Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Seriphyn on 16 Feb 2011, 16:44
-
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1468912&page=1#3
Eh...how can people RP together if we consistently discredit the claims of others, ad hominem etc etc?
-
The simple fact of the matter is there are two groups of roleplayers in Eve and they can't really play together.
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
Because the first group chooses to reject anything that doesn't have the official CCP stamp and the second group (of which I and many of my friends are members) refuse to be limited by such restrictions, there is only a small area where the two can come together.
-
As evidenced by various posts in ANN/IRED/AI/ILF Conflict threads, this happens, and the only ways to avoid people doing this kind of thing are:
a) Do something vindictive ingame that shuts them up
b) Back up every statement you make with some form of evidence
c) Dismiss it and carry on with your life
d) All of the above
Given previous experience, I presently roll with option D. As Saxon says, there's really very little you can do to remedy it otherwise.
-
Is it really so perplexing that Federation and State pilots attempt to discredit each other over a matter that paints one or the other in a negative light? CCP won't divulge every detail, because that isn't how news is spread. If we had 100% accuracy on every Scope release, guaranteed, the story might be different.
What would the alternative theoretical example be? It's discovered through SSC records that the State makes more humanitarian efforts than the Federation does in a given region, and the Federation pilots go "Yeah, that sounds right."
Thats just not how it works, champ. vOv
-
The simple fact of the matter is there are two groups of roleplayers in Eve and they can't really play together.
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
Because the first group chooses to reject anything that doesn't have the official CCP stamp and the second group (of which I and many of my friends are members) refuse to be limited by such restrictions, there is only a small area where the two can come together.
And this is the gist of it. Pretty much my issue too. I refuse to be limited by what CCP declares as canon, not-canon, and I won't stand for anyone who does that to me either. Not that I've done much of that IG lately, but that's that.
I noticed the incident in question, and... well, yeah I agree with Saxon on this. Entierly.
-
Is it really so perplexing that Federation and State pilots attempt to discredit each other over a matter that paints one or the other in a negative light? CCP won't divulge every detail, because that isn't how news is spread. If we had 100% accuracy on every Scope release, guaranteed, the story might be different.
What would the alternative theoretical example be? It's discovered through SSC records that the State makes more humanitarian efforts than the Federation does in a given region, and the Federation pilots go "Yeah, that sounds right."
Thats just not how it works, champ. vOv
Poor example - if it's backed up that it actaully is the case, then yeah, they will have to roll with it. Part of RP is the ability to realize your chocen opponents are not 100% evil and incompetent, and frankly I'm starting to get really tired of the basic reply of "NO you can't possibly be doign something NICE or usefull because I hate you and your evil."
Personal assaults based on faction loyaltty, regardless of actions or words, is pretty damn common. Characters are unwilling or unable to realize that there may be something redeeming about their opponents. Quite boring, tbh.
-
How is my example any different from any other Scope article?
This one claims Caldari did something beneficial, someone below says they probably did it for money, and the person after that seems to have questioned the credibility of the report.
If the article I theorized was produced, I imagine the person below would say they probably did it for money, and the person after that would question the credibility of the report.
From what I've seen so far, the kneejerk reaction of any factional loyalist is to say "that never happened." Regardless of factual evidence of any degree.
-
TBH, I thought the article was believable and made sense, it's something that likely would have happened. I don't think the State would just have let the system sit in ruin. It's bad for profits. Federation may have gone "Eh, local authorities problem, need to save moneys" or whatever.
Instead, because of the one mention of "Caldari Navy carrying out offensive operations in the Federation", the 2nd reply decides to focus on an ad hominem attack on the OP. It's pretty well clear that the factional navies are involved in FW, and it was the Caldari Navy that occupied Placid et al back in 2009 etc. The rest of the article is ignored.
And considering that Aicar's articles before were all quite anti-Caldari, thought it would have been redeeming somewhat. Meanwhile, the other faux-Scope articles by Aicar are completely ignored by the "This never happened" brigade.
In fact, with the other ones, people have decided to play along. I guess it's because Abraxas has stated that there will be no more roleplayed news items, so we'll have to rely on these faux-Scope posts and ANN.
-
I guess it's because Abraxas has stated that there will be no more roleplayed news items
Wat
-
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=825
Aside from dev support we've made the decision to take Mercury (our volunteer fiction corp) off roleplayed news for the meantime, and they are now supporting this effort as well.
Why Aicar has appeared and posting around these articles.
