These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Issler Dainze for CSM7! Hear the bears roar!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#261 - 2012-02-06 22:18:15 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:

So let me know what you all think about these ideas. Let's see if we can get the areas of primary focus down to the top few and then develop a great plan to get support and win some seats in CSM 7!
Issler


a. mining Move to other parts of space, why would there be mining in highly industrialized parts of space, surely most of it would have been mined long ago, so leave just enough for newbies to try out. More Gravimetric sites in the other areas of space, makes miners a little less vulnerable when they have to be scanned down.

b. high missions All High payout missions should be tied to Faction War type mechanics, where players compete over lucrative PvE payouts. High Sec space invaded by Incursions should drop security levels to that of Low Sec or Null for the duration of the Incursion, this will make it not only more interesting and make more sense, but also open up more opportunities for RP with players able to side with the Sansha.

c. casual play Empire Space, both High and Low, should be governed by NPC Faction politics (As opposed to Null which is purely Player politics) This makes for a less demanding and easier navigated environment for Casual players without infringing on the spirit of what EVE is about.

d. NPC corps See Malcanis' High Sec Manifesto.

e. ambulation Not a High Sec issue.

f. alternatives to Technetium Should stay in Null, it's one of the reasons for controlling space out there. That said the ability to Raid and pillage some of that resource in Null without capturing moons would be good, but it's not a High Sec issue.

g. RP Make standings to NPCs matter, Make Faction War an integrated aspect of all activities in Empire Space. Allow players to side with the Sansha in Incursions. Basically make all player actions towards NPCs have lasting meaningful consequences both positive and negative.

h. exploration. Like mining this is something that shouldn't really be in High Sec. If you want to improve exploration as a profession it should be expanded upon in Wormhole space
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#262 - 2012-02-06 23:10:02 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:

So let me know what you all think about these ideas. Let's see if we can get the areas of primary focus down to the top few and then develop a great plan to get support and win some seats in CSM 7!
Issler


a. mining Move to other parts of space, why would there be mining in highly industrialized parts of space, surely most of it would have been mined long ago, so leave just enough for newbies to try out. More Gravimetric sites in the other areas of space, makes miners a little less vulnerable when they have to be scanned down.

b. high missions All High payout missions should be tied to Faction War type mechanics, where players compete over lucrative PvE payouts. High Sec space invaded by Incursions should drop security levels to that of Low Sec or Null for the duration of the Incursion, this will make it not only more interesting and make more sense, but also open up more opportunities for RP with players able to side with the Sansha.

c. casual play Empire Space, both High and Low, should be governed by NPC Faction politics (As opposed to Null which is purely Player politics) This makes for a less demanding and easier navigated environment for Casual players without infringing on the spirit of what EVE is about.

d. NPC corps See Malcanis' High Sec Manifesto.

e. ambulation Not a High Sec issue.

f. alternatives to Technetium Should stay in Null, it's one of the reasons for controlling space out there. That said the ability to Raid and pillage some of that resource in Null without capturing moons would be good, but it's not a High Sec issue.

g. RP Make standings to NPCs matter, Make Faction War an integrated aspect of all activities in Empire Space. Allow players to side with the Sansha in Incursions. Basically make all player actions towards NPCs have lasting meaningful consequences both positive and negative.

h. exploration. Like mining this is something that shouldn't really be in High Sec. If you want to improve exploration as a profession it should be expanded upon in Wormhole space


a. I think there would still be mining in areas under concord control. Concord would have an itnerest to keep the peace where valuable resources are found.

b. I'd say low sec should be where high pay out shoulld be as well. I thought about running with a low sec focus as it is one area in Eve needing a lot of luvin'. But for now I'm leaving it for later in terms of my focus with the CSM.

c. Basically Agree.

d. Ambulation seems to be an issue of more interest to the player base I seek to represent so I am definitely leaving it on the table.

f. No, it is a issue for manufactures. I'm not saying remove it from the moons but finally provide an alternative reaction to make it like all the other high ends.

g. Worth exploring in greater detail for sure.

h. I disagree, I think it could be evolved to be another new set of PvE experiences.

