These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Re-Elect Two step to CSM 7 - Wormholes and more

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
czMulti
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-02-13 09:01:25 UTC
If you live in wh and love it as much as we do, you gotta vote for Two Step.

Posthuman Society votes Two Step!
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2012-02-13 10:52:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiifa
If you use w-space and don't vote for Two Step with his caring attitude and proven record, you are terrible and I want you to suffer

I think his supporters might join me in collecting your corpse

The Mittani wrote:
Two Step is /the/ wormhole candidate. He out-ranked most CSM6 mains in terms of effort.


ps: Get AHARM burn the Taggart Transdimensional hole to the ground, Objectivists are nauseating. If anyone can find and purge them, it's you guys.


pps: (i am completely serious, i hunger for their suffering)


Your Majesty, if they irk you that much, DUCK can do much more than enforce their eviction.
corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#83 - 2012-02-13 16:50:02 UTC
really hard working guy.

gl two step

hoping to see alot of "vote for two step" cans in wh space over the next free weeks

Corbexx for CSM X - Wormholes still deserve better
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#84 - 2012-02-13 23:06:33 UTC
Two-Step and I both worked to defend wormhole improvements. Despite the limitations of being an alternate, Two Step managed to communicate effectively and lent his voice to things of importance for the wormhole population. He also performed well when he had to step up and join meetings in Iceland.

I can't tell you "vote for him" since I'd rather you vote for me, but if you're a wormhole dweller, check his candidacy out if it's just one of two you check.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Captain S04p
Perkone
Caldari State
#85 - 2012-02-14 00:16:35 UTC
You have Narwhals Ate My Duck's Vote!
Kwashi
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2012-02-14 09:42:55 UTC
Corp Bookmarks: greatest game improvement in years. Vote this man in again.

Next year get them to fix POS management !
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#87 - 2012-02-14 12:22:50 UTC
While I will vote for you as my interest group representative (and one with proven track record, thanks for CSM6!), I'd hope to read more of your ideas about the non-wh part of EVE.

What do you consider important issues for CSM7 and for EVE in general, outside our wonderful unknown space?

.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#88 - 2012-02-14 12:31:21 UTC
Roime wrote:
While I will vote for you as my interest group representative (and one with proven track record, thanks for CSM6!), I'd hope to read more of your ideas about the non-wh part of EVE.

What do you consider important issues for CSM7 and for EVE in general, outside our wonderful unknown space?


I think improving 0.0 space is a continuing issue, and one that needs to be addressed by CCP very soon. I think the difference in risk between lowsec and highsec is too big, and there needs to be a more gradual increase in risk. I also think Titans need to not be able to hit much smaller ships, or at least to have their damage reduced when they do hit them (the same applies to sieged dreads, which is a w-space issue as well). I'd like to see continued ship balance improvements, including Black Ops ships, command ships, lower tier t1 frigs and cruisers and EAFs.

CCP is also working on some of the issues already, like wardec mechanics and client-side optimization.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#89 - 2012-02-14 13:40:05 UTC
Thanks for the reply!

Looks good, I agree on all things- except the hisec/lowsec part sounds unfamiliar to me. While my personal opinion is that lowsec is a victim of a false mental image and is not very dangerous at all, how would you balance those risk levels out?

.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#90 - 2012-02-14 13:46:58 UTC
Roime wrote:
Thanks for the reply!

Looks good, I agree on all things- except the hisec/lowsec part sounds unfamiliar to me. While my personal opinion is that lowsec is a victim of a false mental image and is not very dangerous at all, how would you balance those risk levels out?


I'm not sure, and I don't think the CSM's role is to play Junior Game Designer. I do know there are a lot of people in highsec who venture into lowsec once and get popped on the entrance gate, and never go back. The difference between 0.5 and 0.4 security space is huge, which doesn't seem right to me.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-02-14 13:51:37 UTC
Wormswarm, the kings of wormholes, support Two Step. Wormswarm's votes are called for, but Wormswarm encourages all other wormhole dwellers to vote for Two Step.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2012-02-14 13:59:04 UTC
Sure, it is vital that we have a Wormhole representative on the CSM but i won't vote for anyone unless i know their goal and opinions. I know it's not the job of the CSM to design the game but it would help my voting process if you could answer the following:

1. Why do you prefer wormhole space to known space?
2. Why do you feel it's important that residence of C1 wormholes are more easily evicted given the relatively low value of a c1 hole?
3. What's you opinion on a ship/mod that has the ability to hold a WH open past its life or mas allowance (not jumpable mass)?
4. How would you like to see T3 ships expand on? i.e. new ship types t3 mods etc.
5. What UI (D-scan. overview stats) improvements would you make?
6. Where do you stand on WIS/CQ? do you think it should be expanded on or left to die? if the former, how could it be implemented in WH space?
7. Finally, PVP aside, if you could make one change/addition to WH space content or mechanics, what would it be?

Rek

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#93 - 2012-02-14 14:18:24 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Sure, it is vital that we have a Wormhole representative on the CSM but i won't vote for anyone unless i know their goal and opinions. I know it's not the job of the CSM to design the game but it would help my voting process if you could answer the following:

1. Why do you prefer wormhole space to known space?
2. Why do you feel it's important that residence of C1 wormholes are more easily evicted given the relatively low value of a c1 hole?
3. What's you opinion on a ship/mod that has the ability to hold a WH open past its life or mas allowance (not jumpable mass)?
4. How would you like to see T3 ships expand on? i.e. new ship types t3 mods etc.
5. What UI (D-scan. overview stats) improvements would you make?
6. Where do you stand on WIS/CQ? do you think it should be expanded on or left to die? if the former, how could it be implemented in WH space?
7. Finally, PVP aside, if you could make one change/addition to WH space content or mechanics, what would it be?

Rek


Many of these are answered on my blog - http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com

I will answer them here again though.

1. I am in w-space to get the sort of small-medium size PVP that you can no longer get anywhere else in EVE. I also love the dynamic nature of wormholes, and the lack of instant intel from local chat.
2. Because not all C1 wormholes are low value. Some have good PI, some have lots of moons that are being used as T2 component reaction farms, etc. This is not as big an issue now that we have the Tier 3 BCs though.
3. I address this in a lot of detail on my blog, but I am not a fan of mass modifications. Extending the time of a wormhole would potentially be OK, though it would make some invasions a lot easier. I'd have to see exact details to know how I would feel.
4. To start with, I would like to see the bad subsystems balanced. For nearly every subsystem slot, there are one or more subsystems that are basically never used. I'd like to see that fixed. Past that, I would be OK with T3 Battleships, though perhaps with fewer available subsystem slots. I don't think there is room for T3 frigates, given the great number of existing frigate types and the lack of roles for them.
5. I'd like to see the existing overview bugs fixed before the UI is improved. After that is done, improvements to the watch list and broadcast system are pretty high up on my personal list. I think the ability to display which ships are in optimal range of your weapons would be a nice improvement to the overview, especially for newer players.
6. In general, I am not a fan of WiS. I haven't seen any actual *game play* ideas presented for why I would want to wander around. Until I see those, I don't see a reason for CCP to spend any time or effort on it. Of course, if it did have fun and compelling game content, I would want to see it extended to w-space, perhaps via a POS that you were able to dock in.
7. A small change I would make is to randomize the triggers for new spawns in wormhole sites. Doing PVE in w-space is far too easy and predictable right now, and that is a bad thing. Larger change would be either Class 7 wormholes with harder PVE content or more statics in C4 or C5 wormholes.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
tewkz
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#94 - 2012-02-14 14:43:56 UTC  |  Edited by: tewkz
I approve of this product and/or service. I can't think of 6 candidates better than you, you obviously deserve a seat.

E: the fact that you put in so much tireless effort for non wh related things as a K162 candidate is astounding.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2012-02-14 14:56:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Thanks for the swift reply, i will give your blog a read.

For the most we seem to hold the save views on WH and i like your idea of randomising sleeper triggers. This coupled with the idea that sleepers could start to roam WH space (camp WH's attack POS's) would make things more exiting.

However i'm surprised that you haven't given much thought to new T3 ships and their roles... personally i think a T3 industrial ship would be an awesome addition and help to get more industrialists out of HS.

It saddens me that we don't appear to have anyone on the CSM who is pro WiS because it was the thing that got me interested in EVE and if you look back on its development, you'll note that we were told about gameplay features but sadly CCP didn't deliver. IMO, we need to have some new features instead of just polishing and nerfing/buffing existing things.

That said, you have my vote(s) and i'll tell my friends to do the same.

Good luck

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#96 - 2012-02-14 15:32:01 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Thanks for the swift reply, i will give your blog a read.

For the most we seem to hold the save views on WH and i like your idea of randomising sleeper triggers. This coupled with the idea that sleepers could start to roam WH space (camp WH's attack POS's) would make things more exiting.

However i'm surprised that you haven't given much thought to new T3 ships and their roles... personally i think a T3 industrial ship would be an awesome addition and help to get more industrialists out of HS.

It saddens me that we don't appear to have anyone on the CSM who is pro WiS because it was the thing that got me interested in EVE and if you look back on its development, you'll note that we were told about gameplay features but sadly CCP didn't deliver. IMO, we need to have some new features instead of just polishing and nerfing/buffing existing things.

That said, you have my vote(s) and i'll tell my friends to do the same.

Good luck


I disagree about WiS. The only game play features we were told about was the minigame (Slay), and possibly some sort of thing related to boosters. Those aren't compelling reasons to want to devote so much time and effort into WiS.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Hathrul
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#97 - 2012-02-14 16:43:33 UTC
confirming i will use all my accounts to vote for Two step, as will my corp. If you live in wormhole space, there are no other options to vote for

how about SD jam modules? usually you know in what kinda fight people will attempt an SD. and i can see some ships that would have a mid slot free'd easily for such a module
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#98 - 2012-02-14 17:32:14 UTC
Hathrul wrote:
confirming i will use all my accounts to vote for Two step, as will my corp. If you live in wormhole space, there are no other options to vote for

how about SD jam modules? usually you know in what kinda fight people will attempt an SD. and i can see some ships that would have a mid slot free'd easily for such a module


I'd rather just see SD fixed (give killmails, no SD in POS shields, longer SD times for capitals).

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Jasp3r
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#99 - 2012-02-14 18:18:54 UTC
A definite vote from me, we need permanent wormhole representation.
Hathrul
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#100 - 2012-02-14 18:30:32 UTC
Two step wrote:
Hathrul wrote:
confirming i will use all my accounts to vote for Two step, as will my corp. If you live in wormhole space, there are no other options to vote for

how about SD jam modules? usually you know in what kinda fight people will attempt an SD. and i can see some ships that would have a mid slot free'd easily for such a module


I'd rather just see SD fixed (give killmails, no SD in POS shields, longer SD times for capitals).


yea, was just a wild idea. making more modules isnt a good idea really