open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP's stance on the outcome of AT9?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic

Cpt Pugwash
Caldari
Rubra Libertas Militia
Posted - 2011.06.20 13:52:00 - [31]
 

It is not easy for CCP, they put a lot of time, money and effort into the Alliance Tournement and inevitably it isn't always perfect.

Rather than ***** about something seemingly out of CCP control why not suggest ways CCP can improve the AT.

How would you stop people entering second teams?

Personally I would offer teams the ability to nominate a second team and offer as an insentive the gurantee of separate draws in the groups and knock stages. This would legitamise the second teams and prevent any skullduggery before the final.

How do you stop meta gaming in the AT?

You don't - it is an unfortunate aspect of life that people will try to get whatever advantage they think they can get away with. It is not restricted to Eve, see drugs in sports, Team orders in F1 and all kinds of skulldugery in business.

MMO's have a near impossible task of policing their games and CCP have taken the opinion that rather than try to police meta gaming they will allow it as part of the flavour of the game, and with that, it should come as no surprise that it is also a part of the AT.


If you want to blame anybody for yesterdays final then blame the players involved. What they did devalued the AT and their own achievements and they should be thoroughly ashamed.

If you think you can do a better AT then write to CCP with your suggestions.


Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2011.06.20 13:54:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Brahan Seer
Everyone will have forgotten about it this time next week when everyone will be moaning about something else.

Unless it repeats. Then people will remember it, at which point the event loses some of its prestige.

I cannot watch another Minmatar rush team and the Slepnir has become the new Drake.

Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:00:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Cpt Pugwash

If you want to blame anybody for yesterdays final then blame the players involved. What they did devalued the AT and their own achievements and they should be thoroughly ashamed.



I'm sure they'll be ashamed all the way to the bank.

It's too easy to blame the 'players' for the whole debacle just because CCP have already gone into full scale 'if we ignore this long enough we don't have to say anything about it' mode. (Most 0.0 pilots will be familiar with this mode from when an alliance bloc loses 5-10 super caps to a dead node.)

Cpt Pugwash
Caldari
Rubra Libertas Militia
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:09:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas

I'm sure they'll be ashamed all the way to the bank.

It's too easy to blame the 'players' for the whole debacle just because CCP have already gone into full scale 'if we ignore this long enough we don't have to say anything about it' mode. (Most 0.0 pilots will be familiar with this mode from when an alliance bloc loses 5-10 super caps to a dead node.)


I wouldn't expect a goon to understand, I am in fact surprised youa re not praising the winning teams for ****ting up the AT, or does that only come if a goon ****s something up?

If you really care about the AT then do as I have already suggested, engage your brain and make suggestions on how the AT can be improved and how CCP could discourage this in future.

Teala Te'Jir
Amarr
Mr. Benjamin Enterprises
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:19:00 - [35]
 

Do you know what I remember about last years matches. I remember the Hero Battle Badger, I remember the destruction of two previously won special tourney frigs, I also recall many matches that were thrown, I remember PL kicking everyones butts and the final match between PL and Hydra was a snooze fest, it was over so fast. I recall the cool ad that was played during the tournament about Iceland.

That is what I remember of last years tournament. Good times. Cool

Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:20:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Cpt Pugwash

If you really care about the AT then do as I have already suggested, engage your brain and make suggestions on how the AT can be improved and how CCP could discourage this in future.


CCP already said that the whole matter has been shelved until ATX so no, I wouldn't encourage anyone to waste their time coming up with helpful solutions that will just fade into the ether.

Instead, I'm encouraging everyone to appreciate the final for what it was: an eve alliance delivering an expensive **** you to the developers.

Would I have done it in the same situation? No, probably not. But I can appreciate art when I see it. Cool

MaiLina KaTar
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:23:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 20/06/2011 14:23:35
Yeah, obviously they're going to admit publically how the AT-thingy got f*ed in the rear end...

Atticus Fynch
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:27:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Acac Sunflyier
I don't think CCP's stances is ever going to change. it was cool but it doesn't really need to have an official stance.


I think you're right, we don't at all need to have a stance and an opinion about matches. We do on the other hand evaluate the ruleset after each tournament, based on those matches. It would be fair to say that up until now, we've been able to have a relatively open ruleset and still provide good entertainment to the viewers. Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


If you read between the lines, it means they didn't expect this outcome but can do nothing about it since no rules are in place to address it. Much like the scam contracts in EVE.
Not a nice things but the game mechanics allow it.

