These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Kelduum Revaan - Running for CSM7

First post First post
Author
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2012-02-09 01:37:16 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
dec-shield candidate lol

And yet:
CONCORD wrote:
Sicarius.. Declares War Against Ivy League
From: CONCORD
Sent: 2012.02.08 16:18

Sicarius.. has declared war on Ivy League.
Within 24 hours fighting can legally occur between those involved.

I wouldn't call that immunity.

Anyway, on a related note, here's an alternative way wardecs could possibly work: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67445&find=unread
That war dec cost that fellow 1B ISK. Because of the 19 corp decshield you have up.
lol fofo
Noise Control Department
#42 - 2012-02-09 02:26:07 UTC  |  Edited by: lol fofo
I'm glad that some one from eve-uni is running for CSM again this year
i think eve uni is one of key factor for the game survival by making the game a lot easier to understand for new player.

However, don't you think you over reaching your mission statement a bit?

wouldn't be a lot easier and makes more sense if you stick with high-sec, industrial or even find/improves game mechanic that helps new player to enjoy this game without ruining other aspect of eve? (abused by carebear vet with newbiee chars hiding in your Dec-shields)

there's must be some idea in your mind that makes eve is more user- friendly for new players. Once they matured enough they can continue to other part of eve.

Have you look at eve-uni lately ? full with 6months+ eve-uni member who runs incursion nonstop with freshman title..... do some financial pull and see it yourself

looking at your current argument in above posts, using
Quote:
I'll have to double check as its some time since I tried it
as your rebuttal, kinda not helping at all. When the last time you actually checks them ? incarna ? Tyrannis ?? Apocrypha or even worse prior of revelations
Leontyne Gaterau
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2012-02-09 02:54:15 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
dec-shield candidate lol

And yet:
CONCORD wrote:
Sicarius.. Declares War Against Ivy League
From: CONCORD
Sent: 2012.02.08 16:18

Sicarius.. has declared war on Ivy League.
Within 24 hours fighting can legally occur between those involved.

I wouldn't call that immunity.

Anyway, on a related note, here's an alternative way wardecs could possibly work: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67445&find=unread
That war dec cost that fellow 1B ISK. Because of the 19 corp decshield you have up.


I think it is really cute that you say that as though it was a major impediment.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2012-02-09 02:59:35 UTC
Leontyne Gaterau wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
dec-shield candidate lol

And yet:
CONCORD wrote:
Sicarius.. Declares War Against Ivy League
From: CONCORD
Sent: 2012.02.08 16:18

Sicarius.. has declared war on Ivy League.
Within 24 hours fighting can legally occur between those involved.

I wouldn't call that immunity.

Anyway, on a related note, here's an alternative way wardecs could possibly work: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67445&find=unread
That war dec cost that fellow 1B ISK. Because of the 19 corp decshield you have up.
I think it is really cute that you say that as though it was a major impediment.
I say that, because Kelduum would have people believe that EVE-Uni is as deccable as it has always been. Which cannot be further from the truth. EVE-Uni has just gone through the longest period of peace in its history ... all thanks to the allowable exploits in the broken system.
IGNATIUS HOOD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2012-02-09 07:20:46 UTC  |  Edited by: IGNATIUS HOOD
This is rapidly becoming a threadnaught, and this may have been covered but the concept irritates me so i'm going to say it anyway.

are we knights on horseback jousting at tourney?

~no~

sorry folks, war is not, should not, will never be, consensual. whatever reasons or rationale for a entity to declare war on another is not up for debate and nor should the ability for those parties to have their war. The current mechanic sucks becuase it does allow enough freedom and yet people want to make it more difficult to declare wars. EVE is a dangerous place and I'm all for anything to make it more dangerous *EVEN and Especially in HS*

I like my EVE with some danger in it so stop neutering the ability for corps and or capsuleers to violence one another.

Does it **** me off when my corp gets decced? Sure it does! But guess what, thats life in EVE, embrace it, adapt to it,

If it gets changed people will regret that decision...
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."   --H.L. Mencken
Olaf Erkkinen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-02-09 07:57:36 UTC
The issue at hand here is NOT the fact that you can be wardecced in hisec, i think everyone (or most everyone) likes a good fight every now & then and is just fine with that.

The issue actually is how you can easily create a 1 man corp, declare war on a corporation them proceed to sit in a station all day week long, occasionally undocking if there are no war targets in the system.

This is not dangerous to anyone, it's just extremely annoying and stupid, especially for players who are not "l33t PvP-ers" and would rather just get on with their business of manufacturing, trading or whatever else they like to do.
If it's still not clear, the problem is not that these people can't fight, is that there's nothing to fight, they get declared war by 1-2-3 man corps who are just bored/stupid, they can't fight the enemy because the enemy is always docked, and they can't ignore them either because it might just show up to gank that freighter you're moving down to jita or that mining fleet you sent out.

