Backstage - OOC Forums

EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Morwen Lagann on 09 Dec 2010, 00:44

Title: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Morwen Lagann on 09 Dec 2010, 00:44
... Just ask Koro (http://i371.photobucket.com/albums/oo160/koronakesh/GMIntervention.jpg?t=1291875171), Boma or Drake. :lol:

Quote from: Eystur Local Channel
[05:32:32] Koronakesh > The Equilibrium sends its regards, Silonneri.
[05:41:03] Silonneri Balginia > Pilots Boma Airaken, Koronakesh and Drake Arson - For Crimes against the Republic, you are hereby set to kill on sight within our space.
[05:41:11] Silonneri Balginia > Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
[05:49:04] Koronakesh > Be seeing you, Miss Balginia.
[05:49:15] Silonneri Balginia > You too, sweetie.

Quote from: Associated Chatter from OOC
[05:45:25] Drake Arson > WHAT THE FUCK
[05:45:30] Drake Arson > I JSUT GOT SET OUTLAW BY A DEV>!?!?!?!?!!
[05:45:41] Vlad Cetes > LOL
[05:46:43] Dame Death > yep
[05:46:45] Dame Death > :P
[05:46:46] Ze'ev Sinraali > CCP troll best troll.
[05:46:48] Drake Arson > Jeezus chirst
[05:47:03] Drake Arson > Now Imr unnign around in .9 space witha  -6.
[05:47:15] Drake Arson > DEVS
[05:47:18] Drake Arson > They hate me
[05:55:01] Drake Arson > DEVS
[05:55:02] Drake Arson > I love them
...
[06:13:28] Koronakesh > Fuck yes, consequences for rp
[06:13:43] Drake Arson > :D
[06:13:48] Drake Arson > W8ishing you didnt shoot now?
[06:13:54] Koronakesh > toally worth it
...
[06:19:23] Koronakesh > i kept trying to get ulphus to set me red but he wouldn't do it :(
[06:19:35] Koronakesh > I think executing republic fleet should get me red status tho

I'm lollin'. Good one, CCP. :D
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 09 Dec 2010, 00:49
This is how awesome rp'ing via in-space actions can be. Y'all should try it some time.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Graelyn on 09 Dec 2010, 01:13
Congrats!

(http://jessenoller.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/holy-shit-awesome-2.jpg)

I sure as hell wish this sort of thing happened more often!

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Inara Subaka on 09 Dec 2010, 01:19
My only response to this whole incident:

FUCKWIN!
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Isobel Mitar on 09 Dec 2010, 01:29
Awesome! :D
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Mitara Newelle on 09 Dec 2010, 01:57
Very cool!
 :D
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Arvo Katsuya on 09 Dec 2010, 02:23
When I heard about this, my reaction mirrored the above. I really do hope to see more active intervention from the actors on account of our actions having consequences to them, both negatively and positively. The more the 'GMs' can achieve being personable with the players, the better. I loved the early days of Ultima Online because of this.

You do not know how much I would love if Arvo's negative Nation standing could be set to a level where he could perform missions for True Power or True Creations aside from lvl 1's. At the level Arvo has racked it up prior to joining TS-F, it would be unrealistic to do grind them in that manner: there are better and more constructive ways to aid Nation, and Arvo rationalizes it as being tested by Kuvakei until he can work for him directly in Stain.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Rodj Blake on 09 Dec 2010, 02:25
Awesome stuff
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Akrasjel Lanate on 09 Dec 2010, 02:51
Awesome!!!  :eek:  :o
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 09 Dec 2010, 03:43
When I heard about this, my reaction mirrored the above. I really do hope to see more active intervention from the actors on account of our actions having consequences to them, both negatively and positively. The more the 'GMs' can achieve being personable with the players, the better. I loved the early days of Ultima Online because of this.

You do not know how much I would love if Arvo's negative Nation standing could be set to a level where he could perform missions for True Power or True Creations aside from lvl 1's. At the level Arvo has racked it up prior to joining TS-F, it would be unrealistic to do grind them in that manner: there are better and more constructive ways to aid Nation, and Arvo rationalizes it as being tested by Kuvakei until he can work for him directly in Stain.

Come on down. They bite, we bite back ;)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jekaterine on 09 Dec 2010, 04:13
This messes with my sense of order.

Looking at Koro his standings show approximately -6 towards the Republic and the Gallente as well as the fact that he is now -6 CONCORD status making him an Outlaw.

Mind you if a Republic big shot got nuked and set the guy/s doing it -ve whatever to the Republic I'd go "Action has concequences cool", though this would have to apply across the board.
What confuses me is why CONCORD considers just this Republic whatnot of such importance that such a sec hit is warranted.
This of course also goes for the Gallente. Considering how it happened it gets curious as it must be a hardwired CONCORD and Gallente response in reaction to the destruction of this Republic ship.
That girl sure must be important. Or rather her ship.

What we have is two, from the Republic, independent factions nuking Koro/Drake and Bomas standings at the same time that the Republic hammers them.

I reiterate:
Why would CONCORD or the Federation care to such an extent about some Minnie fleet commander getting blown up. I mean they don't get this irate if you shoot NPC:s of comparable rank. Or FW players of high rank do they ?
If they did I missed it.

A question to those who have shot at Sansha stuff lately: Have you been branded the same way in regards to your Sansha standings and their main ally ?

If yes then all is well, if not then it reinforces my belief that this is a "Left hand did something Right hand doesn't know about".
Or simply a rage reaction from the actor for being shot to shit instead of gloriously being able to swan around space unimpeded fawned over by the plebs surrounding her.

What I'm getting at is that organisations don't just do shit on the fly. Especially not military or police such. There are strict protocols that get followed.
If they apply to situation A then they'll be applied to all other such situations.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Gottii on 09 Dec 2010, 05:01
This messes with my sense of order.

Looking at Koro his standings show approximately -6 towards the Republic and the Gallente as well as the fact that he is now -6 CONCORD status making him an Outlaw.

Mind you if a Republic big shot got nuked and set the guy/s doing it -ve whatever to the Republic I'd go "Action has concequences cool", though this would have to apply across the board.
What confuses me is why CONCORD considers just this Republic whatnot of such importance that such a sec hit is warranted.
This of course also goes for the Gallente. Considering how it happened it gets curious as it must be a hardwired CONCORD and Gallente response in reaction to the destruction of this Republic ship.
That girl sure must be important. Or rather her ship.

What we have is two, from the Republic, independent factions nuking Koro/Drake and Bomas standings at the same time that the Republic hammers them.

I reiterate:
Why would CONCORD or the Federation care to such an extent about some Minnie fleet commander getting blown up. I mean they don't get this irate if you shoot NPC:s of comparable rank. Or FW players of high rank do they ?
If they did I missed it.

A question to those who have shot at Sansha stuff lately: Have you been branded the same way in regards to your Sansha standings and their main ally ?

If yes then all is well, if not then it reinforces my belief that this is a "Left hand did something Right hand doesn't know about".
Or simply a rage reaction from the actor for being shot to shit instead of gloriously being able to swan around space unimpeded fawned over by the plebs surrounding her.

What I'm getting at is that organisations don't just do shit on the fly. Especially not military or police such. There are strict protocols that get followed.
If they apply to situation A then they'll be applied to all other such situations.

