These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Iam Widdershins - withdrawn candidacy. Vote Alekseyev Karrde.

Author
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#21 - 2012-02-09 08:41:10 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Do you agree with Issler Dainze that CCP should ignore FiS content to make more space pants?

But no, Flying In Space should never be ignored for the sake of spacepants or any other item of spaceclothing.


If only all of the candidates had your sense.

While I cannot deny that I would probably pay some of my incredibly scarce real-life money to wear dashing hats in an internet spaceship game, I don't think it should have any real priority until it is actually pretty far up there in the list of things that will add value to EVE as a whole.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-02-09 08:57:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Deen Wispa
Hello- Seeing that you believe hisec pvp should be a launching pad for aspiring pvpers, I'd like to know how you envision hisec wardec mechanics should be fixed? And consequently, how hisec pvp should be enhanced for those who are just starting out.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

Hooride707
Project Nemesis
Touch Fiberoptic
#23 - 2012-02-09 09:16:18 UTC
+1
Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#24 - 2012-02-09 09:33:50 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:

  • My focus and perspective, summarized:
  • I think the direction CCP took with the Crucible expansion is fantastic. Fixing extant bugs, peeves with the UI, and mechanics that just make us want to stab our monitors is a crucial process that not only makes existing gameplay better, but is an essential process to enable expanding the game into new areas and making more major changes that let the game continue to mature. I am very interested in seeing this trend continue and finish some of these left-behind features.

    I would like to see a growing focus on improvements to the game's UI and its less visible mechanics; while recent changes have been excellent, I'd like to see more specific overview settings, general UI usability improvements, and a push for the re-write of the Crimewatch engine which handles all the aggression flags in the game.

    I believe that EVE is built around conflict and risk. EVE is a risk-permeated wonderland, a PVP-saturated extravaganza fraught with risk & reward, and I want to see the future of EVE maintain this excitement and keep PVP in every area of the game. This does not mean we should make it easier for established PVPers to prey on the weak, any more than it should be easier for our carebears to completely avoid all harm in any security space. New Eden is not a tennis court, with strict boundaries of play and frequent breaks: it is a long and bloody beach with an unrelenting drive and no such thing as complete safety. That's what makes it so good: we should protect that however we can.

    Along these lines, we should help foster mechanics that will drive small-scale PVP alongside large-scale. Not everyone wants to be involved in epic-scale fleet engagements, and a lot of people's computers/internet cannot even handle the strain. I believe everyone should be able to look to their left, look to their right, and find opportunities for good PVP on either hand wherever they are -- in the future, much as it is today. Hisec PVP is an extremely important and oft-overlooked aspect of this, because only in hisec can an aspiring PVPer learn by getting engagements with a limited number of opponents without CONCORD involvement. If PVP is reduced in hisec, the barrier for entry into PVP is raised dramatically.

    If you have any questions about what I think about something or whether I would support a certain proposition, I will do my best to answer all comers.

    I like you point of view.

    Iam Widdershins wrote:
  • My job as an internet spaceship politician:
  • I'm not here to play at being a politician, garner internet fame or in-game notoriety, or do anything but work to improve the game as best I can. I don't pretend to be a great problem-solver, some kind of analytic powerhouse, or a great mediator of disputes. I am here to improve the core of the game, and I hope the rest of CSM7 can be productive adults as well.

    I believe I am well-suited among the current candidates to contribute to future discussions, and my greatest honor would be to contribute in a meaningful way to the future of the game and its development.


    I see who you mean by that...

    CEO of Lanate Industries

    Citizen of Solitude

    Pinky Feldman
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #25 - 2012-02-09 09:45:28 UTC
    Iam Widdershins wrote:


  • My job as an internet spaceship politician:
  • I'm not here to play at being a politician, garner internet fame or in-game notoriety, or do anything but work to improve the game as best I can. I don't pretend to be a great problem-solver, some kind of analytic powerhouse, or a great mediator of disputes. I am here to improve the core of the game, and I hope the rest of CSM7 can be productive adults as well.

    I believe I am well-suited among the current candidates to contribute to future discussions, and my greatest honor would be to contribute in a meaningful way to the future of the game and its development.
    [/i]


    This is why Widders will make a great member of the CSM. So many of the current CSM candidates seem to want to do it out of ego or political games, and while their platforms have been tailored around what people in game claim to want, after reading many of their posts, its clear that they don't understand game mechanics well enough to realize what this game needs.

    You can vote for a CSM candidate who will promise you the EVE you think you want to play and things they can never deliver on because they're outside of the CSM's scope, or you can vote for someone who will give you a better and more playable EVE.

    Remember, the key to being a good CSM is also their ability to suggest changes that can reasonably be implemented by CCP and won't break the system even further. I look at many of the highsec CSM candidates platforms and while their suggestions about highsec may be good for garnering votes its clear to me that if they were ever implemented, highsec carebear groups would be exploited even more than they are now.
    Iam Widdershins
    Victory or Whatever
    #26 - 2012-02-09 09:54:51 UTC
    Deen Wispa wrote:
    Hello- Seeing that you believe hisec pvp should be a launching pad for aspiring pvpers, I'd like to know how you envision hisec wardec mechanics should be fixed? And consequently, how hisec pvp should be enhanced for those who are just starting out.

