These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#761 - 2012-01-08 03:53:35 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Cearain wrote:
[Hirana, I've already said Ithink its a bad idea to let alliances in but I'm starting to waiver.

There is no need for them to put whole corps in now as missions are so ridiculously easy, but I am willing to bet that a majority of the mission alts we are drowning in are operated from the blue-sea .. hell, with the sorry state of null at present FW will probably be used as an overflow camp when the primary null-farms are filled to capacity.

What good do you see coming out of regular gangs ballooning from the current 10-30 to 60-100 as population quintuples (low estimate). FW consists of a mere 170 systems with the HQ-pipes on either front being 5 systems long or less .. do you expect the tourists to spread out nice and even like .. do you expect them to play 'fair'?

FW becomes a resort. Null are being offered a time-share with all the amenities to entertain and thrill, at no down payment to speak of .. in fact the time-share has faulty ATM that spits out money to anyone who pass by.

There is no upside .. none that I can see at any rate.

PS: Forums ate my post so above is condensed X
PPS/Edit: The "cant enter 1/2 of high-sec" argument is DOA. Everyone, their mother, her dog and its fleas has alts running errands in high-sec .. that was even the case 3 years ago when I was in null and I don't see why that has changed on iota.



One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.

As long as they keep all 170 systems in play there is plenty of room, and blobbing won't be an issue.

But if they do go with some sort of restrictions on where meaningful plexing can happen (border ideas or something) then it will indeed be blob wins.

My corp is currently based near a relatively remote end the minmatar side of fw. We can plex in todifraun and surrounding systems if we like. Its been nice change of pace from the same old stuff in and around kourm.

I don't mind if they reduce the systems you can plex in but I do hope they keep them all spread out throughout the map and not all bunched together. So if they said you could plex in half of the systems and randomly picked wich those were so they were spread out that would be fine. But if they make all the plexing happen in and around kourm or arzad then the side that doesn't have the numbers will have nothing they can do plexing wise.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#762 - 2012-01-08 09:25:40 UTC
Cearain wrote:
One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.

Would love it if it was possible to create intra-militia alliances, if only to have better control with 'SPAIZ!' and a central place to plan/scheme/strategise that is not 3rd party (ie. web forums).
Cearain wrote:
As long as they keep all 170 systems in play there is plenty of room, and blobbing won't be an issue...

Wouldn't that only apply if the newcomers spread out and/or plex? Look at the militia's now .. majority never leaves the hub-pipes and plexers are still very much a minority. Afraid you are fooling yourself if you think that the addition of hundreds of active pilots will not cause blobs as long as all systems are in play.

Perhaps if/when plexing in itself is revamped, but we are looking at a 4-5 month period between alliances are let in and the summer patch hits, that is a long time if it means daily and constant blobs/camps .. and I frankly have doubts as to what they can/will do with plexing in that time as it is essentially the backbone of the FW mechanic.

But yeah, time will tell .. not getting my hopes up though Smile
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#763 - 2012-01-08 13:38:42 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Cearain wrote:
One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.

Would love it if it was possible to create intra-militia alliances, if only to have better control with 'SPAIZ!' and a central place to plan/scheme/strategise that is not 3rd party (ie. web forums).
Cearain wrote:
As long as they keep all 170 systems in play there is plenty of room, and blobbing won't be an issue...

Wouldn't that only apply if the newcomers spread out and/or plex? Look at the militia's now .. majority never leaves the hub-pipes and plexers are still very much a minority. Afraid you are fooling yourself if you think that the addition of hundreds of active pilots will not cause blobs as long as all systems are in play.

Perhaps if/when plexing in itself is revamped, but we are looking at a 4-5 month period between alliances are let in and the summer patch hits, that is a long time if it means daily and constant blobs/camps .. and I frankly have doubts as to what they can/will do with plexing in that time as it is essentially the backbone of the FW mechanic.

But yeah, time will tell .. not getting my hopes up though Smile




If you are not going to plex then you can go where ever you want in the 170 systems. Even if a few big sov holding alliances join they won't leave their sov space empty and bring *everyone.* I'm pretty sure there will be places that will tend to have your number of pilots.