Probably because Sansha is a threat to everyone.  If you side with Sansha against one, they're probably assuming you're siding with Sansha against all.  All four Empires united against Nation before, its not unreasonable to think they would take a similar stance against Nation now, if only in sharing information on Sansha sympathizers.

Also, CONCORD is against Nation.  You aid Nation, they'll set you hostile.  Makes sense to me.

Moreover, Republic and Federation standings are linked.  They're allies. Gottii's got a Fed standings rating over 8.0, but I've never ran a Fed mission in my life, just all the Minmatar missions that bumped up the Fed standings.  Makes sense they're linked on negative standings as well.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Alain Colcer on 09 Dec 2010, 05:51
So who is this Silonneri Balginia?

A Republic fleet pilot who was commanding a fight Sansha or something?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Ciarente on 09 Dec 2010, 06:01


Moreover, Republic and Federation standings are linked.  They're allies. Gottii's got a Fed standings rating over 8.0, but I've never ran a Fed mission in my life, just all the Minmatar missions that bumped up the Fed standings.  Makes sense they're linked on negative standings as well.


And in fact faction standings are for other actions: my Caldari standings have suffered as a result of shooting Amarr.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Hamish Grayson on 09 Dec 2010, 06:08
They've done this before, I got +2.00 to Kaalakiota for hauling a badger full of small arms for a Kaalakiota actor during the BoF arc in 2006.  It was pretty cool especially since Hamish is KK affiliated  8)  Do you guys think we'll see more this since Mercury is getting re-tasked or will incursions replace actor driven events?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Julianus Soter on 09 Dec 2010, 06:49
lolz.
 
About damn time tbh. Now, for the rest of TS-F . . . :D
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Esna Pitoojee on 09 Dec 2010, 09:35
So who is this Silonneri Balginia?

A Republic fleet pilot who was commanding a fight Sansha or something?

I seem to remember her being a Republic Fleet Admiral at one of the earliest incursions, although I'm not 100% sure on that.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Kybernetes Moros on 09 Dec 2010, 10:27
So who is this Silonneri Balginia?

A Republic fleet pilot who was commanding a fight Sansha or something?

I seem to remember her being a Republic Fleet Admiral at one of the earliest incursions, although I'm not 100% sure on that.

Yeah, she kicked about some of the earlier Republic events as a Republic Fleet Admiral or something to that effect. This is the first we've seen of her in a good few months, I think.

I'd love to see this be carried on into future events, myself -- on both sides of the fence, as it were, and with standings / security status going up and down depending on how pilots act. It'd be a shame to see these consequences be a 'one time special', or only limited to security status hits against folks killing the fleet representatives.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Shae Tiann on 09 Dec 2010, 11:15
They've done this before, I got +2.00 to Kaalakiota for hauling a badger full of small arms for a Kaalakiota actor during the BoF arc in 2006.  It was pretty cool especially since Hamish is KK affiliated  8)  Do you guys think we'll see more this since Mercury is getting re-tasked or will incursions replace actor driven events?
It looks to me like incursions are going to be entirely replacing the actors. Mixed feelings about that.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 09 Dec 2010, 11:38
Balginia's a Rep Fleet high up that we've met before. I have her exact title written down somewhere so I can be all polite and stuff IC if I need to talk to her. ;)

Nice touch from CCP.



Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Julianus Soter on 09 Dec 2010, 11:44
They've done this before, I got +2.00 to Kaalakiota for hauling a badger full of small arms for a Kaalakiota actor during the BoF arc in 2006.  It was pretty cool especially since Hamish is KK affiliated  8)  Do you guys think we'll see more this since Mercury is getting re-tasked or will incursions replace actor driven events?
It looks to me like incursions are going to be entirely replacing the actors. Mixed feelings about that.

How on earth do you figure that?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Louella Dougans on 09 Dec 2010, 12:07
They've done this before, I got +2.00 to Kaalakiota for hauling a badger full of small arms for a Kaalakiota actor during the BoF arc in 2006.  It was pretty cool especially since Hamish is KK affiliated  8)  Do you guys think we'll see more this since Mercury is getting re-tasked or will incursions replace actor driven events?
It looks to me like incursions are going to be entirely replacing the actors. Mixed feelings about that.

How on earth do you figure that?

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=3484&build=sisi

that sort of thing, would be problematic, immersion wise, in that Citizen Astur can't be a npc battleship doing things in an incursion, while also piloting an event carrier elsewhere, can they?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Shae Tiann on 09 Dec 2010, 12:33
...  Do you guys think we'll see more this since Mercury is getting re-tasked or will incursions replace actor driven events?
It looks to me like incursions are going to be entirely replacing the actors. Mixed feelings about that.
How on earth do you figure that?
Because they've been expending resources and energy on it for over half a year; why would they introduce a massive, long-term, self-governing mechanic which still requires the mediation of a living person on the other end taking time out of his workday? That makes absolutely no sense.

(edit: emphasis added :P )
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Borza on 09 Dec 2010, 12:38
I was hoping they'd start a new live event arc (or pick up an old unfinished one) once the Sansha incursions are automated.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Invelious on 09 Dec 2010, 12:53
Can we expect this sort of standings adjustment to take place with all public rp corps or was this just a rare moment of hope.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 09 Dec 2010, 13:18
I suspect that once the incursions are in, the event team will turn their attention to elsewhere, and we'll only get a Sansha event if they plan some new thingy for them.

Which is, I think, fair enough. They can only do so many live-events, and there's so much more to the EVE world than just this.

Then again, yea, mixed feelings. FW background story was big when it started; compared FW still feels like a letdown. I fully expect incursions to "fade" in the same way, and while I sort of hope that too (EVE should not be about any one thing), it's also a bit sad.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Ghost Hunter on 09 Dec 2010, 14:25
Sweet god yes hit me with that -10 stick to EVERYONEEEEEE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrTsuvykUZk)


More on topic:

A cautionary turn of events, and a strain of activity that I hope is continued. More consequences for RP actions = Whose laughing now, everyone who just went Outlaw. It will really help lend some weight behind RP as more than fluffy say so when you can hit upside the head with a + or - (what ever else).

The flipside is of course is if someone abuses the positive consequences, but I imagine they have learned the lesson from AURORA in regards to that. I do wonder if one of the ways they will get around potential abusers is by creating unique items that can't be given off that character? Someone gets a faction battleship, but can't trade it off / eject out, so no economic damage from it being sold will occur - kind of deal.

I give this five pelvic thrusts out of six.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: IzzyChan on 09 Dec 2010, 14:38
Wow.  I guess I'll have to move my shit to lowsec when I get back.  And learn how2pirate. ><
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 11 Dec 2010, 17:50
[mod]Bigoted language is not acceptable on these forums [/mod]. CONCORD reset me to +1.00 without contacting me or me having any say at all. I am pretty pissed. What started awesome, ended really fucking stupid. Didn't ask for the fix, didn't want the fix, CCP fail.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Arnulf Ogunkoya on 11 Dec 2010, 20:00
CONCORD reset me to +1.00 without contacting me or me having any say at all. I am pretty pissed. What started awesome, ended really fucking stupid. Didn't ask for the fix, didn't want the fix, CCP fail.