Issler
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#263 - 2012-02-06 23:12:48 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Houm... still thinking about a name, but meanwhile...

We can split the focus points into two cathegories:

- Things that could be acomplished as "fixes" (change/add mechanics)

mining, exploration, more / better missions...

- Things that should be created from scratch

WiS content, casual gameplay, endgame content for hisec...

In a way, there are so many hisec issues that need attention that they can't be forwarded to CCP all in a row; nullsec CSM will be pushing two or three issues as most, and thus spreading hisec's efforts in many areas could be self defeating. Also, whatever candidate was elected, should look forward to cooperate with nullsec CSM, else would be regarded as obstructionist which would be harmful for hisec interests.

The point is telling CCP that hisec also wants their attention, and then go and push a couple of issues. The more handy are, likely, mining and WiS. Mining because CSM is already willing to think of it, so a hisec candidate should protect hisec interest (not nerfing ores nor ice in hisec nor WH, FAI), assist the CSM in pushing CCP to defeat bots, et cetera; and WiS because arguably it's absolute bullshit to have the avatar technology and let it rot in a prison cell for a year or two or how long takes team avatar to grow to a usable size and get the necessary workforce. In the meanwhile, the NEx could use some attention, be filled with the already developed content and get a price cut... then add limited multiplayer ability to CQ (invite buddies), add some simple animations (emotes) and let players determine how to use that. Or, even in a smaller scale, just enable to switch clothes w/o redoing the portrait. Throw us a bone.

Also, from a moral standpoint would be interesting to ask what the hell did they planned to do with the CQ provided they are developing WiS gameplay now, rather than before launching Incarna... Question


Key to success of whoever we get elected is their ability to work with the rest of the CSM. I will be important to cooperate. The point of my effort is balancing CCP's focus and not domination of a single player viewpoint.

Issler
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#264 - 2012-02-06 23:26:34 UTC
Gizu Ichosira wrote:
Issler ,

My small group of friends (real friends, not alts) gathers a few times a week to assist the Empire factions in dealing with the ever-present NPC threat. I have also tried mining, trading, manufacturing and research in both high-security and low-security space, however I find these to be less fun and less profitable than running NPC missions with friends. Although I have no interest in harrassing other Capsuleers for 'lulz' or 'tears', I do appreciate the element of risk and excitement introduced by the sociopathic sadists who enjoy inflicting grief upon others.

Empire space needs better representation on the CSM. I agree that miners need new content, and I am impressed with your resiliance against trolling. Your candidate will have our support.

I would also like to suggest some changes to improve gameplay in Empire space:

-Non-mutual war declarations should not be valid in high-security systems. As it is today, Capsuleers in corporations that become the target of a war declaration have no choice but to leave their corp or remain docked indefinitely.

-Members of NPC corporations should be automatically involved in faction warfare, but only in low-security systems. This 'lite' FW will improve RP and encourage new Capsuleers to form fleets to enter low-sec space for PvP. If they wish to fly in low-sec without this added risk, they can join or create a player corp.

-Add the ability to 'undo' a gate jump if the other side of a gate is hostile and the Capsuleer does not wish to engage the campers. A 30 minute cool-down timer before the ability can be used again would prevent mis-use. Campers can still perform a strategic role by denying entry to a system, or attempt to catch the ships that ignore the danger and continue into the system.

-Stealing from a can or a wreck should evoke a global aggression timer. This would not incur the wrath of CONCORD - they have better things to do - however it would allow other players to punish the thief. CONCORD's current policy allows suicide gankers use 'alts' to collect loot from their victim's wreck with no risk. This change would also allow combat ships to protect miners from can-flippers.

-Add a way for Capsuleers to warn their Corporation or Alliance members when they suspect that a neutral ship is an 'alt' belonging to an enemy. They could be marked as "Suspected hostile alt" or "Suspected alt for Capsuleer [name]" on a shared persistant list. I assume some groups are already doing this out-of-game. It would be nice to see it included as a tool we can all use.

