I'm fairly certain that it derives from an older term taken from UO that references a "safe" or "law-abiding" character.
It means that you cannot attack them without being flagged "grey" yourself and CONCORD will come after you in high-sec space if you agress against the "blue" character.
However, I could be quite wrong as its been a LONG time since I played EVE.
I'm fairly certain that it derives from an older term taken from UO that references a "safe" or "law-abiding" character.
It means that you cannot attack them without being flagged "grey" yourself and CONCORD will come after you in high-sec space if you agress against the "blue" character.
However, I could be quite wrong as its been a LONG time since I played EVE.
What post 2 says makes more sense.
Yes definitely wrong in terms of Eve I'm afraid.
You can also set fleet finder by standings so only blues can join or even see a fleet.
Most importantly its linked to a rule of engagement called NBSI or Not Blue Shoot Instantly run by people across almost all of 0.0 sec space.
Aka if you're not our friend you're dying for entering our space......
Yeah there are usually two types of 0.0 space.
NBSI = Not Blue Shoot It (I.E. If its not an ally it dies)
and
NRDS = Not Red Dont Shoot (I.E. if its not an enemy leave it alone)
Yes except NRDS essentially died with CVA run Providence. The fact that Ushra'Khan claim to run NRDS is fairly laughable as 98% of the occupants there don't so NBSI has to be presumed in any engagement.
Besides, not being red and having been attempted to be ambushed a few times crossing their own mostly deserted home area I wouldn't even take their propaganda news pieces as accurate.
Well unless they've set me personally red and that would be plain hurtful as I drink with a few of their old schoolers at the London Eve meet regularly.
Emoing aside there are a number of large 0.0 entities that run NRDS in low sec - its just not advertised too much so hard to tell who.
Oh sure, the term "blue" for friendly units came from UO. Even todays military have come to adopt terms from UO.
Hmm? I'm not part of any military would you mind embellishing on this?
quoted from Wiki
Friendly fire is inadvertent firing towards one's own or otherwise friendly forces while attempting to engage enemy forces, particularly where this results in injury or death. A death resulting from a negligent discharge is not considered friendly fire. Neither is murder, whether premeditated or in the heat of the moment, and nor is deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons, as in these cases there is no intent to harm the enemy.[1] Similarly, inadvertent harm to non-combatants or structures, usually referred to as "collateral damage" is also not considered to be friendly fire.[2]
The term friendly fire was originally adopted by the United States military. Many North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) militaries refer to these incidents as blue on blue, which derives from military exercises where NATO forces were identified by blue pennants, hence "blue", and Warsaw Pact forces were identified by orange pennants. Another term for such incidents is fratricide, a word that originally refers to the act of a person killing a brother.
Oh sure, the term "blue" for friendly units came from UO. Even todays military have come to adopt terms from UO.
Hmm? I'm not part of any military would you mind embellishing on this?
I was being sarcastic. Ofcourse it doesn't come from UO! Thank Obidom for making that wiki quote. In military exercises, those that I've been part of, friendly units have always been marked and refered to as blue.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Oh sure, the term "blue" for friendly units came from UO. Even todays military have come to adopt terms from UO.
Hmm? I'm not part of any military would you mind embellishing on this?
quoted from Wiki
Friendly fire is inadvertent firing towards one's own or otherwise friendly forces while attempting to engage enemy forces, particularly where this results in injury or death. A death resulting from a negligent discharge is not considered friendly fire. Neither is murder, whether premeditated or in the heat of the moment, and nor is deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons, as in these cases there is no intent to harm the enemy.[1] Similarly, inadvertent harm to non-combatants or structures, usually referred to as "collateral damage" is also not considered to be friendly fire.[2]
The term friendly fire was originally adopted by the United States military. Many North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) militaries refer to these incidents as blue on blue, which derives from military exercises where NATO forces were identified by blue pennants, hence "blue", and Warsaw Pact forces were identified by orange pennants. Another term for such incidents is fratricide, a word that originally refers to the act of a person killing a brother.
So NATO took this from UO?
Or did UO take this as the developer recgnised blue=friendlies?
I believe in coinsidents... or that 'blue' have been used to mark friendlies historically and so making it fit to use in games. Just speculating though... but that seeems more logical for me, than that some army, military, starts to adept things from a game...
Think about that for awhile.
-"Hey, we should change the colormarker for friendly forces, they use blue in this popular game Ultima Online"
-"What the hell are you on about, what Ultimate Online thing are you talking about?"
-"Yeah, everyone play this. So it will be alot easier for us."
-"Ok, great idea! Let us reprints all instruction manual, all those..."
Seriously, is this true?
/Edit: Yeah, I should have figured out the sarcasm /
Kriegspiel, arguably the first modern example of "wargaming" originated in the early 1800s.
"The rules set, which was modified several times established several conventions for wargaming which hold true to the present day, such as the use of maps, color coding the opposing armies as red and blue"
Generally, you NEVER, EVER shoot a "Blue" or a friendly player. If they shoot at you, you put your defenses on and hightail it out of there. Individual corps have different rules, that tends to be the basic, unmodified rule.
Blues are marked, unless you have changed the UI settings, with a little blue box with a plus (or maybe a star?) in side of it. Corp members, green box with a star, and fleet members, purple box with a star, and alliance members which I think are blue boxes with stars, are also "Blue" or friendly.
____________________________ Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online --- == RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP == --- Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online --- Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth ____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
Comments
in eve you have standings with other corps.
