CSM Campaigns

Glad it worked out for you.
In most cases engaging everything loses you ships, time and ISK.

Oh, one main reason to not get burned out is those timers everyone hates, having to leave someone there or a team to get them in when the tower goes out of RF and a team to stop the defenders emptying it before then
Two options there, show cheap ships and look like too much trouble to melt the POS or show a lot of shiny things, few carriers multiple POSes.

That is all.

Spent first 1-3M SP in high sec mining then moving into a Class 2 with HS & C3 static. Grew into that system for a year. Probe ship, destroyer salvager, PI, fueling, mining, Cyclone for Sleepers. Most of the time I was solo'ing the whole system, so the only defense I had was to destabilise any links that came into our system. There would be others around but that fluctuated, they usually left after a week of being blasted away by ships they felt came out of no where.

I could never go back now, would suck too much:

• Recons.
• Frigate links.
• Worst of all pressing D-scan all the time, can't face that again.

As to the rest, I still have a lot of friends that are still in WHs. The only one that engages hostiles; does it because they have a standing force greater than anything that can come through a connection - due to the mass limitations.

While ratting or mining I would hit D-scan often enough to see a ship in flight and I could escape.
Often I would see cloaking ships just before their cloaks flipped on.

Slower than manually clicking, auto D-scan.

There are now shattered systems, the new exploration systems as CCP originally envisioned. Allow worm holers to control access again and let them build a full settlement. They can't make a block, can't take over a region of worm holes.
Stations and system occupancy upgrades.
Maybe stations only in C5 and C6 with larger holes from there into null. Maybe and I say this one very cautiously; rare three day long holes with no mass limit connecting them.

I see nothing but good possibilities in letting alliances take over a single system completely. They become this drifting force that spices up the rest of known space and with a station they can turn into real industry places.
With the way that CCP wants to have null trading hubs and have small null blocs these worm holes could be the "tinkers" of EVE, popping up with goods to trade and supply null.

Friend or foe? Could be very interesting.

Edit: Recons will be a "perfect" cloak in worm holes. You will need a combat probe alt because you probably won't convince anyone else to sit around doing it. No blips as they turn the D-scan immunity on. No knowing if they left a system unless you constantly watch every exist all the time.
Scan deep for them in case they have a book mark way out there? Nothing stopping them having a regular cloak and a mobile structure.

I was pretty disappointed to listen to that interview and realise that the analysis of your problem with the CSM "process" begins and ends with you intensely disliking the fact that other players are free to vote for people whom you don't happen to like.

Equally disappointing was your naive idea of "votes against" somehow 'empowering hi-sec'. I'm afraid maths doesn't work that way, sir. If the ebil nullseccers are winning elections at the moment because they can get more votes for their guy, then they're going to keep on winning elections with your idea because they'll be just as able to vote against people they don't like as you'll be able to vote against people you don't like, but that's a contest they'll win because more of them vote.

"Hi-sec" doesn't need any special process magic to "win" the CSM. "Hi-sec" needs first and foremost for credible candidates who can appeal to voters with a platform a little more sophisticaed than "grr goons grrr gankers grr nullsec". Mike Azariah is the example that leaps readily to mind, and he has been elected twice. Deidre Vaal had similar success. In fact there's every reason to believe that when intelligent, insightful, skillful communicators run on a hi-sec platform, they are quite well served by the CSM process.

And secondly, of course "hi-sec" needs to vote. Your "idea" (it's far from new) runs headfirst like every other idea to "reform" the voting process into getting more people elected of the type that the reformer likes: there's no voting process that will deliver results without the actual votes. And there is no bigger enemy of hi-sec enfranchisement than people who try and claim that "the system" is rigged against them or whatever. You claim to be a student of The Mittani's campaigns; you may recall him commenting to the effect that he had zero worries about hi-sec challengers because hi-sec politicians spend most of their energy telling people that there's no point voting. In direct contrast "Ebil nullseccers" who run for the CSM, don't whine about how hard it is; they spend their time getting people to vote.

And it turns out that telling people to vote for you is a more successful strategy for getting elected than telling people not to vote at all. Such a surprise!

Thirdly, you can handwave away the facts all you like, but the reality is that a very significant percentage of "hi-sec" are alts belonging to players who identify as "nullsec" and the fact is that they're not going to follow your banner any more than turkeys are going to vote for a second Christmas. Since the 0.0 alts are the hi-sec demographic that is the most likely to vote, I strongly suggest you think of some way to appeal to them without attacking their "main" playstyle.

In summary I would strongly advice you to rethink your campaign from scratch, and focus less on stopping the players you don't like from doing things you don't want them to, and much less on why they shouldn't even want a CSM in the first place, and start emphasising how you can help the players you claim to represent do the things they do want to by getting elected to the CSM.

1) Power of voting blocks and coalitions getting a candidate in purely on associate with the group. Applies to all of null and some WH alliances, not just GRRR Goons.
2) Can't vote against all the mushrooms that pop up in the garden.
3) See next section.
4) Yes, MoTD in local chat, etc, high sec needs to even know what CSM is. Number of people I have spoken to and have never heard of the CSM, who have been playing for years is staggering.
5) Missed the fact I want more people to mark the ballots, even if it is to abstain. Make sure we are reaching people and see what types of players we reach. Bit of market research.
6) Bubble Rorquals, absorb modules, anti AFK-cloaking just to name what is in this very thread are aimed at helping null sec. People are stuck on the idea that I am some high sec player.
7) Summary, see next section.
That was a strange post. On one hand shooting me down on the other wishing me luck and thanking me for running. Buttering both sides of the toast?

It seems you guys think I am shooting EVE down, being negative about it, how about looking at it from this perspective:

I think EVE is a fantastic game

The fixes, improvements and such that I am campaiging for are relatively small things in order to take what I feel is excellent toward perfection!

It is a minority campaign.
Most MMOs dumb down and make killing easier for financial reasons.

However, EVE is too PVP centric. At some point, the power to the aggressors is going to be too weighted, then when it hits a tipping point; the "prey" in the game will cascade out. Bit like how coalitions and alliances cascade collapse - only those will be players leaving the game instead.

Thanks for the bump.

afk cloakers shud not be perfectly safe

As ever, your posts are solid and well written. Thank you.

Right, to the meat of it then. We disagree on our opinion of Mittens. I see him as detrimental to EVE over all. So, I hold him up as an example of where I feel null alliances and coaltions vote blindly for the candidate that they feel is representing their "constituency". I like some of the things Sion has to say for himself. I am not blindly going, "GRR Goons," despite the perception people may have.

The unhealthy factor comes from where the representatives, "live."
I am not a particularly good candidate, because it has been some time since I lived in high sec or worm holes and I think low sec is a really strange case of being neither fish nor fowl. There have been changes to analysing and hacking sites, which I have not kept up with since I stopped being in a worm holes, changes that I don't experience and so fall outside of my notice or don't impact me directly, so I won't become so impassioned by them.
As much as we can argue for the mind and personality behind a candidate, their perceptions are still skewed by where they "live."

There needs to be a balance of representation.
Ideas that might impact worm holes for example, need more than one voice. Corbexx for example comes from a large alliance in WHs. If there was a representative from a small WH corp, there might have been a stronger stance against D-scan immunity during the concept stages.

I am not so much trying to stop ganking, as I am trying to push for ways that the victims can counter ambush or stand up against the gankers instead of running. Add another layer to this aspect of game play.

Maybe we need a general guide for newbies that they will have access to when they start the game that:

• Gives them an idea of good fits, e.g. do not dual tank.
• Ways to detect danger and avoid being killed.
• Videos demonstrating some situations.
• The benefits of joining a good corp / alliance.
• An idea of what to expect in low sec, null and WHs.

I will say though; the rage against multi-boxers and now AFK miners has killed an aspect of game play.
The low ISK rewards of cheap ores in high-sec did not matter, when you could do other things, like check your corp forum, chat on Team Speak, share links, check your e-mails, get some work done from home.
You could still be in touch with the game and yet get some other things done, while earning some ISK.

Now, it has become one of the lowest paid routes (yes, even in null (capped income rate)) while, being as big a nuisance, as trying to get some ratting done.