The only problem will be if they bring allot more pilots in *and* make it so you can plex in only a few clusters.(which can be easilly covered by 2 or 3 blobs) If they do that then the side with fewer numbers will have nothing they can do in the occupancy war.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#764 - 2012-01-09 02:19:59 UTC
Cearain wrote:

If you are not going to plex then you can go where ever you want in the 170 systems. Even if a few big sov holding alliances join they won't leave their sov space empty and bring *everyone.* I'm pretty sure there will be places that will tend to have your number of pilots.

The only problem will be if they bring allot more pilots in *and* make it so you can plex in only a few clusters.(which can be easilly covered by 2 or 3 blobs) If they do that then the side with fewer numbers will have nothing they can do in the occupancy war.



This is an interesting point, because I sincerely doubt any Alliances are going to converge onto the FW zones and enlist just to take part of the joyful activity that plexing is at the moment :) It's just not going to be the draw.

My *guess* is that the ones that will join will be for one of two reasons -

1) Role play, though I'm fairly sure those like CVA and UK have said they might not join militias even if they could, for various reasons.

2) The opportunity to have an instant pool of seemingly easy targets to shoot at, in a concentrated area. AKA - the "Puppy Kickers" (Who will most likely be surprised at what they find).

Its possible Alliances could flood in an tip the scales in the plex war one way or another, but I doubt this is high on any Alliance's To-do list. Even if they did, its all the more reason for CCP to be focusing on fixing the entire system first, before changing the participation levels.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#765 - 2012-01-10 15:20:50 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Count NULL wrote:
Make it possible to kick out known spies. While not most pressing issue, there is nothing more annoying than to have a roaming fleet to be followed by a spy: who is in your militia, who you can't kill without loosing standing for yourself and your corp. Make it possible for general militia to vote them out without possibility to comeback for 3 month. This will go a long way towards making militia channels useful for anything else besides trolling. As it stands right now newbies are being kept in dark about all the action going on closed channels. Being able to kick people out of militia is just as important as letting them in.

Second thought: Add an other faction BS to LP store. It's stupid when everyone has to grind missions just to flood market with same item (i.e. Navy Domies ) as it gives best Isk/LP ratio. If you want to have more people in FW then you have to make sure that LP items market doesn't collapse, as it will force people to grind even more missions (or what ever else you replace them with) to support their PVP.


Being able to kick spais would be awesome, though probably problematic to put into practice - how do you get a militia wide vote? is it just a certain number of votes?


There are really 2 opposite ways ccp can address spys in fw. (I'm just addressing the occupancy part of the game, not the fights that are just for the fun of it.)

1) try to keep the relevant intel from them

2) make the intel so freely available that spys really accomplish nothing.

Its when you try to go down the middle that the problems occur.

Personally don't think its possible to exclude spys in fw so I don't think they can go with the first option even if we wanted. Moreover, since the first leads to the sort of null sec politics many in fw hate I would go with the second option.

The second option makes spys fairly harmless. If everyone in miltia knows what plexes are getting attacked by what size forces based on a game mechanic notification system then the ability of spys to screw you over has pretty much been eliminated.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Galatica789
Victory or Whatever
Nourv Gate Security Commission
#766 - 2012-01-11 15:11:17 UTC
I demand more Burger kings to be erected in the FW zones to spice things up WHOPPER STYLE!!!!
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#767 - 2012-01-11 18:04:51 UTC
Galatica789 wrote:
I demand more Burger kings to be erected in the FW zones to spice things up WHOPPER STYLE!!!!


Maybe they can be the official "food service" of the newly remodeled 24th Imperial Crusade station Shalee Lianne's been bargaining to obtain the construction permits for the last few months.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#768 - 2012-01-11 18:27:51 UTC
Cearain wrote:

One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.


This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment.

Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy.

There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective.

With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc.

I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines.

This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#769 - 2012-01-12 03:19:38 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:

One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.


This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment.

Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy.

There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective.

With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc.

I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines.

This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias.

Confirming we have no goals or objectives. Hence this is why Dal, Siseide. Lantorn, Vard and Auga are now under Amarr control Lol
Galatica789
Victory or Whatever
Nourv Gate Security Commission
#770 - 2012-01-12 14:28:16 UTC
I also demand Whopper and Whopper jr. RP!!!!!!!!!!!! Let my demands be heard CCP!!!
Draco Rosso
State War Academy
Caldari State
#771 - 2012-01-12 19:04:33 UTC
Updates?
Still waiting for the dev blob.... it's only been a few years since we got one about fw.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#772 - 2012-01-12 19:42:03 UTC
Draco Rosso wrote:
Updates?
Still waiting for the dev blob.... it's only been a few years since we got one about fw.


