These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Jonatan Reed for CSM XII

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#1 - 2017-02-05 13:51:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonatan Reed
Hi space friends,

I am Jonatan Reed, or JR, of Origin. Currently, I console Elo over Skype when he loses a DOTA match, try to convince him to come back to the game, run his corp in our alliance Did He Say Jump (DHSJ), and I am here to announce that I am running for CSM as a representative for all low sec residents.

About Me

I have played eve since 2009, spending the first 2 years of my eve career in Mostly Harmless before the collapse of the old NC, and spent another year in the drone regions in the old IRC coalition before joining Origin. and Black Legion in Mid-2012.

Since that point, I spent most of my time in Origin and took a couple breaks to play around in wormholes and took a 8 month break in 2015 for IRL reasons before rejoining Origin. when White Legion was formed. I subsequently started managing Origin after Elo Knight took another break and have been managing the corp and being part of DHSJ leadership and one of its main FCs.

My ideal gameplay ranges from mid-large size fleet pvp down to solo.

CSM Platform

I think that a lot of focus of EVE is on nullsec and CCP devotes a lot of resources to improving nullsec at the expense of other areas of space and one of the most neglected areas is lowsec. I think that the CSM desperately needs someone who represents the entire lowsec playerbase, including faction warfare (FW).


Lowsec Vision

I definitely want to bring a perspective to eve where fights between entities aren't based on sov and massive fleets, but are based almost exclusively on structures and small/mid sized entities.
Citadels, and more importantly structures like POSes and POCOs are the crux of fights in almost all of lowsec.


    Citadels and Structures
  1. Re-examination of Citadel Vulnerability Timers - CCP plans to replace POSes with citadels and the to be announced "drilling platforms,” but this will create a landscape of largely uncontestable structures that have mechanics that overwhelming favor the defender.

  2. “Drilling Platforms” - The proper introduction of “drilling platforms” will be critical to avoid the evaporation of a major content generator in lowsec. POSes provide content by allowing individuals, corporations, and alliances to contest ISK-producing assets in space. If “drilling platforms” are governed by the same mechanics as citadels and engineering complexes (i.e. vulnerability and reinforcement timers), we risk losing what is arguably the largest generator of content in lowsec. After all, Asakai was fought over a cobalt moon.



Faction Warfare

  1. Even though I am not personally enlisted in FW currently, as someone who enjoys lowsec pvp in a faction warfare zone and has done it on a few alts, I think the following changes are necessary to FW to benefit both FW and non-FW players.

  2. Suspect Timer on Entering FW Complex: - I think suspect timers should be given to non-militia players who enter a FW complex. By doing so, militia players--new and old alike--will not receive a security status penalty for contesting the complex on behalf of their militia against neutral entities. This is especially beneficial to new players, as many rely on high security space to re-arm and re-ship after entering their respective warzones.

  3. Resetting FW Complex Timers - I think that FW timers should be reset back if someone leaves the complex. It forces people to stay in sites or risk losing their progress, which benefits all pvp’ers.

  4. Increase LP From Killing Opposing Militia Targets - I think that more loyalty points should be awarded to players who engage in pvp with opposing militias by increasing the payout for loyalty point bounties. This promotes content by rewarding PVP over PVE.

  5. Citadels in Faction Warfare - I think that citadels should have FW system control lockouts applied to them as they apply to stations. A hostile militia should not be able to anchor and online a citadel in a system they do not control, and should not be able to dock in any citadel that is anchored in a system that is not controlled by them even if they are on the access list or if it's freeported.


Capitals

  1. Examining Dreadnaught role in current capital meta - I think dreadnaughts need a close examination to find them a new place in eve as carriers and faxes have cemented themselves as the primary capitals for almost all alliances in eve. Faxes are enormously cost-effective against dreads, in that a normal T2 fit fax can basically tank 3 to 4 times its value in dreads. Carriers exacerbate the fax imbalance with their utility between capital neuts and support fighters and their ability to receive reps and capacitor from said triage.

  2. Examining the Dreadnaught role in structure bashing - With the introduction of citadel/structure damage caps and the impending removal of POSes, dreadnoughts will lose their niche in eve as siege platforms. A sieged dread is easily killed by a properly fit citadel. You cannot one-cycle reinforce a citadel like you could for even the largest upgunned POS.

  3. Rorquals should not be jump HICs - I think that Rorquals need to receive a penalty of not being able to use warp disabling modules when they hit their panic module.


Overall TL;DR
Specific attention to overall citadel mechanics and reinforcement mechanics, how drilling platforms will be implemented, and quality of life changes in FW which helps the health of lowsec in general, and a look at how dreadnaughts factor into capital gameplay, and also jumphics

hmu on tweetfleet slack as Jonatan Reed, or twitter as @TehRoot or if you would like to reach out to me.