Best petition it then. If nothing else it should give the GM that recieves it a laugh.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 11 Dec 2010, 20:21
CONCORD reset me to +1.00 without contacting me or me having any say at all. I am pretty pissed. What started awesome, ended really fucking stupid. Didn't ask for the fix, didn't want the fix, CCP fail.

Best petition it then. If nothing else it should give the GM that recieves it a laugh.

Not the worst idea, but I am mostly emoraging about them adding in-game RP consequences, then having some middle management douchenozzle decide that no, nevermind, lets flipflop.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Julianus Soter on 11 Dec 2010, 20:27
Perhaps it was meant as a temporary penalty to allow a bit more realism?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Arnulf Ogunkoya on 11 Dec 2010, 20:47
Perhaps it was meant as a temporary penalty to allow a bit more realism?

I'm not sure I follow the way you are using the word realism in this context.

How is it realistic to outlaw a character for firing on a government agent in pursuit of their duty and then, shortly afterwards, reverse that descision?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Julianus Soter on 11 Dec 2010, 20:56
A temporary 'retaliation' standings revision, to allow pilots loyal to the faction that was attacked to respond.

Like global criminal countdown, or killrights.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 11 Dec 2010, 21:06
A temporary 'retaliation' standings revision, to allow pilots loyal to the faction that was attacked to respond.

Like global criminal countdown, or killrights.

Makes a ton of sense Julianus, still stucks because nobody took advantage of it, and it didn't last long enough for anybody to reasonably take advantage of it. At least the evemails gave me an opportunity to make sandy-panties on IGS.

ETA: It was also kind of a bummer because we were forced to look like we took Astur's deal, when we made it very clear we didn't want it.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Graelyn on 11 Dec 2010, 21:54
Somebody put took out a hit on the awesome.  :|
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 11 Dec 2010, 23:36
Somebody put took out a hit on the awesome.  :|

What did I miss?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Milo Caman on 12 Dec 2010, 05:22

Not the worst idea, but I am mostly emoraging about them adding in-game RP consequences, then having some middle management douchenozzle decide that no, nevermind, lets flipflop.

Have you tried petitioning it?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 12 Dec 2010, 09:18
I'm with the guys who say petition it.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jekaterine on 12 Dec 2010, 09:30
So I'm betting that the  poor actor has gotten spanked for this and had the riot act read.

Seriously though it does make sense as I've still a hard time believing an officer from nation A should be able to set standings in regards to supra national entity B.

Mechanics wise I think CCP should either shit or get off the pot.
Everyone shooting Sansha mothership = -10 to Sansha and allies while getting positive to others
Everyone shooting Minmatar officer = -10 To Minmatar and allies while getting +ve to others
So on and so forth.

Thing is that this is CCP we're dealing with. This is not something they can automate just like that and thus we see willy nilly stuff like this. It's to much work and there's no way CCP will put the effort in.

So everyone gets their hope up with what looks like a CCP cuddle session only to end up bent over a table with hot tears of burning shame running down our faces as they have their with us.
it's shitty but its been like this for the entirety of the games existence, not like I see things improving.

But hey we'll get clickable links ingame so we can move the discussion up to "FU it says so right here ur RP is wrong" from todays "Ok it's not stated which way it is so I don't like it but it's your view of things".
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Boma Airaken on 12 Dec 2010, 18:43
Aaaaaand petitioned. I will keep yall up to date on how it goes.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Ché Biko on 23 Jan 2015, 17:42
Aaaaaand petitioned. I will keep yall up to date on how it goes.
So, does anyone know how this went?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Morwen Lagann on 23 Jan 2015, 17:46
I don't recall it ever being fixed. And Drake's the only one of the three still playing at all afaik.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jekaterine on 24 Jan 2015, 06:17
It was fixed from what I remember being told by Koro.

Next I speak with him I'll see if he remembers.

Edit:
So I checked with Koro and my earlier reply in this thread was correct.
The standings reverted and apologies because actor overstepped his bounds.
Consider that all involved had no problem with their actions having consequences.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Gaven Lok ri on 24 Jan 2015, 10:50
Deciding that the event actor was out of line was one of the more tragic decisions CCP has made over the years.

More of this sort of thing would have been amazing. They would have needed to put in place a transparent policy to regulate it OOC, ofc, but it would have been a much better direction.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 24 Jan 2015, 12:42
Retconning the negative standings set was a colossal fuckup of committee corporate shittery.



Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Samira Kernher on 25 Jun 2015, 10:38
Looks like negative standings for RP actions is back in the game. With regards to a threat made by a dev actor in a recent mail to certain individuals, Falcon had this to say:

Quote
CCP Falcon 6:08 PM
also
yes
we will -10 the shit out of people
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nissui on 25 Jun 2015, 11:10
*plotting intensifies*
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 25 Jun 2015, 11:27
*plotting intensifies*

Thumbs up, bout time!

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jocca Quinn on 25 Jun 2015, 14:19
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NX4moiWXInM/UXtzMp6-nfI/AAAAAAAAtLU/WItYowepf8w/s640/burns+happy.gif)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 25 Jun 2015, 20:15
void devStatement() {
    if (iSeeIt==1) {
        iBelieveIt;
    } else {
        System.println("I don't believe it.");
    }
}
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 25 Jun 2015, 20:29
Then I head over to the IGS and see this (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=431578&find=unread):


Quote from: FINAL DEMAND – REF: ABRIDGED REPORT 099-345697234-099, Odo Korachi
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Directive Enforcement Department would like to offer thanks for your work on the report provided to the Inner Circle Re: the late Dr. Hilen Tukoss, and for the analysis of the tissue samples that were recovered from wreckage found in J174618.

After a meeting with the Inner Circle this morning, and after public request for all tissue samples to be turned over to the Directive Enforcement Department for analysis and formal legal confirmation of identity on June 8th, concerns have been raised regarding the intentions of your group.

With this in mind, and with the comments of pilot Lucas Raholan factored (https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5822828#post5822828) into the situation the Directive Enforcement Department is hereby making a formal final demand for the handover of all biomass samples to the DED for analysis and biometric processing.

Pilot Raholan is hereby being informed of a 24 hour grace period, beginning at the timestamp of this message, during which the samples can be handed over to myself via 14 day contract. Mail confirmation of this contract must be provided once it is set up.

Failure to hand over the samples within 24 hours will result in all recipients of this mail being elevated to outlaw status on all DED records.

This will include standings toward the CONCORD Assembly and the following corporations reverted to -10.0 status:

CONCORD [CONCO]
DED [DED]
Secure Commerce Commission [SCC]
Inner Circle [ICR]


In addition to this, the Inner Circle may see fit to rule in favor of a Directive Enforcement Department warrant to seize equipment pertaining to the ongoing investigation into the death of Dr. Tukoss by force, under Article 5, Section C of the Yulai Convention, which would then not be limited purely to the biomass in question.

The Directive Enforcement Department requests correspondence from Pilot Raholan within 24 hours to arrange handover of all biomass relating to the investigation.

Failure to correspond will be regarded as non-compliance with this demand, and will result in the enactment of aforementioned legal action.

If there are any further questions, feel free to correspond with me directly as your point of contact with the Directive Enforcement Department.

Best regards,

Odo Korachi
Brigadier General, Genesis Fleet
Directive Enforcement Department
CONCORD Assembly
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Esna Pitoojee on 25 Jun 2015, 21:12
Aaaaand more railroading. Excellent! Just what we needed!

Seriously, this is starting to reach TEA levels of head-banging for me.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 25 Jun 2015, 23:42
Aaaaand more railroading. Excellent! Just what we needed!

Seriously, this is starting to reach TEA levels of head-banging for me.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jev North on 26 Jun 2015, 00:04
This is actually pretty encouraging to see, 'cause it means that CCP's mood has shifted positively towards real consequences for roleplay again. Well, unless it's a completely empty threat.

railroading
railroading
:record scratch:

Wait, what? I'm literally unable to see how.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Esna Pitoojee on 26 Jun 2015, 00:33
Okay, so after a chat with Jev on Slack I realize 'railroading' may not be the exact right term.

My issue is, the consequences seem to be intended to nudge the player characters towards the general opinion of viewing CONCORD as unavoidably hostile followed by a refusal to the vast arsenal of tools at CONCORD's disposal to secure the item (locking down capsuleer ships to they cannot move or fire, simply nabbing the item from a hangar as they've done with other high-value items in the past).

I'm afraid this is being done to enforce the narrative of 'established authorities losing control' - a narrative I've made my (low) opinion of clear elsewhere - by making CONCORD an enforced enemy in contrast to their previously-established nature as a worrisome, but necessary institution populated by politically astute persons as befitting such an organization.

You know "walk softly and carry a big stick"? Well, CONCORD's problem right now is that they walk loudly, carry a big stick, but refuse to swing it.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Kyoko Sakoda on 26 Jun 2015, 02:00
You know "walk softly and carry a big stick"? Well, CONCORD's problem right now is that they walk loudly, carry a big stick, but refuse to swing it.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick." - Teddy Roosevelt, Minnesota State Fair, 1901

Also, who said they refuse to swing it? How do you know? :|
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 26 Jun 2015, 02:11
I agree... Thought it's not railroading, it's just being unhappy with the storyline choices, nothing more...

Oh well if they want to go the road of CONCORD are corrupt and incompetent assholes, since everybody considers them that way anyway, what will it change ?

Besides a few like Korachi, they ARE, incompetent through design.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: John Revenent on 26 Jun 2015, 03:45
Don't worry Makoto I sent requests to the Caldari and DED directly.. Doubt it will do anything but its the thought right?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: John Revenent on 26 Jun 2015, 05:03
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5846803#post5846803

Nope.. I'm no help :D
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Korsavius on 26 Jun 2015, 09:13
So it is possible to be -10'ed by a CCP actor, but is it possible to be +10'ed? :3
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Ché Biko on 26 Jun 2015, 10:54
Better than being +10'ed...: https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Citizen%20Arson (https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Citizen%20Arson)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 26 Jun 2015, 11:02
Okay, so after a chat with Jev on Slack I realize 'railroading' may not be the exact right term.

My issue is, the consequences seem to be intended to nudge the player characters towards the general opinion of viewing CONCORD as unavoidably hostile followed by a refusal to the vast arsenal of tools at CONCORD's disposal to secure the item (locking down capsuleer ships to they cannot move or fire, simply nabbing the item from a hangar as they've done with other high-value items in the past).

I'm afraid this is being done to enforce the narrative of 'established authorities losing control' - a narrative I've made my (low) opinion of clear elsewhere - by making CONCORD an enforced enemy in contrast to their previously-established nature as a worrisome, but necessary institution populated by politically astute persons as befitting such an organization.

You know "walk softly and carry a big stick"? Well, CONCORD's problem right now is that they walk loudly, carry a big stick, but refuse to swing it.

Def.: railroading
A term describing the process of forcing the player characters in a Role-Playing Game to complete a certain task before continuing the adventure.
"The GM has subtely instructed us to go to this town before we can finish the damn story. I bet he received a Masters Degree in Railroading."
(Source: Urban Dictionary)

Given that the message says pretty much: "Do it or we will set you (and not-really-involved-people-who-can't-do-a-thing-about-it) on -10 and nick it from your hangar." there seems very little choice involved. Also, given the time-frame of 24 hours there really was no time to explore any alternatives through RP. Not even whether there are any alternatives.

Pretty much falls under "forcing the player characters in a Role-Playing Game to complete a certain task" to me.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 26 Jun 2015, 11:41
Well if they can indeed remove items from the hangar anyway, then it's railroading... If not, then it's a choice between standing penalty + keeping the item, or giving the item away.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Jev North on 26 Jun 2015, 11:42
The fun part here is that you and Esna believed this to be railroading for exactly the opposite reasons.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 26 Jun 2015, 11:47
This is amazing! I feel bad that its happening but I really hope this is the first of many acts of CCP actually having DED flex their muscles.

Its been so disheartening seeing such little done by the supposed "Overwatch" of all of New Eden so much so that they've often used as humorous anecdotes on impotency.

As for railroading, I'm kinda sitting on a Yes and No. To me railroading has always been an act that steps well into the OOC realm. I.e. Like the example of Urban Dictionary, the GM will not continue the adventure until "Go to Tavern A" is completed. CCP's approach here is a bit more nuanced. That is to say they are keeping the consequences of refusal entirely IC. Meaning failure to turn over the body will result in Outlaw status. This to me is very different from the kind of railroading a GM could do in DnD. I.E. Crossing his arms and basically freezing the game world untill "Tavern A" is reached.

To me this is a very cause/effect, choice/consequence move by CCP. The story continues regardless of which choice is made. It just may not continue the way you like it.

I personally think this is awesome. I'd much rather have more of this than less even if sometimes it steps on toes. Again, I do feel bad that a heavy price is being laid out for failure to comply. But coming from a political background, this is exactly what I like to see when when cooperation with larger entities is rebuffed. It's draconic don't get me wrong, but in many ways it's a RealPolitik move and a cool one at that.

Honestly I'm more interested to see what happens next, and what ever does you can be sure a few players have made a legacy here with this.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: John Revenent on 26 Jun 2015, 12:30
I would say no to railroading. CCP is giving two options, A - hand over the remains and keep good standings with our overlords or B - Do the opposite and face the consequences. I am very pleased to have been responded to every one of my mails sent out to officials, both responses were different and dynamic.

Its very good to see this type of support. Boo and Hiss might just cause such future initiatives to be shelved because of OOC issues. Never argue with the DM  :lol:
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 26 Jun 2015, 13:01
I think the ccp devs know where they want to end up and are stacking the 'choices' in that direction, which is perfectly fine for 'plot.'  As long as there is wiggle room for capsuleers to say 'no' and face consequences this all seems good to me.


Give them the choice, and write two different outcomes, let the chips fall where they may.

Super + good for this sort of thing in general, regardless of if the current story is any good or not.  One of these stories will eventually be good and you'll be happy to have this sort of interaction established!


Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Louella Dougans on 26 Jun 2015, 13:38
http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/capsuleers-refuse-tukoss-handover-situation-intensifies/

big plex bounties on the people involved.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 26 Jun 2015, 14:38
http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/capsuleers-refuse-tukoss-handover-situation-intensifies/

big plex bounties on the people involved.