See the difference? War =/= fighting or danger, it too often means just griefing, boredom and stupidity. Now i'm not sure that e-uni's decshield is the right way to handle this, but i am sure that there does need to be some sort of check in place that at least makes it likely that when you declare war on somebody you'll actually go fight.
Deathwing Malevolent
The Unclaimed
Unclaimable
#47 - 2012-02-09 10:58:39 UTC
+1

As a voice of evil myself, you get my vote simply because high-sec and nice people in Eve deserve a greater voice (some say a voice at all) on the CSM
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#48 - 2012-02-09 13:45:44 UTC
Question to a CSM runner :

Kelduum Revaan, do you think that wardecs should be only between entities of the (relative) same size ?

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

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

IGNATIUS HOOD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2012-02-09 14:41:04 UTC
Olaf Erkkinen wrote:
The issue at hand here is NOT the fact that you can be wardecced in hisec, i think everyone (or most everyone) likes a good fight every now & then and is just fine with that.

The issue actually is how you can easily create a 1 man corp, declare war on a corporation them proceed to sit in a station all day week long, occasionally undocking if there are no war targets in the system.

This is not dangerous to anyone, it's just extremely annoying and stupid, especially for players who are not "l33t PvP-ers" and would rather just get on with their business of manufacturing, trading or whatever else they like to do.
If it's still not clear, the problem is not that these people can't fight, is that there's nothing to fight, they get declared war by 1-2-3 man corps who are just bored/stupid, they can't fight the enemy because the enemy is always docked, and they can't ignore them either because it might just show up to gank that freighter you're moving down to jita or that mining fleet you sent out.

See the difference? War =/= fighting or danger, it too often means just griefing, boredom and stupidity. Now i'm not sure that e-uni's decshield is the right way to handle this, but i am sure that there does need to be some sort of check in place that at least makes it likely that when you declare war on somebody you'll actually go fight.


If a one man corp has you decked and you cower in station then you're doing it wrong. You realize there are ways to find out where this lone gunman is right? Unless he is camping your station I don't understand how a lone gunman could possibly limit you. And I'd argue that when that nonsense has happened if your in a corp with more than one person what you indeed have is an opportunity to show him the error of his ways. Anyway causing grief and dragging people through BS is not against the very small set of principles that guide activity in this game. Replying to my post with what amounts to a they don't play nice with me type whine misses the point entirely. You find their tactics annoying because they work. I would say its working as intended.
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."   --H.L. Mencken
Kali Fin
White SANDS SPACE
#50 - 2012-02-09 14:56:00 UTC
Kelduum:

Some of your points have some merit, but this stance on war-decs...

Please leave any sort of quai-FW bullshit out of war-decs. Period. If I were you (and I wouldn't want to be), I would take the stance of having CCP fix the "Surrender" mechanic of wars. As it stands now, a defending corp/alliance can surrender, but it does absolutely nothing. Perhaps a sort of monetary expenditure to ACTUALLY surrender. Maybe have the war bill double, or triple each consecutive week the war is active after the surrender. Maybe there should be a surrender bill paid to the aggressing entity. Whatever. This, along with other numerous reasons, is why people outside of E-UNI probably won't vote for you. Don't get me wrong, you'll probably get a seat, but know that the high-sec pvp community does NOT like your ideas concerning pvp.

I have schemed too long to be supplanted by dead gods. If I cannot have this world, no one can.

Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#51 - 2012-02-09 15:24:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Kelduum Revaan
Reppyk wrote:
Question to a CSM runner :

Kelduum Revaan, do you think that wardecs should be only between entities of the (relative) same size ?

No, I don't see any reason they should be limited to the size of either side.

Although an incentive (moderately bumped up costs, for example) may be a useful way to promote wars between relatively equal groups, measuring this would be nigh on impossible - inactive accounts, alts, SP in different areas, etc would all make it relatively simple to 'game'.

Assuming you are referring to small PvP corps declaring war on larger industrial corps or vice versa (large PvP vs small indy that is, not an indy corp declaring war on a small band of PvPers), the solution would probably lie in providing the PvP players something more rewarding/enjoyable to do, be it revamped losec/FW or similar.

The problem is that with EVE being a sandbox, you cant force people to do something they don't want to - they always have the choice of not logging in, or even dropping to an NPC corp.


Kali Fin wrote:
... I would take the stance of having CCP fix the "Surrender" mechanic of wars. As it stands now, a defending corp/alliance can surrender, but it does absolutely nothing...