Well, I don't think we're getting one that was only about FW but Guard said they were working on a video blog that would "shed light on the upcoming FW changes". A FW-specific dev blog would be RAD though, I hope CCP considers it.

Its entirely possible that the controversy that ensued when we found out one of the updates would be Alliances joining FW has caused them to reconsider if / when that change would be implemented, though I'm not sure about any others. That's been the only concrete change described so far, other than Soundwave mentioning they are looking into the reward / consequence system for occupancy, but that's a summer thing, not something that would have been in the upcoming blog anyways.

Basically, we might have sent them back to the drawing board and postponed the blog if it was about Alliance involvement specifically What? But that's just pure speculation on my part. I haven't heard anything more recent than that...

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#773 - 2012-01-12 19:45:45 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Cearain wrote:

One upside is it may lead to some some better intercorp cooperation within fw. Too soon to tell though.


This is hands down the possible outcome that I am MOST cynical about, given the current environment.

Unity amongst the Faction Warfare corps is not only difficult to achieve, but also useless in and of itself if there isn't miltia-wide goals to be pursued. Right now, no organized groups of militia corps care enough about "winning" FW enough to make concerted, strategic, cross-timezone and cross-corp efforts to seize and hold occupancy.

There are little pushes here and there, little victories and losses, but no long-term strategic objective.

With a lot of corps scattered geographically, pursuing various territories and engaging a wide range of targets beyond just the enemy faction, there is a lot of room for disagreement and ego-driven disputes about how resources shoudl be shared, decisions made, blues adjusted, etc.

I say we need to get the war started again in earnest for their to be enough incentive for corps to set aside their individuality and self-sufficiency to work together across corp lines.

This could be entirely from my bias as a Minmatar pilot, it may not be the case in other militias.



This is why I suggested giving FW an effect that would actually matter (sec status change eventually leading to NPC soverignty change). If the goals are essentially trivial, then people aren't going to really commit to them.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#774 - 2012-01-12 20:00:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Malcanis wrote:

This is why I suggested giving FW an effect that would actually matter (sec status change eventually leading to NPC soverignty change). If the goals are essentially trivial, then people aren't going to really commit to them.


Well, to be fair, Har Harrison's right in that other militias HAVE been more unified and cooperative than the Minmatar Militia. historically.

Even though they'll never admit it all the MM's best PvP corps are actually filled with dedicated role players who simply enjoy playing the part of warring tribes out for their own glory. Blink

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#775 - 2012-01-12 20:17:57 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
..Basically, we might have sent them back to the drawing board and postponed the blog if it was about Alliance involvement specifically What? But that's just pure speculation on my part. I haven't heard anything more recent than that...

Certainly a theory, but if history is any guide then the more likely scenario is that they are just late as usual or deliberately ignoring us, also as usual Big smile
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#776 - 2012-01-12 20:35:54 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
or deliberately ignoring us, also as usual Big smile


I don't really think this is the case anymore, thankfully!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Galatica789
Victory or Whatever
Nourv Gate Security Commission
#777 - 2012-01-13 14:32:27 UTC
French Fries are required also
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#778 - 2012-01-13 15:43:20 UTC
Galatica789 wrote:
French Fries are required also


You better start contributing something useful, next time I'll flag you just as I would anyone else spamming off-topic chatter! Keep it to corp chat.....a lot of people have put a lot of hours into this thread and FW discussion in general.

You're a good pilot and experienced in the warzone - I welcome your input and feedback on where FW should go - but if you're going to post here, please put your SRS BIZNESS hat on first. Thanks.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Rel'k Bloodlor
Federation Front Line Report
Federation Front Line
#779 - 2012-01-13 18:35:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Rel'k Bloodlor
I think my biggest problem with were FW is going right now is with alliances being allowed. (at least on sisi for now) What will this mean for the very identity of FW. I got bad feelings about this being a huge game changer (this coming from me the the guy with all the hair brained ideas he wants just thrown in the game) and rule a breaker†. I believe that this will bust all the right things and my very well be a plot to kill this feature intentnaly by CCP ( I know, I know every one get your tin foil hats) as its going to harm each faction in an areas that they are already hurting in.

1)Amarr, the ground work has been done, the CVA has put its thumb in the pie before but will they again? If they do they will they absorb parts of the existing groups and then proceed to ignore the rest well splitting there time between flooding the war zone and F***ing of to null the rest of the time leaving a huge vacuum ware they were. If they don't the "mimalente republreation" most likely will play whack-a-mole with them every time more than 5 are in one place at one time as it stands there are less of them then any one else. As a group pride is a strong point of theirs (Amarrians and pride..go figure lol) but one the call is sent for order who will speak and will take a knee?


2)Caldari, they already have a problem with chest thumping, lack of centralization, shortage of role players that mean it and know what they mean*, throngs of non-PvPers, highest in game new player influx, and lastly the exclusive access buy proximity and nationality to the games largest market hub**. What will happen on the day the flood gates open? keep in mind that by population alone they of all factions will get washed out with PvE alliances, ego driven war-dec alliances, and null-sec spin-off alliances. Meany will try to lead most will not heed all will be frustrated.

*dumar is an exption and his level of role playing is only equaled buy his level of crazy....if such a thing CAN be.
**this pulls any one on a fence to there corner, as it stands there LP rewards tho they have a high demand also have the lowest price. it can only go down.


3)Galente, we as it is have the attention span of starved wolves with AD HD. One we plex we take every thing and one we chase you you have to go back to hi-sec to lose us. Our leadership is centralized some what but has no grand plan. Witch is great for what we are now but poison for alliances. Our blood lust will be our undoing. We as a group will take any consideration of alliance formation solely based on fights. Weather this means a merger with republic forces or out side groups, if the payment is in blood the vote will be swift and decisive. If our opposing faction folds the former will happen "mimalente republreation" and our presence in black rise will fade, we will become the Amarr's problem. If the CVA go Amarr, or any huge group(s) go Caldari we will make any deal with the devil to get in on the bloodbath.


4)Minmatar, gifted with a already establish low-sec ecosystem, sold player base, easy to identify role playing MO, and strong PvP drive have achieved a good thing as is, how can you add to it and not lose some thing else? You can't they will get spoiled, weather growing to large for the Amarr alone, or an Amarr and CVA/other merger blowing Amarr militia's size up over nite, or just getting watered down buy the influx of new groups to the point were they revert back to the pirates they are.

†We ARE in an alliance with the empire we serve. Dose this not break some CONCORD and/or faction's laws regarding pod-pilot's, there corporations, sovereignty, and economic power getting this involved?. From a "fluff" stand point this whole game is them "real humans" keeping us busy and appeased. Buy most citizens ideals we should be wiped out as the deathless abominations we are. The factions need us as a buffer so here we are, driving there economy's paying there taxes with one rule. We deal with each other and leave there space under there control. How can us having the ability to dogpile in to their wars en mass not be a threat to there ruler ship if one side were to "win".

Now enuff of my opinions and on with the conspiracy theory!!!!!!

Of all the things they could do, of all the things suggested and proposed, and with the amazing DEVS they have THIS is their "fix". Remember the round table? Remember the rumor of internal CCP hate for FW. This stinks of wiggling the table the deck of cards is built on. It seems like a small thing, and it is. Of all the ways to let FW break it's self this is the simplest. To make FW a useless shadow of null, to make a reason to scrap it. To destabilize it in such a way that the only recourse is to over hall it as a feature to the exclusion of all others, some thing only a minority of the player base would want.some thing they need not cater to because the shouts of the other larger player base will be there shield, no further reason for the scrap will be needed. FW will die the way we all wanted it to, in a huge F***ing bloody mess.

TL:DR
evil wizards are after our gold

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#780 - 2012-01-13 19:07:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Cearain wrote:

Again you seem to refer to documents not even written by ccp employees to somehow prove ccp’s intent.
We have the mixture of pvp and npcs with plexes. It fails. You seem to think the solution is to make plexing pay more isk and create consequences. But paying more isk for a bad boring mechanic does not improve the game a all. It makes it worse.