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#2 - 2017-02-05 13:51:39 UTC
reserved

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Mr Black Uchonela
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2017-02-05 19:01:07 UTC
Endorsing JR for CSM.

I happen to know that JR, despite residing in what some would refer to as larger entities in eve, actual does a lot of solo and small gang pvp. Both of which have been lacking attention in the larger scopes of eve and i think JR will represent us well.

FW is definitely something that has been lacking an overhaul for years. I remember back when my eve career started, that it was FW that started my pvp adventures, but it was also FW which made me look for greener fields and the mechanics quickly became dreadful and unintuitive. Which the recent development focus on alpha clones, NPE and other venues leaning towards attracting capsuleers to the game, it only becomes natural that FW, as often opted as the new player go-to place for first pvp encounters, should soon get it turns as the center of attention.
Toni'Tourette
Forth TIl Valhalla
#4 - 2017-02-05 23:16:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Toni'Tourette
Full Support for Jonatan Reed for CSM

He is a keystone to our operations, even if they are behind the scenes and go un-noticed by the whole of the alliance, the knowledge he has and the skill he has developed while playing eve, makes him a great contestant for the CSM would enjoy seeing what he could bring to the table for the Lo-Sec groups.

Making Low Sec Great Again

Make
Eve
Great
Again
QuickSwipe Collier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2017-02-05 23:18:07 UTC
Vote for JR if you want to nerf Jump Dessies. I don't want to but that's on his agenda.
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#6 - 2017-02-05 23:28:53 UTC
Toni'Tourette wrote:
Full Support for Jonatan Reed for CSM

He is a keystone to our operations, even if they are behind the scenes and go un-noticed by the whole of the alliance, the knowledge he has and the skill he has developed while playing eve, makes him a great contestant for the CSM would enjoy seeing what he could bring to the table for the Lo-Sec groups.

Making Low Sec Great Again


MEGA

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Maphistu
The Order of the Paradox
#7 - 2017-02-06 03:53:42 UTC
About time low-sec get a representation! Pirate
Zach Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2017-02-06 23:20:54 UTC
As a white man, I can 100% throw my support behind Jonatan Reed because, white people. Thanks Obama.
Popko Washington
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2017-02-07 17:28:18 UTC
Jonatan Reed is a good man. A vote for him is a vote for a greater lowsec.
Zomboy Alfrir
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2017-02-09 18:27:20 UTC
As someone who flies with Jonatan on most fleets, I can vouch for his knowledge of the game, his will to help our group and his leadership in all combat situations. He is also the kind of guy that will listen to your ideas and give you constructive criticism on them. I think he'll be a great addition to the Council.
Prometheus Hinken
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#11 - 2017-02-10 08:01:34 UTC
I like that you didn't purely focus on the PvP aspect of lowsec life. What are some things you believe can be improved upon for the overall health of the lowsec ecosystem?


How would you go about communicating issues from all lowsec residents (FW, Pirate, and strictly PvE) to CCP?

What potential changes that were announced do you feel area gamebreaking to lowsec but not any other space, if anything at all (Not counting Citadels in FW space)?

You mentioned increasing LP payout for faction militias for killing an opposing faction's player. Are there any other LP buffs that you would be behind? How do you feel about a faction at Tier 1 receiving 50% of their normal payout as it currently stands?
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#12 - 2017-02-11 00:01:33 UTC
Quote:
I like that you didn't purely focus on the PvP aspect of lowsec life. What are some things you believe can be improved upon for the overall health of the lowsec ecosystem?


I think that my FW changes I advocate for will definitely help the health of the average lowsec inhabitant, and have been asked for by the overall FW community and regular lowsec pvp'ers for the past few years

Quote:
How would you go about communicating issues from all lowsec residents (FW, Pirate, and strictly PvE) to CCP?


I really liked Noobman's townhalls that he did for wormholes. I'd use the same format in conjunction with any other lowsec representatives so that we could as a group bring up all of our collective issues and discuss them with the lowsec community at large. Dev's would be invited to attend and listen/speak and members in general would be invited to submit suggestions, bugs, and issues in general to any of the CSM lowsec representatives that would be present to bring up in the meeting for discussion.

Quote:
What potential changes that were announced do you feel area gamebreaking to lowsec but not any other space, if anything at all (Not counting Citadels in FW space)?


Unfortunately, I have proposed changes that are some of the same changes beyond the FW citadel changes that previous CSM members have pushed for and CCP have mostly ignored. I'm not the only lowsec candidate this year, and I'm really hoping that the lowsec community at large will vote en masse this year to push more representatives of our gameplay and lifestyle onto the CSM so maybe CCP will finally listen to our problems and suggestions seriously.

Additionally, the serious talk of drilling platforms replacing POSes within the next year in accordance with the roadmap demands that lowsec players from both FW and the larger lowsec alliances be involved deeply with these mechanics because....