Blue = friendly
Red = enemy
I'm fairly certain that it derives from an older term taken from UO that references a "safe" or "law-abiding" character.
It means that you cannot attack them without being flagged "grey" yourself and CONCORD will come after you in high-sec space if you agress against the "blue" character.
However, I could be quite wrong as its been a LONG time since I played EVE.
What post 2 says makes more sense.
Most importantly its linked to a rule of engagement called NBSI or Not Blue Shoot Instantly run by people across almost all of 0.0 sec space.
Aka if you're not our friend you're dying for entering our space......
Bjoern / Sir Prime
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Yes definitely wrong in terms of Eve I'm afraid.
You can also set fleet finder by standings so only blues can join or even see a fleet.
Bjoern / Sir Prime
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Yeah there are usually two types of 0.0 space.
NBSI = Not Blue Shoot It (I.E. If its not an ally it dies)
and
NRDS = Not Red Dont Shoot (I.E. if its not an enemy leave it alone)
The term comes from the standard coloring associated with the standings system.
The "old" standings system was/is a scale from -10 to +10.
-10 to -5: Deep Red
-4.99 to -0.01: Orange
0: Neutral (grey)
0.01 to 5: Light Blue
5.01 to 10: Dark Blue
Yes except NRDS essentially died with CVA run Providence. The fact that Ushra'Khan claim to run NRDS is fairly laughable as 98% of the occupants there don't so NBSI has to be presumed in any engagement.
Besides, not being red and having been attempted to be ambushed a few times crossing their own mostly deserted home area I wouldn't even take their propaganda news pieces as accurate.
Well unless they've set me personally red and that would be plain hurtful as I drink with a few of their old schoolers at the London Eve meet regularly.
Emoing aside there are a number of large 0.0 entities that run NRDS in low sec - its just not advertised too much so hard to tell who.
Bjoern / Sir Prime
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
nerds.. everyone knows red/blue comes from EQ.
stupid space ship game.
u mad?
Give me liberty or give me lasers
would like to add if your in game there is also
green: a member of your corp
purple: a member of your fleet/gang
Though those can both be filed under blue.
Into the breach meatbags
Corrected your error.
Oh sure, the term "blue" for friendly units came from UO. Even todays military have come to adopt terms from UO.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Hmm? I'm not part of any military would you mind embellishing on this?
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
quoted from Wiki
Friendly fire is inadvertent firing towards one's own or otherwise friendly forces while attempting to engage enemy forces, particularly where this results in injury or death. A death resulting from a negligent discharge is not considered friendly fire. Neither is murder, whether premeditated or in the heat of the moment, and nor is deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons, as in these cases there is no intent to harm the enemy.[1] Similarly, inadvertent harm to non-combatants or structures, usually referred to as "collateral damage" is also not considered to be friendly fire.[2]
The term friendly fire was originally adopted by the United States military. Many North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) militaries refer to these incidents as blue on blue, which derives from military exercises where NATO forces were identified by blue pennants, hence "blue", and Warsaw Pact forces were identified by orange pennants. Another term for such incidents is fratricide, a word that originally refers to the act of a person killing a brother.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Norsefire-logo.png
I was being sarcastic. Ofcourse it doesn't come from UO! Thank Obidom for making that wiki quote. In military exercises, those that I've been part of, friendly units have always been marked and refered to as blue.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
So NATO took this from UO?
Or did UO take this as the developer recgnised blue=friendlies?
I believe in coinsidents... or that 'blue' have been used to mark friendlies historically and so making it fit to use in games. Just speculating though... but that seeems more logical for me, than that some army, military, starts to adept things from a game...
Think about that for awhile.
-"Hey, we should change the colormarker for friendly forces, they use blue in this popular game Ultima Online"
-"What the hell are you on about, what Ultimate Online thing are you talking about?"
-"Yeah, everyone play this. So it will be alot easier for us."
-"Ok, great idea! Let us reprints all instruction manual, all those..."
Seriously, is this true?
/Edit: Yeah, I should have figured out the sarcasm /
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
This thread has taken a turn towards hilarity.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
It goes back a LOT further than NATO exercises...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriegsspiel_(wargame)
Kriegspiel, arguably the first modern example of "wargaming" originated in the early 1800s.
"The rules set, which was modified several times established several conventions for wargaming which hold true to the present day, such as the use of maps, color coding the opposing armies as red and blue"
EO? I'm not sure I've ever heard it referred as EO.
Are we all becoming that lazy that EVE has become too long to type out and must be abbreviated with EO?
FACT:
If you marked friendlies with purple, the term would be "Purple".
FACT:
If you marked friendliest with yellow, the term would be "Yellow".
What's this discussion about anyway?
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
Blue = Good, Friendly Player
Generally, you NEVER, EVER shoot a "Blue" or a friendly player. If they shoot at you, you put your defenses on and hightail it out of there. Individual corps have different rules, that tends to be the basic, unmodified rule.
Blues are marked, unless you have changed the UI settings, with a little blue box with a plus (or maybe a star?) in side of it. Corp members, green box with a star, and fleet members, purple box with a star, and alliance members which I think are blue boxes with stars, are also "Blue" or friendly.
____________________________
Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online
---
== RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP ==
---
Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online
---
Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth
____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
FACT:
To communicate with others you have a language.
FACT:
It is easier to understand people that use the same language as yourself.
Now the general term about friendles in EVE is 'blue'. Your post do not change that fact. The term 'blue' is what the OP is asking about.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"