-
Instead, because of the one mention of "Caldari Navy carrying out offensive operations in the Federation", the 2nd reply decides to focus on an ad hominem attack on the OP.
...
And considering that Aicar's articles before were all quite anti-Caldari, thought it would have been redeeming somewhat.
A State-aligned character is attacking what he sees as the Federation-aligned Scope character's inaccurate and slanted reporting.
Also, I am not sure you understand what ad hominem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) means. The character Hamish questioned the facts of the article. He didn't say "Aicar is a slimmy Gallente scum sucker and therefore this article is wrong." He instead stated his world view, which is in conflict with parts of the article.
It's pretty well clear that the factional navies are involved in FW, and it was the Caldari Navy that occupied Placid et al back in 2009 etc. The rest of the article is ignored.
Except that we disagree OOC on whether or not it is the Caldari Navy, State Protectorate, or various State PMCs. This has been discussed at length and those of us who argue the NPCs present in FW are not by an large Caldari Navy have been ignored.
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
Players choose which based on whether it supports their preferred version of the universe. The groups are by no means fixed.
See the below/above example.
Some players take various scraps of information (FW, Caldari military background articles), piece together a few linking credible hooks not provided by CCP (CONCORD mandated empire issued ID/Tags), and present what they feel is a more interesting situation/story (State forces are inherently mixed and the Caldari Navy isn't the primary occupier in FW).
But that is rejected by others because where is the CCP generated background for the middle part?
-
The problem is that somebody is reporting "news" when that news hasn't actually happened.
There's lots of stuff going on in Eve, so if you want to be a reporter go and report on it rather than making stuff up.
-
The problem is that somebody is reporting "news" when that news hasn't actually happened.
There's lots of stuff going on in Eve, so if you want to be a reporter go and report on it rather than making stuff up.
This.
And if you have to make up news about the NPC corps don't throw in off-hand comments that negate all your credibility by borderline god-modding.
-
Aside from dev support we've made the decision to take Mercury (our volunteer fiction corp) off roleplayed news for the meantime, and they are now supporting this effort as well.
So ANN doesn't really have any competition? Interesting.
-
TBH, I thought the article was believable and made sense, it's something that likely would have happened. I don't think the State would just have let the system sit in ruin. It's bad for profits. Federation may have gone "Eh, local authorities problem, need to save moneys" or whatever.
Instead, because of the one mention of "Caldari Navy carrying out offensive operations in the Federation", the 2nd reply decides to focus on an ad hominem attack on the OP. It's pretty well clear that the factional navies are involved in FW, and it was the Caldari Navy that occupied Placid et al back in 2009 etc. The rest of the article is ignored.
And considering that Aicar's articles before were all quite anti-Caldari, thought it would have been redeeming somewhat. Meanwhile, the other faux-Scope articles by Aicar are completely ignored by the "This never happened" brigade.
In fact, with the other ones, people have decided to play along. I guess it's because Abraxas has stated that there will be no more roleplayed news items, so we'll have to rely on these faux-Scope posts and ANN.
First off, it's pretty well clear that Factional Navies are not involved in faction warfare and it was not the Caldari Navy that occupied Placid. The whole premise behind FW is that CONCORD will unleash their wrath against the first empire that sends it's real Navy into the warzone. This will leave them, and CONCORD, too weak to protect themselves against the retaliation of the Empire they attacked.
This isn’t, as Saxon suggests, that this is a case me being upset because he’s RPing stuff that isn’t directly supported by PF. I think you are missing the subtle battle going on between our characters. He isn’t playing a reporter trying to report unbiased news, and I’m just bullying him and nit-picking over PF. He’s playing a member of the Dove party using the media as weapon against the Caldari and I’m a member of the old school patriot faction who is keenly aware of how his sort fight.
The character Aicar’s sole agenda is to convince people that the Caldari Navy is leading the offensive in Placid and that it’s having a negative effect on the Intaki locals. In order to get this message out, his tactic is to encapsulate this message inside larger articles. He recently started using ‘positive’ reports on the Caldari as a Trojan horse for his message. The important part to Aicar, and to my character is the CN in placid message.
The more often he can sneak this into a more sensationalist topic, the more people accept that it’s the truth. The more people accept it as fact, the more people view the Caldari as a monolithic entity possessing all the worst traits of the Provist faction and oppressive corporate culture. This leaves only the Federation there to protect the Intaki from these terrible people.
