These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
5 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

CSM 8 - Roc the Vote

First post First post
Author
A Band Apart.
#1 - 2013-01-29 19:41:28 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Dolan
TL;DR

Why Roc? Discipline, consistency, passion, dedication, community, no alliance agenda. My voice is your voice.

CSM 8 - THE VOICES IN MY HEAD

PLAYER

I've been a part of New Eden for nearly seven years now. It's hard to believe when I say that out loud to myself. Like many veterans, I've watched our universe reinvent itself time and again, sometimes for the worse, but overall for the betterment and continued longevity of our beloved game. I am passionate about our universe in all aspects, even those that may not appeal to the vast majority. I believe that every facet of EVE Online is what makes it wonderful, not just the current topic of the moment.

While there are glaring issues and hot topics like nullsec POSes, lowsec engagement, future direction of ship rebalancing, graphics upgrades, etc, etc, there are also continuing issues such as Incarna, API, UI, exploits, botting, and more.

I do not have an agenda for any one item, or even a group of items. The views of every player are valid to me. Every voice deserves to be heard at the table. You may ask me what my platform is and my response will be "What's important to you?"

As a member of the CSM, I would be your representative. To push my own ideas would be flawed, though I will always welcome discussion on how to improve all of our ideas.

I do my best to keep abreast of everything that can potentially affect my enjoyment of our game, lurking in forums, engaging in community blogs, digesting what third parties say about CCP's efforts, but I am just one man - one man with one voice.

PROBLEM SOLVER

In game I have only experienced some of what our game has to offer directly, and probably some things that others haven't experienced. My time in New Eden has been unique to me as yours has been unique to you. I have been in large alliances. I have been part of the factional war. I continue to fund myself through market trading, scams, and killing pirates, which I suppose is a form of piracy on its own. I have been industrious. I have hung around my Captain's Quarters. I have developed third party applications use the API.

In a gesture of transparency, I have never mined. I have never been a Director in an Alliance, though I have been a Director within a corporation. Does this negate my value in those two arenas? Hardly, because you have been part of those mechanics, and through you I am made better.

All of these have been learning experiences, and I am always growing. There are many complex underlying systems involved in EVE Online, and I've been fortunate to have a peek at some, to speak intimately with those that have built them and continue to work on them, to have an appreciation for what CCP does and how we can identify how it can be done even better.

Out of game I have spent the better part of my life focusing my career on being that trusted individual people turn to when they need the right answer, when they need a well thought out plan of execution that not only meets the need, but exceeds it. I am a lateral thinker, naturally able to see multiple paths and quickly select the appropriate direction. I am a developer. I am a QA specialist. I am an Information Architect. I am a digital Project Manager. I am a Technical Director.

My job has always been to deliver the best. I've never done it alone. I am just one man - one man with a voice.

MY VOICE

I have mentioned that I am one man with a voice. I am. It's a strong voice, a consistent voice, a voice that I have always used to advocate our community both in and out of game. My humble blog has retained a consistent following over the years as I've explored various aspects of Roc's immortal life, and through Roc, my own life.

I am the voice of reason amidst the storms. I am the storm amidst the tides of complacency. I am a solid Roc upon which you can rely. I do not waver from any commitment. I do not falter from any challenge. I can be depended upon to give my all to any task set before me.

I believe in people. I believe we are all of value. I believe that when voices unite, change is inevitable. I believe in you. I believe in me. I believe that together our voices are made stronger. I believe we can make a difference in our universe.

I hope you believe the same. Roc the Vote.

rocwieler.com/csm8 for more comments.

Never start a fight you can win.

#2 - 2013-01-29 20:21:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kainotomiu Ronuken
Hi there,

I used to read your blog, and I think you're a pretty decent guy. However, I'm a bit worried that you're running for the CSM without a platform of any kind - is it enough to say "I will represent ALL of you" when it is a well-known fact that no two players in EVE Online have the same views?

With that in mind, here are some questions;



Which blog post do you most agree with? This one or this one? Why?



What are your views on the 100-page thread of people asking for revamped POSes? What do you think of CCP Seagull's response here? What would you do in Two Step's position?