This is fucking amazing... Just saying!
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Samira Kernher on 26 Jun 2015, 15:39
This is pretty amazing.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 26 Jun 2015, 16:35
It's cool.

At the same time, 'boo' for them targeting Scherezad and slapping a 25 PLEX bounty on her. She did turn over all the samples she had.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 26 Jun 2015, 16:38
Yeah I dunno why they are going after Schere, she's literally the nicest person in New Eden. That's like going after Mr. Rogers or something....
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Karmilla Strife on 26 Jun 2015, 16:50
25 PLEX bounties on RPers? Time for us to conspire and get free subscriptions for each other!
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Kyoko Sakoda on 26 Jun 2015, 18:04
“abhorrent anti-authoritarian display of personal pride”

This is one of the worst political science phrases I've ever read in my life.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Gottii on 26 Jun 2015, 20:20
This is amazing. 
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Esna Pitoojee on 26 Jun 2015, 20:21
Yeah I dunno why they are going after Schere, she's literally the nicest person in New Eden. That's like going after Mr. Rogers or something....

Because they want to make us hate CONCORD. Logic doesn't matter, just as long as we adopt the position they want us to take.

Sorry if I'm being overly bitter, but that's how I see this line of events.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Louella Dougans on 26 Jun 2015, 23:34
25 PLEX bounties on RPers? Time for us to conspire and get free subscriptions for each other!

CCP Falcon said any suspicion of collusion would mean DED wouldn't pay out.

if there's going to be a conspiracy, you have to be sekrit about it.

like, super sekrit
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Karmilla Strife on 27 Jun 2015, 01:06
Edit: whatever

Second Edit: no really not worth it... I quit anyway.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 27 Jun 2015, 03:18
Yeah I dunno why they are going after Schere, she's literally the nicest person in New Eden. That's like going after Mr. Rogers or something....

Because they want to make us hate CONCORD. Logic doesn't matter, just as long as we adopt the position they want us to take.

Sorry if I'm being overly bitter, but that's how I see this line of events.

Likewise, they have a (not so recent) tendency, to paint factions in black and white. It was similar in Colelie and disgusted most Minmatar RPers.

Don't get me wrong, I think what they are doing is very nice overall. This is what we have been expecting for long. Event actors return, consequences for ingame actions...

I am even for big factional upheavals, change, factions losing, being smacked to the ground, and losing all the more the better. That doesn't make you necessarily lose faith in your faction.

But this is clearly intended as such.

So, I will have to adapt once again and turn this drama into valuable RP drama. After having to deal in a similar fashion than with the stupid useless Ammatar Mandate, it will not be a first... But I will have to drop more or less completely the faction if it continues in that direction... This is just the last CONCORD straw.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 27 Jun 2015, 10:36
I think we may be going off the rails with speculation here. From what I've seen so far this looks like a very standard sort of investigative procedure CCP is trying to conduct through DED.

On the subject of Schere being named. Im more inclined to believe she was names before she began cooperating with the investigation, and the employee's of CCP working on this are just a bit slow in adjusting the the situation. That would be my guess.

I'm not quite sure why this makes us hate CONCORD? If this kinda stuff makes you hates CONCORD then you should have always hated CONCORD, because at least to me, this is essentially how they are have always supposed to acted. They are Capsuleer police after all.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 27 Jun 2015, 11:17
No, if it had been only Lucas, there would be no problem with it. It would be a conflict between capsuleers that despise CONCORD secrecy and scream because DRIFTERS ARE COMING, and CONCORD supporters, where CONCORD does his police job.

Now though, it's just painting them in a tyrannical evil light. They are already despicable through the sheer inconsistency of their laws, utter incompetence, and many more things, and there is not much left to love in them... We really have lost what made them great at first before TEA. Now to me they just look like incompetent fools flailing their arms and making hissy fits no better than the capsuleers they are trying to crackdown upon...

If they were doing their police jobs properly, they would launch a warrant against Lucas like they did here, maybe with the same bounty, and ask the others for cooperation and call them to testimony/interrogation.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Anyanka Funk on 27 Jun 2015, 12:42
25 PLEX bounties on RPers? Time for us to conspire and get free subscriptions for each other!

CCP Falcon said any suspicion of collusion would mean DED wouldn't pay out.

if there's going to be a conspiracy, you have to be sekrit about it.

like, super sekrit

So, hypothetically, if ccp bountied a player for x amount of plex and said player made an alt to collect the full bounty, would the player be banned? Why use a broken bounty system to begin with? Why not just ban the player?

Alternatively, why not just give the player x amount of plex if they don't get banned?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 27 Jun 2015, 13:56
No, they wouldn't be banned. They just wouldn't get the bounty.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lunarisse Aspenstar on 27 Jun 2015, 17:24
I would say no to railroading. CCP is giving two options, A - hand over the remains and keep good standings with our overlords or B - Do the opposite and face the consequences. I am very pleased to have been responded to every one of my mails sent out to officials, both responses were different and dynamic.

Its very good to see this type of support. Boo and Hiss might just cause such future initiatives to be shelved because of OOC issues. Never argue with the DM  :lol:

I second John.  As a director of one of the corps affected, I have thoroughly enjoyed the rp resulting from this (even though poor IC luna is a wreck) and as John said, we do have choices.  We also got a response from an in game dev actor after we took some actions and wrote about it, so there has been that too.

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 27 Jun 2015, 17:49
Yea again this sounds overall like a great thing.

You all will love this precident whenever they get to (x) faction you are involved with
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 27 Jun 2015, 17:57
No, if it had been only Lucas, there would be no problem with it. It would be a conflict between capsuleers that despise CONCORD secrecy and scream because DRIFTERS ARE COMING, and CONCORD supporters, where CONCORD does his police job.

Now though, it's just painting them in a tyrannical evil light. They are already despicable through the sheer inconsistency of their laws, utter incompetence, and many more things, and there is not much left to love in them... We really have lost what made them great at first before TEA. Now to me they just look like incompetent fools flailing their arms and making hissy fits no better than the capsuleers they are trying to crackdown upon...

How is operating within the confines of the Yulai convention Tyrannical? Draconic and heavy handed sure, but they are essentially using the tools given to them, it's not like they are rewriting any laws on the fly or "Changing the deal" as we go alone here.

If they were doing their police jobs properly, they would launch a warrant against Lucas like they did here, maybe with the same bounty, and ask the others for cooperation and call them to testimony/interrogation.

Wat? This is exactly what they are doing. They are asking for cooperation and all those suspected of collusion are being remanded on warrant. Testimony and cooperation comes after people have turned themselves in. They are issuing what happens if they don't turn themselves in.

This is exactly what happens if you skip bail or fail to appear after a subpoena has been issued for your questioning. Maybe not the bounty part. That's a little wild west, but its still pretty standard judicial practice. Failure to cooperate with a legal investigation is treated as obstruction of justice, a crime in and of itself.

I just don't see how this behavior is anything but very straightforward application of law, draconic sure but pretty standard.

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Gorion on 27 Jun 2015, 18:20
Shit like this should have been in at day 1.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 27 Jun 2015, 18:35
Putting boots to necks is what governments do in EVE.