But, since the majority of viewers are butthurt about this, they will be changing the rules.

Jos Wijnants
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:30:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Jos Wijnants on 20/06/2011 14:39:24
Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas
Originally by: Cpt Pugwash

If you really care about the AT then do as I have already suggested, engage your brain and make suggestions on how the AT can be improved and how CCP could discourage this in future.


CCP already said that the whole matter has been shelved until ATX so no, I wouldn't encourage anyone to waste their time coming up with helpful solutions that will just fade into the ether.

Instead, I'm encouraging everyone to appreciate the final for what it was: an eve alliance delivering an expensive **** you to the developers.

Would I have done it in the same situation? No, probably not. But I can appreciate art when I see it. Cool


indeed ,so CCP will keep their mouth shut about this ,in the hope a lot of people forget what happened and do the same thing again at a possible AT X?
Oooh wait ...............forget it CCP will never say something,when there is a chance of loosing face(a little too late)

salty Milk
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:47:00 - [40]
 

with publicity like this i doubt they will change a thing, the sponsors will be paying double next year to get a 30 second spot before a hydra match unless ccp take the opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot

Atticus Fynch
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:50:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: salty Milk
with publicity like this i doubt they will change a thing, the sponsors will be paying double next year to get a 30 second spot before a hydra match unless ccp take the opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot


yes, but do you honestly think people will tune in to watch a rigged match?

Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:55:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Doctor Ungabungas on 20/06/2011 15:01:33
Originally by: salty Milk
with publicity like this i doubt they will change a thing, the sponsors will be paying double next year to get a 30 second spot before a hydra match unless ccp take the opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot


Publicity like what? I think you might be the only one around here who hasn't noticed that CCP has suddenly gone very very quiet about the whole thing. Wink

[To clarify: CCP didn't spend a truckload of money flying people over to Iceland to sell Eve to people who already play Eve.]

Ioci
Gallente
Space Mermaids
Posted - 2011.06.20 14:58:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Acac Sunflyier
I don't think CCP's stances is ever going to change. it was cool but it doesn't really need to have an official stance.


I think you're right, we don't at all need to have a stance and an opinion about matches. We do on the other hand evaluate the ruleset after each tournament, based on those matches. It would be fair to say that up until now, we've been able to have a relatively open ruleset and still provide good entertainment to the viewers. Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


Your missing the point I think. I saw one mixed fleet and it was a faction, BPC drop fleet. That's the first Alliance tournament I ever watched and it was very accurate to EVE. FotM fleets that are so effective you either build the FotM fleet or don't participate.

People say EVE is dying. They need to finish that sentence. EVE Quality is dying. You guys can't ruleset a 'fair' tournament because we build our own fleets and if I bring anything but FotM, it dies. How do you regulate that?

Ineka
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.06.20 15:03:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Ioci
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Acac Sunflyier
I don't think CCP's stances is ever going to change. it was cool but it doesn't really need to have an official stance.


I think you're right, we don't at all need to have a stance and an opinion about matches. We do on the other hand evaluate the ruleset after each tournament, based on those matches. It would be fair to say that up until now, we've been able to have a relatively open ruleset and still provide good entertainment to the viewers. Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


Your missing the point I think. I saw one mixed fleet and it was a faction, BPC drop fleet. That's the first Alliance tournament I ever watched and it was very accurate to EVE. FotM fleets that are so effective you either build the FotM fleet or don't participate.

People say EVE is dying. They need to finish that sentence. EVE Quality is dying. You guys can't ruleset a 'fair' tournament because we build our own fleets and if I bring anything but FotM, it dies. How do you regulate that?


With a bigger blob !

Laughing

Jos Wijnants
Posted - 2011.06.20 15:05:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Doctor Ungabungas
Edited by: Doctor Ungabungas on 20/06/2011 15:01:33
Originally by: salty Milk
with publicity like this i doubt they will change a thing, the sponsors will be paying double next year to get a 30 second spot before a hydra match unless ccp take the opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot


Publicity like what? I think you might be the only one around here who hasn't noticed that CCP has suddenly gone very very quiet about the whole thing. Wink

[To clarify: CCP didn't spend a truckload of money flying people over to Iceland to sell Eve to people who already play Eve.]



this

Zondrail
Formic Hive
Posted - 2011.06.20 15:09:00 - [46]
 

I feel like there are really only two ways to treat this. I think if you keep it as is, where throwing games, buying out teams, and loading the brackets with your own B teams is allowed and/or encouraged. The tournament needs to be pushed *much* more as an in-game event... part of the actual game and story of EVE.