    Hey, good question thanks.

    I apologize if this is a disorganized answer, as I just started coming down with the flu from the flu shot I got like 10 hours ago (ain't that nice). Here we go.

    Right now one of the largest new challenges facing young hisec wardeckers is the legitimization of alliance hopping, particularly to Dec Shield. Once your target jumps to Dec Shield, so does the war. In addition, the war does not immediately shut down as it did before: you can actually pay to continue it as long as you like. While this is good on the surface, the problem remains that the corporation will leave the alliance again in around 24 hours. If you are not on top of the ball with canceling the war, you will be completely unable to be at war with them again at best case for 24 hours due to the mechanics of voting (cannot put up a war if you have 3 or more, even if they are ending; cannot put up a war against a corporation or alliance you are already at war with; cannot vote to declare war on a corporation that is currently in an alliance).

    Another tactic that used to be illegal that (I believe) is now allowed is completely dissolving your corporation, then re-forming it under the same name with the same people, ending the war for at least 48 hours (24 for the vote, 24 for the war to go live). While this leaves control towers and other corp-anchored assets abandoned, that is not a major problem for most carebear corps.

    If your targets do not jump to an alliance to end your war or completely reform their corp, then you are no worse off than you were in '07; however, this is not to say that those mechanics were good either.

    Joining and leaving corporations is fluid and easy for both sides, though it favors the aggressor, who is prepared to engage by already having no roles, and perhaps not even starting out in the corporation that is at war. Joining and leaving corporations at any time is fully sanctioned by senior GM staff, as long as you go through a very basic and minimal process; currently, the bare minimum amount of time to be in the corporation is 15 seconds. While these tactics are fun for the aggressor and can provide surprise ganks against reticent targets, they seem reasonable more and more in ruling only, and the rules that allow this have only been fully clarified by the GMs in the last year or so.

    Changes I would probably like to see:

    There have been various suggestions for changes to mechanics that will force members of corporations to remain in their corporation, or at least not be allowed to leave, that seem to be heading in the right direction conceptually. I think a model where only the aggressors are allowed to leave their corporation and only those who were declared upon are allowed to recruit could be successful, as long as the corp that was declared upon is forbidden to hop to an alliance for the duration of the war through forced game mechanics. The corp that is set upon would be allowed to hire free-roaming mercs to fight for them, and the aggressors would not be able to grow in numbers; the biggest problem the set-upon would have is scammers and enemy AWOXers being recruited. (I do not think this should allow or disallow recruitment or expulsion of corporations from alliances that are at war, but I do think that there needs to be a better notification of acceptance to an alliance so that all parties know when it will happen. Lots of people die because they suddenly find themselves in alliance at war while they are travelling, just as the 24h timer finishes.)

    However, this also holds its own problems. Whenever I come up with a change to game mechanics, I think to myself: How could I exploit this to ruin someone's day? That is my calling in EVE, and I have spent years practicing it.

    For instance, with a rule like this, I could recruit mission runners to a corporation that is having war declared upon it; they would then be unable to leave, ever, and I could grief them straight out of the game for a few paltry million isk a week! There should therefore be a way for you to forcibly leave a corporation that on a long timer, say 4 or 6 days, notifying your corporation members and their war targets. Corporation recruitments on behalf of the aggressive corporation could perhaps also be similarly delayed, say 24 hours with (again) a notification to both groups that the timer is beginning when the recruitment is set in motion.

    Always remember! Any condition in a game mechanic can be exploited in your favor. You can meet any guidelines; if you were allowed to leave a corporation immediately when you're getting teamkilled while at war, then corporations could immediately be dissolved by just blowing up their own members in shuttles. When someone offers a proposal, always think about the worst thing you could possibly do to someone with that change in place.

    I also think that corporations should be able to declare war on other groups while they have less than three ACTIVE wars, not less than three wars in any state whatsoever. If you declare war on an alliance and it collapses two corps at a time for a whole week, you cannot declare war on any of those corporations because you've always got three items on the list. This is counterintuitive to the way alliance wars work, where wars that are already ending do not count towards the total cost of adding a new one.

    In short:

    Hard restrictions on the movement of corporations that are at war, long-timer restrictions on joining and leaving for the aggressors and the victims respectively, and lots of notifications for when when timers begin and corps join warring alliances.

    Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

    Iam Widdershins
    Victory or Whatever
    #27 - 2012-02-09 10:03:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Iam Widdershins
    I just came up with this as I was going along. I have not really sat down to think about this in-depth before, but I have given it some thought on the side. I believe that, alongside some easier-to-use mechanics to securely ransom the corporation that's being aggressed, this could really make war-declarations in hisec something extremely useful and eliminate the corp-hopping issue almost entirely. Wars should really be an honest brawl between two competing corporations, and coming up with the mechanics to foster that environment is difficult. I don't know if this is the best way to do it, but it's a start.

    I am very interested and very much anticipating what CCP is planning for fixing the war system; I hope it is something similar to this, or that they read that post and take it into consideration. There's a lot that could be improved, and there's a lot that could go horribly wrong if this isn't done right; if there is something to be exploited to use the mechanic to your advantage, EVE's players (including us in Project Nemesis) will be all over it in a flash.

    That's the kind of insight I like to bring to a discussion.

    Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

    HellGate fr
    #28 - 2012-02-09 10:42:07 UTC
    One thousand times yes
    Roime
    Mea Culpa.
    Shadow Cartel
    #29 - 2012-02-09 12:02:42 UTC
    I don't know you, but you got a very good agenda up there.

    Good luck!

    .

    Heimdallofasgard
    Ministry of Furious Retribution
    Fraternity.
    #30 - 2012-02-09 12:05:56 UTC
    HellGate fr wrote:
    One thousand times yes


    You have my votes too!
    Lady Aja
    #31 - 2012-02-09 12:21:25 UTC
    as for your war dec issues.. and recruitment. I think when applying to join to a corp that is at war one should get a pop up saying

    this corpoeration is at war with the followign corps and or alliances. do you wish to continue?

    otherwise i am for your empire war dec changes.
    where is my ability to link a sig properly CCP you munters!!
    
    WhiteGhostBear
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #32 - 2012-02-09 13:18:18 UTC
    Project Nemesis was my first war dec, during my first few weeks in Eve. I hated them back then, but now being an older and wiser pilot I appreciate what they did for me. It was definitely a trial by fire.

    Also, they mega-trolled my terrible former CEO EthanPow, for which I am forever grateful.

    Definitely have my support.
    Red Templar
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #33 - 2012-02-09 14:51:32 UTC
    I like that you listed your experiences and achievements in eve. Never read your forum posts before, but thanks for supplying the links. They look solid and well written.

    You get my like, even though i probably will not vote for you.

    [b]For Love. For Peace. For Honor.

    For None of the Above.

    For Pony![/b]

    Kahz Niverrah
    Distinguished Johnsons
    #34 - 2012-02-09 15:36:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahz Niverrah
    Iam Widdershins wrote:
    There's a lot that could be improved, and there's a lot that could go horribly wrong if this isn't done right; if there is something to be exploited to use the mechanic to your advantage, EVE's players (including us in Project Nemesis) will be all over it in a flash.

    That's the kind of insight I like to bring to a discussion.

    This speaks volumes.

    I've seen Widders gracefully navigate EVE's mechanics with unmatched efficiency. If broken mechanics are going to be fixed properly, you need someone with the ability to see how things are going to be exploited, and the desire to make changes that are for the better of the game and not personal interests.

    Iam has both of these qualities.

    I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main.

    Cosmo Raata
    Hostile.
    PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
    #35 - 2012-02-09 15:58:01 UTC
    I support Iam Widders for CSM. Having played EvE for almost 9 years, I started my career in empire and graduated to 0.0 like everyone else. I have the unique experience of turning back around to empire as many of our veteran players do. I believe Iam knows first hand what causes this 0.0 decent and will work hard to reinvigorate the desire to pvp in all locations again.

    While I love what I do in empire, wormholes and low sec, I long to return again to 0.0 but many changes would have to occur before it would be worthwhile. Iam has the right ideas and desire to push for those changes.

    So, you could either vote for someone that thinks 0.0 is perfect and wants it kept that way, or you can vote for someone who believes pvp is the forefront of eve and should be equally feasible everywhere.
    LiSung
    New Eden Asteroid Preservation Society
    #36 - 2012-02-09 16:14:01 UTC
    +1 for your reputation and apparent good intentions. Good luck.
    Lee Janssen
    Zero Fun Allowed
    #37 - 2012-02-09 17:32:37 UTC
    Even though i'm cooler than Iam here, better looking, know more about everything than he does, he still gets my vote.

    PS: Don't forget to send me that isk you were going to for that vote later. kthx.
    Reppyk
    The Black Shell
    #38 - 2012-02-09 18:02:39 UTC
    Only 96 "likes" ?
    Until I read that thread.

    You're short of 3 "likes" now.

    I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

    Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !

    Charlie Crocodile
    Sorfus Morfus
    #39 - 2012-02-09 18:20:19 UTC
    Widders gets the vote.

    Loves the game. Wants to help make it better. No posturing, no BS.

    ...

    And he's funny as fc*k on Battleclinic.

    Having joined the empire-lowsec-null...yawn....lowsec-empire route of many older players I can honestly say that having a CSM like Widders would vastly improve the lot of all internet spaceship peeples that PVP. It should be good in and out of empire. And yes to war dec changes!
    Tomaso Yoshitome
    Project Nemesis
    Touch Fiberoptic
    #40 - 2012-02-09 19:41:43 UTC
    I've flown with Iam for years in Project Nemesis, and he's one of my favorite PRONS. Very capable guy, with an extremely well-rounded knowledge of most aspects of EVE - would be truly excellent on the CSM.
    Also, he's rugged.
    Absolutely has my vote.

    <3