Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fellow spaceship pilots,

With the upcoming CSM elections we are once again facing the discussions as to what CSM is and what they can do to help us players. Is it worth it to cast your vote for the candidate with the opinion closest to your own?

Currently the CSM is heavily biased towards 0.0, as the 0.0 groups have the power to channel their votes into their respective leaders. Highsec has many more players, most of which either don't vote or their votes are distributed across a large list of minority-representing candidates, making them effectively worthless.

It's our opinion that the idea of CSM itself is not the problem. It gives players a (small) voice as to which direction they'd like EVE Online to take, as well as an oppurtunity for CCP to share future ideas and receive feedback on them - hopefully avoiding future debacles like the Jita monument shoot-out.

We feel the problem lies in how CSM candidates are voted for.

We present a possible solution to this problem by introducing categories. Simply put, we'd like to divide the CSM into different sections. The most basic categories would be: 0.0, lowsec, highsec, and wormhole space.

Perhaps feedback is needed on a new PvP feature. The CSM would provide feedback based on the category they campaigned for, as the feature might have a totally different impact in one catagory, or section of space, compared to another. This would also make it easier to evaluate an elected candidate, to determine if your vote is being utilized to your liking the next voting term.

To provide a unique perspective to whether features are balanced and of any value to players; a basic fifth catagory would be introduced: user experience. Are new players able to understand all the features Eve has to offer? Is the placement of this button or window really working out?

Each candidate would have to select an area that they'd campaign for, resulting in two candidates for each of the aforementioned categories and a single candidate for the user experience category as it applies to the others in a small portion. This would keep the current number of candidates at nine, each having a backup spot, resulting in five backup positions.

Each account has only one vote in one catagory, in a sense, due to each candidate being linked to that catagory. The chairman would be determined by receiving the most votes overall.

We feel that with this system the purpose of CSM could be returned, as it allows for diversity within CSM creating an equal voice for everybody.

Thanks for reading,

Snus Mumriken & Cyerus


tl;dr (summary)

• Divide the CSM into 5 different categories; 0.0, highsec, lowsec, wormhole space, user experience
• Each candidate has to choose a category to campaign for, resulting in diversity within CSM
• 0.0, highsec, lowsec, wormhole space are given two seats each, user experience only receiving one as it already applies (in small portions) to the other categories.
• Each category has one backup position, resulting in five backup spots.
• Most overall votes will become Chairman.

How do you define a highsec player? If I run three accounts, three mains in null but six of the characters in highsec, am I a highsec or a nullsec player?

If I'm in my Jita clone, am I classed as a highsec or a nullsec character?

If I set my home station to highsec but spend all my time in null, am I a highsec or a nullsec player?


And do you really think that the nullsec blocs couldn't stuff the highsec ballots for giggles too?

We are not limiting players based on their playstyle. Every player is able to run for any of the categories, as long as they stand by their choice once elected.

And yes, the 0.0 groups could still pile votes, but they'll risk losing a seat on another candidate.