Actually, the 'Surrender' mechanic does work, its just not properly documented anywhere. :CCP:

What actually needs to happen is for a director of the defending corporation (executor in the case of alliances) to be in the same station as the CEO of the attacking corp (again, executor) then select surrender.

That opens a trade window, and once accepted by both sides (with optional items/ISK etc), the war enters the normal 24 hour cooldown listing the defender as having surrendered.
Garr Earthbender
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#52 - 2012-02-09 16:12:41 UTC
I am of the opinion that E-Uni leadership needs to keep their focus on what E-Uni does best. Teach new players how to play EVE. To say that the Kelduum is neutral is a bit of a stretch I think. I have my Coercer pledged elsewhere.

-Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper

Kali Fin
White SANDS SPACE
#53 - 2012-02-09 16:16:49 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:

Actually, the 'Surrender' mechanic does work, its just not properly documented anywhere. :CCP:

What actually needs to happen is for a director of the defending corporation (executor in the case of alliances) to be in the same station as the CEO of the attacking corp (again, executor) then select surrender.

That opens a trade window, and once accepted by both sides (with optional items/ISK etc), the war enters the normal 24 hour cooldown listing the defender as having surrendered.


My point being that surrender, as it stands now, doesn't work and it leaves war declaration open to abuse, which we can all say is true. Surrendering has to be mutually agreed upon, which it never is. Instead of changing the entirety of the war mechanic, you should take the stance on fixing the CURRENT war mechanics. Less work for you, less work for the devs at CCP. You'll get more votes if you come up with simple, yet long over-due changes and improvements.

I have schemed too long to be supplanted by dead gods. If I cannot have this world, no one can.

Zenver
Offgrid.
#54 - 2012-02-09 16:46:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Zenver
Kali Fin wrote:

... Surrendering has to be mutually agreed upon, which it never is...


I have no idea how you think that surrendering should work, but it's always going to be mutually agreed upon. Incase you aren't familiar with the process of surrender it involves the victim giving the aggressor what they want. I.e. Germany surrendering after WWI (ok, that was somewhat lopsided, but Germany still signed on to it). The point being, surrender is something that happens mutually. You can't surrender if the enemy wants to keep killing you.

That said, RL surrender isn't exactly the same as eve surrender. Because eve is a video game. And alts, and alt corporations, and you don't care what anyone thinks, and no one cares what you do as long as it doesn't hurt them, etc.

As a result of the above, I really don't see a 'surrender' mechanic coming into play very much at all because there is no way to hold the individual pilots accountable for respecting the treaty. (although I guess if CCP was feeling really bold they could make it so that members of a corp who signs a treaty are held against war-decing again even if they switch corps)


Aside from this off topic discussion. A question:

If elected, are you planning on sticking mainly to highsec issues, or are you going to have opinions/address other parts of the game? If so, I guess I'd like to have a feel for how you feel about WH/null/whatever. Just asking because you projected yourself as sort of a 'candidate for everyone'.
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#55 - 2012-02-09 17:05:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Reppyk
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Although an incentive (moderately bumped up costs, for example) may be a useful way to promote wars between relatively equal groups, measuring this would be nigh on impossible - inactive accounts, alts, SP in different areas, etc would all make it relatively simple to 'game'.
In facts, there is already one in the game : that's why corp wardecs are less expensive than alliance wardecs (I'm not saying that it's a very good idea, but well).

But your answer wasn't what I was expecting, since I read your other message :
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
Anyway, on a related note, here's an alternative way wardecs could possibly work: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67445&find=unread
So, you're still willing to let small entites wardecing a much bigger entities, but at the same time, you're proposing a new EHP grind (after POCOs, POS, IHubs, TCUs, SBUs, 00 stations and outposts, but I don't think you ever fought for one of these) that will make EVEuni even safer ?
You know that there are only a few highsec alliances that could fight the EVEuni blob, and none that could defend a structure 24h/24 ? Yes you know it.

EDIT : (wow 3 pages disappeared from this thread). I posted a message on your thread. The more I read from you, the more I'm getting convinced that you have a very limited grasp of "EVE".

========

Let's say I'm running for the CSM, and I'm known for my wardec experience (and for nothing else).

For example, I could make escorts, moving into lowsec, recruting PVP pilots in my alliance, giving tips to my corpmates like running lvl4 missions with several pilots and a pvp fit, etc. It's a sandbox, my only limit is my imagination.

But instead, I'm telling my corpmates to stay docked, with a bunch of rules to "make the wardec very boring for the evil griefers". I'm using an exploit to limit wardecs, and with time I convinced CCP that it should not be an exploit anymore. The only highsec pvp I'm willing to do is consensual, only one week and no podding and we can only fight here and here and not here and please don't hit my own POS I want it safe and blabla.

Should I run for the CSM ? Really ?

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

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

CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#56 - 2012-02-09 17:35:09 UTC
Off topic posts removed. Please stay on topic and polite, thank you.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#57 - 2012-02-09 17:40:05 UTC
I'll just chime in on the whole wardec argument by asking one question I don't see being discussed.

Kelduum, if you need a griefing-free, consensual PvP environment, or if you need to be able to protect your University from attacks for a period of time so you can accomplish an educational goal, why do you not just use the test server for this purpose??

Clearly you want more ways for people to avoid combat. I get that. You need to run your classes in peace, I get that. But the way I see it, there's test server where you have the GM's on your side - if someone griefs you there during class you can get them banned.

Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier to just take advantage of this free, already-functioning resource to help your students, instead of taking the time to invent a complicated Sov structure and create "null sec bubbles" in high sec space to "improve" the wardec system?

Does anyone else besides EvE University feel like we need null bubbles in high sec? I see no reason to bring the mountain to Mohammed, when its much easier to take Mohammed to the mountain. Getting your students on SiSi also teaches them about getting on SiSi, further empowering them to contribute more to the EvE universe in the long run through feedback and experimentation.

I LOVE your dedication to new players, its great. But like I said, your methods, and my methods, for instructing new players are pretty different. I see no benefit to the younger players by reinforcing unfair expectations on Tranquility, when you could teach them so much more by using SiSi for your safety zone, and using Tranquility to teach about survival in a corporation that's in a state of constant war (which will undoubtedly benefit the new players as they move out into the more dangerous parts of the game).

And besides, you'd save both your students and your corporation a lot of isk in the process!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Kali Fin
White SANDS SPACE
#58 - 2012-02-09 17:50:50 UTC
And in keeping with the topic of war-dec mechanics, I know that you're infamous (read: hated) for advertising and over exploiting the so-called "DecShield" mechanic, if you can even call it that. What is your stance on this? Are you willing to part from this "get out of jail free" mechanic for something more even and standardized?

I have schemed too long to be supplanted by dead gods. If I cannot have this world, no one can.

Kali Fin
White SANDS SPACE
#59 - 2012-02-09 17:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Kali Fin
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
I'll just chime in on the whole wardec argument by asking one question I don't see being discussed.

Kelduum, if you need a griefing-free, consensual PvP environment, or if you need to be able to protect your University from attacks for a period of time so you can accomplish an educational goal, why do you not just use the test server for this purpose??

Clearly you want more ways for people to avoid combat. I get that. You need to run your classes in peace, I get that. But the way I see it, there's test server where you have the GM's on your side - if someone griefs you there during class you can get them banned.

Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier to just take advantage of this free, already-functioning resource to help your students, instead of taking the time to invent a complicated Sov structure and create "null sec bubbles" in high sec space to "improve" the wardec system?

Does anyone else besides EvE University feel like we need null bubbles in high sec? I see no reason to bring the mountain to Mohammed, when its much easier to take Mohammed to the mountain. Getting your students on SiSi also teaches them about getting on SiSi, further empowering them to contribute more to the EvE universe in the long run through feedback and experimentation.

I LOVE your dedication to new players, its great. But like I said, your methods, and my methods, for instructing new players are pretty different. I see no benefit to the younger players by reinforcing unfair expectations on Tranquility, when you could teach them so much more by using SiSi for your safety zone, and using Tranquility to teach about survival in a corporation that's in a state of constant war (which will undoubtedly benefit the new players as they move out into the more dangerous parts of the game).

And besides, you'd save both your students and your corporation a lot of isk in the process!


THIS! OMG THIS!

...except for the whole "null-sec bubble" idea. The low-sec pockets in high-sec are a great place to learn pvp, albeit a small hit to sec status. Taking control of a small low-sec constellation is fairly easy. No sov bills, no structure grinding, just pure, unadulterated pvp. Kelduum should really take into consideration SiSi when discussing teaching new players the ropes, especially when he wants to change TQ game mechanics.

I have schemed too long to be supplanted by dead gods. If I cannot have this world, no one can.

Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#60 - 2012-02-09 18:33:13 UTC
What is your position on following issues of high sec warfare:

A) Neutral orcas in high sec wars
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Neutral_orcas_in_high_sec_wars_%28CSM%29

B) Neutral remote repers not getting aggression timer when remote repairing targets engaged in combat making them near invulnerable when positioned near stations.

Do you think those are problems CCP should address? If yes what changes to mechanic would you advocate and what level of priority would you put on those changes?

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...