You're absolutely right, those documents were written by the CSM, not by CCP. I referenced those because I assume that those statements, votes, etc. were created as a result of, not in spite of, with conversations with the developers, and that the CSM isn't just pulling those statements about CCP out of thin air. It is entirely possible that they did.

But since you're challenging me to dig deep, I'll do just that. I present to you CCP's clear vision for Faction Warfare - straight from their own mouths. And yes, its been all about smaller-gang warfare, systems built to resist blobbing, and always hardcore PvP-centric - not "PvP lite". I agree with this vision completely, and believe this document should continue to provide the framework for further development. As you've said all along - CCP's intentions for a FW system that is PvP focused does NOT mesh well with the resulting FW mechanics that involve a ton of PvE instead. I don't want to be misunderstood here - shooting rats is not how I want to advance in FW either. My current rank of Valklear General is utterly meaningless - it means I spent a week running missions. That's a shame, and I look forward to that being changed.

Quote:
You claimed that missions and plexes should try to mix pvp and pve but the only reason you give for this is some anecdotal stories how you got a few fights that way. However, as I explained it is unlikely that you got those fights because of the npcs. You got those fights because of the beacons in local. You have never offered any sort of analysis of how npcs promote pvp.


I haven't claimed missions AND plexes should mix PvE and PvP, I've agreed all along plexes should be about PvP, I simply maintain that the missions can be done in a way that enables PvP to be done there as well, and not only by solo players.

Quote:
I have posted numerous reasons explaining why npcs decrease pvp opportunities.(forced pve fits, forces your fleet to have many more ships so the other side won’t engage etc. etc.) There has never been any decent arguments how they will increase pvp in the long run. Just your stories about how a few times you got some fights by baiting others while you were doing missions.


You're right, its NOT the NPC's that drive PvP, it never has been. I've always referenced the fact that the missions are on public overview. That will continue to be the case - as long as missions are on overviews, they will attract PvP, and pilots will use them to bait PvP. What I've responded to is the fact that the PvP they attract is interceptor chasing bombers. Boring, and lame. By tweaking the NPC AI, we can change the dynamic from interceptors chasing bombers to any number of ship compositions that are viable for completing the missions. Should missions be the main thing driving PvP throughout the warzone? Of course not. Should we adjust them so that the inevitable PvP that ends up inside them (as a result of the overview, not the NPCs) becomes more varied and less stale? Absolutely.

Quote:
Seriously, Hans think it through. Get a concrete idea of how fw could be great or let it be. Don’t just keep repeating half-baked ideas and saying well “some think this some think that.” Shooting rats sucks. Admit it. Paying people more isk to shoot more rats in fw plexes is a **** idea. If you don’t realize it yet, figure it out. Get a clear understanding of what needs to be done, before you push for change.


There's no need to get accusatory here - I think you keep reacting to a misunderstanding about what I'm saying. The bottom line is some do think one way, or another. I've worked hard to allow a dialogue to take place in the various threads, rather than simply club everyone's ideas down with my own because I think they're superior. I will continue to play that role.

NPC's do NOT drive PvP, I agree. Your assessment of this is correct. All I've ever said is that FW pilots need isk income, missions are fine for that purpose, lest plexing and other *PvP-based* occupancy activities devolve into a farmed income themselves. My point has consistently been that every aspect of FW should be PvP-related, and that includes the missions. That is why I praise the fact that you must publically expose yourself to PvP when running them as a FW pilot, and argued only that they should encourage more varied ship compositions for completion than the standard bomber setup people abuse nowadays.

If you want to know what MY vision of FW is, just read the Dev blog that I linked to above. They are one are the same. The reality of FW falls short of this - in many ways.

I kindly ask that you not read too much into my defense of posters like Esna that are sharing their opinions, because everyone here deserves a voice. You misinterpret my defense of payouts for plexes as me endorsing an NPC-based system. That is not how I feel at all. By leaving NPC's inside plexes, and than paying pilots to complete them, you are cloning missions, not promoting PvP. I ONLY think payment or other direct economic motivations for plex completion are acceptable under the provision that they are a PvP-based system, the gameplay inside must be seperate and distinct from that of traditional missions. Ultimately, paying people for PvP victories is by far the cheapest, and least dynamic way of encouraging warfare. It's one solution, but certainly not the best.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary