EVE General Discussion

Sugar Kyle. I'm not familiar with the other two guys, but I'll take your word for it.

There is this presumption that electing someone from lowsec or with a lowsec focus is going to get anything done for lowsec.

The CSM doesn't work that way. What genuine CSM initiatives have actually born fruit in the last 3 years?

Every candidate promises a mile long list of reforms and ideas, and 99% of them will never see the light of day.

Elect the person you think is most deserving of free trips to Iceland and is most likely to call out CCP on being mentally ******** when they act so.

This division of candidates and regional representation is detrimental to Eve yet continues to be perpetuated.

I will not vote for a candidate claiming to represent low or high or nul. I will vote for a candidate who represents Eve, and sees the game for all its parts, not some.

if CSM is fractured and you think a candidate should represent everyone, and wait for this canditate you are delluded and weaken your own position. If null people say they have plans for null we should counter them with people from lowsec. This is how democracy works and thinking it's a bunch of people coming together hoping to please their neighbour is just silly.

Not that I think CSM election is that important - just saying your logic is broken.

Lol this guy, LS the be all end all of the game hue hue hue!

"Don't take my gooo man!, its for your own good!"

So apart from the hordes of NS descending upon LS for moons (which will just get flipped again anyway) is there any other reason why this would be bad? Or do you legitimately think you can contest lowsec system in the same way you do NS systems?

I'm voting for Mizhir!



I like Bacon.

look back to all the updates for the last Two years.

list all the changes impacting lowsec.

tldr; CCP hates lowsec

agreed, the only thing wrong regarding lowsec is not by itself, directly related to lowsec.

the problem is the risk vs reward of lowsec.

it is more risky than both low and null, yet bring less income than those two.

this would be okish if we could really control things SOV style, but it is not.

i you add to this the fact that low cannot defend himself agaisnt null, because of supers not able to be built / acuired by lowsec in number sufficent to actually even stand a chance, low is doomed from the start.


what i would like to see:

1- a rebalance of the risk/reward (could be achieve via point 3)
2- rebalance of supers in low, either by actually allowing low to build them, or making them unable to use any fighting module / drones in low
3- some kind of "sov", not as far as null indeed, but living in an area and controling it should bring some advantages, like maybe reduced pos consumption, slightly delayed sentry aggro, a slight increase in sig spawn / rat spawn / rewards on rats / better ore spawn.
of course, to keep it inline, the low bonus should be, at best, 50% of what is possible in null regarding those topics, and some null advantage shall remain in null, like managing docking rights for example

point 3 would only apply to non FW systems (some of them / all ?)

How does one find a list of candidates and their ideals?

Erm, yes, I think that null blobs would overpower LS corps if they wanted to.

And the reason is because LS already has enough stuff for the inherent difficulty of the space. It's mid way between high and NPC null. I know I know you'll swear its the most skill intensive and crazily difficult places in the game, but that's only because few people properly set up there, so you're just small splinter groups of people attacking each other. If they suddenly made lowsec more profitable than null, organised groups would simply move in and dominate the income streams.