - 2012-07-12 08:45:28 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I never said it WAS against the rules, I'm not asking for anyone to be 'banned' or anything. Just arguing that it's another type of collusion that alters the progression/results of the tournament - which I think defeats the point of a competitive tournament, and something I'd like to not see in future events. CCP agree to some extent regarding collusion undermining the tournaments, which is why they've banned most forms of it - I just think they should follow that line of reasoning to the end and ban *all* collusion. Comparing my sentiments with the example of removing ECM because someone may not "like it" is utterly ridiculous - use of ECM or other "chance based" modules is in no way comparable to teams flat out buying/selling progression in the tournament. Don't muddy the waters by coming up with completely irrelevant things that are not similar in the slightest, and which no one was arguing for/against anyway.

CCP have always been FOR this kind of behaviour in tournaments. The rules they bought in are were done to stop farcical matches where no-one competed from beginning to end, not to ban people from eeking out a couple of extra points from a match that is, by now, a foregone conclusion.

I do appreciate you may want to see just the ship-on-ship combat, but please respect EvE combat will always exist within the meta-game and some of us like to see that on screen as much as another Sleip based team.


I'm tired of the identical sleip teams too lol. That'll be less of a problem in later matches though so whatever