That the Khanid and Sansha ships were originally half lasers half missiles split ships?
Quote from: The Cosmopolite on 13 Aug 2010, 15:09 When, precisely, do you think this retcon took place and what line do you think was removed?You need to have a pre-retcon chron copy to make this point convincing.I see no record of such a retcon on the EVE-Online EVE Fiction forum sticky and I have a copy of the chron pre-dating CCP's chronicle retcon exercise that has the very line you say was added to it.You're asserting a line was removed but I can't see any evidence for that assertion.You're asserting a line was added and I can't see any evidence for that assertion.Provide the evidence and there's a debate. And even then, they've not altered the in-game material and they've repeated the material on moderated evelopedia pages. You can't extrapolate intent from an alleged absence when there is presence elsewhere.CosmoFair enough points. But let's hear something even more convincing: An explanation as to why they would have done it if they didn't intend to remove the plot. If you can't come up with an explanation, then we're likely going to believe Andreus' point because it makes sense and no other explanation is apparent.Additionally, you seem rather... aggressive about this issue. Which I find interesting.
When, precisely, do you think this retcon took place and what line do you think was removed?You need to have a pre-retcon chron copy to make this point convincing.I see no record of such a retcon on the EVE-Online EVE Fiction forum sticky and I have a copy of the chron pre-dating CCP's chronicle retcon exercise that has the very line you say was added to it.You're asserting a line was removed but I can't see any evidence for that assertion.You're asserting a line was added and I can't see any evidence for that assertion.Provide the evidence and there's a debate. And even then, they've not altered the in-game material and they've repeated the material on moderated evelopedia pages. You can't extrapolate intent from an alleged absence when there is presence elsewhere.Cosmo
I don't see the significance here. What far-reaching consequences does it have, whether CCP did it or not? And do tone down the personal insults, hmm? Everyone's free to debate their view on these things, and Cosmo's not the one getting offensive about it.
If someone's acting in an unneccessarily confrontational manner, I feel it's within my rights to remark upon it.The significance of the removal is clear - they wouldn't take the effort to remove it unless it indicated something about the sentences that were removed. What does it indicate in this case? Something about the Federation's relationship with ORE was removed.
I am not being aggressive or confrontational in the slightest. I also think it is a bit much for people to make claims about what I was like when they met me in real life. I could reply as to what Andreus was like but I think that would be silly and unproductive.There still isn't any evidence presented that the chronicle has changed at all.I find it a bit strange that I'm the one who has to explain why they would have done something for which there is no evidence. When there is evidence for the change, there's a debate about why it might have happened. Until there is any evidence, there is no debate. Just assertions that the change occured.Andreus says a change to the CONCORD chron is evidence they have been changing chrons. Yes, certainly. But we knew that because there was an announced chron retcon exercise and all the changes were logged. So, for the CONCORD chron:QuoteRewrote Chronicle “CONCORD,” making numerous changes: made mention of last year’s Elder War events; added historical details on the brokering of the ceasefire agreement between the Caldari and the Gallente; several other small changes.As I've already stated, no such change for the Outer Ring Excavations chron appears noted in the EVE Fiction forum section log of changes to chronicles. That is evidence there was no change in that exercise.I have a pre-CCP chronicle retcon exercise copy of the chronicle at issue that has the line Andreus thinks was added in it already. That is evidence there was no such change in that exercise.What I am doing is challenging the claim being made and, by the way, this has nothing to do with winning an IC argument. The IC points have been made and it's finished with. This is an OOC discussion about the background of EVE and I make no apology for asking for clear evidence when someone claims a retcon has taken place.Cosmo
Rewrote Chronicle “CONCORD,” making numerous changes: made mention of last year’s Elder War events; added historical details on the brokering of the ceasefire agreement between the Caldari and the Gallente; several other small changes.
You act exactly like your character does. I'm not even sure you roleplay most of the time. Make of that what you will.I remain absolutely certain there was a modification to the chronicle as I clearly remember that chronicle was the place I specifically learnt of the original nature of ORE's departure from the Federation. Either way, it seems rather remiss of CCP not to mention in a chronicle specifically regarding ORE that such an event took place.
All I make of it is that I am discussing the subject calmly and for lack of evidence on the subject you seem to have to resort to casting aspersions on my character as a player.I dare say others will make of it what they will.As to your certainty, if you're so certain, when did it change? Tell us that.As to CCP not mentioning in the chronicle this detail: that is likely a consequence of it being a very old chronicle indeed. It dates from 2001. The in-game descriptions are later.Contrary to the mythology, the founders of CCP did not have every bit of the storyline for ten years worked out in advance in 2000. They developed it as they went along, just as they are doing now.There is strong internal evidence that the chron has never been touched since. For instance: who is the founder of ORE? The chron says Yani Sar Arteu. Three news pieces since consistently say otherwise:http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=429&tid=4http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=822&tid=7http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=606&tid=4I find it hard to believe they would retcon the chronicle while leaving this rather glaring contradiction entirely untouched.Cosmo