-Remove the ability to advertise contracts in local chat. That is not the purpose of local chat. If people want to buy your deadspace afterburner they will search for it in the existing contract search interface.



1. Wardec mechanisms need a revamp to be sure. Right now there are so many hoops little corps go through to deal with the mayhem they can create (corp jumping, temp to NPC corps....). One thing I've always felt is there should be some sort of declared "you win its over, now leave us alone" condition or in other words some stated goal that brings a war to an end. Before I get spammed by everyone that claims I am trying to propose some solution to the wardec in highsec issue, I'm not. I support looking at it in great detail and seeing if we can improve it because folks on both sides aren't satisfied with it as is.

2. I liike the idea. I would love to hear what other folks think. I've maintained for a long time what I'd like to see happen in low sec is a mechanism evolve where player organization can essentially become the local law enforcement agencies and that idea seems like a step in that direction.

3. I want to see gate guns return to what they were originally intended to be. Righ now they only thing they actually do is accidently get a noob ganked. Low sec pirates can permacamp the gate guns and that was never their intention. What I have suggested is that the forces at the gate gradually escalate so that permanent low sec gate camps become a thing of the past. Another great topic for some deep conversations about ways to improve this aspect of Eve.

4. The can/wreck idea definitely is something could support.

5. We are constantly updating individual standings to deal with hostile neutrals.

6. I agree with unspamming the local chat! Spam is meant to be fried and eaten in a sandwich, not to make my local chat channel blink non-stop with contract nonsense.

Sorry I hadn't gotten back to you sooner! Thanks for your post!

Issler
Arcathra
Technodyne Ltd.
#265 - 2012-02-07 07:24:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcathra
Here are my general ideas about the main topics:

a. Mining
Needs a big overhaul I think. Maybe moving away from the belt mining to gravimetric, exploration and comet mining. Nearly all belts should be scanned down, miners should need to move around more and low-sec needs considerable better mining sites than high-sec, especially in the "higher" low-sec (0.4 to 0.3).
This may also help with bots, because those mining sites could be mined dry fast and a miner would have to scan new sites constantly. Some of those mining sites might contain combat NPC or even in some rare cases other mining related rewards.
This maybe would also need a rework of the mining barges or a new class of mining vessels ("mining explorers").

b. High-Sec Missions
Not only High-Sec Missions have to be reworked, Low-Sec (and Null-Sec) missions, too. Missions should be much more like Sleepers oder Incursion-Sansha. Make them like this: up until level 3 they are for solo pilotes. The new level 3 missions have a payout of about half the ISK of the current level 4 and should be about as hard (or harder). Level 4 missions would be made for small gangs of 3 to 5 pilots. Those missions may have the need for support ships (logistics, command ships, interceptors) and are harder than level 3 missions and can't be soloed. New Level 5 missions should be catered to fleets of 10 pilots and above.
Also include elements in the missions that encourage pilots to fit their ships more like PvP ships, e.g. having to use a warp scrambler in some missions etc. The possibility of target changing NPCs and the PvP ready mission runner ships should have a much better chance against gankers.

c. Casual
Don't know if we really need more casual activities. I think there are more than enough. I'm personaly more for small group content to give small corporations of family and friends more to do and give them some ways to learn how to play as a (small) fleet together.

d. NPC Corps
No real ideas, think there are already a lot of good ideas around to solve the problem with NPC corps and wardeccs. Don't let people avoid wardeccs through silly game mechanics, but use a system where the decced corps has also some saying about when the wardecc ends and what the conditions might be.

e. Ambulation
I think we have a big thread about that plus some additional threads in the Features & Ideas forum. But the main point should be to try to deliver meaningful gameplay alongside of ambulation and set a focus on social gameplay.

f. Alternatives to Technetium
Don't know if that is really a high-sec issue. Think we should let this issue be handled by the nullsec representatives, they know much more about that. After all, highsec should stay dependent of nullsec (and the other way around). We shouldn't cut all ties were possible, we still play a one shard game and it should stay that way.