What are your opinions on the recent tension between the HBC and the CFC that ultimately cooled down due solely (apparently) to the fact that the awful sov mechanics disincentivise sov warfare? How do you think that more war in nullsec could be encouraged? What do you think of the battle in Asakai - good result of the HBC/CFC conflict, or a lucky (unlucky for DBRB) one-off?
A Band Apart.
#3 - 2013-01-29 20:58:20 UTC
First of all, thanks for commenting. I think one of the issues I've run into years past when running for CSM is the concept of "no platform".

I actually have a platform. I have ideas. I have opinions. On all aspects of the game.

What I don't have is the illusion that is so often made to other players by CSM candidates saying "If I get elected I promise that nullsec will be fixed!"

The truth is that the CSM does not drive CCP's development direction. That was never the nature of the beast. The CSM is a sounding board, and when used correctly can indeed help mitigate bad decisions but has never been in a position of authority and honestly shouldn't be.

I need to communicate that better. I admit.

As to your direct questions:

GANKING IS PVP

I have carebear moments where I really don't want to be shot at. The easy answer there is to not undock. I can't get shot if I don't undock. Might be time to get some market orders up to date anyway.

The truth is, as has been put forward by others, that open PVP is instrumental to learning how to prosper in EVE Online. When I think back to my own career, and the stories that have been shared amongst real life friends, 99% of my deaths were caused by own stupidity. Period. I should've known better to do what I did that resulted in my death.

The idea of making EVE "safe" to appeal to a broader player base is not something I agree with when it comes to PVP. Do I agree with docking games? No. Do I agree with other abuses of the system that would be the equivalent of "lvl 80 on a lvl 1"? No. Undocking, as an example, is a fundamental game mechanic that everyone needs to do. Dying as soon as I do shouldn't be seen as right.

I can also make a counter-argument. If I'm in lowsec of nullsec and undock then I have every right to be shot at. It was my own dumb fault for docking up where I did. It's part of the harsh beauty that is New Eden.

I respect Jester. We've agreed and disagreed in the past on things. This could be one of them.

Last year I wrote about my own ideas for 'themeparking' EVE with a method that would produce everychanging content taking the pressure off of devs. You can read about that HERE if you want.

---
POSes. Need of help. Yes. I know CCP Seagull and I can believe that what was in the CSM Minutes didn't reflect the truer story. I also believe that any longterm solution for such a critical component of the game should be taken slowly with lots of discussion with the players and CSM to ensure a system that we're all happy with going forward. Do I know what that system is? No. As you mentioned, there is a 100 threadnaught with many ideas and trolling already that give a wealth of insight into the issue.

---

Next point. SOV Mechanics. Broken. Yes. Obvious. Yes.

---

What you've done here, perhaps on purpose, is reinforce my platform of "The voice of the people." SOV mechanics and POSes might not be important to a lot of people. I still care enough to be informed and have an opinion. Highsec carebears may not matter to the other end of that spectrum. I still care care enough to be informed and have an opinion.

Again, I must reiterate, any CSM candidate that stands on singular platforms doesn't deserve the position. The CSM represents ALL PLAYERS not just the ones that agree with their ideas.

Never start a fight you can win.

#4 - 2013-01-29 21:01:31 UTC
Thanks for your responses.
A Band Apart.
#5 - 2013-01-29 21:06:48 UTC
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:
Thanks for your responses.


No problem at all. Thanks for the questions.

Never start a fight you can win.

CODE.
#6 - 2013-01-29 21:16:09 UTC
Roc Wieler wrote:
Again, I must reiterate, any CSM candidate that stands on singular platforms doesn't deserve the position. The CSM represents ALL PLAYERS not just the ones that agree with their ideas.


What is you plan to represent the part of the playerbase who demand the removal of all aggression in highsec?
Tom JBrokaw
#7 - 2013-01-29 21:17:40 UTC
a cursory examination of your blog shows you spend most of your time talking about yourself. do you expect people to believe you are up to putting in the work to better the game, or is this really just a vanity run. or a shameless attempt to cash in on your percieved fame?

Singular Snowflake wrote:
Roc Wieler wrote:
Again, I must reiterate, any CSM candidate that stands on singular platforms doesn't deserve the position. The CSM represents ALL PLAYERS not just the ones that agree with their ideas.


What is you plan to represent the part of the playerbase who demand the removal of all aggression in highsec?


id also like to echo this question. the tone of your responses say that you have an attitude of "htfu" to some portion of players, that their positions are not in fact worth considering. in light of that, how can anyone really take your claim that you represent "all players" at face value?
A Band Apart.
#8 - 2013-01-29 22:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Roc Wieler
My blog is about me, yes. Roc's Ramblings. It's my personal experiences in EVE Online. There is occasionally some non-roc-related EVE fiction as well as out of character posts.

That has no bearing on my involvement or love for this community. In fact, if you've read or followed my blog you would know I've ran many contests over the years as well as other community oriented initiatives. Right now, for example, is the Fandom contest, where the winner will be the featured vocalist on a self-produced album with all proceeds from all my album sales going to Child's Play charity.

I also don't have a HTFU attitude at all. I have my own opinion. Being able to state one's opinion with strength of conviction and the hopes of intelligent and productive debate shouldn't be a demerit.

Anyway, that doesn't answer the questions asked.

Here's my approach to all things in life:
- what is position 1?
- what is position 2?
- can the two co-exist? If so, how?
- if not, what is the best course of action for my demographic

That last point is often the scariest in any project regardless of medium as you are undoubtedly going to make some people unhappy.

In the case of a "safe" high sec, here is but one idea:
- flag modules as aggressive

In a nutshell it essentially means you can't have any "aggressive" or "combat" oriented modules fit when you undock. If you do, you can be attacked, as per normal gameplay. If you don't have any of the aggressive or combat modules fit in high sec, then you have safe passage through highsec systems.

This caters to the carebears but also allows for mistakes to be made, and thusly, maintains EVE's harsh learning curve.

Another idea could be "diplomatic immunity" where a pilot can literally purchase a pass they store in their cargo hold. The more systems in high sec they want to pass through, the higher the cost of the pass. Of course, the second the pilot leaves highsec, the pass is revoked.

This creates an ISK sink as well as the chance for mistakes to be made, and thusly, maintains EVE's harsh learning curve.

What I've done here is called brainstorming. Already I can see problems with my own ideas. As a member of the CSM it would be my job to honestly critique ideas, tear them apart, poke holes in them until the best solution for a particular issue is identified.

It's all part of the process.

Of course, this is where CCP says "we're going to make it shiny" and as players we are reminded that the CSM doesn't direct development of the game and can be ignored at a moment's notice.

Stay calm and vote Roc.

Never start a fight you can win.

#9 - 2013-01-30 12:32:03 UTC
Do you feel that you can work with people like CCP Punkturis and CCP Dolan after writing blog posts like this one? Will you be writing creepy posts about other CCP staff as well?

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

Amarr Empire
#10 - 2013-01-30 12:45:59 UTC
Roc. dude.

Your relentless self-promotion should be a means to an end - not an election platform.
#11 - 2013-01-30 12:46:07 UTC  |  Edited by: rodyas
Quote:
Do you feel that you can work with people like CCP Punkturis and CCP Dolan after writing blog posts like this one? Will you be writing creepy posts about other CCP staff as well?



^ Isn't that what the massing drinking is for? At least now, I think I would drink as much as you guys do now.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

#12 - 2013-01-30 12:54:44 UTC
rodyas wrote:
Quote:
Do you feel that you can work with people like CCP Punkturis and CCP Dolan after writing blog posts like this one? Will you be writing creepy posts about other CCP staff as well?



^ Isn't that what the massing drinking is for? At least now, I think I would drink as much as you guys do now.


The devs go out drinking with the CSM because they aren't afraid we will roofie them and drag them back to our hotel room.

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

The Initiative.
#13 - 2013-01-30 13:04:24 UTC
Roc Wieler wrote:

Here's my approach to all things in life:
- what is position 1?
- what is position 2?
- can the two co-exist? If so, how?
- if not, what is the best course of action for my demographic

That last point is often the scariest in any project regardless of medium as you are undoubtedly going to make some people unhappy.

In the case of a "safe" high sec, here is but one idea:
- flag modules as aggressive

In a nutshell it essentially means you can't have any "aggressive" or "combat" oriented modules fit when you undock. If you do, you can be attacked, as per normal gameplay. If you don't have any of the aggressive or combat modules fit in high sec, then you have safe passage through highsec systems.

This caters to the carebears but also allows for mistakes to be made, and thusly, maintains EVE's harsh learning curve...


So open-season on mission runners? Or on miners with combat drones in their drone bay?

Interestingly, I made almost exactly this suggestion a few years ago, as a reducto ad absurdum proposal during one of the many, many suicide ganking threads as an illustration of what some of the more extreme "anti ganker" proposals would lead to.

Sadly, no one was enthusiastic. Apparently CCP should be able to code the game to know who's undocking with weapons with criminal intent and who merely intends to murder NPCs.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

#14 - 2013-01-30 13:06:32 UTC
Ah that is a good point, forgot about the trust issue with drinking. I shall have to visit a frat or so more often, before I go to fanfest, so I get the ethics down.

"In my room I got naked, and wanting to respect the traditions surrounding me, headed downstairs."
- roc (blog)

How is he not Punkturis or Bolton anyhow. I think the main complaint right now, is if another Bolton is needed in Iceland or not.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

#15 - 2013-01-30 13:09:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Roc Wieler wrote:

Here's my approach to all things in life:
- what is position 1?
- what is position 2?
- can the two co-exist? If so, how?
- if not, what is the best course of action for my demographic

That last point is often the scariest in any project regardless of medium as you are undoubtedly going to make some people unhappy.

In the case of a "safe" high sec, here is but one idea:
- flag modules as aggressive

In a nutshell it essentially means you can't have any "aggressive" or "combat" oriented modules fit when you undock. If you do, you can be attacked, as per normal gameplay. If you don't have any of the aggressive or combat modules fit in high sec, then you have safe passage through highsec systems.

This caters to the carebears but also allows for mistakes to be made, and thusly, maintains EVE's harsh learning curve...


So open-season on mission runners? Or on miners with combat drones in their drone bay?

Interestingly, I made almost exactly this suggestion a few years ago, as a reducto ad absurdum proposal during one of the many, many suicide ganking threads as an illustration of what some of the more extreme "anti ganker" proposals would lead to.

Sadly, no one was enthusiastic. Apparently CCP should be able to code the game to know who's undocking with weapons with criminal intent and who merely intends to murder NPCs.


Well if they undock with active tanks be easy to tell if they are murdering NPCs. Could code it so you are like 80% or more if lucky accurate based on that. The bad calls could be excused to RNG, and if it happens repeatedly, just tell them RNG doesn't like them, and everything happening to them is normal and acceptable.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

The Initiative.
#16 - 2013-01-30 13:28:10 UTC
So death to regen tanked drakes, buffer-tanked Macks and speed tanking AFs?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

#17 - 2013-01-30 13:31:10 UTC
^ Yes to buffer-tanked Macks.

The other deaths would be blamed on RNG.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

#18 - 2013-01-30 14:04:04 UTC
Wait. Are you advocating an RNG-based system to determine whether or not players are allowed to be attacked in highsec or not?

...
The Initiative.
#19 - 2013-01-30 15:05:07 UTC
It's exciting and innovative ideas like that that will bring a new level of excitement to hi-sec.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Mercenary Coalition
#20 - 2013-01-30 15:11:53 UTC
Two step wrote:
rodyas wrote:
Quote:
Do you feel that you can work with people like CCP Punkturis and CCP Dolan after writing blog posts like this one? Will you be writing creepy posts about other CCP staff as well?



^ Isn't that what the massing drinking is for? At least now, I think I would drink as much as you guys do now.


The devs go out drinking with the CSM because they aren't afraid we will roofie them and drag them back to our hotel room.


Goddamn. LolLol

Roc is a cool guy. He's never taken advantage of me, even when he could have...

2004-2008: Mercenary Coalition Boss

2007-2010: CCP Game Designer | 2011-2013: CSM6 Delegate & CSM7 Chairman

2011-2015: Pandemic Legionnaire

2015- : Mercenary Coalition Boss

Follow Seleene on Twitter!

5 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump