CSM Campaigns

Hello!

My name is Lorelei and I am announcing my candidacy for CSM XI. I am running on a platform that is focussed on High Sec. I am a self-confessed High Sec Carebear and am proud of it. I have analysed the commitments planned/coming up in my life for the next year and have decided that I can afford the time to run for CSM XI!

This is my Campaign Thread from last year:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=386664

This is my CapStable Podcast Interiew:

http://capstable.net/blog/2015/01/26/lorelei-ierendi/

And this is my infrequently used blog:

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/

But to recap for people that do not want to jump to other web sites:

Is there room for a High Sec candidate on the CSM? Someone that has the well-being of the multitude of High Sec pilots at heart?
I would like there to be a "High Sec" platform, for a candidate for the CSM. If no one else wants to step up to the plate, then I will. If someone else wants to run for CSM for the benefit of High Sec gameplay, then I am happy to step down and support them... if they can do a better job.

The problem with High Sec space is that the players there are all independent. There is no feeling of "we". This lack of "we" is a problem. The lack of "we all stand together" is a problem. The "apathy of the carebear" is a problem...

This I know. I know that, although numerically High Sec has the largest number of log-ins... accounts... players... I know that High Sec will probably never be able to gather together enough in order to support a CSM candidate. But that is no reason to not try!!
Come on, High Sec! If something is important for you, stand up for it!!!

Who am I?

I am a High Sec Carebear, and proud of it!
High Sec Carebears tend not to socialize too much, and are only members of NPC or small corporations.

Well, this is not the first character I have created in order to play "EVE". I have never been a member of a big alliance or coalition. I have never been a member of a big corporation. Hell, I have never left High Sec space before the CSMX Election..

I gained my love of Spaceship games by playing Elite... way back on my ZX Spectrum 48k+ (with a jammed SHIFT key (jammed as in... raspberry jam)). Back then it was possible to try docking with a space station and to accidentally line up with the back of the station... and die whilst trying to fly through the back of the station to the entrance. Fun times.

I graduated to Frontier: Elite II on a 486 PC, and spent my time happily flying between Barnard's Star, SOL, and Wolf 359. I should have been studying, but flying a (mostly harmless) panther fully loaded with robots was more fun.

I kept my eyes open for an online version of a space-sim... and that is where EVE comes in.
I really enjoy (as in "really") flying transports, fulfilling contracts, and, sometimes, mining.

My CSM Platform 2016:

I think it is important for people to know what the CSM is, and can achieve. I could not run claiming that I would make all spaceships pink. As a member of the CSM I would not be in a position to dictate to CCP or enforce any "election promises". The CSM seems to have taken a hit in its popularity this year. The scandals have meant that CCP and the Player Base have lost some trust in this institution.

But well:

- None Of The Above: Campaigning for an opportunity for people to vote for the CSM, but to vote for None Of The Above. The problem of player participation is disproportionately affecting those of us in high sec (because we carebears are not exactly non-solo).
In order to increase the possibility of player participation, maybe CCP could add a line of text to the Downtime Popup that bothers us so much every day. Reminding players to vote is not a bad thing.

Ganker: I would like at least a 50% chance of walking away from a gank. At the moment this is not the case. On my blog I mentioned changes to Concord that I would like to see. I would also like to see some changes to Ice Spawning (maybe in random systems?) that would mean that the gankers would have to move around to gank ice miners! Local chat could also be changed to provide less free "intel" to people. No need to announce to everyone who is in local... just the number of pilots.
Please read my last thread before posting questions... high sec is worth fighting for!

New Player Experience: The opportunities are better than the system last year... but still do not teach a new player how to use DSCAN.

Player Corporations: See my blog for details. The need for player groups that are just social has not changed. This is one of the things that I am going to be carrying over from my campaign from last year.

But when all is said and done, I believe a CSM member needs to be a conduit for information exchange between CCP and the players. I do not think that the CSM should be used for the Metagame.

Thank you for reading this far. I am looking forward to working with you / hearing from you, and although I am always busy at this time of year, I promise to read every post in my thread.

I'm sure this thread will only be ravaged by fellow CODE. bros and the like, so I figured I would take this chance to talk about ganking, as it takes up a large chunk of your platform. A little background on me; I am a ganker, wardeccer, scammer, and former awoxer and make my living as such. I joined EVE on a cresting wave of advertising to "be the villain" in EVE Online and blogs from criminals and griefers.

Having read through a few of your recent blog posts, specifically the one regarding the changes you would like to see for CONCORD, (random spawning times, response times, and greater patrols) I don't agree that these changes would create better conditions for potential victims, rather they would just further complicate operations for gankers. Creating "random within ranges" of response times and spawning for CONCORD in different security systems just means that I would need to wait a few days until CODE. bros (You know who you are) tested the ranges into the ground and determined new ranges from which gankers could effectively gank targets. Seriously. No matter what changes are made, as long as CCP doesn't take away our red button we will find a way to gank efficiently. As for patrols, I'm still unclear on their effectiveness considering that most gankers don't usually do much ganking within 15 minutes of their previous ganking. Keep in mind that CONCORD serves the purpose of reactively punishing criminal activity. You compare CONCORD to the Police, but its purpose is to punish, not save lives. In short, I think you want to punish gankers because you see them as a group that has effectively broken the system, and currently don't have a hard counter.

I'm sure you're going to find some support for your initiative, but I don't forsee CCP making these changes. I talked to the "greatly despicable" Mike Azariah a few months ago about the highsec criminal community in the wake of the news of hyperdunking getting axed by CCP. The one thing that stuck with me was him telling me that ganking was something that CCP actually supports as content because it serves a reminder that you are never safe in EVE. It's just a little something that keeps my cold heart pumping, as I hold ganking dear as one of the few pillars of highsec piracy.

I think it was best put by FloppietheBanjoClown in his recent post regarding Good Guys in Highsec:


So why not promote ideas for making highsec more fun by creating new opportunities, careers, and above all else content! What happened to Bounty Hunters and an actual functional bounty system? How about player integration and roles in Empire space or even CONCORD? I understand that the whole election promises business is kind of a farce for the CSM, but at the same time members are still giving an input on the development of the game and future plans, so no reason to shy away from making suggestions.

Good luck, but you don't have my vote.

Then I promise, if elected, I shall ask the devs to make a pink skin.

Thanks for stopping by my thread.
Yes ganking takes up a large part of my platform... but there are other aspects to my platform as well. CODE. bros did not maul my campaign last year, and I am sure that they will not do it this year either.

It is getting late, and I will write a more thoughtful response to your post later/tomorrow when I am not so tired. It's nice to have some thoughtful input from the "pirate" community. After all, we are all in High Sec together, and high sec should be fun for everyone (or at least subject to rules and conditions that make sense and seem consistent).

Have you tried mining?

Thanks for stopping by, Mike!

Yes, I am aware of balance issues - and I am not wanting to turn High Sec into a theme park. I am actually trying to think of balance, or things making sense when I talk about things like CONCORD and different ice spawning mechanics.

CCP have already definitively spoken about bumping, ganking and stuff like that, and I am not naïve enough to think I could get them to change their mind! But those of us who Haul/Mine/Build are also out there (even if we never read forum threads or participate in discussions or vote in the CSM elections).

With all the pessimism about CSM things being blogged / talked about I am not sure what the future holds for the CSM and the role it will play in the future. But I will try to fly it like I mean it. o7

Hi! Good luck in your campaign as well!



More than you would think actually, as I have lots to move around. It works pretty much the same as most things in this game where the antagonist party basically just has to find some one who gets careless or makes a mistake, leaving an opening for a gank. There's a reason why red and black frog don't complain about CODE.; the same reason extreme nullbears don't really get caught much; they know how to mitigate the risks associated with their profession and they know that the only kills antagonists get are the ones given to them. Use scouts, use webbing alts, pay attention, fit a tank, one or more of these will deny any chance of a gank happening. Honestly it's bad game play as there is no real back and forth; the antagonist is entirely reactive, waiting for a chance to strike.



You want the game, and its players, to be able to sort out the good behaviors from the bad ones, rewarding the good, punishing the bad. It's honestly one of the few things that make the game unique. Considering a skillful and careful player can maintain extremely high levels of safety, I don't think CONCORD needs a buff or a change. You do not want to make it too hard to gank in high sec, nor too easy to remain safe. If anything I personally feel its too tilted towards the latter at the moment, but I am willing to hear it from both sides. I haven't ganked in HS in a long time, but at least from the antagonist side here, some people refused to be caught, while others simply let it happen - safety is a personal responsibility in this game, mechanics that do it for you removes part of what makes EvE, EvE. Basically, Its already to the point where you can be practically untouchable in HS, in my appraisal.

High sec is as safe as its players are informed.

Yes, I understand what the CSM does and is for. I would invite you to stop by my thread.

Sorry, perhaps this is just me but I cannot seem to find your proposed changes to CONCORD on your blog. Could you provide a link or a summary here?

But as to your point and has been pointed out above, you already have a better than 50% chance of "getting away" from a gank. Way more than 50% of the targets I consider ganking escape unscathed either because further investigation reveals they are too tanked, paying too much attention, a miscalculation on my part, or by just dumb luck warping away at the last minute. I would even venture to say anyone who knows what they are doing and spends a small amount of effort can avoid over 99% of all highsec ganks.

I am thinking though you mean to make the criminal highsec PvP encounters themselves less binary. I think such a thing is possible while keeping risk in highsec so I am curious about what ideas you might have.

As to risk, what is your current view on the risk vs. reward balance of highsec? Do you think the income levels possible in highsec are suitable for the current level of risk? If so, do you think this has any consequences for the game as a whole that you are concerned about?

Just quickly on the subject of risk... I felt safer mining in Provi than I do in High Sec. Earned more as well.

When I look at courier contracts, I sometime think "who would move that stuff for so little isk?". With the increase in Plex prices (last year they were about 800mill?) it is getting harder to plex an account by mining... The high end of the income levels possible in High Sec are, I am sure, ridiculous... but not everyone of us has 8 accounts logging in after downtime to mine an ice field to extinction, and then again when it comes back up again. The average Hisec carebear (who wont be reading these forums, or sadly voting in the election) will not be making that much.

I don't think risk vs reward is the only variable to consider. Fun vs reward is also very important.
Mining an Ice belt in a skiff is not much fun. There is not much to do except watch Netflix or browse youtube. The income I get from it is not enough to justify the lack of fun, and the risk is relatively minimal.

I am personally happy with high sec right now. I think the biggest misconception is that high sec is the safe zone, CCP has never pushed it as a safe zone more a safer area than the rest.

I have two characters that primarily make high sec their home and travel in it without incident with only the occasional KM. I think it's important to remember the role that gankers serve in the overall eve ecosystem and messing around with that will cause unintended consequences.

If your getting ganked follow the eve philosophy and get even. Blow them up.

Please define significant?
One could maintain that there are a significant group of players that think high sec ganking should be not possible........