On the other hand... if you want this to be treated as an authentic e-sport (if I dare use the term), then this needs to go to a new level where teams have to have a physical presence, people can be banned on a player by player basis (let's be honest there's not going to be an easy way for CCP to keep anyone or any team out of the tournament, given that Alliances can be made at will). You also have to tie the consequences closely with the players that are actually participating. This is really the only way I could see being able to force the usual set of competition ethics into the alliance tournaments.

flapie 2
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.20 15:10:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: flapie 2 on 20/06/2011 15:11:35
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


I think you should be ahead of your game insted of running up behind it, this has been a discussion for several years now. And yet the "open" ruleset dint changes one bit to prevent it. Now it collapsed most people are ****ed off, proll half of them wont look again next year, the other half will proll only watch iff there are more changes to the event its setup. Maybe its time for a slight change of tactics ??

Just my 2isk tho.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.20 16:10:00 - [48]
 


Dr Djago
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.06.20 16:18:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Dr Djago on 20/06/2011 16:18:56
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Acac Sunflyier
I don't think CCP's stances is ever going to change. it was cool but it doesn't really need to have an official stance.


I think you're right, we don't at all need to have a stance and an opinion about matches. We do on the other hand evaluate the ruleset after each tournament, based on those matches. It would be fair to say that up until now, we've been able to have a relatively open ruleset and still provide good entertainment to the viewers. Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


CCP Soundwave FFS, stop dancing around the bushes just told us something will be changed for next year to stop some of the community anger. And remember you too were getting shafted along side with rest of 28,000 players.

Julien Brellier
Posted - 2011.06.20 18:49:00 - [50]
 

For me, the main attraction of Tournament was that it was the ONE PLACE in new eden that equal fleets could battle on equal terms and actually find out who had the better ships/fittings/FCs/pilots.

Now that AT is nothing more than the big alliances fixing matches and fielding b (and c) teams in order to make billions from the free ships, I really don't give two solitary ****s about it.

A sad end to what was once actually quite an exciting tournament.

James Moroci
Posted - 2011.06.20 18:52:00 - [51]
 

u have to be abilionare to be in the AT. wich is a shame.. there should be catagories. so all can attend not only the billionairs from the wealthy alliances..

slightly sillydude
Posted - 2011.06.20 18:53:00 - [52]
 

It was lame but they did still beat all the other contenders, its not like they cheated.

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:02:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: slightly sillydude
It was lame but they did still beat all the other contenders, its not like they cheated.

But this is not what this is all about.

Imagine Argentina and Brazil in the soccer World Cup Final. Imagine Brazil winning the first half of the match. Then imagine how both teams walk onto the field for the second half, pulling their shorts down and begin to **** for the rest of the match.

Both teams may be great at soccer, both may be from South America, but the match will ultimately enter the history books as the Match of the ****ers.

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:09:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Acac Sunflyier
I don't think CCP's stances is ever going to change. it was cool but it doesn't really need to have an official stance.


I think you're right, we don't at all need to have a stance and an opinion about matches. We do on the other hand evaluate the ruleset after each tournament, based on those matches. It would be fair to say that up until now, we've been able to have a relatively open ruleset and still provide good entertainment to the viewers. Most things that are left open like this, are left open until someone inevitably crosses the line and you have to revisit that openness. Will we need to revisit the rules based on what happened this year? Probably, but we won't know for sure for another year :)


I'm sure your real prize Sponsors won't be so amused - I wouldn't be, and this whole "it's EVE" thing isn't cutting it.

Your viewers think you should be embarrassed about the outcome because they see it as a disgrace to the tournaments integrity.

The fact that you didn't have an after fight discussion about it that is memorable, there wasn't really any amused smiling laughing, enjoyable moment.

There was no, "Let us get the whole EVE TV Crew on deck and in front of the camera" like you have done every other year to celebrate the outcome is telling.

Your stance is pretty clear - and I think you need to take action on it for the integrity of the tournament this year and next. Not seeing what the lack of action is going to have on next year's tournament is clearly going against the wisdom and history of years of prior sports competition in the REAL WORLD - you want to say "EVE IS REAL" then you better deal with real consequences. "EVE" reflects the real world - there is nothing amazing or "meta-game" about the outcome. It was cheap and weak.

Everyone feels like this - anyone who is amused has a childish and short-sighted attitude. It's not that people take the tournament "too-seriously" it's that people have an inherent sense of integrity - no matter how close they are to a subject in seriousness. And the Tournament has lost its integrity.





Tech two
UK1 Zero
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:10:00 - [55]
 

Outbreak and Hydra just raised the bar.

You want to not get spied on before a match? You know now what to do.

You can't stop 2 good friends working together.... if they are good enough. Outbreak has never really been in Hydra for long.

This has to be the most talked about AT match ever! Was it an ideal ending? No.. has it given CCP food for thought? YES!

Also, what is to stop the rich alliances, just buying a load of high skilled chars, setting up a brand new alliance and playing as them? Has anyone ever stopped to think that some of the unheard or not well known alliances in this tournament were just offshoots of other alliances? But they were crap and didn't win so that's ok right?


AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:18:00 - [56]
 

As long as you're aware of the bff relationship between the 2 teams you could make it (via rules) so that they meet each other before the finals. That's about all you can do. So many matches APPEARED to be thrown (the command link drake taking off in the wrong direction, the tengu who burned out his launchers) that it's impossible to tell for sure unless you make it as obvious as the clowns involved here did.

The other big flaw in this tournament is the points. By now they should get it right so that all hulls are at least somewhat likely to appear. If that means assigning different points (using decimals where appropriate, of course) to different ships of the same class and tier, so be it.

Vaarun
Amarr
The Night Crew
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:20:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Bloodpetal
Everyone feels like this - anyone who is amused has a childish and short-sighted attitude. It's not that people take the tournament "too-seriously" it's that people have an inherent sense of integrity - no matter how close they are to a subject in seriousness. And the Tournament has lost its integrity.




Pure poetry and spot-on. You summarized the communities sentiments beautifully.


o7

Estephania
Independent Political Analysts
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:29:00 - [58]
 

Dynamic tournament draw will eliminate some of meta-gaming. No more those 1st place of group E will play 2nd place of group D. All 1st placed teams enter a pool, all 2nd placed teams enter another pool. They are drawn one against another.
Only alliances with visible (will be defined by CCP) and continuous presence on killboards will be eligible. No more crappy alt alliances no one heard about. No more "reborn" alliances that were sleeping in their graves up until it was a right moment to enter AT registration.

As for metagaming in general, it can be minimized, but it cannot be eliminated. It's human nature - ppl in general will do morally wrong, low and disgusting things to get an advantage. Isn't it what is happening in life? Will you refrain from little tricks and intrigues when your promotion or career is at stake? Eve is just the reflection of human nature, nothing more. Of course it would be better to leave those things out of MMOs, but you can't change ppl.

P42ALPHA
Gallente
Epidemic.
THE D0MINION
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:39:00 - [59]
 

Edited by: P42ALPHA on 20/06/2011 19:49:16
Simple solution. If players dont want to compete in a torny. Dont have one. No need to hand out free stuff to ppl just showing up.

Or have a player torny instead, and ccp will match up players into 10 man fleets, and have the point system only effect the player, and not a whole team. That will create true tears. I can hear all the hard core 0.0 carebears. "But, but, I cant give orders on TS" LAWL

Oh ya, and remove any prizes. Zero isk, and no ship to sell. Make it about winning. This should remove the 16 year old girl syndrom we have been seeing. When the Finals are finished, and there is a winner. Have the payout based on player voting, and donations.


Also adjust the price of entry.

A-team keep the same isk. A-team, true allience members that are vets in those alliences. 2 year members.

B-team double the cost. B-team equals any team with a player that has been in, or has a alt/other account in any other Allience for no less the 2 years.

ect. ect.

This will probly rub ppl the wrong way, but only sov holding alliance's that have held there space, or has held consistent sov for no less then 1 year.

Make Eve hard again, with consequence.

AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:41:00 - [60]
 

I think the 'one team per alliance' rule is stupid, tbh. As long as the total prize pool value is not significantly higher (and preferably slightly lower) than the total value of entry fees + likely ship losses (net of insurance) then the more the merrier, afaic.

It's really not fair that a small alliance with a dozen competent PVPers can field the same number of teams as a huge alliance with hundreds of competent PVPers. (And FWIW I'm someone who tends to fart in the general direction of large alliances.)


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only