g. RP
Can't think of much that could help here other than more live events and more empire politics and of course ambulation related things.

h. Exploration
Make exploration more meaningful and interesting in high-sec and low-sec. Connect it directly with mining.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#266 - 2012-02-07 08:20:27 UTC
Arcathra wrote:
(...)
b. High-Sec Missions
Not only High-Sec Missions have to be reworked, Low-Sec (and Null-Sec) missions, too. Missions should be much more like Sleepers oder Incursion-Sansha. Make them like this: up until level 3 they are for solo pilotes. The new level 3 missions have a payout of about half the ISK of the current level 4 and should be about as hard (or harder). Level 4 missions would be made for small gangs of 3 to 5 pilots. Those missions may have the need for support ships (logistics, command ships, interceptors) and are harder than level 3 missions and can't be soloed. New Level 5 missions should be catered to fleets of 10 pilots and above.
Also include elements in the missions that encourage pilots to fit their ships more like PvP ships, e.g. having to use a warp scrambler in some missions etc. The possibility of target changing NPCs and the PvP ready mission runner ships should have a much better chance against gankers.


Houm... that would break the escalation of difficulty. Lvl 5 already were supposed to be "small gang PvE" and they failed because, a, they could be soloed, b, if shared they paid back a lot less than soloing Lvl4s, and c, they were removed from hisec, and no sensible mission runner is going to jeopardize a fitting worth several weeks of gameplay for the ludicrously low reward provided by Lvl5.

Actually, Incusions were meant to "fix" the small gang PvE, but CCP in its infinite wisdom broke them by implementing the silly "winner takes all" policy; join a fleet, lose your ship and lose any reward because your fleet did 50 DP less than the next one, and that's all you need to send incursions to hell, thus breeding professional incursion grinders by "natural selection".

The point with mission running is that if you want people to do anything more difficult than grind Lvl4, it must be better paid and thus it will become a larger ISK faucet. That's economy 101, if running small gang PvE pays better, that's what you gonna do. If don't, you won't do it. Which is exactly what happened with incursions. Of course, now nullsec and lowsec are envious of how good income incursions provide and ask incursion runner's gameplay to be fukked in favor of themselves, very EVE style.

BTW, Incursions ISK faucet, as opposed to missions, can be easily tuned by CCP by changing the spawn rate and preventing abuse of the spawned ones. There is no REAL economical reason to nerf incursion mechanics or add more gankability to them.
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#267 - 2012-02-07 13:00:13 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
1. Is the Voice of Reason party the right name? Something as simple as having the right name can make a huge difference. So thoughts on what name resonates the most.

2. There have been some great folks that came forward so far with ideas but have decided to not run because of the time commitment. For that reason I am going to create a party advisory council. These would be folks that would take on a role throughout the CSM 7 as their time permits with specific game area focus and assist the elected candidates refine their focus. So thoughts? Anyone interested in a "cabinert" role?

Hmm, it's beginning to sound a lot like how the TAKE CARE party around CSM used to be and work. Perhaps there are some remnants this VoR can cooperate with/merge with/learn from?

The reason I don't like the name is that it sounds too cocky. When the purpose/focus of the party is figured out, it will be easier to pick a better name.

A coucil is almost mandatory for a party. Not only does this make it possible to have a single candidate in the election, if so desired. The canditate(s) can draw upon more expertise.
I am willing to look at topics (from an RP perspective if applicable), but considering I have not actually played the game since early november, and don't have a lot of experience apart from racing, mining, PI, exploration and other in-space prospecting, I may not be the best person. I may also find that I don't have enough time, so I would prefer to provide feedback if I feel inclined to do so, as opposed to "on demand".

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#268 - 2012-02-07 14:54:59 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:


Miners
Industrialists
Traders
Small Corps
Independent players
High Sec
Low Sec
PvE
Casual Players
WiS




So you're taking the shot gun method...the project management failures of all the previous CSM's (apart from 6) and asking people to vote for you based on this?!

