CSM Campaigns

If you'd like to ask me a question or just chat, don't be a stranger! I'll be keeping an eye on this thread, or alternatively you can come and join us in the "Spectre Fleet" channel - meet people, hang out, join fleets, and have fun!

UPDATE #1

Seraph IX Barasab posted this article on the 26th of February, regarding an alleged EULA and TOS violation. In the pursuit of neutrality, I recommend you read it and all accompanying logs, however I will not be fielding questions on the subject. To provide context for this article, Seraph was previously my CEO in the corporation "Hades Effect" before a successful coup d'etat and removal of all remaining and inactive members. His article on EN24 is a continuation in his many attempts at slander, after his defamation efforts failed in this very thread when ISD purged his numerous posts here and again here. Furthermore, before the article on EN24 was published, he tried one last time at drumming up controversy in the General Discussion section of the forums here. Seraph is on a personal vendetta and is using EN24 as his last available mouthpiece to perpetuate this "scandal". If this is how you arrived at my thread, I hope as a result you stay a while and read some of what has already been posted. My goal to be elected to the CSM is legitimate, and if you have any questions relevant to the CSM or the future of Eve itself, I will more than happily answer them.

UPDATE #2

CCP Eterne posted a community spotlight on Spectre Fleet, showcasing our history, the community, and explaining what we do and who we are. It's a great read if you're not familiar with the NPSI community and would like to know more. The official Spectre Fleet forum thread can be found here, but I highly recommend joining the channel and saying hello!

Vote for Jayne.

If ever there were a military scientist in this game, this man would be your archetype.

Devoted and a technical expert, Jayne has the brains to be on the CSM if not also the charisma to rally people behind him.

If Jayne becomes CSM his corpses will suddenly go up in price, right?



Jayne for CSM!

Vote Jayne !!!!

Yaaaaaay! Jayne for CSM!

You have my axe and/or black ops.

For those who haven't been following the changes, the dev blog regarding alliance logos can be found here.

An alliance logo remaining the intellectual property of CCP is a necessary requirement and is a consequence of eve being single-threaded. When an alliance is created, it becomes a part of Eve's history regardless of how small a role they play. This isn't something that you can take away, and if CCP is going to pursue projects such as the TV series, IP must be preserved.

It is up to CCP's benevolence for players to use Alliance logos on commercialized good. I hope it stays this way.

The dev blog regarding the ToS changes regarding impersonation can be found here.

I have very little opinion on this as a rule change itself, beyond that a person in Eve should be more creative than naming themselves "Chriba" instead of "Chribba". The great scams and thefts in Eve come from the long cons and cunning infiltrations - I hope they stay that way. If there was any issue regarding this at all, it would be asymmetric enforcement of these rules by the GM team.

Oh so many to choose from, I've been very pleased with the vast majority of balance changes being made.

Although not particularly recent, the overall update to T1 cruisers, beams, artillery, and especially rails did wonders to make fleet combat much more effective and accessible for lower skilled pilots. Demonstrated to be effective by groups like European Goonion and most recently BNI with their Thorax fleet (which I designed), T1 cruiser usage has spread to most groups, proving that you can make a cheap doctrine effective in medium size fleet warfare in lowsec and nullsec.

The full list of changes can be found here, here, here, and here.

The following quote from CCP Fozzie is a perfect example of what this update accomplished and why it was good for the game as a whole:

"... we've done our job right then when a newer player shows up to your Armour HAC fleet saying "I've got an Augoror how can I help?" the FC will respond with "xxxxx is our logistics channel, the guys in there will get you set up with the cap chain and anchor", rather than "LOLN00B come back with a real ship"."

Of course, the warp speed changes and interceptor balancing was a big hit with everyone, and for good reason. However, I think that the cruiser changes are the unsung heroes of Rubicon, and until people realize that a hoarde of interceptors (murderfleet) is not an unkillable doctrine, I'll be content rocking around with new players in cruisers.



This was a tough one.

I had to go with the Electronic Attack Ships.

My reasoning is simple - I still don't see them being utilized in fleet combat at any scale, small gang, medium gang, or large fleet fights. If I do, they are instantly going to be primaried due to the combination of fragility and force multiplication. The high training time into a deadend skill and the comparable utility and power of the T1 disruption frigates (at 2% of the cost) does nothing to justify their use.

For example, the Vigil has a a slightly lower bonus to target painters than the Hyena, at 7.5% and 10% respectively. However, the Hyena has one less midslot than the Vigil, yet bonused to webs in addition to target painters. How is this ship intended to fulfill a more meaningful role than the T1 version? It's hard to justify.

Sandwiched between the staying power of recons, and the surprisingly effective T1 disruption frigates, it seems like they've been struggling to find their niche in the current meta of Eve. Sad for such beautiful ships with awesome bonuses to be so unloved.



OMNIDIRECTIONAL TRACKING LINKS

No question in my mind about this one. I never realized just how broken they were until I analyzed the use of sentry drones on HACs and Battleships. This problem was exacerbated by the failure for them to stack with drone scope rigs (optimal range) producing absolutely insane numbers when used on ships like the Ishtar.

Bringing them more inline with the tracking computers is a great move, and the subtle change allowing for overheating and scripting naturally tends towards an active gameplay rather than the AFK nature that drone assist has become known for. Overheating when it's really needed has always been the pinnacle of edge-of-your-seat gameplay and I'm glad to see it come to drones.



Capping Drone Assist

I understand that CCP is trying to reduce the usage of sentry drones in nullsec warfare, but this does nothing to stop small gang usage in lowsec, or ignoring scan resolution in order to attack a target. It feels like a poorly thought out band-aid for a problem with much deeper problems than just "now you have to assist drones to your squad commander instead of fleet commander."

That, and it's an arbitrary limitation. I hate arbitrary mechanics and restrictions.

There are so many possibilities to change the way these fleets operate, while maintaining the reason this mechanics exists in the first place, such as lightening the load on the already hectic role logi pilots fulfill. Instead of a meaningful change, CCP elected to go for a mechanic that simply made the current iteration of a broken functionality slightly less convenient to use, and even then only on a large scale. I won't say I'm not pleased that a change was made, but I am certainly dissapointed it wasn't more creative or meaningful.

There is no question in my mind that Jayne will serve the players' interests to the best of his abilities.

His insightful and analytical approach will be an invaluable asset to the EVE community.

Vote for Jayne for CSM!