These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Vic Jefferson for CSM XI - Chaos and Hilarity.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tikari Ishin
Motiveless Malignity
Deepwater Hooligans
#21 - 2016-01-10 19:48:01 UTC
V O T E V I C
O T E V I C
T E V I C
E V I C
V I C
I C
C


Be a better person today, Vote Vic!

Self-proclaimed queen of Syndicate.

Come fight my rifter in 35-RK9, ship provided for free.

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#22 - 2016-01-11 00:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Vic Jefferson
Never spit in a well you may have to drink from, do not try to put out a fire with gasoline.



So I'm going to be blunt here. If you are disenfranchised with the CSM process, the CSM candidates, etc., electing troll candidates who will exacerbate the issues with the CSM and it is not the proper way to accomplish things. I too am quite sickened with the current CSM, but attempting to punish players or CCP by electing joke or troll candidates will just make things worse.

We just haven't seen many (there are a few, you know who you are Big smile ) actual communicators interested in fostering good player-developer relationships. We have a bunch of people who either come to the table with agendas, a sense of entitlement, a sense of disenfranchisement, or other forms of bitter that just prevent progress outright. Downward spirals are something you have a limited window to fix.

CCP should have the exclusive right to bar candidates from the CSM either based on whatever criteria they want, or from previous CSM performances.

Elect communicators, elect people who know how to listen and to collaborate.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#23 - 2016-01-12 04:18:55 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:

4)More NPC null pockets are needed. One of the reasons for this is to allow actual capital movement between regions and make more places accessible to move through or move to. Generally NPC pockets lead to much more interesting times for local sov-holders; with how big the universe is now, and with the recent WH nerf, actually getting at people and providing a healthy amount of risk is a bit of a challenge logistically, whereas these would really help. I do think the jump ranges and times are way too strict, but a few well placed systems could really accelerate movement my making more direct travel paths.


Vic has a very good point here. NPC Null pockets in more places gives people a stepping stone to the SOV regions nearby.
Having lived in Syndicate for awhile now I understand how hard it is to be evicted from NPC Null. Its all about will power and true control of space. This would allow many groups a chance to get a foothold near SOV and eventually try to take a piece for themselves.
Heimotz
Sentinel Event
Hatakani Trade Winds Combine
#24 - 2016-01-12 04:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Heimotz
Krystyn wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:

4)More NPC null pockets are needed. One of the reasons for this is to allow actual capital movement between regions and make more places accessible to move through or move to. Generally NPC pockets lead to much more interesting times for local sov-holders; with how big the universe is now, and with the recent WH nerf, actually getting at people and providing a healthy amount of risk is a bit of a challenge logistically, whereas these would really help. I do think the jump ranges and times are way too strict, but a few well placed systems could really accelerate movement my making more direct travel paths.


Vic has a very good point here. NPC Null pockets in more places gives people a stepping stone to the SOV regions nearby.
Having lived in Syndicate for awhile now I understand how hard it is to be evicted from NPC Null. Its all about will power and true control of space. This would allow many groups a chance to get a foothold near SOV and eventually try to take a piece for themselves.

Tightening up ly distances in some areas would be good too. There are vast areas of null entry that are impossible to get caps to. The unintentional fortresses created by the arbitrary 5ly jump range needs to be addressed.

Oh, and Vic gets my vote, and my hammer.
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#25 - 2016-01-12 05:08:13 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:


The main principle I am running on is buffing NPC null, Low Sec, and Sov Null to the extent that people can start in any security band from day one while also prospering learning, and getting involved with the universe. Let's make EvE like the trailers – for real. Distribute resources as content seeds and watch the players do the rest. Give people a challenge, not a chore.

My go-to success story is that of Barleguet and Brave Newbies. I am in no way affiliated with Brave, but I have seen their work first hand. Basically, you had an empty low-sec system which was otherwise unremarkable besides for a few level 5 agents. Once they were done moving in, Barleguet was transformed into a 24-7 content stop where a man could buy a quafe, a rifter, and 5000 rounds of EMP S and use them all on the way home. Just by concentrating some population, all sorts of content sprung up; new markets, defense fleets, and gangs coming from far and wide. Surely some of the most fierce players in Brave now surely got their first lessons and adrenaline rushes from belt ratting around planet seven. Content fed a cycle of content creation. An unimposing, non-FW system became a huge hub of activity.

Which brings me to the actual crux of it all – there needs to be more resources in low and null that are both profitable and accessible to new and old players, resources which will both be in demand and create content. The Security Tags and Mordu's Angel spawns are great examples. I think everyone sort of tacitly realizes that High Sec L4s and Incursions are a sacred cow that will not be tipped over any time soon, ergo the solution if you want to promote more real interaction is to actually properly balance other resources and income potential. If you could put another Barleguet on the map, you would create a great place for new players to actually learn the game, and content for everyone. The charm of Barleguet wasn't smashing the day old player in the venture trying to get rich off that sweet, sweet Jaspet, it was the chaos that immediately descended into asteroid belt. For better or worse, you just need an impetus to get people undocked, the rest created itself. I want a reason for a new group of players to rush out into lowsec, struggle to survive, lose countless ships, but have a chance to become far wealthier than their High Sec cousins, and have many more exciting tales to share.

Look at TISHU or OSS. Or any other small, fun alliance in the game. They create a ton of content for as little support as they have, most members have alts to make their ISK for them some where else, as there certainly isn't any money to be made in Syndicate. However, Syndicate is the only type of region that has enough entities close enough to each other to meaningfully shoot at each other; happens in lowsec too, but sov null is just too vast to ever really see much consistent conflict. What I'm saying is it's dumb to hand over all the keys to new players, and new player retention (Read: income, stable, reliable, accessible, Point F) in the form of anomalies to sov holders and sov empires when by and large, there are so many play styles that would appeal and retain players in non-sov regions, if only there were a way for it to be viable to live there.


I cut out a lot of Vic's text here but I only want to focus on a few points.
Barleguet was awesome. My old alliances used to fly there expressly to fight BRAVE and we fought there a lot. When BRAVE moved to YZ-LQL we would trek out there to fight them as well. They were close enough to Syndicate to fly their in small ships. Which of course is another thing Vic mentioned space is too big for anything big and slow to get around. My battleships have gathered so much rust and dust as I have no reason to fly them as they suck so hard.

There was a lot of charm in smashing that venture in the belt. His friends would show up to fight shortly afterwards and glorious melee in space would commence. The space hornets were stirred up and it was run and gun for awhile until you died or killed enough hornets that they simmered back down.

His comments about TISHU and OSS are very true. Syndicate has a few decent groups that get form up enough people to fight each other on a semi-often basis. I've fought both with and against most of the other units in Syndicate. Whenever I've left the region it seems like I would fly 30 jumps to not fight anyone and then fly home

I slightly disagree as you can definitely make some isk out in NPC Null, however his main point is to get enough concentration of players to have decent conflict you need enough isk generators in the area to keep people viable enough to stick around and currently there is continually shifting of people into an area of syndicate and then there aren't enough anoms and scan sites, ratting belts etc to be able to keep them up with enough isk to stay active and then they **** out of the area and then we fall back into their not being enough people to get fights very often. Rinse and repeat adnauseum.

And just in case people think I'm too big of a Vic supporter...
https://zkillboard.com/kill/33660942/
https://zkillboard.com/kill/31680574/
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#26 - 2016-01-12 05:09:26 UTC
Heimotz wrote:
Krystyn wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:

4)More NPC null pockets are needed. One of the reasons for this is to allow actual capital movement between regions and make more places accessible to move through or move to. Generally NPC pockets lead to much more interesting times for local sov-holders; with how big the universe is now, and with the recent WH nerf, actually getting at people and providing a healthy amount of risk is a bit of a challenge logistically, whereas these would really help. I do think the jump ranges and times are way too strict, but a few well placed systems could really accelerate movement my making more direct travel paths.


Vic has a very good point here. NPC Null pockets in more places gives people a stepping stone to the SOV regions nearby.
Having lived in Syndicate for awhile now I understand how hard it is to be evicted from NPC Null. Its all about will power and true control of space. This would allow many groups a chance to get a foothold near SOV and eventually try to take a piece for themselves.

Tightening up ly distances in some areas would be good too. There are vast areas of null entry that are impossible to get caps to. The unintentional fortresses created by the arbitrary 5ly jump range needs to be addressed.

Oh, and Vic gets my vote, and my hammer.


Heimotz is also on those kills on Vic by the way...
Jin Latte
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2016-01-14 01:21:19 UTC
Vic,

You post to quote "GrrGoons" as part of your candidacy. You have stated on multiple CSM threads how you feel rather verbally going as far as calling goons and the Imperium more or less a conspiracy. I will not argue sov warfare has slowed however Goons and Imperium are not the only entity held accountable for this. To my knowledge there are plenty other entities in other areas of sov holding space that are likewise in coalitions that are just as stagnant.

You seem to press Goons as one of your sub topics yet have voiced about them the most in of your posts outside your initial posts on them have been about the Imperium. You make little to no account for fozzie sov and make of that what you will Since the release of almost all major warfare has stopped and all expansions as well or any kind of warfare in the respect of sov grabs. Since Fozzie release there has been little need for it and defending it has been an annoyance to say the least. With all that said far be it for me to say your entire campaign seems entirely biased on nothing but the self destruction f the goons let me say again there are other coalitions that are running with just as many blues with just as much space.

To say that the goons are the only 'bad' group that could be detrimental to the health of Eve online is so insanely biased and absurd. In another thread you recommended Co2 to more or less depart the Imperium lest we be unable to speak from a 'culturally acceptable level'.

So let me ask you this. Would you prefer the goons and ONLY [as you have failed to list the other coalitions] the goons to disband under the circumstances that it is hurting eves health as a SANDBOX where they players make their own choice and do what they will third party or not (rules and regulations aside)? Or be forced to disband as part of your candidacy is "GrrGoons" which I assume you would plan to 'fix' or change in someway ?
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#28 - 2016-01-14 05:20:23 UTC
Jin Latte wrote:
To my knowledge there are plenty other entities in other areas of sov holding space that are likewise in coalitions that are just as stagnant.


There was a dream that was Content Ring once. An area geographically favored to become the content cauldron that AegisSov promised. Then the goons came, and the dream turned into an endless nightmare of empty systems. Sure some areas may be stagnant, but its another thing actively enforce it.


Jin Latte wrote:

You seem to press Goons as one of your sub topics yet have voiced about them the most in of your posts outside your initial posts on them have been about the Imperium. You make little to no account for fozzie sov and make of that what you will Since the release of almost all major warfare has stopped and all expansions as well or any kind of warfare in the respect of sov grabs. Since Fozzie release there has been little need for it and defending it has been an annoyance to say the least. With all that said far be it for me to say your entire campaign seems entirely biased on nothing but the self destruction f the goons let me say again there are other coalitions that are running with just as many blues with just as much space.


I have made account of FozzieSov. I would suggest reading what I wrote about the two dissonant entry bars, as this goes through, in some depth, about how even though the mechanics have changed, social structures have not. If you want warfare, find people who are also interested in that part of the game. The Imperium is not interested in that part of the game. Maybe its members are, but it is not. A much more scary, exciting world is out there in New Eden, but you have to want it bad enough to take risks, and there are no risks for member alliances of the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

To say that the goons are the only 'bad' group that could be detrimental to the health of Eve online is so insanely biased and absurd. In another thread you recommended Co2 to more or less depart the Imperium lest we be unable to speak from a 'culturally acceptable level'.


You could all be swell, upstanding people, but I'd never know it since you spend all your time bending knee to the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

So let me ask you this. Would you prefer the goons and ONLY [as you have failed to list the other coalitions] the goons to disband under the circumstances that it is hurting eves health as a SANDBOX where they players make their own choice and do what they will third party or not (rules and regulations aside)? Or be forced to disband as part of your candidacy is "GrrGoons" which I assume you would plan to 'fix' or change in someway ?


Goons have such a huge super majority of players that you cannot compare them to other coalitions; its not about how much space someone has, but how much of the player base they have locked up. True, it's a sandbox, play however you find enjoyment and laughs. No matter what mechanics they implement, if they are even half sane, if so many of the players are locked into a situation where they cannot shoot at each other, they won't; mechanics alone cannot create content. Waiting for one feature to deliver you content is just silly; AegisSov may not be the best, but its daft to demonize it and blame all the game's ills on it - the game's ills are in large part player made, and there is no magic game mechanic bullet to magically create large scale wars when the powers that be do not want it. If CCP is interested in making the game a more interesting place, they should foster smaller alliances, as all the keys to newbies right now are in large part owned by large blocs.


Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Jin Latte
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2016-01-14 10:10:07 UTC
I have made account of FozzieSov. I would suggest reading what I wrote about the two dissonant entry bars, as this goes through, in some depth, about how even though the mechanics have changed, social structures have not. If you want warfare, find people who are also interested in that part of the game. The Imperium is not interested in that part of the game. Maybe its members are, but it is not. A much more scary, exciting world is out there in New Eden, but you have to want it bad enough to take risks, and there are no risks for member alliances of the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

To say that the goons are the only 'bad' group that could be detrimental to the health of Eve online is so insanely biased and absurd. In another thread you recommended Co2 to more or less depart the Imperium lest we be unable to speak from a 'culturally acceptable level'.


You could all be swell, upstanding people, but I'd never know it since you spend all your time bending knee to the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

So let me ask you this. Would you prefer the goons and ONLY [as you have failed to list the other coalitions] the goons to disband under the circumstances that it is hurting eves health as a SANDBOX where they players make their own choice and do what they will third party or not (rules and regulations aside)? Or be forced to disband as part of your candidacy is "GrrGoons" which I assume you would plan to 'fix' or change in someway ?


Goons have such a huge super majority of players that you cannot compare them to other coalitions; its not about how much space someone has, but how much of the player base they have locked up. True, it's a sandbox, play however you find enjoyment and laughs. No matter what mechanics they implement, if they are even half sane, if so many of the players are locked into a situation where they cannot shoot at each other, they won't; mechanics alone cannot create content. Waiting for one feature to deliver you content is just silly; AegisSov may not be the best, but its daft to demonize it and blame all the game's ills on it - the game's ills are in large part player made, and there is no magic game mechanic bullet to magically create large scale wars when the powers that be do not want it. If CCP is interested in making the game a more interesting place, they should foster smaller alliances, as all the keys to newbies right now are in large part owned by large blocs.


[/quote]


let's see where to begin. Alright you say you made note on fozzie sov, yes I did say you had, to quote " You make little to no account for fozzie sov" that is not none, but some to an extent. you just however fail to mention it's as a potential primary factor in the decrease of sov activity. Since it came out nobody wants to do warfare, at least not on a massive scale hence all the NIP's and agreements such as in delve for open pvp content WITH OUT any soc grab hits due to the annoyances they cause... might want to look into that more before you shift all the blame to one place.

I will level with you, I am not against you as a person or specifically because I am a member of Co2, I am against you because your entire campaign seems entirely biased.

You mention there is no "magic update" to just bring content, and I would agree with that. but again player choice. The issue here is that an empire should always look to thrive and if possible expand and most would even look for peace. which, makes sense the issue being in a game.... Peace is boring. I am not disagreeing and trust me when I say I am an advocate of major wars, I miss them and I want them back. HOWEVER the Imperium IS comparable to other coalitions. size is slightly relevant. but you say space controlled is not.... you than say
Quote:
Goons have such a huge super majority of players that you cannot compare them to other coalitions; its not about how much space someone has


This one though is great...
Quote:
You could all be swell, upstanding people, but I'd never know it since you spend all your time bending knee to the Imperium.


yet you accuse other Imperium runners of not being cultured or understanding the values of which make eve so great. You toss them out so to speak as options that are in no way considerable or at least you seem to feel they should not be, specifically because they are imperium members regardless of their personal values. Make sure to remember goons were very much so outspoken for the change in tech moons that of which they controlled almost if not ALL of them which at the point of the change stood only to benefit everyone else giving them a chance.

however I digress and am out of space on this.
Capri Sun KraftFoods
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#30 - 2016-01-14 13:11:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Capri Sun KraftFoods
Jin Latte wrote:
I have made account of FozzieSov. I would suggest reading what I wrote about the two dissonant entry bars, as this goes through, in some depth, about how even though the mechanics have changed, social structures have not. If you want warfare, find people who are also interested in that part of the game. The Imperium is not interested in that part of the game. Maybe its members are, but it is not. A much more scary, exciting world is out there in New Eden, but you have to want it bad enough to take risks, and there are no risks for member alliances of the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

To say that the goons are the only 'bad' group that could be detrimental to the health of Eve online is so insanely biased and absurd. In another thread you recommended Co2 to more or less depart the Imperium lest we be unable to speak from a 'culturally acceptable level'.


You could all be swell, upstanding people, but I'd never know it since you spend all your time bending knee to the Imperium.

Jin Latte wrote:

So let me ask you this. Would you prefer the goons and ONLY [as you have failed to list the other coalitions] the goons to disband under the circumstances that it is hurting eves health as a SANDBOX where they players make their own choice and do what they will third party or not (rules and regulations aside)? Or be forced to disband as part of your candidacy is "GrrGoons" which I assume you would plan to 'fix' or change in someway ?


Goons have such a huge super majority of players that you cannot compare them to other coalitions; its not about how much space someone has, but how much of the player base they have locked up. True, it's a sandbox, play however you find enjoyment and laughs. No matter what mechanics they implement, if they are even half sane, if so many of the players are locked into a situation where they cannot shoot at each other, they won't; mechanics alone cannot create content. Waiting for one feature to deliver you content is just silly; AegisSov may not be the best, but its daft to demonize it and blame all the game's ills on it - the game's ills are in large part player made, and there is no magic game mechanic bullet to magically create large scale wars when the powers that be do not want it. If CCP is interested in making the game a more interesting place, they should foster smaller alliances, as all the keys to newbies right now are in large part owned by large blocs.





let's see where to begin. Alright you say you made note on fozzie sov, yes I did say you had, to quote " You make little to no account for fozzie sov" that is not none, but some to an extent. you just however fail to mention it's as a potential primary factor in the decrease of sov activity. Since it came out nobody wants to do warfare, at least not on a massive scale hence all the NIP's and agreements such as in delve for open pvp content WITH OUT any soc grab hits due to the annoyances they cause... might want to look into that more before you shift all the blame to one place.

I will level with you, I am not against you as a person or specifically because I am a member of Co2, I am against you because your entire campaign seems entirely biased.

You mention there is no "magic update" to just bring content, and I would agree with that. but again player choice. The issue here is that an empire should always look to thrive and if possible expand and most would even look for peace. which, makes sense the issue being in a game.... Peace is boring. I am not disagreeing and trust me when I say I am an advocate of major wars, I miss them and I want them back. HOWEVER the Imperium IS comparable to other coalitions. size is slightly relevant. but you say space controlled is not.... you than say
Quote:
Goons have such a huge super majority of players that you cannot compare them to other coalitions; its not about how much space someone has


This one though is great...
Quote:
You could all be swell, upstanding people, but I'd never know it since you spend all your time bending knee to the Imperium.


yet you accuse other Imperium runners of not being cultured or understanding the values of which make eve so great. You toss them out so to speak as options that are in no way considerable or at least you seem to feel they should not be, specifically because they are imperium members regardless of their personal values. Make sure to remember goons were very much so outspoken for the change in tech moons that of which they controlled almost if not ALL of them which at the point of the change stood only to benefit everyone else giving them a chance.

however I digress and am out of space on this.


[/quote]

Ur gay pwned
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#31 - 2016-01-14 18:54:11 UTC
Jin Latte wrote:
You toss them out so to speak as options that are in no way considerable or at least you seem to feel they should not be, specifically because they are imperium members regardless of their personal values.


I am not sure how much more explicit I need to be here. The only value you have to the CFC is as a vassal state, and when this is done this at the expense of potential content for players and alliances in exchange for safety, when trading content for safety is tolerated by alliance members as acceptable behavior, it speaks volumes about what those members actually value. It's painfully obvious that member states value ratting and SRP far more than getting the content they moan you cannot get because of AegisSov. Content Ring was a thing for a good few months, let me remind you how well the CFC tolerated that. Honestly PH could have had a nice sporty war with one of the vassal states of equivalent size, but instead it was the prerogative of the CFC to just overwhelm them.

Yes, maybe the system isn't the best, nothing is perfect, it could use some work. However, in the case of the Imperium, it doesn't matter what system is in place, what mechanics are in the game, they will always pick the most boring one that ensures security. EvE was fresh, new, inventive, and exciting when things were allowed to happen in game, but the social structures that be prevent most of this. As a member of the Imperium, you are associated with this behavior, or you tacitly agree with it by the nature of being in a coalition whose modus operandi was and still is weaponized boredom. Which is why I do not find your pseudo claims of having different values than your host coalition credulous; if you had different values, why be blue to them, given them players to wage conquest and defense with? Either you are very conflicted, or you are, at the end of the day, very content being a pawn to the greater CFC so long as you can rat and get SRP.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
jeffrey Trald
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2016-01-15 00:18:33 UTC
Isn't the CSM supposed to be none biased, built to improve the game through player feed back. So Vic, you seem very biased against the CFC, which, are they not called the Imperium now. It seems you are using the CSM elections as a way to spread propaganda about your reds rather than staying none biased. As such, why should i vote for you instead of someone else that has stuck to the issues and not taken the time to bad mouth other entities in game?
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#33 - 2016-01-15 00:38:26 UTC
jeffrey Trald wrote:
Isn't the CSM supposed to be none biased, built to improve the game through player feed back. So Vic, you seem very biased against the CFC, which, are they not called the Imperium now. It seems you are using the CSM elections as a way to spread propaganda about your reds rather than staying none biased. As such, why should i vote for you instead of someone else that has stuck to the issues and not taken the time to bad mouth other entities in game?


There is a healthy amount of Grrr Goons in my posting, but there are lots of other very topics that I cover that are only tangential at best to it. While you are free to call me whatever you want so long as the moderators do not get involved, I would kindly ask you to center on the issues, opinions, or perspectives I have posted here, which cover many aspects of the game.

I surmise that everyone went through a phase as a kid where you liked dinosaurs. I mean how could you not, they were huge and had big teeth, and didn't take smack from puny small mammals. When we had huge tyrant coalitions, unlike dinosaurs, they didn't vie for dominance through brutal contests of strength; they turned blue. Now, between Phobe and AegisSov, that was supposed to be the proverbial meteor that wipes out the big ticket sov blocs, 'dinosaurs', if you will. Thing is, it didn't. We are supposed to be in an age when there is competition between rapidly evolving smaller alliances, each clawing, gnashing, and fighting for their own chunk of sov, but the culture of big ticket sov is still dominant, and we have seen what that culture does to conflict, namely, eliminates it.

As I have written about in other posts, a lot of what has prevented this is that established blocs have all the out of game resources to make things work, whereas new entities have to do all of this in one step to compete, which is exceptionally difficult to do. When dinosaurs were wiped out, evolution ran riot with the clean slate of a world to work with, whereas here, not all that much changed. The central theme of my campaign is that if you want New Eden to feel 'New', if you want to engage newer players with content they can personally get involved with and feel an attachment to the game and have fun with, then you have to give players a smoother incline and more choices of how to start that journey. Right now the choices are leveling a raven or joining a big ticket null bloc.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Bhock
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2016-01-15 23:41:18 UTC
Finally available, the interview recorded by CSM Watch for the CSM 11 election coverage: Vic Jefferson interview

Enjoy !
bigbillthaboss3
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2016-01-21 17:43:49 UTC
You are a joke.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#36 - 2016-01-21 18:32:46 UTC
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:
You are a joke.

Do you care to elaborate on that statement or are you truly so mindless a goon?

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Mithandra
B.O.P Supplication For Glorious
Dracarys.
#37 - 2016-01-22 07:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Mithandra
I read your whole thread.

Ive read other threads that made my teeth itch, yours however didnt make them itch all the time.

The only problem i have with you as a candidate is your propensity for going into other candidates threads and bashing thier positions. Its low and too close to how real politicians operate. If I was voting i would vote for someone more interested in eve, than being the person with the best sound bite or wittiest retort.

Let your own position stand as evidence of your ability to get the job done at csm.

Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#38 - 2016-01-22 10:42:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vic Jefferson
Mithandra wrote:
I read your whole thread.

Ive read other threads that made my teeth itch, yours however didnt make them itch all the time.

The only problem i have with you as a candidate is your propensity for going into other candidates threads and bashing thier positions. Its low and too close to how real politicians operate. If I was voting i would vote for someone more interested in eve, than being the person with the best sound bite or wittiest retort.

Let your own position stand as evidence of your ability to get the job done at csm.


In an ideal world yeah, the candidate with the best positions and who is most interested in eve would win. Sadly, the current state of the CSM is actually very close to real politicians another way, namely that popularity, backing, and visibility have more to do with it than the raw strength of the platforms. At least here, ideas are given the time to collide in what sometimes progresses and elevates the discourse between two candidates.

While you may brush it off as bashing, I tend to view it as opportunities. Patience, and communicating with everyone, not just those of your chosen play style, is important. It takes a truly skilled person to convince someone to respect an opinion they do not agree with, and see no value in.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#39 - 2016-01-23 21:47:50 UTC
High sec content again. Was it not the ideal to make people move out of High sec? So, shouldn't High sec become more boring, less interesting and instead more interesting, new mechanics and fun should be added to Low sec/NPC Null sec and Null sec?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#40 - 2016-01-24 20:46:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Vic Jefferson
Rivr Luzade wrote:
High sec content again. Was it not the ideal to make people move out of High sec? So, shouldn't High sec become more boring, less interesting and instead more interesting, new mechanics and fun should be added to Low sec/NPC Null sec and Null sec?


I am at least 90% a low and null sec candidate. Wherever people will play, the opposite side of play, the antagonist side, should be viable - such is what makes EvE, EvE. More and better ways to generate content in Hi Sec is for everyone's benefit.

To be fair, finding new content for sov-null is a challenge; they are rather inventive and, in my appraisal, don't want it. They solved the siphons with the API malarkey, and theoretically the time in to fix this wont' be put in because PoS are being phased out soon anyway. They solved the ESS with placing them in fully spawned anoms, and theoretically they don't want to put the time into fix this because they are working on revamping rats in their entirety.

AegisSov worked in the areas that it was geographically favored to, like Cloud Ring. Big ticket null solved that too. You can give tools to make Sov-Null play ball, but if they aren't interested in content, no tool will make them participate.

That being said I have the opposite appraisal of NPC null residents. I don't know how much I can possibly beat the dead horse that is Syndicate, but, let's see. So in Sept 2015, Syndicate produced .18T isk worth of stuff, and destroyed .50T. This screams a few things; it's one of the few regions that destroys a significantly larger amount than it creates, and for having basically zero good ways to earn income locally, there is a surprising amount of conflict there. Imagine if NPC null had stable income streams so living there was actually viable for people? People want to live where they control their own content, can find risk and reward around the corner, and where the hassles of empire space don't inhibit game play. More, better, and more accessible income streams in NPC null would empower 'right sized' groups to live there and live the small gang dream. I daresay the majority of people that have left Syndicate based entities have done so for financial reasons, and no matter which group you talk to, sourcing income is the hardest part of living there. There is a player demand for that playstyle, but it is supported less than Hi Sec.

Give Low and NPC null residents content seeds and income, and content flourishes. Give every single tool to empire creators who don't want content, and we see the result.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Previous page123Next page