These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#241 - 2013-01-22 08:23:44 UTC
Yup, barring unforseen circumstances. Just haven't made a thread yet, probably will just wait until official candidacy opens up.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#242 - 2013-01-22 10:03:12 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Callduron wrote:
high risk high reward high sec gameplay (done - by Incursions).


Just to throw my two cents into the argument, calling incursions "high risk" at this point is... amusing. They may have been high risk when they first came out, but my understanding is that over the years, players have mastered them. I believe that the point of the general ideas Malcanis proposed was that risk pretty much must come from players to have teeth, because no matter how good the AI, players will master and trivialize it in time. Therefore, things like highsec L5 missions whose mission deadspace pockets actually count as lowsec and so on.


Arguable. They can be trivialised by bling but bling brings its own risks as you Goons know rather well. When I was doing them last year (and I don't believe the difficulty has changed much) we lost people often enough to make it interesting. It was also possible to escalate both risk and reward by popping the triggers and tanking multiple waves.

So while not high risk, certainly not risk free.

I also think that this is the kind of issue that sees us in danger of circular logic. Most people in high sec simply can't do excursions at all. They lack the leadership, the ability to do third party research and the contacts in the incursion community to get fleets. So they don't do them. If they did they'd get killed.

So it is high risk to those people but they don't run them at all rather than accept the dangers.

It's something that would be quite interesting to see the metrics on. What is the current score between Sanshas and us? Is it more dangerous to run a high sec incursion or a null sec anomaly? And if none of it is truly dangerous (since players can choose not to enter such sites if they'll probably die) why does one area of space have better reward than any other since all risk is equal except the risk from players.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#243 - 2013-01-22 10:06:57 UTC
Callduron wrote:
Arguable. They can be trivialised by bling

No, you don't need bling to run incursions, except in a "I must wring the most isk/hour out of this as possible" or "you must be this tall to ride this ride" manner.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#244 - 2013-01-22 10:11:12 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Rich vs poor.

As per the article I wrote on the subject, which perhaps you might like to familiarise yourself with after all, there's no reasonable way to adjust the balance between "rich" and "poor" that can't be joyously exploited by the rich, short of CCP confiscating everyone's stuff and evenly redistributing it.


Balance is achieved not, I agree, by parity of wealth but by evening out power. I listened to Elise reminiscing about soloing 200 people with his titan in the old days on a podcast (possibly Declarations of War). And I thought while it's a cool story this is exactly what we need to get away from, a gameplay situation that is fun for one person and sucks for 200 others.

One of the iconic images of Eve history is the Goon rifters tearing down the old and established. That can't be done if one older player is worth dozens of young players. As Eve ages we need to make sure it's possible for the poor to bring down the rich which won't happen if pvp is HACs or gtfo.

That's why I see the Retribution Cruiser tiericide as one of the most important redistributions of wealth in Eve history. It didn't give impoverished new players more money. It gave them more value for the ships they can afford.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#245 - 2013-01-22 10:40:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Callduron wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Rich vs poor.

As per the article I wrote on the subject, which perhaps you might like to familiarise yourself with after all, there's no reasonable way to adjust the balance between "rich" and "poor" that can't be joyously exploited by the rich, short of CCP confiscating everyone's stuff and evenly redistributing it.


Balance is achieved not, I agree, by parity of wealth but by evening out power. I listened to Elise reminiscing about soloing 200 people with his titan in the old days on a podcast (possibly Declarations of War). And I thought while it's a cool story this is exactly what we need to get away from, a gameplay situation that is fun for one person and sucks for 200 others.

One of the iconic images of Eve history is the Goon rifters tearing down the old and established. That can't be done if one older player is worth dozens of young players. As Eve ages we need to make sure it's possible for the poor to bring down the rich which won't happen if pvp is HACs or gtfo.

That's why I see the Retribution Cruiser tiericide as one of the most important redistributions of wealth in Eve history. It didn't give impoverished new players more money. It gave them more value for the ships they can afford.


I unreservedly agree with you on all these points. The only one I'd comment on is the second, and that's to say that possible isn't the same as easy. Yes, Goons started out in Rifters, but it certainly wasn't by Rifters alone that they prevailed, but by working with other groups, by innovating their group processes, and above all by having an exceptionally coherent and vigorous internal culture (Oh look, another article!)

EDIT: And, by, you know, several years of relentless effort. That's the part that people usually refer to when they talk about it being "impossible" for new players to overcome established ones. They mean they don't want to put the same effort into kicking the king of the castle out that the king put into building that castle.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#246 - 2013-01-22 11:09:51 UTC
I've just read and very much enjoyed your articles on lex malcanis and goon culture.

Regarding the effort required to become king of nullsec. Frankly I don't care who is king. What concerns me is that king ruling the whole map. If the test/fa thing blows over and PL drives into the drone regions we could see an all blue null within a year, at least as far as sov and infrastructure is concerned. I would much rather see a patchwork quilt of rival warlords.

I have no inside knowledge on whether the HBC and CFC want this to happen but if they did who could stop them?

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#247 - 2013-01-22 12:14:59 UTC
Callduron wrote:
I've just read and very much enjoyed your articles on lex malcanis and goon culture.

Regarding the effort required to become king of nullsec. Frankly I don't care who is king. What concerns me is that king ruling the whole map. If the test/fa thing blows over and PL drives into the drone regions we could see an all blue null within a year, at least as far as sov and infrastructure is concerned. I would much rather see a patchwork quilt of rival warlords.

I have no inside knowledge on whether the HBC and CFC want this to happen but if they did who could stop them?


If the players who live in sov space want to make sov space an "all blue" then who are you or I to tell them they shouldn't? Isn't the point of a sandbox to build what we want how we want? Others are free to try and stop us, of course - then it comes down to who's better at building sandcastles, and whose sandcastle was better designed and built.

So much for player freedom. The other side of the equation is of course the mechanics that CCP overlay that space with, which inventivise and reward specific sandcastle styles. At the moment the horrible "You've got a week before you need to get serious about dealing with this" Dominion sov system means that it's possible for one large group to dominate the whole of 0.0 -there's no reasonable power projection nerf that will mean than the CFC can't move its fleet within a week. And there's no real downside to concentrating all of a wide-spread bloc's forces into a single point, because the moons keep on gooing even when your fleet is 6 regions away.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Anslo
Scope Works
#248 - 2013-01-22 13:44:26 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Anslo wrote:
"Vote for me! I can fix high-sec!"

Is from a nul-block.

Yeahno. My vote's going to Herr Ronin.


Ronin is in a nullbloc too, but don't let the facts get in the way of your decision.


Yeah, no, he's not. How 'bout them facts?

Vote Herr Ronin for someone who REALLY knows high-sec.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#249 - 2013-01-22 14:01:46 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Anslo wrote:
"Vote for me! I can fix high-sec!"

Is from a nul-block.

Yeahno. My vote's going to Herr Ronin.


Ronin is in a nullbloc too, but don't let the facts get in the way of your decision.


Yeah, no, he's not. How 'bout them facts?

Vote Herr Ronin for someone who REALLY knows high-sec.


Oh he's left now has he?

I think Ronin's going for a very different consituency than the one I'm aiming at, and perhaps his electoral tactics makes better sense than mine. I'm really only aiming for that segment of the voters that is interested in improving the game as a whole, using methods based on evidence and logic, rather than baseless conspiracy theories.

I think that you, on the other hand, would be best represented by Ronin, and I wholeheartedly recommend him to you.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#250 - 2013-01-22 14:07:20 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Vote Herr Ronin for someone who REALLY knows high-sec.

Let's see his manifesto:

Incursions
War Mechanics
Mission Running

Extensive list, indeed, and is certain to bring new prosperity to hisec, and balance hisec with the other security statuses in meaningful ways. I can definitely see why he would be someone's first choice. Roll

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Frying Doom
#251 - 2013-01-22 14:49:28 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Anslo wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Anslo wrote:
"Vote for me! I can fix high-sec!"

Is from a nul-block.

Yeahno. My vote's going to Herr Ronin.


Ronin is in a nullbloc too, but don't let the facts get in the way of your decision.


Yeah, no, he's not. How 'bout them facts?

Vote Herr Ronin for someone who REALLY knows high-sec.


Oh he's left now has he?

I think Ronin's going for a very different consituency than the one I'm aiming at, and perhaps his electoral tactics makes better sense than mine. I'm really only aiming for that segment of the voters that is interested in improving the game as a whole, using methods based on evidence and logic, rather than baseless conspiracy theories.