What exactly do you aim to change? What is your priority list? You speak like 0.0 residents get everything there own way, which is completely false.
Zixie Draco
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#269 - 2012-02-07 15:43:05 UTC
Some of most of this cannot be changed. Vote for Skippermonkey for a more realistic presence on the council..

Would you like a kitten?

Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#270 - 2012-02-07 16:11:28 UTC
Ghazu wrote:
lol why is wis on the bottom of the list



Because "W"?

List should have been straight alphabetical sequence to avoid the appearance of one plank being more important than another.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#271 - 2012-02-07 19:59:10 UTC
So an update on the plans.

We will be renaming the party.

We will focus on a single candidate with a council to support who we get elected.

We will focus on the follow in this order

Mining
Missions
Keeping CCP's feet to the fire for ambulation

and secondarily

Can flipping/wreck stealing/agression/low sec gate mechanics
NPC corp mechanics

Looking for volunteers for the council!

And suggestions for a party name!

Still time for someone else to come forward to be the candidate for this party if there is someone with more "eve celebity" than me to improve our chances of gettting CSM 7 representation!

Issler
Temmu Guerra
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#272 - 2012-02-07 20:43:23 UTC
How many times am I going to see someone ask for CCP to take a look at the can flipping / Ninja Salvaging mechanics. They have said multiple times it is working as intended and there will be no change.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#273 - 2012-02-07 20:48:02 UTC
Temmu Guerra wrote:
How many times am I going to see someone ask for CCP to take a look at the can flipping / Ninja Salvaging mechanics. They have said multiple times it is working as intended and there will be no change.



I think this idea deserves some support.

From Gizu

-Stealing from a can or a wreck should evoke a global aggression timer. This would not incur the wrath of CONCORD - they have better things to do - however it would allow other players to punish the thief. CONCORD's current policy allows suicide gankers use 'alts' to collect loot from their victim's wreck with no risk. This change would also allow combat ships to protect miners from can-flippers.

So I guess your answer is at least one more time.

Issler
Skex Relbore
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2012-02-08 02:06:08 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


I already suggested a nifty proposal to get hisec consensual PvP for "sports" so people could learn to PvP in a casual, friendly manner. Was another twist in the "arena" concept but a pretty solid one IMO; getting blast to pieces by an overkill is not exaclty going to tech you to PvP, and also PvP is economically inviable for most of the learning curve.

Here's the thread:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=297847#post297847



What you are asking for already exists.

R-V-B

It's amazing how people so ignorant of what exists in this game think they know how to fix it.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#275 - 2012-02-08 23:34:07 UTC
Please feel free to continue this discussion in the updated Rational Party Thread.

Issler
Ellan Thrace
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#276 - 2012-02-09 23:02:14 UTC
New player that wants mining to better!

You have my vote Issler!

ET
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#277 - 2012-02-09 23:14:17 UTC
i will be filing a protest with ccp to have the likes for this thread invalidated on the grounds that editing the thread and thread title long after it was posted to obtain likes is a violation of the system
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#278 - 2012-02-09 23:18:31 UTC
Retar Aveymone wrote:
i will be filing a protest with ccp to have the likes for this thread invalidated on the grounds that editing the thread and thread title long after it was posted to obtain likes is a violation of the system


Since this was my first thread and CCP never really told us specifically how to do this, good luck with that!

Its more likely to get the likes from the second thread added to this one! Big smile

Issler
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#279 - 2012-02-09 23:38:00 UTC
And to folks that may have "liked" posts in the the thread that also support the idea of me in the CSM 7, be sure to like the initial post of this thread to get me over the magic "100". It isn't clear what CCP intended to be the number to used to make that bar, but just in case.

Thanks for your support!

Issler
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#280 - 2012-02-10 00:50:48 UTC
Yeah there was never an official date maybe for the threads created on jita. But there could be. They said the 8th is the start of it, but not sure if that is just when the background check app was started or if it applied to jita threads as well.

Even though your thoughts towards this show reason CCP can still trump it, we shall see what they choose.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne