These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Cipreh for CSM8! Make our voices heard! [QUALIFIED]

First post First post
Author
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
#41 - 2013-01-21 17:09:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Mister Tuggles wrote:
Who is the current CSM member for WH's?


Two step. I don't know if he is running again though.
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
#42 - 2013-01-21 17:10:10 UTC
Malception
Tenebrous Effect
#43 - 2013-01-21 17:18:53 UTC
He isn't running again. Or so he said on the podcast Down the Pipe.
Cipreh
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2013-01-21 20:40:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Cipreh
Two step wrote:
A couple of questions:

1) If CCP doesn't change the voting system, would you participate in a primary?
2) Why did you post this in the wrong forum?



I have already stated publicly that I am 100% behind the idea of a w-space primary, and would happily be a part of it. I want to see the candidate who is willing to do his or her best for the majority of our community get elected, and if it's not me, then I will gladly back someone else.

I posted in this forum, because for all the talk of a primary that has happened over the last few months, nothing concrete has come of it. No dates have been set, and no information has been made available to the potential candidates or the community regarding its organization or timing. We are getting down to the wire here with just over two months to go, and something needs to happen.

In order for people to make an informed decision when the primary does happen, they need to know where the various candidates stand on issues the community feels are important. After the primary, whoever the community decides they want on the CSM can make a post in the appropriate forum and get the prerequisite votes or likes.

Blog: http://lostwithoutlocal.blogspot.com Twitter: @Cipreh I am also available on Skype, details available upon request. Feel free to contact me via any of the above methods,or in-game.

Bane Nucleus
Assault and Battery
Transmission Lost
#45 - 2013-01-21 20:53:07 UTC
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:


Second, your first stated position about foritifications is clearly directed at one group in partitculiar who will remain nameless. Your current plan is to instead of conquering said group by playing the game they wish you to play, You want the rules changed so you can in theory come in with your group and maybe one other organizations host and wipe the slate clean in their fortress. If you are willing to call them complacent and weak then why don't you go take them out as it stands right now? Oh thats right, your scared shitless of their reputation for obliterating those that get to the top of the mountain to try to kick them off.



LOL! You talk about someone elses blither, then you post this garbage. Get the **** out of here.



No trolling please

Jack Miton
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#46 - 2013-01-21 21:20:37 UTC
Bane Nucleus wrote:
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
ramblings

LOL! You talk about someone elses blither, then you post this garbage. Get the **** out of here.

*hugs* ;)

On a related note though, just to clarify, Cipreh, are you planning to push for making it easier to evict any WH or just the high end ones?
I ask because personally I consider it much easier to evict someone in a heavily fortified C5/6, sure, AHARM for example, than someone in a heavily fortified C2, such as several TLOST corps for example.

Also, why do you feel this is actually needed at all?
I mean, people are always complaining that WHs are too empty so how would making evictions easier help bring more people into WHs to populate them?

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#47 - 2013-01-21 21:25:44 UTC
First off, lol @ Casirio.

Second, Cipreh has a point regarding a lack of information on the primaries. That's how I'd prefer to vote, but I haven't seen any solid information on it yet. Is it still just an idea or is someone actually making it happen?
Cipreh
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2013-01-21 21:34:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Cipreh
Jack Miton wrote:
Bane Nucleus wrote:
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
ramblings

LOL! You talk about someone elses blither, then you post this garbage. Get the **** out of here.

*hugs* ;)

On a related note though, just to clarify, Cipreh, are you planning to push for making it easier to evict any WH or just the high end ones?
I ask because personally I consider it much easier to evict someone in a heavily fortified C5/6, sure, AHARM for example, than someone in a heavily fortified C2, such as several TLOST corps for example.

Also, why do you feel this is actually needed at all?
I mean, people are always complaining that WHs are too empty so how would making evictions easier help bring more people into WHs to populate them?


At no point did I say I wanted to make it easier to evict anyone, just that the current dynamics breed complacency, and I feel there should be more of a risk to the various styles of game play, whether it's exploration, PvE, or industry that are common in w-space, to bring it in-line with the rewards.

Now I am not saying make the sites harder, but I feel the difficulty and risk in these activities should come from other players, more then by anything CCP adds to the game. The changes I have talked about in my previous posts have all touched on ways to improve on bringing people into contact with each other more often, to drive conflict.

Blog: http://lostwithoutlocal.blogspot.com Twitter: @Cipreh I am also available on Skype, details available upon request. Feel free to contact me via any of the above methods,or in-game.

Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#49 - 2013-01-21 22:01:23 UTC
You are being pretty darn vague about what complaceny on high end WH corp means. Do you have any clarifications? Seems like the reasonable conclusion from my end.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#50 - 2013-01-21 22:08:17 UTC
Klarion Sythis wrote:
First off, lol @ Casirio.

Second, Cipreh has a point regarding a lack of information on the primaries. That's how I'd prefer to vote, but I haven't seen any solid information on it yet. Is it still just an idea or is someone actually making it happen?


I am working on it, but if you read the minutes, CCP *may* be changing the voting system which would make a primary unneeded. I am trying to get confirmation from them, which should be this week (hopefully) that the changes will happen. If not, I am planning on running a primary.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Zarak1 Kenpach1
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2013-01-21 23:03:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Zarak1 Kenpach1
Bane, you are just mad I pointed out some pretty hard facts regarding your (terrible) alliances (terrible) candidate.

Jack, would you like me to post the Ballad of Jack Miton for everyone to read. Just continue to be a full on forum warrior please. I'll break you off a little preview. Jack Miton griefed his former corp for 6 months out of spiteful feelings.

I just posted a blog and moved on. But, damn son! You have some commitment/serious issues for what you did to Bite Me Inc.
Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2013-01-22 00:11:41 UTC
To be fair Zarak, you do come off as a maniac when you post.
Jack Miton
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#53 - 2013-01-22 00:32:56 UTC
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
I just posted a blog and moved on. But, damn son! You have some commitment/serious issues for what you did to Bite Me Inc.

oh this is you moving on. my mistake then.

what exactly did i do to bite me inc?
i still like them, i still talk to a lot of them regularly, id be happy to fly with them at any time should the situation warrant it. i also don't troll their blogs, forum posts, channels... really not sure what youre getting at...

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Matuk Grymwal
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#54 - 2013-01-22 01:08:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Matuk Grymwal
Jack Miton wrote:
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
I just posted a blog and moved on. But, damn son! You have some commitment/serious issues for what you did to Bite Me Inc.

oh this is you moving on. my mistake then.

what exactly did i do to bite me inc?
i still like them, i still talk to a lot of them regularly, id be happy to fly with them at any time should the situation warrant it. i also don't troll their blogs, forum posts, channels... really not sure what youre getting at...

Eh, well I suppose Jack did troll any sub optimal t3/capital fit that got linked in corp. But he does that everywhere to everyone in fairly equal measure, including these forums. The only major grief Jack caused me was leaving to join AHARM and crimping my home ops in the AU TZ Big smile.
Bane Nucleus
Assault and Battery
Transmission Lost
#55 - 2013-01-22 01:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Bane Nucleus
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
Bane, you are just mad I pointed out some pretty hard facts regarding your (terrible) alliances (terrible) candidate.


Whatever makes you feel better.

No trolling please

Bamsey Amraa
Strategic Crusier Club
#56 - 2013-01-22 06:20:17 UTC
-1 vote
Sushi Nardieu
The Generic Pirate Corporation
#57 - 2013-01-22 06:54:20 UTC
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:


Jack, would you like me to post the Ballad of Jack Miton for everyone to read. Just continue to be a full on forum warrior please. I'll break you off a little preview. Jack Miton griefed his former corp for 6 months out of spiteful feelings.

I just posted a blog and moved on. But, damn son! You have some commitment/serious issues for what you did to Bite Me Inc.


Jack's cool

The Guns of Knowledge 

chris elliot
The Red Island Foundation
Pandemic Legion
#58 - 2013-01-22 07:01:04 UTC
I would have to argue against the removal of some of the empty c5's idea personally. There are fairly decent groups of people who are not able to roll around in 30+ man t3 gangs with dread and carrier support at a whim, nor to call on large alliance structures to help disperse one. Lowering the total number of holes would only increase the dominance of groups that can and accelerate stagnation in a newly shrunken pool. Increasing the frequency that you will roll into the same people over and over again, has boring written all over it.

You won't really do much to drive conflict because these groups could not compete to begin with so they will just spend more time pos'ed up, all you have done is lower the number of options for people.

Most people complain about never getting fights when they are part of organizations that have a reputation for blobing the crap out of any sort of fight with a wall of superior firepower. Once scouts see your ticker, they simply decide they would rater play LoL or watch a movie than bash their heads against a gang they already know will likely outnumber and outclass them by virtue of their killboard alone, and they pos up. So what you have done is instead of increasing conflict, you have increased the potential for blue balls and aggravation.

I heard the idea tossed around a while back that sleepers could be allowed to attack pos's. Maybe this could be examined to help rid w-space of undefended farming holes. Have the damage/penalties scale with time or something so that a system can not receive a head shot overnight but that its residents can not simply ignore the sleepers and continue to farm sites and leave the existing throwaway tower to die in the interim. The existing incursion mechanics could be used to deny loot of any kind during one of these assaults. Possibly utilize the penalties from an incursion site as well so that a 2-3 man farming operation will not be able to defend(or leave) a system that has been sieged overnight, but that a relatively small organization, with the appropriate amount of work, could do it.

^ Note that the above may be a terrible idea when analyzed by the troling hive mind of these forums but you get what I am going after here.
Sushi Nardieu
The Generic Pirate Corporation
#59 - 2013-01-22 07:48:34 UTC
chris elliot wrote:


I heard the idea tossed around a while back that sleepers could be allowed to attack pos's. Maybe this could be examined to help rid w-space of undefended farming holes. Have the damage/penalties scale with time or something so that a system can not receive a head shot overnight but that its residents can not simply ignore the sleepers and continue to farm sites and leave the existing throwaway tower to die in the interim. The existing incursion mechanics could be used to deny loot of any kind during one of these assaults. Possibly utilize the penalties from an incursion site as well so that a 2-3 man farming operation will not be able to defend(or leave) a system that has been sieged overnight, but that a relatively small organization, with the appropriate amount of work, could do it.

^ Note that the above may be a terrible idea when analyzed by the troling hive mind of these forums but you get what I am going after here.


As much as I enjoy the ultimate goal, I cannot support PvE in this game.

Why?

ALL PvE eventually goes to farm. It won't take long for anybody to work out everything there is to know about PvE AI. Therefore, it'll be cool for a few weeks/months and then months of code writing becomes boring.

PvP mechanics is what this thread is about.

The Guns of Knowledge 

Simon Severasse
Los Marginales
#60 - 2013-01-22 08:02:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Simon Severasse
Sushi Nardieu wrote:


PvP mechanics is what this thread is about.


I respectfully disagree with you man, this thread is about a WH CSM representative, and we need a common voice in there.