Capsuleers are used to being a bit of a protected class. It's kind of a shock when the heavy-handed authoritarianism that we know is abundant in the setting actually lands on us. 
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silver Night on 27 Jun 2015, 18:47
This is amazing and I love it. That is all.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Liuni Kalthis on 27 Jun 2015, 23:16
\o/ yay
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 28 Jun 2015, 02:24
No, if it had been only Lucas, there would be no problem with it. It would be a conflict between capsuleers that despise CONCORD secrecy and scream because DRIFTERS ARE COMING, and CONCORD supporters, where CONCORD does his police job.

Now though, it's just painting them in a tyrannical evil light. They are already despicable through the sheer inconsistency of their laws, utter incompetence, and many more things, and there is not much left to love in them... We really have lost what made them great at first before TEA. Now to me they just look like incompetent fools flailing their arms and making hissy fits no better than the capsuleers they are trying to crackdown upon...

How is operating within the confines of the Yulai convention Tyrannical? Draconic and heavy handed sure, but they are essentially using the tools given to them, it's not like they are rewriting any laws on the fly or "Changing the deal" as we go alone here.

If they were doing their police jobs properly, they would launch a warrant against Lucas like they did here, maybe with the same bounty, and ask the others for cooperation and call them to testimony/interrogation.

Wat? This is exactly what they are doing. They are asking for cooperation and all those suspected of collusion are being remanded on warrant. Testimony and cooperation comes after people have turned themselves in. They are issuing what happens if they don't turn themselves in.

This is exactly what happens if you skip bail or fail to appear after a subpoena has been issued for your questioning. Maybe not the bounty part. That's a little wild west, but its still pretty standard judicial practice. Failure to cooperate with a legal investigation is treated as obstruction of justice, a crime in and of itself.

I just don't see how this behavior is anything but very straightforward application of law, draconic sure but pretty standard.

Sorry if that's my feeling on the matter, but I don't like it, much like I didn't like Colelie. I think they got it right when it comes to the themes behind, but completely wrong on how they are doing it. It's a problem I have with the form, not the content. The form basically forces players to despise CONCORD (I can understand with all the stupid laws, it's tied to gamedesign silliness, but this... no).

And no, that's not what they are doing. They are not asking for cooperation, they are putting a huge bounty on their head. They already turned themselves in (cf Schere, that still got bountied no matter what).

I don't see any of this as something a serious organization would do... Well, maybe some do, and good for them I mean... But I don't myself.

tl;dr of everything I tried to say until now, and probably what Esna tried to tell too : please stop making the NPC factions act like idiots without any common sense, so that capsuleers can stroke their hardon on capsuleer emancipation.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 28 Jun 2015, 02:41
The form basically forces players to despise CONCORD (I can understand with all the stupid laws, it's tied to gamedesign silliness, but this... no), unless they are... I don't know.

'Unless they are...' having different thoughts and opinions than Lyn, something which you encounter constantly yet can only express as 'I don't know.'

I don't hate CONCORD. I don't despise it. 

I'd be surprised if I'm the only player that feels this way.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 28 Jun 2015, 02:54
Good catch... That's also why I edited it because I noticed it could be heard that way too.

Ah well, a good way to ignore the rest of the content of my post!

I don't mind if players, or characters disagree with me, or my character. I am just voicing my OOC opinion on the matter, and am not the only one to think that way.

Maybe i'm too old and don't see the quality of the story improving to the standards we had in the past...
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 28 Jun 2015, 08:58
I get that Lyn, taste is taste. Like Makkal im basically getting the exact opposite feeling from all this. I used to hate CONCORD, primarily because they were totally impotent and never really "policed" before, at least outside the game mechanics they were designed for. Although I could be wrong about this, but at least in my time here, they've seemed totally sedentary and not this large judicial body that supposedly loomed over us for the greater good.

And yes, you definately have a good point with Schere. It's very confusing why they continue to press on her even though she has agreed to cooperate completely, maybe its because they want to pressure her to pressure her colleagues? Or maybe what I'm more inclined to believe is that the employee working on the NPC actor Schere was in communication with isn't the same person who issued the bounty PDF, and information never get passed.

I dunno tho. I'm basically waiting to see what happens at this point. If they continue to press Schere, then I said the DED is crossing some legal lines, but at this point everything is just so crazy I can't really stop being excited about it.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 28 Jun 2015, 09:10
Yes, ingame they were... poorly present, except through mechanics, that for some of them makes not much sense lorewise... They had a lot of redeeming qualities to be found in the lore, mostly. Their symbolic value, their incorruptible side, and just overall the space police/justice that used to bring together all the empires... Until TEA happened. That's why I loved seeing Korachi and some other DED actors playing the badasses in most live events, because it was the first times CONCORD came actually to do something.

Personally I'm still excited about the new interactions they promise with players... A lot more even, for what they did in Sarum Prime yesterday, because unlike old live events that turned most of the time into grindfests and a huge mess since they were always advertised in advance, those new ones look totally targeted on a more decent scale, and play on surprise. It may make me start to like live events, when I just stopped bothering in the past.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 28 Jun 2015, 09:39
And yes, you definately have a good point with Schere. It's very confusing why they continue to press on her even though she has agreed to cooperate completely, maybe its because they want to pressure her to pressure her colleagues? Or maybe what I'm more inclined to believe is that the employee working on the NPC actor Schere was in communication with isn't the same person who issued the bounty PDF, and information never get passed.

Okay, bit of lawyerly tactics, here.

When I see that a client of mine has cooperated with the police, I want to /headdesk. Neither prosecutors nor police are typically very sympathetic. The defendant who cooperates with police early on has no leverage in negotiation and gets hit with a brick.

What's more, a defendant (esp. one who has no leverage) may be used as leverage against co-defendants who care about her.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 28 Jun 2015, 10:02
The problem I have with it, kind'a, is twofold.

In game, I personally see a harsh break between a DED/CONCORD that "were totally impotent and never really 'policed' before, at least outside the game mechanics they were designed for", a CONCORD that didn't lift a finger when they were practically told up front that the Elderfleet will destroy their HQ... etc. pp. and a DED/CONCORD that goes down on cpasuleers for what seems to be a minor transgression with the force of a thermonuklear bomb, continuing even to threaten people who comply to their full ability.

I don't like whole 180° turnarounds in a story. They are simply not believable, they mean a break of suspension of disbelief for me and generally lend themselves easily to cause such. And lastly, it means you can't really know what consequences you can expect, given your actions. It also leads to inconsistencies as the laws on biomass, which have never been enacted by CONCORD, until now where it's quite convenient for them. - It's a deus ex machina of the bad sort, in my opinion.

Out of game, the problem is that the timeframes are so short that they are counterproductive to any RP happening between the involved parties that aims at searching a third solution between just fleeing the DED and simply comlying. While that might be realistic in some sense, it's also frustrationg. But it is worse: I for example had no way to react to the situation within the original 24 hour ultimatum, simply due to the short timeframe, it being under the week and me having a life besides EVE, with work to be done and sleep to be had. Some people centrally involed in this have not been at home for the weekend, I have heared. Others didn't want to make decisions over their heads. And when I wrote to some NPCs it took a full 15 hours for them to respond - which is reasonable as they are merely people as well, but which is an awfully long time given the background of a 24 hour ultimata tact.

And I'm not even getting into the problem of coordinating over various timzones there.