I think that you, on the other hand, would be best represented by Ronin, and I wholeheartedly recommend him to you.

*cough cough*

Can we leave the senseless attacks against conspiracy theories out of it.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#252 - 2013-01-22 14:54:43 UTC
Sounds like something THEY would say

<.<
>.>
-.-

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Xenuria
#253 - 2013-01-22 15:46:12 UTC
I am actually impressed, you would have my vote if I wasn't already going to vote for myself. In the best of worlds I look forward to working with you.
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
The Network.
#254 - 2013-01-23 08:42:20 UTC
I want to like Malcanis' candidacy. But then I see Frying Doom supports him. I feel like I'm being tricked.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#255 - 2013-01-23 08:56:06 UTC
Support me and let Frying Doom feel tricked.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Frying Doom
#256 - 2013-01-23 09:54:48 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
I want to like Malcanis' candidacy. But then I see Frying Doom supports him. I feel like I'm being tricked.

Ok one of the hardest posts I have ever had to frame in my mind. Why would I support a candidate from Null sec.

Well let us start with some of the standard things most Null candidates say. (Well how it comes across to me anyway)

Q: What do you think should happen to Hi-sec Industry
A: Hi-sec is only a starting area, so Hi-sec should be nerfed and they should have to move to lo-sec or Null sec.

Q: What about small corps that don't want to join a large Null alliance.
A: Oh they need to go to Null so we can have target practice.

Q: Do you think the CSM should be a body for the whole of EvE.
A: No it makes a better lobby group for Null sec.

Q: Where do you think CCP should spend its resources?
A: Null

Q: Ok after Null where should it spend the rest of its resources?
A: Null

And so on.

There are those who still want the CSM to be a Null sec lobby group and a title for their alliance but little more than that. But CCP will never take a Null sec lobby group seriously. Now the balance of CSM 7 has helped but other factors have hindered it.

Malcanis, well he does not fit the profile of someone who is all for Null, his approach seems to cover the who game. This approach has now become more valuable with CCPs theme approach as I like the idea of having a CSM member who actually seems to understand the game and how it interlocks.

In a recent thread I learned Malcanis's views on a lot of EvE and his views for the future are similar to mine. Not the same but similar.

My future view of EvE is actually very simple it is Risk vs Reward and works kind of like this
Lowest risk to highest risk.

  1. NPC corp member
  2. Hi-sec player corp member
  3. Lo-sec player corp member
  4. NPC Null sec player corp member
  5. SOV Null sec corp member
  6. Wormhole player corp member


Now I can hear people say but an Null NPC corp member is risking more than a hi-sec NPC corp member. Well they are not really, they are risking what they are flying and nothing else.

NPC facilities should be the lower bracket in any space, Players in corporations risk POSs, Outposts and infrastructure such as logistics that NPC corps just don't have.

With this Dangerous space needs to grow, for example I am in favour of a usage based Sov system so it removes the structure grind but actually means to keep the area you just forced someone out of you must use it yourself to get Sov or just keep it empty to make it go back to unclaimed space. But the whole thing comes back to risk vs reward, Null players should be rewarded more han hi-sec ones but at the same time players spending hundreds of millions of isk on a POS in hi-sec should be rewarded more than someone just using NPC facilities.

So as I said risk vs reward and Malcanis seems to know risk vs reward better over the whole game than any candidate I have ever seen before so I am voting for him. It really is that simple.

Yes rambling a bit in this one sorry.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
Muffins of Mayhem
#257 - 2013-01-23 09:58:37 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


Yes indeed I do. Basically, as a point of game philosophy, sov alliances should explicitly derive their strength from their members, not from any one specific structure or resource. That means that things like Tech moons" should be in the "nice to have, but not essential" category, not the "if you don't have them then you're a second class alliance at best" category. This has some pretty far reaching implications, but as an absolutely vital and very urgent first step, I want CCP to make it viable for the 0.0 players to start repatriating most of those hi-sec alts back to their own space.

When it's worth while for 0.0 players to do their mining, ship building, invention, R&D etc etc etc in their own space, then the population of sov 0.0 will rise dramatically (my best guess is that it would at least double, probably more). And all those guys in belts and anoms, hauling ore and datacores, attending to research POS and so on an so forth, those guys right there should be the foundation of a sov alliance's wealth and power, and by their presence and by their importance, right there you have your "small gang" objectives. And that in turn will give "small gang" obectives for the defenders too.



What you have stated above is spot on, and has almost certainly earned you my vote. However I would like to hear you opinions on cloaky AFK camping. Do you think this is balanced? The vision you describe above is NEVER going to happen while AFK cloaky campers are impossible to counter.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#258 - 2013-01-23 10:05:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
AFK cloaky campers aren't "impossible" to counter. They take some effort and some changes in your ship fitting to counter. Organising into a defence gang is also a very good idea. They're "impossible" to counter if you try and run 0.0 anoms like hi-sec missions.

That said...

I would support one nerf to cloakers: a cloaked ship should not be able to actively scan. If you want to use the DSCAN, system scan or probes, you should have to be uncloaked. That would mean a cloaker would have to briefly decloak to locate targets off his grid. That would give you your opportunity to know whether he was active or not.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
The Network.
#259 - 2013-01-23 10:22:20 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
I want to like Malcanis' candidacy. But then I see Frying Doom supports him. I feel like I'm being tricked.

Ok one of the hardest posts I have ever had to frame in my mind. Why would I support a candidate from Null sec.

Well let us start with some of the standard things most Null candidates say. (Well how it comes across to me anyway)

Q: What do you think should happen to Hi-sec Industry
A: Hi-sec is only a starting area, so Hi-sec should be nerfed and they should have to move to lo-sec or Null sec.

Q: What about small corps that don't want to join a large Null alliance.
A: Oh they need to go to Null so we can have target practice.

Q: Do you think the CSM should be a body for the whole of EvE.
A: No it makes a better lobby group for Null sec.

Q: Where do you think CCP should spend its resources?
A: Null

Q: Ok after Null where should it spend the rest of its resources?
A: Null

And so on.

There are those who still want the CSM to be a Null sec lobby group and a title for their alliance but little more than that. But CCP will never take a Null sec lobby group seriously. Now the balance of CSM 7 has helped but other factors have hindered it.

Malcanis, well he does not fit the profile of someone who is all for Null, his approach seems to cover the who game. This approach has now become more valuable with CCPs theme approach as I like the idea of having a CSM member who actually seems to understand the game and how it interlocks.

In a recent thread I learned Malcanis's views on a lot of EvE and his views for the future are similar to mine. Not the same but similar.

My future view of EvE is actually very simple it is Risk vs Reward and works kind of like this
Lowest risk to highest risk.

  1. NPC corp member
  2. Hi-sec player corp member
  3. Lo-sec player corp member
  4. NPC Null sec player corp member
  5. SOV Null sec corp member
  6. Wormhole player corp member


Now I can hear people say but an Null NPC corp member is risking more than a hi-sec NPC corp member. Well they are not really, they are risking what they are flying and nothing else.

NPC facilities should be the lower bracket in any space, Players in corporations risk POSs, Outposts and infrastructure such as logistics that NPC corps just don't have.

With this Dangerous space needs to grow, for example I am in favour of a usage based Sov system so it removes the structure grind but actually means to keep the area you just forced someone out of you must use it yourself to get Sov or just keep it empty to make it go back to unclaimed space. But the whole thing comes back to risk vs reward, Null players should be rewarded more han hi-sec ones but at the same time players spending hundreds of millions of isk on a POS in hi-sec should be rewarded more than someone just using NPC facilities.

So as I said risk vs reward and Malcanis seems to know risk vs reward better over the whole game than any candidate I have ever seen before so I am voting for him. It really is that simple.

Yes rambling a bit in this one sorry.


I guess my question is what in particular about Malcanis places him outside of your empty-chair-0.0-CSM-Rep (regardless of how it comes across to you, no one actually says any of those things except maybe number 1 and even then none of the "they should have to move" stuff) .

Your future EVE is one I share too (maybe move WH above sov), and I think most of the rest of the CSM, certainly the null sec guys like Elise and Seleene, would agree with like 90% of that stuff.

But those facts don't ever seem to connect with you. So why Mal?

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#260 - 2013-01-23 10:29:03 UTC
Well to name only the most obvious example, the "answer" to the very first question in his list is the direct opposite of my view. Rather than hi-sec being nerfed to reflect it being a starter area, I think the way we look at hi-sec needs to be completely revolutionised, because it's clearly and obviously not just a starter area and hasn't been for the majority of EVE's existence.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016