Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No.

People should be able to post on whatever character they like.

Using different characters can help lend credibility to an argument at times.

For example, Scip is my main (with >8000 posts in the forum) and if there is a topic that is pvp related, it is easy for someone to look at my killboard and see where my pvp experience lies and make a judgement whether I might know what I am talking about in that particular thread.

However, if I post on Scip in relation to industry or hauling, that's far less obvious. So in those threads, I instead post on my industry alt, who also has a killboard littered with the occasional blockade runner loss to bubble camps and a very industry focused corp history. In a similar vein, others can gain some independent measure of whether the information I post with her is based on actual experience in game, or just sperg/noise.

I would hope someone running for the CSM would be able to think a bit deeper on an issue than that.

I have been there too.. In fact I created Borat Guereen as an alt to fight against the system because of the very same reason initially. At the time, my other alts had assets to lose, but since I have re-organized myself to avoid this kind of issues, and I also had had assets destroyed before that because of what I had posted under my main alts.

I truly believe the alt system helps more the power players than the little guys. I do understand it gives protection to them too, and I do not deny that at all. It is just that like the cynos, it favors larger groups more than smaller groups or solo players.

The suggestions I am bringing can be misread because these are complex issues. And as you point out, not all suggestions may be good, or hurt too much the little guys, and I am always ready to revisit my positions. For example I abandoned the idea I was pushing last year to force players to link all their alts via EULA change, to instead encourage players to link their alts by giving those that do so a minor economic advanatge. I still need to be able to express these ideas and discuss the, as unlike larger groups, the campaign and these forums are the main place I interact with the community, not having any corp or alliance forums and such and mostly playing solo.

Working to limit the influences of the power players that lead the larger groups is what I am all about. Understanding how to not screw the little guys too is why I bring up these discussions, knowing that I am not infaillible and need others little guys to speak out too.

Zhilia has been my forum alt for 10 years. She has ~4500 posts. To my knowledge, a half dozen people connect my main to her, though I haven't made much effort to mask the link.

Forcing me to post with my main would obliterate that record. Is that really what you want?

Oh, I also use my market alt to post in sell orders. Because she handles my money. Why would I use this character for that? Why would I use my main, who is mostly broke, for that?

And besides, how would you determine my main? I know which one I consider "main" but the character I log on *most* often is actually an industrial guy on another account entirely.

why is that?


what if say mittani came up with a great idea on how to fix a major issue in eve. however because he was forced to post as mittani everyone just Grr goonesed it into the ground. your ideas should stand or fall on their own merits not on the merits of the one posting it.

if you are worried about hidden motives don't... i mean have you seen the forums? we so much as think we might detect the wif of a hint that there may be some way this advantages some one or some group directly we tear it apart.

Yes, I have seen the forums.

As a matter of fact my first posting was to talk about the issue of ESS placed in anomalies.

I never had posted before and I got the clear feeling ina few eeks around this discussion that Null sec groups were using their alt-influence to destroy any attempt to make the ESS do what they were supposed to do in the first place when unvelied by CCP, i.e. force the defenders to come defend them if they were attacked, in exchange for a minor increase of benefit from their local PVE activity.

Instead the Null sec carebears found an exploit to have them defended by rat NPCs and trigger the reward without risk via pods, which to this day is still the case as no CSM raised this issue (at last they did some lip service to the placement of ESS on top of citadels, which has been changed because it really was too much and nopt as defendable than the "creativity" of having rats defend your assets ).

There was nothing there that could be argumented here from a different play-style perspective, which led me to conclude than running for CSM was the only way to defend these ideas, as the "community" was not interested to hear about other play-styles needs here.

I also assumed that I was not the only solo or micro-corp lurker player and it could work. Obviously, it's been two years and it has not worked and still I do hope a little bit longer that it could. I am too much of an optimist, which is a bad character flaw.

.. but you are not the only one to have had that idea and i remember seeing it supported and torn down from both sides (i was in support) many against it made a valid argument about using your environment to your advantage and gave many suggestions how you can use this against a group

I agree, and an idea need to be fine-tuned through discussions and debates, and looked at from different play-styles perspectives, which an open CSM campaign debate can bring.

Based on the voting system in soviet Russia

I shiptoast with my main, why don't you?