These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Two CSMs of EVE Online

First post First post
Author
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#201 - 2011-10-16 17:45:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Handsome Hussein wrote:
Tippia wrote:
B * (N +1) * (W + 1), where B = Base Price (2M for a corp, 50M for an alliance), N = number of wars you currently have (1 for your shielddeccing corp), W = number of wars currently against the target corporation (which is the number you're aiming to inflate with the shield).

So quite a bit. CCP might just be thinking "rather than deal with all these petitions that are kind of hard to prove, we just let them have the ISK sink."
Kelduum has already stated that they are avoiding a large proportion of the costs. Normally their nineteen corporation decshield would cost 72B ISK per month to maintain ... they are only paying a small fraction of that cost. So the ISK sink argument doesn't come into play either.
Handsome Hussein
#202 - 2011-10-16 17:46:25 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum has already stated that they are avoiding a large proportion of the costs. Normally their nineteen corporation decshield would cost 72B ISK per month to maintain ... they are only pay a small fraction of that cost. So the ISK sink argument doesn't come into play either.

Link?

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.

Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2011-10-16 17:52:51 UTC
Handsome Hussein wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum has already stated that they are avoiding a large proportion of the costs. Normally their nineteen corporation decshield would cost 72B ISK per month to maintain ... they are only pay a small fraction of that cost. So the ISK sink argument doesn't come into play either.
Link?

Kelduum Revaan wrote:
As far as the mechanic or mechanics used to prevent the wars costing us up to 72 billion ISK per month, I would rather not go into detail, as although I have had confirmation from CCP it is fine, the mechanic could be used in other ways - similarly, I would rather people didn't speculate as to this, at least in public, although I'm certain that a few of you may know how it works. Lets just call it a special E-UNI "sekrit"... (source)

Azelor Delaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#204 - 2011-10-16 17:53:47 UTC
Today, I found a way around the decshield for EVE University. I checked with a GM to make sure it wouldn't be considered an exploit, and was informed that it was not. However, there is a portion that falls under the "grey area" (it would make it impossible for the decced corporation/alliance to toggle mutual on any wars they currently have). It also would put the dec fee at a flat rate, instead of it increasing exponentially.

The GM escalated me to make sure that they were correct, so once I have a clear answer, I will post how to get around the EVE University dec shield.

Sometimes, coming up with a solution while bitching about the problem works wonder. :D
Handsome Hussein
#205 - 2011-10-16 18:05:43 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
As far as the mechanic or mechanics used to prevent the wars costing us up to 72 billion ISK per month, I would rather not go into detail, as although I have had confirmation from CCP it is fine, the mechanic could be used in other ways - similarly, I would rather people didn't speculate as to this, at least in public, although I'm certain that a few of you may know how it works. Lets just call it a special E-UNI "sekrit"... (source)

I get a lot of things from that, but not that CCP is providing the goods. Rather, they are saying that whatever the Uni is doing to get that ISK is fine.

Could be anything, from RMT to Uni management to buy PLEX (might explain the recent price hikes...) to market manipulation. And I get that the mechanic is in-game, so all that extra income that could be going to shiny new ******* ships is instead being used to make an NPC corp. ISK sink.

Again, you're failing to convince me that others couldn't do the exact same thing. Rather than getting up in the Uni's **** and thinking they're special for some reason (and obsessing over it), why don't you do something productive to outline the problem like Tippia?

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.

Andrea Griffin
#206 - 2011-10-16 18:13:40 UTC
Not that one person matters much, but I would occasionally make donations to Eve Uni and send new pilots looking for a corporation there as well. I will no longer do so and will, in fact, discourage new players from joining. This is absolutely inappropriate behavior and against the spirit of Eve.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2011-10-16 18:18:08 UTC
Handsome Hussein wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
As far as the mechanic or mechanics used to prevent the wars costing us up to 72 billion ISK per month, I would rather not go into detail, as although I have had confirmation from CCP it is fine, the mechanic could be used in other ways - similarly, I would rather people didn't speculate as to this, at least in public, although I'm certain that a few of you may know how it works. Lets just call it a special E-UNI "sekrit"... (source)

I get a lot of things from that, but not that CCP is providing the goods. Rather, they are saying that whatever the Uni is doing to get that ISK is fine. Again, you're failing to convince me that others couldn't do the exact same thing.
I'm sure the method is open to all. But I doubt more than a handful know how to do it.

The one method is to simply dec an alliance-less corp multiple times, then move that corp into an alliance. All those wars now apply to the alliance for the next calculation. Corp deccing is cheaper than alliance deccing. That method is not what the Uni is doing, since Ivy League membership remains unchanged.

At any rate ... the point is that the ISK sink argument for decshields is moot. There are methods to make creating decshields inexpensive. You don't need to create your decshield at the alliance rate, you can create it at the corporate rate.


Quote:
Rather than getting up in the Uni's **** and thinking they're special for some reason (and obsessing over it), why don't you do something productive to outline the problem like Tippia?
I have. I haven't gone into any detail on how to fix it ... I'll leave that for others ... but I have pointed out the big big problem here (without mentioning the Uni), is that it is now impossible to engage highsec corps (other than through suicide ganking.) That removes them all from the sandbox ... they are now, in essence, NPC corps, but with all the benefits of a player-run corporation.
Orion Guardian
#208 - 2011-10-16 18:29:36 UTC
Ogi Talvanen wrote:
Confirming Kelduum and Poetic are big friends.



I am selling proof in form of images of them both drinking Sake in a jacuzzi for 100m ISK. Uploaded to a safe location where I provide you a DL link. Just send me the ISK ingame and I will contact you
Handsome Hussein
#209 - 2011-10-16 18:34:40 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
The one method is to simply dec an alliance-less corp multiple times, then move that corp into an alliance. All those wars now apply to the alliance for the next calculation. Corp deccing is cheaper than alliance deccing. That method is not what the Uni is doing, since Ivy League membership remains unchanged.

So... How is what the Uni doing worse than this? I don't get why the Uni even factors into this... Right. You're completely ******* mental over them.

Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I have. I haven't gone into any detail on how to fix it ... I'll leave that for others ... but I have pointed out the big big problem here (without mentioning the Uni), is that it is now impossible to engage highsec corps (other than through suicide ganking.) That removes them all from the sandbox ... they are now, in essence, NPC corps, but with all the benefits of a player-run corporation.

This is a well-thought out statement, makes a lot of sense and is a great argument. But you ****** it up by getting all tinfoil mental over the Uni (who aren't even using the corp-cost mechanic to cheapen their decshield!).

Wow.

You really need to get over them if you're going to be at all productive.

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.

Cerulean Ice
Royal Amarr Reclamation
#210 - 2011-10-16 18:47:22 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
No player-run corporation in this game should be able to recuse themselves from the sandbox.


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

merriam-webster definition of recuse

  • to disqualify (oneself) as judge in a particular case; broadly
  • to remove (oneself) from participation to avoid a conflict of interest


merriam-webster definition of conflict of interest

  • a conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2011-10-16 18:58:11 UTC
Handsome Hussein wrote:
But you ****** it up by getting all tinfoil mental over the Uni (who aren't even using the corp-cost mechanic to cheapen their decshield!).
They're using a different, as yet unknown (except by a handful of people) method. Either way ... same difference.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#212 - 2011-10-16 19:01:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Cerulean Ice wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
No player-run corporation in this game should be able to recuse themselves from the sandbox.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • to remove (oneself) from participation to avoid a conflict of interest

You are correct, sir. I guess I knew what the first half meant (to remove (oneself) from participation), but was unaware of the conflict of interest portion of the meaning.

Thanks. I'll use "remove" instead.
Azelor Delaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#213 - 2011-10-16 19:30:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Azelor Delaria
Alrighty, still no word from the GM, but I just want to say the following.

A few months ago, CCP decided to remove the ability to make ships unprobable. This was done to “facilitate” more PvP, while also using the excuse that “no one should ever be truly safe” in EVE. The sandbox should not be so closed as to prevent combat between players. Carebears cried about this, of course, and I’ll admit I was one of them before I realized I didn’t truly care. I would just play a bit smarter and there we would go.

However, in the span of roughly six months, CCP has done a complete reversal of the “HTFU” stance. They have made it so corporations can be immune (or, rather, close to it) to war decs. They are creating a situation where you can legally close off your space. The sandbox for these people becomes only the people in the corporation and alliance, with everyone else becoming a nuisance at best.

Why is this? There is no way to say EVE University now becomes ”dec-proof”, something that Kelduum has wanted, if his posts are to be believed and that it wasn't something they wanted. Whether Poetic is right in Kelduum negotiating with CCP to implement such a thing is trivial. What matters is that the sandbox has been destroyed. Whether you agree with high sec PvP being legitimate or not, you have to understand it’s only a matter of time before other things come down the line that affect low-security space and null-security space. What’s next? Reintroduction of “unprobable” ships? Increasing the DPS of the sentry guns in low sec so that they insta-pop even a battleship?

Tinfoil hattery or not, this has real and drastic consequences to all aspects of EVE Online. This now becomes a game of who has the most money. Ships were never to be balanced around price, so why should anything else?
Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#214 - 2011-10-16 19:33:02 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
And EVE University is not a corp filled with newbs. The majority of their members are a year old or older. It is a carebear corporation.
So, a care-bear corporation with 50B in kills and losses in the last month (interesting definition of carebear), and rather than just being over 3 months old as they were earlier in the thread, they're now over a year old? Finished collating your data again have you Poetic? If so, please do show the rest of the class.

Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Handsome ******* wrote:
But you ****** it up by getting all tinfoil mental over the Uni (who aren't even using the corp-cost mechanic to cheapen their decshield!).
They're using a different, as yet unknown (except by a handful of people) method.

Except that you already quoted a post in the original thread which explained at least one way to avoid part of the cost.

You're going round in circles again Poetic... I guess we will be back here again tomorrow with your claims getting bigger.

Pro Tip: If you're going to make stuff up, try to have at least have some proof with it, and stick to the made up things - don't just try and make them worse when you are found out.

Also, I'm still David Warner.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2011-10-16 19:37:39 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
And EVE University is not a corp filled with newbs. The majority of their members are a year old or older. It is a carebear corporation.
So, a care-bear corporation with 50B in kills and losses in the last month (interesting definition of carebear)
Any corporation that needs a 19 corp decshield to protect them from mean people and baddies ... that's a carebear corporation. How many kills and losses will you have over the next month?

Quote:
Pro Tip: If you're going to make stuff up, try to have at least have some proof with it, and stick to the made up things - don't just try and make them worse when you are found out.
I'm still waiting for you to refute anything I've said.
Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#216 - 2011-10-16 20:03:42 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Quote:
Pro Tip: If you're going to make stuff up, try to have at least have some proof with it, and stick to the made up things - don't just try and make them worse when you are found out.
I'm still waiting for you to refute anything I've said.


And I have yet to see anything proving any of your (various, and rapidly changing) accusations, or any of the data you claimed you were 're-compiling' after 'apparently' losing it.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#217 - 2011-10-16 20:25:37 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Quote:
Pro Tip: If you're going to make stuff up, try to have at least have some proof with it, and stick to the made up things - don't just try and make them worse when you are found out.
I'm still waiting for you to refute anything I've said.


And I have yet to see anything proving any of your (various, and rapidly changing) accusations, or any of the data you claimed you were 're-compiling' after 'apparently' losing it.

I never lost anything (that's your spin.) I'm just in the process of inserting it into Google Docs, where folks can analyze and confirm the data for themselves. Little point just pumping out reports on the data, if people can't see the data. What I did was just for me, so I wrote quick and dirty code, with no view to usability. Sort of the Irdalth method of design, except that I don't expect anyone to use it other than myself.
Darian Reymont
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#218 - 2011-10-16 20:43:29 UTC
I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing your data, Poetic. Smile

Former E-UNI Director, station pilot and snoob. https://twitter.com//DarianReymont

ShipToaster
#219 - 2011-10-16 22:49:24 UTC
Place the blame for claiming that eve university is not a newbie corp at my door as I was the one who brought it up initially. The figures I saw mentioned were that newbs of under six months in eve university were under 50% of the total membership and players over a year were 25%. These figures were well over a year old.

Same goes for mentioning that the relationship between eve university and ccp is becoming a concern. I never took this as far as PS but I dont like the idea of any alliance getting special treatment even if it was only CCP asking what they could do to help you.

Handsome Hussein wrote:
[]Out of curiosity, does anyone know how much such a decshield costs on a weekly basis? Seems to me that would be a pretty big ISK sink.


Taking the eve university 19 corp dec shield as an example the answer to your question is it has no cost if not decced but if decced it costs 950 million per week, possibly more if you dont make the aggressor corps wars mutual, instead of 72 billion.

Method to set one a decshield up is:

1. make all current wars mutual so they do not count in any calculations
2. dec with dec shield corp
3. pay 50 million
4. make this war mutual
5. repeat steps 2 through 4 until you reach desired amount

in eve universities case it would cost 19x50=950 million to set it up.

Kelduum Revaan wrote:
So, a care-bear corporation with 50B in kills and losses in the last month (interesting definition of carebear)


I dont think it is fair to use these stats to try to claim you are not a carebear corp as you have been in your wardec event for the last month. Were you not around 2000 members just before your month of fighting started and you lost at least 800 carebears for this event?

.

Skunk Gracklaw
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#220 - 2011-10-16 22:53:04 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I never lost anything (that's your spin.) I'm just in the process of inserting it into Google Docs, where folks can analyze and confirm the data for themselves. Little point just pumping out reports on the data, if people can't see the data. What I did was just for me, so I wrote quick and dirty code, with no view to usability. Sort of the Irdalth method of design, except that I don't expect anyone to use it other than myself.

So you're plugging some random numbers into a Google spreadsheet and using that as proof?