Hamish is part Intaki, and views the Federation as oppressing them and that the sort of thing Aicar is doing as one of the tools they do use to keep the Intaki under their thumb. He isn't going to let Aicar get away attacking the State and Intaki Independence movement just because he says something on that the surface appears to be positive for the Caldari.
If you don't like the way I RP, that's fine, but coming here and trying to convince every body my RP is wrong and I'm being a jerk isn't going to stop me for doing what I want.
-
Re-reading the article and response with the explanation provided by Hamish I can see what you were going for. Unfortunately, without that background, it looks like so many of the dismissive "prove it" responses that we see from those who refuse to "play along" with player invented role playing devices.
-
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
This completely.
I always have run-ins with the first group (I'm with the second obviously). I see no problem at all with the IGS posts, and I think neither would anyone who looked at it purely from an IC standpoint would have any problem with it too.
-
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
This completely.
I always have run-ins with the first group (I'm with the second obviously). I see no problem at all with the IGS posts, and I think neither would anyone who looked at it purely from an IC standpoint would have any problem with it too.
While this does happen, its not the case here.
-
The first group waits patiently for CCP to dole out any crumb of information, which they collect and debate at length trying to make some a tapestry from the tiniest scraps.
The second group takes those same scraps and supplies the remainder of the fabric from their own imagination.
I would describe this as more of a continuum, where the two groups are at the opposite ends. In the middle are a lot of players who are comfortable making up certain kinds of stuff, but not other kinds of stuff. As an example, I would guess many players would be comfortable inventing a city their character used to live in, for example, even if they felt inventing population statistics for Gallente Prime was out of the line.
And I agree that if people come from RP cultures very far apart on the continuum, playing together in a shared world can be challenging. The other group may seem like "no fun nitpickers" and the other one "no fun godmoders". ;)
-
Hamish's take on things very much fits with my suspicions, I say that meaning I absolutely support the articles. Subtle, well-executed, and provides that burning ember of tension begging for resolve (which is where we humans screw it up, fighting over how to resolve it).
His refutation was certainly quite in line with what would be expected of his character and keeps the conflict moving. I'm far more guilty of crossing the line in an objectionable manner recently :9.
-
I don't want to derail the thread by responding to Hamish's commentary, which I've stated before as being totally non-sensical from a prime fiction perspective.
Rodj Blake is right, specifically in connection with NPC corporations. There's a threshold of 'imagination' we can apply in the public sphere regarding non-player controlled entities. The main debate raging in the roleplaying 'community' is whether it exists at all, and if it does, where it lies.
-
Also, I am not sure you understand what ad hominem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) means.
You know what, this is actually a much better way of saying what I wanted to say.
-
Hamish, nobody likes a "ur doin it wrong", but...well...(and these are links, silly blank theme)
Complicating matters, there have been several violent incidents between the Caldari Navy forces garrisoning the system and Gallentean or neutral industrial ships transiting the area (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3346&tid=5)
The rapid Caldari military advance into Gallente space has spread Caldari Navy forces thin, forcing the Navy to outsource patrol duties in less critical systems to the megacorporate security forces (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3098&tid=11)
"unless directed as part of strategic Caldari naval operations in the vicinity." (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3277&tid=4)
Caldari Navy forces in the occupied territories have been at an elevated state of alert since Tuesday's elections. (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3610&tid=4)
Inversely, with regards to the Federation Navy...
Plexing STPRO pilots shoot up Federation Navy (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=2312&tid=5)
Objective is as follows: To secure space occupancy and clear the way for Federation Navy search and capture teams to locate stolen military equipment. (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=2952&tid=10)
(http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=27-07-09Reports would trickle in of Gallentean successes, Gallentean conquests and Federation Navy domination[/url)
All FW NPCs carry factional navy tags. They are a "holding force". The capsuleer militia goes in, takes a system, and the faction navy comes in to hold it.
No amount of saying this is incorrect will change this. If it bothers you that much, then can you please just leave related RP threads alone?
-
I don't want to derail the thread by responding to Hamish's commentary, which I've stated before as being totally non-sensical from a prime fiction perspective.
Complicating matters, there have been several violent incidents between the Caldari Navy forces garrisoning the system and Gallentean or neutral industrial ships transiting the area (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3346&tid=5)
The rapid Caldari military advance into Gallente space has spread Caldari Navy forces thin, forcing the Navy to outsource patrol duties in less critical systems to the megacorporate security forces (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3098&tid=11)
"unless directed as part of strategic Caldari naval operations in the vicinity." (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3277&tid=4)
Caldari Navy forces in the occupied territories have been at an elevated state of alert since Tuesday's elections. (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3610&tid=4)
...
