| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (16)

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 10:55AM venekor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh noes a name change, run for the hills! This is the EVE community for ya though, crying over a name change.

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 11:30AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You're spot on. Many people would rather play the "forum" aspect of the game than the actual game itself. I would say the eve community whines more than the WoW community. Prime example of this is Goonswarm. all they seem to do is "roam" the forums and consistently contradict themselves. But hey, if you want to pay $15 a month to access a web forum, well by all means it's your money.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 2:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah!

Let's not make them go the route everyone else goes that costs a billion ISK and resets the timer on how long they've owned space, with the benefits that come with it.

It's just a name! And a ton of money! And SoV benefits!

Amazing how knowledge can color an argument.

Also, article is wrong in a one significant detail. Band of Brothers didn't reform under a new name. KenZoku had been around for months already, they just joined an existing alliance, then tried to have that alliance name changed. If they had actually created a new alliance they could have chosen any name they wanted, but of course they'd also have to pay the 1 billion credits.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 2:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ TriggerHappy -- the article's quoted text from GM Grimmi addresses the fact that the KenZoku alliance was created months prior to when (former) Band of Brothers corps joined it:

"Ultimately, we felt we had no other recourse than to reverse the name change, the key factor being that during this re-investigation we learned the KenZoku alliance was created several months before the BoB alliance leadership switched hands."
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 9:16PM Graill440 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Moo, your right in the extreme version of what you typed.

The more valid bottom line is this, more dev (gm)meddling.

They cant just leave well enough alone. Frightened at what actions may or may not lose them subs, typicaly pathetic. And in this case the wrong choice.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 11:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ah! So thats where all the drama queens from everquest 1 went! Was wondering

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 11:29AM archipelagos said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I imagine that if there had been no precedent of favouritism towards the alliance in question then this may not have become the issue it did. A name change in and of itself is probably not the real problem here but what it may or may not have represented.

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 11:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Exactly. It's pretty sad that they had to create an "Internal Affairs" department at CCP because of their devs/admins getting involved in the politics and high-end crafting shenanigans.


@1&2
How long has it been "bad" to complain about dishonest behavior? People like YOU are what's wrong with the world today. EVERYTHING is fine as long as it doesn't directly affect you.

Sure it's just a game, but bullshit is bullshit, regardless of the circumstances.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 11:37AM Nef said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I think it's more along the lines of Kenny getting a name change (against the name change policy) without having to go through the in-game means. Which would cost them sov. (they do still have some) It may be a minor issue overall, but it's still breaking the rules -- rules that have been upheld in the past.

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 12:02PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You really can't understand the implications of CCP allowing this name change unless you have a better understanding of the game mechanics. Don't think this is like a WoW or WAR guild getting their name changed, the two things aren't even similar and this really is a pretty big deal to the EVE community.

EVE is a sandbox game, developers make the rules and the players live or die by their own wits or stupidity. It's SUPPOSED to be an every-man-for-himself, kill-or-be-killed "oh you had everything you own ripped from you, sorry bout that, be more careful next time ok?" game of consequences. "Yeah, you got owned pretty hard that time, guess it's gonna be pretty tough to get back where you were, huh?"

But in this particular scenario, after a powerful corporation had their asses handed to them, CCP decided to come help them along when they shouldn't have interfered at all. It was like, "everyone has to play by the same rules, but sometimes we will make exceptions for a few of our most serious players to make them happy. Thanks for playing EVE."

If they didn't correct this by reverting the alliance's name, then the whole game loses a lot of it's integrity as a player-driven sandbox.

Posted: Mar 30th 2009 4:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For those who don't know about the whole BOB backstory then yes this may seem ridiculous, but it's not if you really know the history. As mentioned in the article above there was a Dev who gave blueprints to BOB and misused his power. This just sounds like they gave BOB valuable crafting items, but at the time this was happening EVE had a blueprint lottery, meaning there was a very small chance to get the very lucrative blueprints among the thousands of players (blueprints are required to make anything in eve) and BOB got a whole bunch of these. These blueprints allowed BOB to gain a HUGE economic advantage over everyone and allowed them to gain an unprecedented advantage that they still had right up till their dispersion.

In addition to this BOB was taught how the game worked from the inside out by the Dev that abused their powers and BOB regularly meta-games and finds ways to crash their enemies computers leaving their ships in space (15 min aggression timer keeps you in play even if you drop) allowing them to slaughter their enemies. It's also important to know that BOB's aim is to rule all of space in EVE which would be a terrible thing for one alliance to do.

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 5:38PM Firebreak said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
EVE conspiracy theories are the best theories. The idea that a BoB player can crash my computer to kill my ship is laughable. You would have thought they would have done that a lot more before losing all of their space.

As a side note the POS exploit made a lot more money then the BPO's that BoB got. Even that is still a drop in the bucket of EVE economy.
Reply

Posted: Mar 31st 2009 1:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
OK, this crap about lag only affecting those fighting against BoB has gone far enough. Stop talking out of your arses.

For one, doing such a thing for a fleet battle involving hundreds of players would be rather difficult, and ultimately increase lag for both sides. Perhaps it has more to do with a significant number of BoB members being European and therefore closer to the servers? That's purely speculation of course as is ANY statement about someone else's lag!

Secondly, having been on BOTH sides of these battles at one point or another, I can confidently say that the lag is universal. It's more bullshit one-sided whinging.

I agree that the name change should not have occurred in this case, but read the statement a little more carefully - this is NOT the first time an alliance name has been changed according to CCP.

"the name change request was not submitted within a timely manner, as it had been in the legacy cases we were holding up as examples."

This means they were pointing to other name-changes they had allowed. It is not setting a precedent, rather following one.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 12:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't see anyone mentioning this yet, but the issue pertaining to the name change is about two things. First, that CCP is showing favortism again; something a company needs to steadfastly remain apart from. Same issue arose in WoW with Blizzard Devs allowing their friends and guilds to jump from PVE to PVP servers when their policy publicly stated no one would be allowed to do that. People get really ticked off by that sort of thing, and this isn't the first time CCP has been caught with their hand in the cookie jar so to speak. What I think a lot of people are left asking is, what other favors have they done that they haven't been caught doing?

And secondly there is a particular game mechanic that was avoided in how CCP conducted the name change. Control of 0.0 space in EVE is a big deal. When an alliance wants to change its name they either have to create an entirely new alliance--incuring a rather large expense and loss of sovereignty over their existing space, or jump into another already existing alliance. Ex-BOB didn't want to do either in this case. They wanted to regain their old lost alliance name, not incur the rather large expense of starting a new alliance, and not lose their remaining sovereignty over their remaining systems.

CCP changed their existing alliance name and circumvented the game mechanics that would have cost the alliance the money and the loss of sovereignty. That's never been done for anyone else in the history of EVE, and on the very face of it, should show everyone the extraordinary lengths to which CCP was treating with ex-BOB.

Rules are their for a reason. When you start making exceptions for some--especially with CCPs track record with BOB, then you also have to make them for others. And in this case it really had very little to do with the name specifically, and everything to do with those game mechanics that everyone but ex-BOB was having to live with.

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 12:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I forgot to add this. Keep in mind who actually conducted the name change, and circumvented the game mechanics for ex-BOB. A GM. And employee of CCP who has access to the data base and all the reporting tools would need to enact such things inside the game.

After a rather lengthy uproar on the official forums, with many threads being locked and deleted, CCP finally released a second statement regarding the incident indicating they would roll back the name change. The excuse they used was they hadn't known that the KenZoku alliance had actually been in existence previous to the incident which resulted in BOB having its alliance dissolved.

Does anyone serious believe this? Anyone with the power to make changes inside the game has the access required to look up anything they require. Either someone was extraordinarily incompetent, or extraordinarily prefabricating. They took several weeks to make a decision on the petition afterall. You mean no one, in all that time, took the time to verify any of the facts of the petition? That in and of itself is worrisome.
Reply

Posted: Mar 26th 2009 1:41PM Ninevah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, it's crap like this that makes a game feel like it was just created BY CCP folks FOR CCP folks. Just so they could play around and screw over others.

The principle is very important to me. If no one else gets a name change, then why should that exception be made for one group in particular?

It makes me glad that I just let my subscription expire recently...

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW