These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

[Open question to CSM Candidates] What is Your stance on WH stuff?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#21 - 2012-02-27 17:34:25 UTC
Aiifa wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:

Nope, which is why this irritates me. I have never had any issue defending unpopular measures I thought were beneficial, feel free to look at my track record. If I thought this idea was the one to go for, I'd be defending it tooth and nails. I don't...

I don't have any issue with someone voting for someone other than me, particularly if that other candidate is a decent one (which Two step mostly is, in the "one trick pony" category). But if you decide not to vote for me, at least do so because you actually disagree with me, not because you disagree with what you think I said.


Is this you officially disputing the CSM minutes Two Step and others wrote up and opened for review before publishing? A little late to do that.

As the official record reads, you were one of the people who mooted wormhole stabilization in the first place, and no matter how enthusiastic you personally were about it, Two Step was the person who responded with aptly vehement disagreement (apparently) and that's why he is getting the votes.

Perhaps when you say "one trick pony" you mean devoted specialist and splendid, necessary choice for CSM rep.


Yes indeed, it is me disputing the accuracy of the CSM minutes, not insofar as it mentioning that this idea was discussed, but insfar as it implies this idea was advocated for, and even more so because it fails to mention the caveats this idea entails, and the fact it was but one of the ones discussed, and also because it fails to mention why it was discussed.
It's an interesting argument for elections "vote for me, they want to ruin WHs", but it's untrue. Hence my portraying it as dishonest.

Two step didn't voice any disagreement then, he wasn't there. He voiced, at other times, the same issues with that idea that I myself mention. As well as a general disagreement on the idea that people should be able to wall themselves in to that extent.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-02-27 18:52:53 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:

So I'll have to repeat myself again.

I'm talking about a situation where an attacker has at most the ability to get in 3 caps to the defender's 30+.


The very restriction that keeps Wormholes different is this. I personally don't see the problem. You want to invade, spend some time and effort to invade. Yeah, it's gonna suck for those guys who have toons parked - scanners, Caps, Logistics... But you know what? THAT is what keeps WH's different from 0.0!

Force Projection / Logistics / Movement in general is *restricted* in Wormspace. This is a *good* thing.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2012-02-27 19:35:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiifa
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Aiifa wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:

Nope, which is why this irritates me. I have never had any issue defending unpopular measures I thought were beneficial, feel free to look at my track record. If I thought this idea was the one to go for, I'd be defending it tooth and nails. I don't...

I don't have any issue with someone voting for someone other than me, particularly if that other candidate is a decent one (which Two step mostly is, in the "one trick pony" category). But if you decide not to vote for me, at least do so because you actually disagree with me, not because you disagree with what you think I said.


Is this you officially disputing the CSM minutes Two Step and others wrote up and opened for review before publishing? A little late to do that.

As the official record reads, you were one of the people who mooted wormhole stabilization in the first place, and no matter how enthusiastic you personally were about it, Two Step was the person who responded with aptly vehement disagreement (apparently) and that's why he is getting the votes.

Perhaps when you say "one trick pony" you mean devoted specialist and splendid, necessary choice for CSM rep.


Yes indeed, it is me disputing the accuracy of the CSM minutes, not insofar as it mentioning that this idea was discussed, but insfar as it implies this idea was advocated for, and even more so because it fails to mention the caveats this idea entails, and the fact it was but one of the ones discussed, and also because it fails to mention why it was discussed.
It's an interesting argument for elections "vote for me, they want to ruin WHs", but it's untrue. Hence my portraying it as dishonest.

Two step didn't voice any disagreement then, he wasn't there. He voiced, at other times, the same issues with that idea that I myself mention. As well as a general disagreement on the idea that people should be able to wall themselves in to that extent.


So given what you say, at worst he's done a better job of communicating his concerns and what happened at the summit than you, despite the fact he wasn't even there.

Whichever way you spin it he's looking like the better candidate. Not just for wormhole space, now.
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#24 - 2012-02-27 19:45:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:

So I'll have to repeat myself again.

I'm talking about a situation where an attacker has at most the ability to get in 3 caps to the defender's 30+.


The very restriction that keeps Wormholes different is this. I personally don't see the problem. You want to invade, spend some time and effort to invade. Yeah, it's gonna suck for those guys who have toons parked - scanners, Caps, Logistics... But you know what? THAT is what keeps WH's different from 0.0!

Force Projection / Logistics / Movement in general is *restricted* in Wormspace. This is a *good* thing.


I wholeheartedly agree with you. I dont want anything that makes it trivial to move in and out of wormholes, or to invade wormholes.
I'm talking about the situation that happens when you push these things to the limit here, not the general rule.

Aiifa wrote:

So given what you say, at worst he's done a better job of communicating his concerns than you, despite the fact he wasn't even there.

Whichever way you spin it he's looking like the better candidate. Not just for wormhole space, now.


Not in the least, *I* voiced my concerns adequately. I've had a few terms to discuss this question as you may well know. I haven't recommended or requested CCP do anything, pointing out an issue is all I've done. The fact that he mischaracterizes my stance to get votes has nothing to do with how adequate his communication was.

What it makes him is a less honest (and, granted, more effective) politician, regardless of what his qualities may or may not be.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#25 - 2012-02-27 22:02:40 UTC
I went back and listened to the session in question. I'm going to stick by what was covered in the minutes. I didn't hear any specific limits on extending the total mass allowed through a wormhole discussed.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-02-27 22:23:50 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
Meissa. At Your Blog You wrote:

Quote:

Wormholes


This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM. That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting. Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes. I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)


Now maybe this is a good place to elaborate on Your proposal?


Im gona Quote myself for visibility :P

Meissa - can You elaborate on Your idea as stated in Your blog?

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-02-28 13:36:04 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
*I* voiced my concerns adequately. I've had a few terms to discuss this question as you may well know. I haven't recommended or requested CCP do anything, pointing out an issue is all I've done. The fact that he mischaracterizes my stance to get votes has nothing to do with how adequate his communication was.

What it makes him is a less honest (and, granted, more effective) politician, regardless of what his qualities may or may not be.


Got some links? Some evidence?
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-02-28 17:36:15 UTC
So other than Meissa's travesty of an idea, how about all those other wormhole ideas... like alliance bookmarks? Any reason we can't have those?
Dorn Val
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#29 - 2012-02-29 10:09:18 UTC
Anything that would allow more mass though a worm hole than it could normally handle would end the small scale PVP that we enjoy now in w-space. If I wanted to get into blob warfare I'd move to null...

Also I don't want anyone on the CSM that's advocating changes to game mechanics just to make their own game play easier...

Sandbox: An enclosed area filled with sand for children engaged in open-ended, unstructured, imaginative play. Also a place for cats to urinate and defecate...
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#30 - 2012-02-29 12:42:03 UTC
Aiifa wrote:
So other than Meissa's travesty of an idea, how about all those other wormhole ideas... like alliance bookmarks? Any reason we can't have those?


What makes them tough is that right now, there are no alliance roles. One simple solution might be to just have a checkbox that makes all corp bookmarks in the alliance the same for all corps in the alliance. That wouldn't allow for "private" corp bookmarks though.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-03-01 03:20:57 UTC
What if you took the permissions for shared bookmarks by folder, rather than broad all or nothing. One folde ris corp, another has corp/available at alliance level


Written from my c5 pos while wondering how someone else is considered the 'only wh candidate'

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2012-03-01 16:16:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiifa
Mike Azariah wrote:
What if you took the permissions for shared bookmarks by folder, rather than broad all or nothing. One folde ris corp, another has corp/available at alliance level


Written from my c5 pos while wondering how someone else is considered the 'only wh candidate'



You're still creating new roles.

Maybe have the executor corp bms shared with the whole alliance?

This isn't the thread for ideas though, I should think.

Have wormholes been used as a testing ground by CCP?
Fade Toblack
Per.ly
The 20 Minuters
#33 - 2012-03-02 12:10:57 UTC
Two step wrote:
What makes them tough is that right now, there are no alliance roles.


That's been fixed for adding alliance events to the calendar... and isn't it actually the same role that's used for calendar events and corp locations?

But yes, as a member of a small alliance all living together in w-space, anything that makes co-operation between corps easier would be a god-send. Alliance bookmarks just being the most obvious addition to the game.
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2012-03-02 14:05:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiifa
whoops, deleted
Franklin D Roosevelt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-03-02 21:05:37 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
I would like all (well, at least those that have anything to say in the subject) of CSM candidates to state their point of view on WH balancing/iterations/mechanics/tweaks/etc...

I would like to know what you think is broken and what works perfectly and should never be changed.

What would You like being added to WH and what taken away?

How do You see WH (as a gameplay style) fits in whole EVE gameplay experience?

Wormholes should become an integral part of SOV mechanics IMHO
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#36 - 2012-03-02 23:00:41 UTC
Franklin D Roosevelt wrote:
Max Kolonko wrote:
I would like all (well, at least those that have anything to say in the subject) of CSM candidates to state their point of view on WH balancing/iterations/mechanics/tweaks/etc...

I would like to know what you think is broken and what works perfectly and should never be changed.

What would You like being added to WH and what taken away?

How do You see WH (as a gameplay style) fits in whole EVE gameplay experience?

Wormholes should become an integral part of SOV mechanics IMHO


Lets agree to disagree :P

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Aiifa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-03-03 13:30:27 UTC
Franklin D Roosevelt wrote:
Max Kolonko wrote:
I would like all (well, at least those that have anything to say in the subject) of CSM candidates to state their point of view on WH balancing/iterations/mechanics/tweaks/etc...

I would like to know what you think is broken and what works perfectly and should never be changed.

What would You like being added to WH and what taken away?

How do You see WH (as a gameplay style) fits in whole EVE gameplay experience?

Wormholes should become an integral part of SOV mechanics IMHO


not to harsh your buzz but your wild freethinking is just too much for me

also o7 Max was nice seeing you thursday

Mittani is of course retreating from his position on grav sites in wh space

for the candidates more well-versed in w-space, what is the big deal with ABC ores being available? They are not easy pickings; sometimes you get lucky and it's quiet, sometimes you don't and lose everything. That seems a fair amount of risk.
Khorghast
Chilled Environment
#38 - 2012-03-07 14:41:19 UTC
This seems very straight forward to me. If you live in a wormhole, as I do, vote for Two step. Meissa is not a wormhole candidate, but rather a wormhole invasion candidate.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-03-07 20:11:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
Khorghast wrote:
This seems very straight forward to me. If you live in a wormhole, as I do, vote for Two step. Meissa is not a wormhole candidate, but rather a wormhole invasion candidate.



pretty much THIS^^^

Aiifa wrote:


also o7 Max was nice seeing you thursday




o7

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
asidburn Enaka
The 501st Legion
#40 - 2012-03-08 08:48:48 UTC
i just want to let everyone know about this scammer claming to be giving plex for votes dont be caught falling for this scam vote aganist darius III member of interstellar eXodus {IE-EX} they are scaming people pass the word on to everyone you can and vote aganist these undeserving jerks here is a copy of the chat log as proof of there unworthy actions!!!!!!!!

asidburn Enaka > what do i need to do
Darius III > http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=480 go there
Darius III > vote for me then paste the message you got after vote cast into this chat
asidburn Enaka > your vote has been registered. We thank you for your participation.
Darius III > Thanks man
Darius III > that concludes our business
Darius III > Fly safe
asidburn Enaka > and what about the contract
asidburn Enaka > i will have my alliance vote aganist you about 250 people
asidburn Enaka > and then where will you be
asidburn Enaka > send me the contract and i will have them vote for you
asidburn Enaka > this is what we call a test of charecture
Darius III > Have them vote against me
Darius III > Sorry for the ssam
Darius III > But I wouldnt sleep at night if I didnt do everything in my power to make syure that Goons dont ruin this CSM
asidburn Enaka > your an idiot all your going to do is send more votes to the goons
Darius III > not really
Darius III > Goons will win chairman nbo matetr what, doesnt matter
Darius III > nothing can stop them
Darius III > and thats a real shame
asidburn Enaka > well you just lost 243 votes
asidburn Enaka > got 1 lost 243
Darius III > Didnt have them anyway
Darius III > didnt lose anything
Darius III > Just please dont make forum post about me, it would ruin my campaign
asidburn Enaka > not to mentone att the isk spam bans you r about to get
asidburn Enaka > too late
asidburn Enaka > and i just copyed this conv
asidburn Enaka > so i can post
Darius III > You wouldnt dare do it
Darius III > You too lazy anyway
Darius III > I dont have a thing to worry about
asidburn Enaka > haha i play eve 8 hrs a day and im retired all i have is time
Darius III > no lazy bones like you would waste their time. LOL so much for your empty threats LOL

rember i dont care who you vote for just dont voter for the
Previous page123Next page