These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

June Ting for CSM10 - newbies and independent PVPers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#41 - 2015-01-12 19:09:03 UTC
June and I live in the same city and are close IRL, so when she let me know she was stopping off in Iceland on her way to Europe for a business trip, I wanted to hang out with her. I asked if I could invite her and was given the all-clear, so I did. If that was a problem, my apologies; it didn't seem to be at the time (and like I said I checked).

While she was in Iceland and later in Europe, her dog had a series of very bad seizures. It was miserable, the phone calls were miserable, nobody slept very long, and nobody wants to go through that again. So, no summits.

Which is a bit of a shame, as if elected, she'll make a great CSM-- she and I have talked a lot about EVE, the metagame, etc, and for a while lead SOUND together. We've shaped each other's perspective on a number of things. I wholeheartedly endorse her, and hope to spend the next year listening to the (NDA-sanitized) stories of CSM awesomeness.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#42 - 2015-01-12 19:12:09 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
corbexx wrote:
You mention that you can't go to summits (due to your dog), however you did attend the last summer summit. At the summits alot of extra talking, chatting, sorting issues happens outside the meetings themselves (down the pub). Do you think you being there had a negative affect since people had to be more careful on what they spoke about, since you arent under nda?

Last August, I was in Iceland as a stopover on a previously scheduled business trip to Europe that happened to coincide with the summer summit. I was in fact invited by Ali Aras with CCP Leeloo's permission to come socialize at the pub while I was in town, yes. Anyone could have been at the pub eavesdropping, so people should have had to watch what they said anyways. Rule 0 of infosec is that you never know who is listening. To be quite honest, I'd rather that people in fact practice proper infosec, so the fact that I was overtly there and people were aware I was non-NDAed should have just made people follow good practices anyways and should not have negatively affected things. Plenty of non-NDA social talk happened without any problems.

As far as the future goes, unfortunately my dog had a rather bad seizure while I was in Europe, which makes it extremely unlikely that I'll ever be able to take an international trip again as long as my dog is still alive :(. At the time, I hoped that the trip would go smoothly so I could continue traveling in the future, but it didn't. My spouse did not enjoy making the 2am panicked phonecall to me, and I did not enjoy being many thousand miles away and unable to do anything to help.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
#43 - 2015-01-13 06:30:23 UTC
June Ting wrote:


Sovnull: Making smaller, less sp-intensive groups viable in null requires more gradations in quality of space, fewer regions like the drone regions and period basis where you *have* to be blue to your neighbors to run logistics, and making it so that it's difficult and undesirable to hold more than one region at a time. The way towards better null balance is having a totem pole, with people with high numbers and skillpoints competing for the most desirable regions, and not interfering with people with low numbers and skillpoints contesting the least valuable regions. The changes to force projection have been good so far, but haven't yet fully solved some of the game balance issues that would allow smaller groups to take sov wholesale. (PFR/YARR/PIZZA being examples of some of the first pioneers in this area).




You do understand, that you cant have force projection effectively nerfed and have regions like drones and your example of period basis easily accessible, at least not without significant modifications to the geography of the eve map which could create some serious complications. Omist may actually be a better example, as you can get to period basis via jf via NPC null, its kinda of ugly but possible. Omist, Tenal much of the drone regions, is basically impossible to get to without being blue to the individuals up the pipe form you. Just something for you to think about.

From your original OP, you seem to suggest that we are still living in an age of supercaps online, even with force projection nerfs and s.carriers significantly limited drone bays / drone selection options. What do you see supercarriers positions being in the games meta?

I personally think that other than being hard to kill supercarriers by in large are pretty well balanced, kill there 1 flight of fighters and they are harmless to subcaps, i suspect you largest issue may be with scaling, noteably that supercarrier pilots by in large tend to coalesce into a few capital heavy groups, I.E. PL, NC. Goons ect.
Saya Xu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#44 - 2015-01-13 22:25:24 UTC
June Ting wrote:
corbexx wrote:
You mention that you can't go to summits (due to your dog), however you did attend the last summer summit. At the summits alot of extra talking, chatting, sorting issues happens outside the meetings themselves (down the pub). Do you think you being there had a negative affect since people had to be more careful on what they spoke about, since you arent under nda?

... I was in fact invited by Ali Aras with CCP Leeloo's permission to come socialize at the pub while I was in town, yes. Anyone could have been at the pub eavesdropping, so people should have had to watch what they said anyways. Rule 0 of infosec is that you never know who is listening. To be quite honest, I'd rather that people in fact practice proper infosec, so the fact that I was overtly there and people were aware I was non-NDAed should have just made people follow good practices anyways and should not have negatively affected things. ....


@ June
I don't think you are grasping the point.. whether you were ok'ed to be there or not, doesn't really matter. The problem is that the CSM has a limited time with CCP devs. From what I have heard, especially the relaxed times at the pub can be very useful for both. Do you realize that you being there held the CSM back?

@ Ali:
Why on earth did you invite someone from eve during the summit (though outside of office hours) and not just did stuff together before or after the summit? Or was this launch her CSM candidacy?
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#45 - 2015-01-13 22:36:10 UTC
Saya Xu wrote:
I don't think you are grasping the point.. whether you were ok'ed to be there or not, doesn't really matter. The problem is that the CSM has a limited time with CCP devs. From what I have heard, especially the relaxed times at the pub can be very useful for both. Do you realize that you being there held the CSM back?

You are asking a loaded question that presumes an unjustified assumption.

I answered the original question without the unjustified assumption above already. My viewpoint is that the CSM should not discuss NDAed material in public settings, and that a pub counts as a public setting. It is not required to discuss NDAed material to have relaxed/social time be productive and useful.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#46 - 2015-01-13 22:49:39 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:
You do understand, that you cant have force projection effectively nerfed and have regions like drones and your example of period basis easily accessible, at least not without significant modifications to the geography of the eve map which could create some serious complications. Omist may actually be a better example, as you can get to period basis via jf via NPC null, its kinda of ugly but possible. Omist, Tenal much of the drone regions, is basically impossible to get to without being blue to the individuals up the pipe form you. Just something for you to think about.

Concern acknowledged. I do think there are some clever ways as far as making nullsec more capable of supplying itself without having a dependency upon jump freight in order to mitigate that problem. But yes, you are correct that there is a tension there.

Quote:
From your original OP, you seem to suggest that we are still living in an age of supercaps online, even with force projection nerfs and s.carriers significantly limited drone bays / drone selection options. What do you see supercarriers positions being in the games meta?

The main issue remaining with supers is the massive spidertanking ability. Supers already enjoy the huge advantage over dreads of being ewar immune when being moved, and not having to siege in order to apply their damage. They don't also need the ability to spidertank, such that 20+ of them are functionally untouchable. If they're made much thinner, and more in the style of tier 3 BCs that dish out damage, but die if tackled, they'd be substantially better balanced.

Quote:
I personally think that other than being hard to kill supercarriers by in large are pretty well balanced, kill there 1 flight of fighters and they are harmless to subcaps, i suspect you largest issue may be with scaling, noteably that supercarrier pilots by in large tend to coalesce into a few capital heavy groups, I.E. PL, NC. Goons ect.

HERO mildir has had some discussions about how to counter supers. Unfortunately, we don't believe that killing flights of fighters actually is practical and useful with the way that massed supers currently are used. Subcapital fleets cannot remain on field against massed fighters plus a few nigh-invincible battleships/tech3 antibombers with triage/slowcat support. Two solid waves of bombs must connect for fighters to die.

If you have a better mechanism to suggest for "just" killing the fighters I'm all ears, but it's easier said than done.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#47 - 2015-01-13 22:58:26 UTC
Saya Xu wrote:

@ Ali:
Why on earth did you invite someone from eve during the summit (though outside of office hours) and not just did stuff together before or after the summit? Or was this launch her CSM candidacy?

We had a great time afterwards, actually, although aforementioned dog issues combined with a hangover made hiking a somewhat ambitious plan.

As for why invite her...why else does one invite someone to a bar? Hanging out and having fun is a thing, I didn't want to have to pick between social groups, so I asked about it. She worried about being welcome, I said it'd be totally fine. Are you expecting someone to turn down a good-faith invitation to socialize because they're worried about something coming up, despite assurances it's completely legit?

Seriously, if this is (was) a problem, it's a problem with me, not June. I've been known to fall victim to Geek Social Fallacy #4 before, it happens. Talk to me or CCP Leeloo about it, and go back to asking June tricky questions about, oh, I dunno, the position of newbie coalitions in EVE or something like that.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
Saya Xu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#48 - 2015-01-13 23:36:57 UTC
I totally agree it is an issue Ali caused, not June. June however could have prevented it by saying it was better to meet seperately. You cut the CSMs valuable and constructive time with CCP. Just because you can invite her, doesn't mean you should have. However, you are not running again Ali, so I stopped caring. She however might get into the CSM and therefore is a concern.

As a potential CSM member you should be able to handle tricky or loaded questions without becoming too defensive. Responding to someone asking if they have stopped beating their wife, isn't quite a constructive answer (if you dont know what I am referring to, read reddit people).
Nonn Sequitor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#49 - 2015-01-13 23:54:15 UTC
June Ting wrote:
You are asking a loaded question that presumes an unjustified assumption.


You are dodging the question. Let's have a link fight.

By the way, your "viewpoint" about whether a particular discussion should or shouldn't occur isn't germane. it seems like that at least one of the CSM who was there had an issue with your presence. Also, discussions at public venues can remain private as long as nobody's too drunk to keep their voices under control. But that assumes everyone in the conversation is an appropriate participant. You weren't, so perhaps your presence stifled any option to continue productive work.

Has HERO identified a candidate for this year's CSM yet? Do you suppose that they have one? Are you actively campaigning to be that person? If there is someone else selected to be the coalition candidate, will you step aside so as not to split their vote and possibly cost them a seat?
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#50 - 2015-01-13 23:58:17 UTC
Nonn Sequitor wrote:
Has HERO identified a candidate for this year's CSM yet? Do you suppose that they have one? Are you actively campaigning to be that person? If there is someone else selected to be the coalition candidate, will you step aside so as not to split their vote and possibly cost them a seat?

I cannot speak for HERO regarding any kind of official coalition balloting. Lquid Drisseg is the person determining that, as per the CNM meeting notes.

As I said originally, I ran without regard to whether I was getting support from my blues. I would be delighted if I were placed anywhere on the HERO ballot at all, but I expect my support to come from sources inside and outside HERO. The STV process means that the concept of 'vote splitting' is meaningless, as long as people vote a sufficiently long slate.

I intend to endorse anyone that I feel would make a good CSM candidate, regardless of whether they are in HERO or not.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Hans Zwaardhandler
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#51 - 2015-01-15 16:07:39 UTC
What is your opinion on the nullsec subcap meta being dominated by Ishtars and Tengus in major fleet fights? Is this a result of CCP overnerfing certain shiptypes like battleships and battlecruisers, or them allowing things like scanning to be easily conducted for better bombing runs? What is your opinion of the state of capitals and supercapitals in nullsec warfare?

Sorry for the disjointedness of my questions.
Sub Starasque
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2015-01-15 17:06:21 UTC
Saya Xu wrote:
I totally agree it is an issue Ali caused, not June. June however could have prevented it by saying it was better to meet seperately. You cut the CSMs valuable and constructive time with CCP. Just because you can invite her, doesn't mean you should have. However, you are not running again Ali, so I stopped caring. She however might get into the CSM and therefore is a concern.

Nah, you're just taking an opportunity to jump on to something tangential to June's candidacy to be plain rude. This whole visit thing bears no relevance to this thread focused on June's platform and candidacy. If it really rustles your jimmies so badly you can talk about it somewhere else rather than derail this thread.
Nonn Sequitor wrote:
By the way, your "viewpoint" about whether a particular discussion should or shouldn't occur isn't germane. it seems like that at least one of the CSM who was there had an issue with your presence.

Then it's incumbent upon "that CSM" to make that concern known. If it's such a huge deal then they can just get that request for one friend to spend time with another denied. They went through the proper channels to see if it was okay. They were told it was. This whole conversation is just making the involved look vindictive. They need to sort this stuff out in private.


Now for something relevant to the thread. I can give my personal support and endorsement of June after spending much of my roughly two years in this game living around and interacting with her and her associates. She has demonstrated to me her knowledge, professionalism, and genuine care for the game.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#53 - 2015-01-15 18:28:58 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
Hans Zwaardhandler wrote:
What is your opinion on the nullsec subcap meta being dominated by Ishtars and Tengus in major fleet fights? Is this a result of CCP overnerfing certain shiptypes like battleships and battlecruisers, or them allowing things like scanning to be easily conducted for better bombing runs?

Balance is always a tricky thing to accomplish, and players tend to overdo the thing that is optimal because they want to win. I think that it's unhealthy for the game when there is only one Right Way to do a fleet fight e.g. 'ishtars/tengus online, whomever has the most wins' but it's far easier to heap criticism and less easy to actually balance things correctly. In general, having viable counters for things is helpful, and if it's impossible to economically counter something, then perhaps a nerf is in order or a buff for a potential counter that doesn't currently quite work.

I'm waiting to see how the results of the isboxing ban shake out before I make a sweeping statement about bombing runs making doctrines viable/non-viable in 2015. Things have changed somewhat since 2014 in that department, and it takes time for doctrines to adapt.

Quote:
What is your opinion of the state of capitals and supercapitals in nullsec warfare

Asked, and answered. If you have a more specific question I'm happy to elaborate.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
Bisu Deckryder
Definitely Not Cloaked LLC
#54 - 2015-01-15 22:38:47 UTC
I can vouch that June is highly motivated to help both new players and older players, and is if not one of the nicest people in eve, (she might be anyways) is one of the people I would most highly trust to be involved in the csm to stay motivated and ight for what she believes in. I can't say I'm going to vote for her, but if you agree with her on the issues you can count on her to fight for what she believes in.


June what do you think needs to be done, if anything, to make solo pvp more viable?
corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2015-01-17 18:59:52 UTC
You mention on just for crits that there are ugly areas of balance in w space that need urgent attention, could you expand on this?

Corbexx for CSM X - Wormholes still deserve better
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#56 - 2015-01-17 21:11:42 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
June what do you think needs to be done, if anything, to make solo pvp more viable?

corbexx wrote:
You mention on just for crits that there are ugly areas of balance in w space that need urgent attention, could you expand on this?

Noting that I owe you a response and am not ignoring you. I am gone until Monday due to the MIT Mystery Hunt, but should have a response to you by Tuesday.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#57 - 2015-01-21 03:03:37 UTC
Responses as promised now that I'm back on a normal schedule:
Bisu Deckryder wrote:
June what do you think needs to be done, if anything, to make solo pvp more viable?

There are a couple of meta-issues going on here. As someone who blobs rather filthily on a regular basis, the number one thing that enables us to make solo pvpers miserable is the fact that there is an intel inbalance between us and the people that we kill. This is a problem which can somewhat be solved by the players rather than by the developers - in particular, https://eveharmony.com/Default.aspx pulling from zKB is pretty damn great for leveling the playing field.

One "small" thing I'd like to see fixed (that still won't save you from being blobbed) is that a fleet of one should be able to benefit from the person's own leadership bonuses. It's kind of perverse that you will perform 10% better by having an alt in a noobship cloaked at a safe in your squad compared to being legitimately solo. c.f
Quote:
Leadership - Grants a 2% bonus to fleet members' targeting speed per skill level.
Armored Warfare - Grants a 2% bonus to fleet members' armor hit points per skill level.
Information Warfare - Grants a 2% bonus to fleet members' targeting range per skill level.
Siege Warfare - Grants a 2% bonus to fleet members' shield capacity per skill level.
Skirmish Warfare - Grants a 2% bonus to fleet members' agility per skill level.


corbexx wrote:
You mention on just for crits that there are ugly areas of balance in w space that need urgent attention, could you expand on this?

Sure - so here's the original quote:
Quote:
I believe that lowsec should feature prominently in any plans CCP makes, but there are ugly areas of balance in low, null, high, and whs that all need urgent attention, and will ultimately benefit all areas when fixed.

Please parse that as "there are ugly individual topics that affect multiple areas of space" rather than me running wild telling people what's broken specifically about the areas that they live in.

My answer to this as far as things that I'd like to see fixed that I think would very much help w-space - PHAs were hugely useful for increasing the willingness of pos-dependent groups to recruit newer players, and I'd love to see CCP implement PSMAs as well capable of storing perhaps a few cruisers per pilot. I also feel that having the subsystems on tech 3s rebalanced would provide a modest demand increase for T3s, which would benefit w-space (c.f. earlier conversations about the profitability of incursioning in highsec vs. running sites in w-space - it's clearly improved since your efforts to get the lower class site payouts inceased for sure, but it's still not fixed yet as far as overall balance goes)

I fight for the freedom of my people.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#58 - 2015-01-25 20:04:05 UTC
I forgot to link the Just For Crits interview I did a few weeks ago, but it's at http://justforcrits.com/csmx-june-ting/

One of my current minor peeves, heh, is that I spent 4+ hours yesterday flying a scimi saving fleet members from a rather nasty pos and sets of fighters and there's no public killboard record of my contribution aside from the fact that my fleet didn't die. Unfortunately, it's hard to say from the outside what the difficulty of repmails is so I'm reluctant to make any F&I-ish committments around it other than to say that I feel the pain of the neglected logi community loud and clear.

I've also been having some very interesting conversations with Lockefox about my earlier remarks about making POSes in highsec non-unanchorable in response to decs. I definitely did in fact fail to consider the impact upon large-scale build operations that require using POSes to function. I'm not about breaking the economy in the service of a few weeks of short-term explosions, and I now better understand that my proposal without further industrial POS rebalancing would in fact not actually induce people to leave POSes up as potential targets due to the lack of reward to accompany the added risk. Back to the drafting board to revise. I do in fact listen to reasonable feedback, so please do contact me to talk me back from the edge of proposals that might have impacts I didn't account for.

I fight for the freedom of my people.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#59 - 2015-01-30 14:36:43 UTC  |  Edited by: June Ting
Here's a practical demonstration of why having someone on the CSM whose primary job is teaching newbies is valuable:

"Using more than one... will be penalized" needs to be replaced with "Using more than one... has diminishing returns". "will be penalized" is vague, and makes it sound like fitting two makes your ship *worse* than fitting one. Small little points of friction add up to make the learning curve unbearably bad.

Quote:
08:11:20 <+ryn_carrera> I was thinking a nano and a BCS because of the stacking penalty.
08:14:47 <@nolan> which stacking penalty?
08:17:18 <+picti> For having 2 BCS on the condor
08:20:40 <@nolan> that's actually an anti-stacking penalty
08:20:52 <@nolan> 2x damage mods is usually a bit more than double the increase from 1 damage mod
08:21:00 <@nolan> it's after that that it starts getting worse
08:21:13 <+ryn_carrera> ...
08:21:27 <+ryn_carrera> [mind blown]
08:21:27 <+suzaku_furukawa> wait what
08:22:10 <+suzaku_furukawa> ah. :ccp math:
08:22:18 <+suzaku_furukawa> S(n) = 0.5^[((n-1) / 2.22292081) ^2]
08:22:47 <+suzaku_furukawa> if you have two mods that give 20% each you end up with 40.9% apparently
08:22:57 <+ryn_carrera> Sometimes I think this game is inconsistent on purpose, because **** you, that's why.
08:23:21 <@nolan> ryn_carrera: it's not inconsistent :)
08:23:29 <@nolan> it's a relatively straight forward formula
08:23:36 <@nolan> here's a worked example:
08:23:43 <@nolan> omen navy issue, base damage with no mods: 199dps
08:23:55 <@nolan> with 1x damage mod: 244dps, i.e. 45dps more
08:24:05 <@nolan> with 2x damage mod: 292, i.e. 93dps more
08:24:15 <@nolan> ryn_carrera: the thing is damage mods increase both damage /and/ firing rate
08:24:21 <@nolan> and this complicates things.
08:24:29 <+ryn_carrera> TIL
08:24:49 <+ryn_carrera> I had no idea they increased rate of fire, too.
08:27:38 <+ryn_carrera> And I meant inconsistent wrt the text for the modules, "Using more than one type of this module..."
08:28:25 <+ryn_carrera> "By more than one, we actually meant 3 or more, because you should totally use 2 always and forever."
08:29:26 <@nolan> haha - things garmur's dont appreciate: stabbers being able to put them into armor from 30km
08:30:24 <+suzaku_furukawa> ryn_carrera: you do get stacking penalty on the second one. but the second module is boosting a value that is already increased by the first module
08:30:45 <+suzaku_furukawa> and the stacking penalty is small enough to not make much of a difference
08:31:27 <+ryn_carrera> Wait, additional modules of the same type are multiplicative???


In other news, CSM candidate application is now done modulo me scanning my ID at work! :) Edit: done!

I fight for the freedom of my people.
June Ting
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#60 - 2015-02-05 21:39:03 UTC
Most candidates have signed up for a Cap Stable interview by this point, although they're understandably swamped as far as getting them edited and published.

Unfortunately, there's a fairly large number of candidates that haven't yet participated in Foo's short answer questions at http://foo-eve.blogspot.com/p/csm-10-candidate-questions.html and the Just for Crits interviews at http://justforcrits.com/csmx-candidates-on-lowsec/

I implore other candidates to participate in these text format questionnaires in order to make more clear what their positions are in a concise format to make informed voting easier.

I fight for the freedom of my people.