CSM Campaigns

Walls of text that I didn't bother to read, for this I will not endorse you

~Words~ are scary things. Thanks for bumping the thread, though.

To expand on my previous post

As a fellow regular in the NCQA subforum, I can attest that Sabriz is a very smart individual with a grasp on the game that extends far beyond CODE. She's very honest about her playstyle and always gives out good advice to new players on how to avoid becoming prey to gankers. I wouldn't touch her with a ten foot pole in-game, but I'm convinced she's actually interested its well-being. CODE is just one of the many facets to Sabriz.

I have no special love for CODE, but I will be voting for Sabriz as an individual who appreciates the freedom of expression we have in New Eden, and who I believe will protect that essential element of gameplay.

I won't muck up her thread with an argument, but I would encourage you to read through her posting history - particularly in NCQA and Market Discussions - before you write her off as a simple ganker. I feel her expertise in market economics and deep understanding of ship stat balancing are great traits for a CSM candidate. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion.

Sabriz:

I'll start this off on the wrong foot, but please read it through. :)

I hate CODE. I think they're extortionist griefers and it is only because EVE is the sandbox that it is that I don't think they should be banned entirely. They say they produce content, and in fairness they certainly do, but it is not the kind of content that I care to participate in.

Having said that, despite much of my heart railing against this, your thread here has shown you to be a thoughtful person, I think, with some very intriguing ideas, complex and nuanced enough so that my heart's argument of, "She's just a CODE griefer! Ignore her!" just isn't fair and won't wash.. So, despite your background, I find myself following you and seriously considering you.

How's that for a ringing endorsement? :)

As such, I'd like to post to you some questions I'm asking the candidates that I'm seriously considering.

Space has become littered with abandoned POS structures. What is your position on getting rid of them? I'd like to see, perhaps, a orbital degrading mechanic once the fuel is gone. This, then would open up the moons for pilots that will actually use them. The current mechanic, of course, involves Wardec-ing a possibly abandoned Corp and then sitting there for an extended period of time blapping the structures. I think something better is quite possible.

EVE seems to be popularly seen as more than a game, perhaps moving into the hobby realm. I'm aware that some discussions have been held with regard to finding a way to bring a more casual player or a more casual play-style option into EVE. Would you advocate this? If so, how might this be done without fundamentally changing the nature of the game? Would it?

It seems a given that CSM X and CCP will look at dealing with the SovNull question this term. Beyond that, from a gameplay perspective, what would you advocate as the next priority?

EVE players seem to be quite passionate about the game, yet it is said that the voting rate for CSM elections is lower than that of even the United States midterms. Does this diminish the validity of the CSM? What would you like to do to combat the voter apathy that we see and effectively educate the voters on the reality of what the CSM can effectively do?

Finally, and most importantly, do you like cats? :-)

Thanks so much!

Personally that says a lot about both Sabriz and yourself. About Sabriz it correctly identifies that Sabriz is intelligent and thoughful, and genuinely wants to see Eve succeed even more than it already has and be a continuing success in the future. About you, it identifies you as an open minded and intelligent individual who is willing to put your personal dislike for Sabriz' play style aside and recognize that it's important to have representation from all sides of a debate. *tips hat*



Personally I'd love to see them either become effectively suspect, or be hackable, maybe not right away (forgot to fuel your tower last night before bed? Too bad gone now) but after some amout of inactive time (even on the order of months would be fine with me). Either way I think clearing them should be a task left for playersand not be some passive event.

2 of 2



Big question. Here's a few things that are *very big* things first.

1) Look at aspects of the game that are presently widely botted - mining, anomoly ratting, agent missions - and try to make these more interactive and entertaining. I have no tolerance for cheating, but I think you can learn a lot from what activities cheaters automate and why they do it.

2) Redesign the new player experience to get people interacting with other players early on. I'd definitely want to add a mission in the training systems where you had to retrieve an item from a rat's wreck but that had only minor consequences for failure, and then later I'd add an optional mission to probe down someone doing that mission and cause them to fail it. Similarly, a 'courier this package through lowsec' mission which does not hurt to fail, and later a 'steal the parcel' mission.


Smaller things:

1) Introduce more warnings to newer players of some of the player-created dangers they face in New Eden

2) Provide new players with evidence of how effective they can be in numbers, if they pick fights carefully and are led. (We do this in the New Order a lot; but it applies outside gank situations too).




I'd be a bit more concerned if more people cared who a game company used to consult with that who runs their country. Priorities. RL is more important than a game, even an obsessive hobby like EVE.

Most people don't vote because they don't think the CSM is important enough to invest the time needed to make a thought out decision on who to support. Outside of big controversies this will continue.





I *loathe* the creatures with a passion that borders on inarticulate rage.

I don't claim there aren't people who play without wanting conflict.

The thing is, those people *do* get involved in conflict without realising it.


Let's go back to the period of the Goonswarm v TEST war for an example. Consider a level 4 mission runner running missions in Dodixie against Serpentis rats, looting every wreck and deliberately not engaging with the occasional ninja that enters their mission.
Whether they intend to or not, that player is objectively helping the Goonswarm side of the war, by increasing supply of Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I on the market, which was one of their alliance's main supply bottlenecks in the war. Here a 'highsec carebear' is helping the Goons win fleet fights in nullsec.


Or consider an incursion fleet commander that operates purely in highsec. By the simple act of deciding to change from a Nightmare fleet doctrine to a Paladin fleet doctrine, they reduce the value of nullsec rental systems that have Sansha anomolies or that produce deadspace shield modules.

This might be a more damaging to an alliance that controls that space than losing an entire 250 person Ishtar fleet to bombers - all caused by someone who wanted to avoid conflict.


Anyone who interacts with EVE's market in any way, shape of form is involved in real loss PVP.

I would like to add to that that over filled freighters are the only targets that can be chosen for any reliable ganking profits. While mission boats full of purples certainly exist, they are far too rare and difficult to track down to qualify as a source of income. Incursion boats are likewise difficult to gank due to having logi and friends nearby nearly always, unless they make really poor decisions or really bad mistakes.

Those last two conditions are still true for freighters, but people making those poor decisions and mistakes happens frequently enough that they can be killed for profit by highly organized and well supplied individuals.

These are basically all one question, so I'll combine the answer.

Firstly, there's people that want a 'corporation lite' that is just a chat channel. I think this functionality is better served by actual chat channels. There is a community around the minerbumping channel which includes people who are in CODE., people who support CODE., people who don't support our in game actions but find us hilarious, and spies. This community was my home, not the various corporations I've been in, since I discovered it.

It's currently extremely hard to find a corporation that seems like it might be a good fit for your playstyle within the game client. This isn't an EVE exclusive phenomenon - it's the case in every online game I've played. In my experience from other games, voice chat is what coheres communities, and helps you quickly ascertain 'nope, these people aren't for me' or 'yep, I'll get on well with this group'.

Corporation public chat rooms with voice chat would go a long way to improving players finding corps, I believe. If I could make one change to the 'corp interface' it would be encouraging the use of corp public voice chat (through EVE Voice). Corporations could then carry out whatever recruitment security screening they felt was appropriate and recruit interested people that pass their #opsec.

I'd also add the ability for corporations to bring non-members into their corp chat channel.

I want to see players incentivised to hold on to a corporation and defend it when attacked, through some mixture of carrots and sticks that makes holding on usually the highest EV play (from a game theoretical point of view). Currently the in-game benefits to being in a 1 person corp that was established yesterday are the same as, or slightly higher than, the benefits of being in a six month old 30 person corp.

I would like to see some setup where the more ore your corp has mined over its history, the more mining related boosts your corp's medium to long term members receive. The more rats your corp has killed, the more bonuses to missioning and/or incursion running and/or anomoly ratting you receive, and so on. I don't have all of the answers here.



For retention: Getting newbies interacting with other players is needed, otherwise they mostly follow the 'level up your Dominix then quit' path. For retaining established players, it's their social ties within game that are key. Witness the CFC titan pilot that was recently accused of being a spy and expelled with extreme prejudice - the Titan loss wasn't what made him uninstall EVE, it was the severing of social ties. (From what I've heard he's back playing now and his alliance reinstated him in good standing, replaced his Titan and consider him loyal, not a spy).

Making the 'game theoretical correct play' be to stay invested in your corp will help with keeping those social ties.