All FW NPCs carry factional navy tags. They are a "holding force". The capsuleer militia goes in, takes a system, and the faction navy comes in to hold it.
It appears that that both of you require CCP approved potentially bias news articles to establish the structure of the Caldari Military. The idea that the bulk of forces involved in garrisoning occupied territory, let alone the bulk of Caldari military forces are megacorporate security forces does seem to agree with your world view.
Different interpretations of the referenced phrases above in combination with chronicles and corp descriptions support the idea that the State's military is far from centralized and any vast undertaking requires the involvement of the megacorporate security forces, auxiliary mercenary forces, all coordinated with the help of the smallish Caldari Navy.
No amount of saying this is incorrect will change this. If it bothers you that much, then can you please just leave related RP threads alone?
Except that it is not incorrect; it is different interpretations of the information presented.
When we (Caldari roleplayers) read Scope generated news and then respond to it In Character, it is read as if it can only portray the Caldari in a bad light since the Scope is not Echelon or NoH. This lets us write off what we view as inconsistencies in reporting and attribute things we don't like to lack of knowledge concerning how the State functions (because it functions just like the Federation doesn't it?).
The simple fact of the matter is there are two groups of roleplayers in Eve and they can't really play together.
But they will happily shoot at each other.
-
The NPC ships carry Caldari Navy tags.
While I can understand the whole "militia act designed to prevent direct confrontation", this did not stop the State from auctioning off development rights to the territories, landing troops on the planets, installing new regimes, enforcing a communications blockade etc.
This is war, it's not a case of trying to demonize the State, or the big bad Federation. Federation Navy ships occupy Nisuwa right now, for example. And according to the Caldari epic arc, the Federation Navy maintains a forward presence in Black Rise, detention centers with raped women etc etc.
It's direct conflict that doesn't happen, and that CONCORD doesn't allow. The militias clean out an area of enemy navy presence, and their navy moves in. Take "To Live in Peace" which infers that the Federation and Caldari have continued to be fighting each other even when the first war passed.
-
Seriphyn,
You are doing it wrong. First, you are using OOC knowledge to establish an objective reality to which all characters are supposed to adhere.
1. I disagree with you using OOC knowledge to make a judgement about an IC position
2. I disagree that this OOC knowledge is neccessarily in conflict with the position taken
3. I disagree that the OOC knowledge provided by CCP should be considered in any form or shape 'unquestionable objective reality'
4. I disagree with your interpretation that everyone should agree on an 'objective reality' and imagine things from that point on
It's not believable because *to you* because the post is too much a mismatch for *your vision* of EVE.
I don't know the official CCP stance on either the Caldari or Federation military, and my character will believe it if it sounds sensible. My character won't believe it if it doesn't sound sensible and the only proof is an OOC CCP thing. When confronted with two news articles, one written by a CCP paid employee, and one written by a fellow player, I won't be judging the former more truthful than the latter for OOC reasons.
-
Seriphyn,
You are doing it wrong. First, you are using OOC knowledge to establish an objective reality to which all characters are supposed to adhere.
1. I disagree with you using OOC knowledge to make a judgement about an IC position
2. I disagree that this OOC knowledge is neccessarily in conflict with the position taken
3. I disagree that the OOC knowledge provided by CCP should be considered in any form or shape 'unquestionable objective reality'
4. I disagree with your interpretation that everyone should agree on an 'objective reality' and imagine things from that point on
It's not believable because *to you* because the post is too much a mismatch for *your vision* of EVE.
I don't know the official CCP stance on either the Caldari or Federation military, and my character will believe it if it sounds sensible. My character won't believe it if it doesn't sound sensible and the only proof is an OOC CCP thing. When confronted with two news articles, one written by a CCP paid employee, and one written by a fellow player, I won't be judging the former more truthful than the latter for OOC reasons.
I fully support this statement.
-
[mod]Thread locked. The premise of the thread seems to be that someone is 'doing it wrong'. As per the rules of the board, that's not an appropriate position to open a thread with. It doesn't matter if you think they're doing it really, really wrong or not - it's still a violation of the rules. It's fine to debate different IC positions, but it's not fine to insist that your way is the only right way. Chances are if there is any way that is so strongly supported by the evidence, people will support it without you telling them they have to do it your way. Those who have repeatedly been moderated for similar offenses (you probably know who you are) should know that further offenses are very likely to result in formal warnings.[/mod]