So, while the way the ultimata are placed follows a certain in-game logic, I feel like the people responsible for setting those OOCly failed to take into measure that we and they are actually not spending 24 hours in EVE and that the realities in the game are subject to out of game realities, rather than the other way around.

(Actually, I stayed with EVE rather than WOW, because the raids I have been member of in my late WOW days didn't see it like that, while the corps in EVE I was a member of saw it pretty much like that: RL/OOC > IC/IG. And EVE lent itself to be played like that.)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 28 Jun 2015, 10:04
Okay, bit of lawyerly tactics, here.

When I see that a client of mine has cooperated with the police, I want to /headdesk. Neither prosecutors nor police are typically very sympathetic. The defendant who cooperates with police early on has no leverage in negotiation and gets hit with a brick.

What's more, a defendant (esp. one who has no leverage) may be used as leverage against co-defendants who care about her.

That's how it works in the US, huh?  :s
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 28 Jun 2015, 10:37
Okay, bit of lawyerly tactics, here.

When I see that a client of mine has cooperated with the police, I want to /headdesk. Neither prosecutors nor police are typically very sympathetic. The defendant who cooperates with police early on has no leverage in negotiation and gets hit with a brick.

What's more, a defendant (esp. one who has no leverage) may be used as leverage against co-defendants who care about her.

That's how it works in the US, huh?  :s

Sometimes maddeningly, yes. I think there might be a cultural ebb and flow to this, though.

At the moment, we've got a rift between the police and the policed, and it often extends to the prosecutors.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Rok-Yuni on 28 Jun 2015, 12:47
my only issue with the way people are talking about CONCORD, is that other than the limited number of Dev actors that are about, CONCORD can't actually get involved against the drifters or any other group for that matter.

It's hardcoded into the design of their abilities in game.

using that OOC limitation as an IC barb just doesn't sit well with me, i hated it when it was used during the Nation incursions against both the Navies and CONCORD too...

just my 2 cents.

otherwise.... YAY, CCP - Player interaction again.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 28 Jun 2015, 13:16
Sometimes maddeningly, yes. I think there might be a cultural ebb and flow to this, though.

At the moment, we've got a rift between the police and the policed, and it often extends to the prosecutors.

Did anyone ever tell your police and prosecutors that they're basically teaching your population not to cooperate with them? <,< I mean, that's basic psychology, there. If cooperation is punished and non-cooperation rewarded... Ohmy. I better don't think about that any further.

Let me just say this way of handling things doesn't seem like and example of 'best practice' to me.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Samira Kernher on 28 Jun 2015, 13:18
There's a reason why the US tends to breed a culture of anti-establishment.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 28 Jun 2015, 14:07
And that's why CCP takes them as blueprint for the DED/CONCORD?  :?: :ugh:

Oh, did I mention earlier that whenever any official from the 4 nations was contacted, all they answered boiled down to "Hand it over to CONCORD.", regardless of whether they were asked to intervene or to recieve the brainslice instead of CONCORD (and then obviously being free to hand it over to CONCORD with a triumphant gesture, showing that they could handle what the DED could not)?

:ugh: Where's the flexibility there?
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Kyoko Sakoda on 28 Jun 2015, 17:07
Where's the flexibility there?

(https://media4.giphy.com/media/wMNK4IfeH86uQ/200_s.gif)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vizage on 28 Jun 2015, 18:09
Good guys win again! :/
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: John Revenent on 28 Jun 2015, 22:54
Excellent.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 30 Jun 2015, 07:30
Did anyone ever tell your police and prosecutors that they're basically teaching your population not to cooperate with them? <,< I mean, that's basic psychology, there. If cooperation is punished and non-cooperation rewarded... Ohmy. I better don't think about that any further.

Let me just say this way of handling things doesn't seem like and example of 'best practice' to me.

Bear in mind that we've still got a strong thread of moralistic, macho aggression in our culture.

Criminals are bad people and deserve to suffer. If they're getting raped in prison, the rest of us will just make jokes about it because that's just one more thing they should have thought of before they went out and committed crimes.

We'll have none of this namby-pamby Scandinavian-style criminal-coddling, 'cause it obviously doesn't work. No, don't show us your stupid facts; your system obviously doesn't work because it's obvious that it can't work because it's obviously wrong.

No, your recidivism statistics can't possibly be a fraction of ours, and it's irrelevant anyway because it's wrong to treat criminals like human beings. Don't you know these people did bad things?

We're not listening! Lalalalalalalalalalala....

(Why yes, I got into criminal defense because I'm a sociopath or anarchist and want to help the bad guys. Why do you ask?)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Makkal on 30 Jun 2015, 07:34
Okay but... this is a little off-topic.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 30 Jun 2015, 07:45
Okay but... this is a little off-topic.

Only a little. If CCP is basing CONCORD's RP on the American authorities, you can expect them to reach for the stick rather than the carrot at every turn.

'Cause you can't go around being nice to bad people, no sir.

Also, if you consider the possibility that CONCORD officials may look at capsuleers as morally objectionable by definition, their heavy-handed approach becomes a lot more explicable.

(That would also make them more profoundly anti-capsuleer than basically anybody but the SoE, though.)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 30 Jun 2015, 09:17
Back to....thread?   :P

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Arnulf Ogunkoya on 30 Jun 2015, 12:52
Back to....thread?   :P

I don't know. It seems relevant to contemplate what attitude CCP is having their NPC actors model in their interactions with us. And a certain level of horrified contempt would make sense given the actions of the deranged (i.e. the non roleplayers who blow up stuff for giggles).
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 30 Jun 2015, 13:59
I think we might be grasping a tiny bit comparing a modern security-establishment with a sci-fi interplanetary police force 20,000 years and another galaxy away that has to try and deal with immortal spaceship demigods, that's all :P

CCP always says any faction relevance to modern day Earth societies is very loose and tenuous if at all and don't really apply.

DED is more of an interplanetary INTERPOL than the USA patchwork of 1,000 different police forces with different rules and facepalming and their own structures.




Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 30 Jun 2015, 15:21
I think we might be grasping a tiny bit comparing a modern security-establishment with a sci-fi interplanetary police force 20,000 years and another galaxy away that has to try and deal with immortal spaceship demigods, that's all :P

CCP always says any faction relevance to modern day Earth societies is very loose and tenuous if at all and don't really apply.

DED is more of an interplanetary INTERPOL than the USA patchwork of 1,000 different police forces with different rules and facepalming and their own structures.

Conceded. However, the sort of attitudes that lead to high-handed actions by authority figures are not limited by time, place, or culture.

There's a reason you need no additional adjectives (evil, authoritarian, etc.) to go from "state" to "police state."
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 30 Jun 2015, 19:40
Good point! I was going to say the things that we can always take as prescidents from our world is how humans in authority positions typically act, especially without boundaries, or under pressure from superiors, or the old human nature in general.   So international space cop beauracrat in the future probably has the same general pressures and motivations as today's international interpol agent or whatever. 
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 01 Jul 2015, 01:48
I think we might be grasping a tiny bit comparing a modern security-establishment with a sci-fi interplanetary police force 20,000 years and another galaxy away that has to try and deal with immortal spaceship demigods, that's all :P

CCP always says any faction relevance to modern day Earth societies is very loose and tenuous if at all and don't really apply.

DED is more of an interplanetary INTERPOL than the USA patchwork of 1,000 different police forces with different rules and facepalming and their own structures.


Considering what they showcased recently, they sure look closer to something else than space INTERPOL... Which they were supposed to be at first.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 01 Jul 2015, 05:18
Confirmed. They don't look like INTERPOL at all. Sorry, Silas, but I think there is quite some value to what Aria wrote exactly because CCP seems to work CONCORD/DED based on a model of 'stick rather than the carrot at every turn' law enforcement, now.

Also, given that INTERPOL is depending on the cooperation of the member states and here the member states seemed pretty much bound to do exactly as CONCORD wishes it seems to be quite the obvious mistake to take INTERPOl as an analogue to CONCORD. Here, CONCORD/DED acted more like the FBI in Hollywood movies, walking in, displacing any authority of member state polices or institutions and boldly doing their thing.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 01 Jul 2015, 08:11
Probably due to my unfamiliarity with how INTERPOL operates, sorry.  I thought they were kind of an EU FBI of sorts?

And I think the hollywood dick-waving between FBI and local Police is slightly exaggerated. Not that there aren't turf wars of course.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 01 Jul 2015, 09:02
As a side note, lest people get the impression that we Americans are living in a dystopian hell hole, we've actually walked the culture back a bit from where it was at in the '80s and '90s. There are drug courts that focus on recovery and reform, etc., our cops are increasingly under a magnifying glass, it's understood by just about everyone who isn't a DEA agent that the "war on drugs" is a farce, and it's been a while since I heard the words "tough on crime." There's a long way to go, though.

Eve, on the other hand, is a dystopian grimdark setting, so we can maybe expect positions to be more entrenched. Things do not get better.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 01 Jul 2015, 09:39
Interpol is more than just EU... It's 190 signatories.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 01 Jul 2015, 10:07
As a side note, lest people get the impression that we Americans are living in a dystopian hell hole, we've actually walked the culture back a bit from where it was at in the '80s and '90s. There are drug courts that focus on recovery and reform, etc., our cops are increasingly under a magnifying glass, it's understood by just about everyone who isn't a DEA agent that the "war on drugs" is a farce, and it's been a while since I heard the words "tough on crime." There's a long way to go, though.

Eve, on the other hand, is a dystopian grimdark setting, so we can maybe expect positions to be more entrenched. Things do not get better.

Yea we are way off topic but absolutely, even conservative states are realizing they simply can't afford to have 2.1 million people in prison anymore for mostly non-violent things.

Economist had a good cover story on this about a week ago actually.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 01 Jul 2015, 15:54
Interpol is an intergovernmental organization facilitating international police cooperation. It even predates the EU and was under Nazi control since the anexxiation of Austria.

The role of Interpol is defined by the general provisions of its constitution.
Article 2 states that its role is: "To ensure and promote the widest possible mutual assistance between all criminal police authorities within the limits of the laws existing in the different countries and in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights." ...
"To establish and develop all institutions likely to contribute effectively to the prevention and suppression of ordinary law crimes."
Article 3 states: "It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."

Amongst the 190 signatories are the USA, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Germany...

It's decidedly not an european FBI.

And I expect the hollywood representations of the FBI to be exaggerated - that's why I noted that CONCORD/DED seems now to be like a hollywood representation of the FBI: Because I didn't want to imply that the FBI is that bad IRL.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 02 Jul 2015, 01:16
Well considering everything is grimdark in New Eden, I suppose that such a CONCORD is not out of place.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Aria Jenneth on 02 Jul 2015, 07:19
Well considering everything is grimdark in New Eden, I suppose that such a CONCORD is not out of place.

Actually, I get the feeling a lot of the reason the Gallente are preceived as the "Mary Sue" faction is because CCP hasn't managed to make them grimdark enough to match the general background. Even if we read them as a run-away libertarian commercialist dystopia with its democracy undercut by its corporations (a traditional cyberpunk trope), that still doesn't compare to an outright corporate feudal state such as the State.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Pieter Tuulinen on 02 Jul 2015, 10:06
Am I the only one who finds the Gallente totally grimdark? Economically and militarily one of the most powerful factions, but unable to achieve much of anything due to flailing about and factional infighting. Supposed beacon of liberty, yet at the mercy of an increasingly bold secret police.

There's something very not good going on in the Federation...
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Korsavius on 02 Jul 2015, 10:33
I don't see what is so grimdark about the State. Just do what you're told, or contribute to your community in some way and life will be quite comfortable for you. :)
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nissui on 02 Jul 2015, 10:49
Am I the only one who finds the Gallente totally grimdark? Economically and militarily one of the most powerful factions, but unable to achieve much of anything due to flailing about and factional infighting. Supposed beacon of liberty, yet at the mercy of an increasingly bold secret police.

There's something very not good going on in the Federation...

You aren't the only one. I've argued OOC that all the big four can be seen as bads.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Lyn Farel on 02 Jul 2015, 15:40
Am I the only one who finds the Gallente totally grimdark? Economically and militarily one of the most powerful factions, but unable to achieve much of anything due to flailing about and factional infighting. Supposed beacon of liberty, yet at the mercy of an increasingly bold secret police.

There's something very not good going on in the Federation...

I find them extremely grimdark as well, but only because I have done their epic arc. Otherwise, it is harder to see.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Pieter Tuulinen on 02 Jul 2015, 15:47
I want to know how the economic powerhouse of the Cluster managed to elect a President who wants to expand the war and managed to get militarily eclipsed by their much smaller neighbour and enemy...

Where'd all that money go, Roden? Hmmmmmm???!
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Nicoletta Mithra on 02 Jul 2015, 17:31
Well considering everything is grimdark in New Eden, I suppose that such a CONCORD is not out of place.

It wouldn't be, if it weren't the case that they have been portrayed as incompetent sissies previously, now making a 180° turn into brute bullies.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Saede Riordan on 10 Jul 2015, 11:06
I want to know how the economic powerhouse of the Cluster managed to elect a President who wants to expand the war and managed to get militarily eclipsed by their much smaller neighbour and enemy...


Since that never happens in real life...
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Morwen Lagann on 10 Jul 2015, 11:17
I want to know how the economic powerhouse of the Cluster managed to elect a President who wants to expand the war and managed to get militarily eclipsed by their much smaller neighbour and enemy...

Where'd all that money go, Roden? Hmmmmmm???!

The Hecate. Duh.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Elmund Egivand on 12 Jul 2015, 22:03
I don't see what is so grimdark about the State. Just do what you're told, or contribute to your community in some way and life will be quite comfortable for you. :)

Whenever I read stuff about the State, I always have that Cyberpunk vibe. Somehow I imagine that behind every neatly ordered cubicle and under every freshly-vacuumed carpet there's Syndicate-ish shenanigans lurking around.
Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Vieve on 14 Jul 2015, 09:39
Am I the only one who finds the Gallente totally grimdark?

Newp.

Title: Re: CCP Says: Ingame RP actions have ingame consequences, mkay?
Post by: Silas Vitalia on 14 Jul 2015, 12:12
Old Gallente.  Old Gallente were cyberpunk green, goggle wearing, mowhawk sporting, urban technoscapes.

Then they got all.... well not that.