The drilling platform changes effect both FW and non-FW lowsec alliance. They both derive content and income over those moon towers. I think that using current citadel mechanics, mostly in the way vulnerability timers work, is complete **** frankly. It takes the timezone defense to obscene levels. At least right now you can strontkite if a tower is going to have an unfavorable timer for reinforce. There's no ability to strontkite on citadels without keeping a minimum amount of DPS required to pause the timer until the reinforce cycle is favorable to you.

In general I really feel like current citadel mechanics being brought to the moon mining area is the single biggest threat to lowsec, for the reasons I explained above.

Quote:
You mentioned increasing LP payout for faction militias for killing an opposing faction's player. Are there any other LP buffs that you would be behind? How do you feel about a faction at Tier 1 receiving 50% of their normal payout as it currently stands?


FW was never intended to be a PvE-centric system. It was designed as a PVP system with PVE incentives. I am behind increasing pvp interactions by adjusting FW LP payouts for PVP activities, but not PVE.

I appreciate your input obviously on all of my ideas.

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Prometheus Hinken
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-02-11 08:52:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Hinken
Jonatan Reed wrote:


FW was never intended to be a PvE-centric system. It was designed as a PVP system with PVE incentives. I am behind increasing pvp interactions by adjusting FW LP payouts for PVP activities, but not PVE.

I appreciate your input obviously on all of my ideas.


I would argue that if there are more PvE-focused activities, such as increasing LP payout for Tier 1 systems to something reasonable (Like to 75% payout, rather than the current 50% payout), it would give more incentive to flip systems, and thus generate PvP by default. The side effect of that is more warp-core stabbed frigates running plexes, but IMO that's the same frustration as roaming in nullsec and being reported 10 jumps out.

Other than that, thanks for taking time to really reply to my questions.
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#14 - 2017-02-11 14:47:07 UTC
Prometheus Hinken wrote:
Jonatan Reed wrote:


FW was never intended to be a PvE-centric system. It was designed as a PVP system with PVE incentives. I am behind increasing pvp interactions by adjusting FW LP payouts for PVP activities, but not PVE.

I appreciate your input obviously on all of my ideas.


I would argue that if there are more PvE-focused activities, such as increasing LP payout for Tier 1 systems to something reasonable (Like to 75% payout, rather than the current 50% payout), it would give more incentive to flip systems, and thus generate PvP by default. The side effect of that is more warp-core stabbed frigates running plexes, but IMO that's the same frustration as roaming in nullsec and being reported 10 jumps out.

Other than that, thanks for taking time to really reply to my questions.


No problem. Obviously I'm open to feedback and you make a good point. Increases in FW payout like such can have benefits and side effects that transcend the simple "pve vs pvp". I just like that as a rule of thumb when talking about buffing LP payouts as a whole.

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
QuickSwipe Collier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2017-02-12 23:44:46 UTC
Will you campaign to remove the Sov requirement for supercapitals?
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#16 - 2017-02-12 23:54:10 UTC
QuickSwipe Collier wrote:
Will you campaign to remove the Sov requirement for supercapitals?


I obviously think supercap prolifieration needs to be accelerated

/s

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Duke Heuer
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2017-02-13 02:03:35 UTC
Remove the Travel Ban:

get rid of bubbles and remote sebos. I want to travel around EVE and not stay docked.
BlazingBunny
Criterion.
#18 - 2017-02-15 23:12:17 UTC
So as a person and as an alliance mate, I fully endorse JR. I do want to know 3 things. One do you think removing the refit ability for triage only, was a bad idea or a good idea. Two, What way would you try to keep lowsec from turning into an area where large blocs to dominate exclusively. Thirdly, do you think EVE as a game is getting less skill intensive to benefit a more open market?
Jonatan Reed
Wildcard.
Boundary Experts
#19 - 2017-02-22 01:07:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonatan Reed
BlazingBunny wrote:
So as a person and as an alliance mate, I fully endorse JR. I do want to know 3 things. One do you think removing the refit ability for triage only, was a bad idea or a good idea. Two, What way would you try to keep lowsec from turning into an area where large blocs to dominate exclusively. Thirdly, do you think EVE as a game is getting less skill intensive to benefit a more open market?


I believe removing the refit ability for triage and all capitals in general with an aggression timer was a good idea.

Second, I think that lowsec in general can't be prevented from becoming bloc-dominated, but it can be hard to run huge empires by making structures that make money stay vulnerable to small entitles, like moon poses and pocos.

I think EVE is in a middle zone. It's easier then ever to be a new player joining the game, and it's definitely still a veteran's game. This is a fine line however.

ELITE PVP, WHADDUP
Otsdarva IV
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#20 - 2017-02-25 15:38:59 UTC
12Next page