These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Temba Ronin
#681 - 2013-03-28 15:47:26 UTC
First Gratz to Malcanis for making it into the election, next we have to get him on CSM8!

That being said I find the nullsec vs highsec manufacturing discussion quite compelling. Being the reviled miner/ builder/ inventor type myself I am very interested in how it is resolved.

Having spent my formative days as a highsec miner/ builder/ inventor before moving up to lowsec and now residing in nullsec I can tell you that the system surely requires fixing.

When you are in highsec you dream of the lowsec ores and the hopefully greater profit margins, and of course the moongoo to fund your building plans. So you and your corp make the jump to lowsec to jumpstart your industrial careers. You've already learned how to support a POS with PI in highsec and you dive right into moon mining and mining those yummy lowsec belts! Then after a time the ganking picks up in your little corner of EVE and suddenly you find yourself outgunned or constantly jumping into your fighting ships to repel tourists, gankers, and mission roamers chasing escalations in your backyard. Your productivity is down and your pvp is up, gate camping becomes an interesting diversion and gives you a taste of "fleet" action. Of course this comes at a price, now a good slice of your industrial corp will become enamored with pvp and spend less time mining. You start to get annoyed at the ease with which bigger roams and gangs can pour thru your lowsec home looking for laughs and easy kills on the weekend. Then you start to absorb the other industrial corps in your area because you all feel the same constraints squeezing you and greater numbers hopefully mean quicker responses to threats and thus more time to be about the business of making things that earn profits. However even as a larger corp you never can get a handle on safer operations in lowsec so your eye starts to wander towards nullsec and joining an alliance and reaping the benefits of holding sov.

Of course with the passage of time you make it, woo hoo! You are a nullsec resident miner/ buider/ inventor/ pve & pvp pilot. But there are a few more surprises in store for you, remember that lowly ore veldspar you starting mining as a noob, well you'll be mining it again in your sov because tritanium is essential and the vast quantities of it are now far away in the highsec trade hubs. As an Alliance member you'll be building ships that your corp mates and Alliance mates need for defense and for roams making profits from the building of ships becomes less important then building the ships that will help your alliance hold sov.

You're going to spend a lot more time flying in pvp fleets learning to be a more valuable member of your alliance because the threats to sov trickle thru every week. You will find it less and less compelling to build ships because of the supply chain required to make them is now stretched from nullsec to Jita and your essential import & export routes to highsec can be disrupted by wardecs from freighter killers looking for the JF or cloaky hauler who thinks it won't happen to him until it does. Your best pvp people and fc's to fight back against a wardec are busy defending your sov in nullsec, so your supply route is compromised and your building grinds to a halt.

Nullsec is a wasteland for manufacturing because it is forced to rely upon highsec and the tethers that connect high to null are easily disrupted, add to that the ease for roams to slip into sov space to gank miners who don't keep an eye on local or monitor intel channels for neuts and reds in their area and you quickly enter the zone of diminishing returns.

In my humble opinion Null sec needs the expanded ability to create manufacturing/ trade hubs that are completely autonomous from highsec, which means seeding the systems with gravs and belts that contain all the ores available in empire space with sufficient quantities to support robust building.

As a miner/ builder/ inventor/ pve & pvp pilot that has invested my time to gain the skills to reside in nullsec it seems wrong to have to depend upon highsec for my continued existence. I don't want to be at the whim of wardec corps who have very little risk beyond paying for the wardec they inflict upon nullsec corps and then hang around highsec trade hubs to prey upon haulers. If you consider this an improved wardec system then perhaps I am just not aware of how bad the old system was. Nullsec needs to become autonomous I hope the new members of CSM8 can get that message to CCP.

I am not a highsec basher, I honestly believe the meta game of EVE online is demanding improvements in null so the game can continue it's evolution.

Please join me in voting for MALCANIS for CSM8

Power To The Players!

The Best Ship In EVE Online Is "Friendship", Power To The Players!

Reppyk
The Black Shell
#682 - 2013-03-28 16:00:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Reppyk
Malcanis wrote:
Well it was a bit of a general question. What specifically are you concerned about? hi-sec POS being a PITA to shoot? Yeah they kind of are, but there are ~implications with making it easier to kill POS with subcaps, like seeing W-space scoured out by the dominant corps there.
"yes but" aren't exactly a stand that I can satisfy with. P

For example, you're advocating about changing the way highsec manufacturing slots work (which is directly a huge incentive to use POSes) and at the same time "nerfing the EHP of structures", making them more vulnerable. Meaning that ~POS business~ would become a serious business in EVE.
So hundreds of pilots would anchor hundreds of towers all around EVE, as good as they are at the moment, which "just" a lower EHP. You didn't say more about it, so I don't even know if you're talking about a shenanigan "-5% structure HP" or a massive batnerf move "-90% HP **** you, structures !". Or maybe you were only talking about TCUs/SBUs ?

I mean, you'll probably get elected (and you have my support /o/ ) and your role will definitively not be as a game designer, but you must represent people.
One day CCP will come at you and ask you "sup Malca, here's what we planned on the highsec industry, it's linked with POS, what do you think of it ?" (or even better : you will come at CCP saying "hey bros, some pilots are telling me that small-scale structure fights are so broken nobody wants to do it"). Not only you'll have to express your own opinion, but the opinions of your fellow pilots as well.

Keeping on the same example : you're saying that highsec POSes are a PITA to destroy. I disagree with this opinion ; of course it's indeed "a pain in the ass" but that's not even remotely the main problem I would adovcate : highsec POSes have an immunity in EVE. You could reply "maybe but that's your (maybe experienced) personal point of view". Yes but thanks to some tools (zboard in this case), I can for example check own many large (non-faction, I'm too lazy) control towers died this month and feel the scale of the problem.

You may think at first that my original post was "plz future CSM member nerf POSes plz" but it's not. I'm just trying to find correct CSM members that I could EVEmail about inquiries, and at the same time CSM members that are not posing as "expert on a few, narrow domains" but listeners (collecting problems) and investigators (what's the deal ? Maybe I should ask a few people that know that ****).

You're doing a good job at it actually, but you can do it even better. :)

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

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

Sui'Djin
State War Academy
Caldari State
#683 - 2013-03-28 16:11:35 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Temba Ronin wrote:
OK the whole tone of the CSM8 Election is so much more positive!


One effect of the STV system is that it gives candidates a very powerful incentive to work together with at least some of the other candidates, rather than viewing every single other candidate purely as a competitor.

Don't worry though; if CCP keep it, then EVE-normality will soon be restored, because it will inevitably lead to the formation of political parties. With all the effects that implies.

Anyway, just to let you all know: I'm in. Many thanks for your endorsements and I hope you enjoyed voting for me cos I'm going to ask you to do it again next week!

glad to hear that Cool
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#684 - 2013-03-28 17:02:43 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Well it was a bit of a general question. What specifically are you concerned about? hi-sec POS being a PITA to shoot? Yeah they kind of are, but there are ~implications with making it easier to kill POS with subcaps, like seeing W-space scoured out by the dominant corps there.
"yes but" aren't exactly a stand that I can satisfy with. P

For example, you're advocating about changing the way highsec manufacturing slots work (which is directly a huge incentive to use POSes) and at the same time "nerfing the EHP of structures", making them more vulnerable. Meaning that ~POS business~ would become a serious business in EVE.
So hundreds of pilots would anchor hundreds of towers all around EVE, as good as they are at the moment, which "just" a lower EHP. You didn't say more about it, so I don't even know if you're talking about a shenanigan "-5% structure HP" or a massive batnerf move "-90% HP **** you, structures !". Or maybe you were only talking about TCUs/SBUs ?

I mean, you'll probably get elected (and you have my support /o/ ) and your role will definitively not be as a game designer, but you must represent people.
One day CCP will come at you and ask you "sup Malca, here's what we planned on the highsec industry, it's linked with POS, what do you think of it ?" (or even better : you will come at CCP saying "hey bros, some pilots are telling me that small-scale structure fights are so broken nobody wants to do it"). Not only you'll have to express your own opinion, but the opinions of your fellow pilots as well.

Keeping on the same example : you're saying that highsec POSes are a PITA to destroy. I disagree with this opinion ; of course it's indeed "a pain in the ass" but that's not even remotely the main problem I would adovcate : highsec POSes have an immunity in EVE. You could reply "maybe but that's your (maybe experienced) personal point of view". Yes but thanks to some tools (zboard in this case), I can for example check own many large (non-faction, I'm too lazy) control towers died this month and feel the scale of the problem.

You may think at first that my original post was "plz future CSM member nerf POSes plz" but it's not. I'm just trying to find correct CSM members that I could EVEmail about inquiries, and at the same time CSM members that are not posing as "expert on a few, narrow domains" but listeners (collecting problems) and investigators (what's the deal ? Maybe I should ask a few people that know that ****).

You're doing a good job at it actually, but you can do it even better. :)



T be clear: the "structures" I was referring to were the sovereignty structures - TCUs, hubs, stations. HP-wise, most POS are fine. Large POS in hi-sec are an issue, but one I'd prefer to see addressed by improving the options for shooting at them with - but in a way that doesn't crap on W-space. It's a conundrum.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#685 - 2013-03-28 17:05:26 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Reppyk wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You mean in the sense of trying to shoot at them?
And defending them, don't be so single-sided. Smile
The shooting part and the linked isk-versus-reward part (like in "a giant dickstar costs 500m" and "if I kill it, I'll loot 20m").
If you want I can ask you particular questions but it would mean that you don't care about it or feel it's well balanced atm.


Well it was a bit of a general question. What specifically are you concerned about? hi-sec POS being a PITA to shoot? Yeah they kind of are, but there are ~implications with making it easier to kill POS with subcaps, like seeing W-space scoured out by the dominant corps there.


There are some requirements for hanging POSes in high sec that don't apply in WH space (standings, charters), so those could be manipulated to make small and medium POSes more attractive to high sec dwellers, and large POSes less attractive. WH POSes would not be affected at all, except perhaps for price rebalances caused by changing demand in Empire space.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#686 - 2013-03-28 17:08:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
I was going to yap about -75% shield strength in hisec due to regulations, but that doesn't have any impact on the fact that to take down a hisec pos, you have to wardec that corp, and when that happens they have 24 hours to pull it down, meaning the "worst" that'll happen, unless the defenders are complete muppets, is a disruption.

Muttering about HP etc is just arguing about convenience for the attacker.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#687 - 2013-03-28 18:06:10 UTC
I don't have a problem with POSes being used in hi-sec tbh. In fact In my dream of EVE, players would deploy POS as the greatly preferred alternative to using NPC stations. (in this dream, POS aren't horrible)

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lelob
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#688 - 2013-03-29 09:57:39 UTC
I would rather vote for some publord from SMA then a publord from INIT.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#689 - 2013-03-29 10:02:32 UTC
Lelob wrote:
I would rather vote for some publord from SMA then a publord from INIT.


Luckily, you don't have to choose! You can put the SMA publord as your first pick and me as your second.

If you need any more help with how to vote for publords, please don't hesitate to ask.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#690 - 2013-03-29 19:01:12 UTC
So you are endorsed by nullsec bears to protect their business? What's the point of "nerfing" high sec when low sec is garbage (heeheehe get wreckt by instalockers at gates heehehe gee I wonder why lowsec is **** let's nerf highsec because my goons overlords told me to) then there is nullsec, but you have to commit yourself and become a slave till you can get a piece of the cake, null pvp is just plain boring.
FIx lowsec, it'll fix high sec, but hey since you're just another goon's pet you will only defend your private interests.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#691 - 2013-03-29 19:05:58 UTC
Nullbear, "nerfing" hisec, goons overlords and goon's pet. That post ticks all the troll checkboxes.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#692 - 2013-03-29 19:16:06 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Nullbear, "nerfing" hisec, goons overlords and goon's pet. That post ticks all the troll checkboxes.

I have a different opinion, I must be a troll. You can't prove me wrong so you try to be provocative but I see clearly trough your ruse.
If they "nerf" high sec they need to nerf nullsec for the same reasons, they also need to make low sec attractive and fun.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#693 - 2013-03-29 19:30:42 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
If they "nerf" high sec they need to nerf nullsec for the same reasons

Do tell what these reasons are.

Afk Moon Goo wrote:
they also need to make low sec attractive and fun.

Do tell how this'll benefit either hisec or nullsec.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Marian Devers
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
#694 - 2013-03-29 19:47:04 UTC
Malcanis, what are your thoughts regarding supercaps; also, regarding Shadoo's 0.0 Thunderdome?
Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#695 - 2013-03-29 19:49:34 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:

Do tell what these reasons are.

I don't know dude, aren't you voting for this guy? You should know the reasons better mate.
- no risk, high reward isk that can be scaled
- huge afk income
- convenient and easy to setup
etc
Lord Zim wrote:

Do tell how this'll benefit either hisec or nullsec.

If you don't see how making lowsec more attractive will benefit hisec I don't know what to say friendo. Gatecamp and instalockers are horrible designs, don't get me wrong you should be able to die but only if you fail/got outplayed not because people are camping a gate with a setup that require no skill.
There is no way to annoy pirates for example, on the other hand you can suicide gank bears in hs pretty easily, they should allow bombs in lowsec and remove instalocks gg you fixed ls, maybe add a % of lock time that scale with the number of ships next to the gate.

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#696 - 2013-03-29 19:53:02 UTC
So in short, lots of usual trolly catchphrases in the first post, made by a day 0 alt with trolly name, most likely no idea what these "hisec nerfs" it's complaining about actually are, and a hilarious assumption that the only thing wrong with lowsec is "gatecamps everywhere" and "instalocks ruining mah game".

Yep. All the troll checkboxes.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#697 - 2013-03-29 19:58:30 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
So in short, lots of usual trolly catchphrases in the first post, made by a day 0 alt with trolly name, most likely no idea what these "hisec nerfs" it's complaining about actually are, and a hilarious assumption that the only thing wrong with lowsec is "gatecamps everywhere" and "instalocks ruining mah game".

Yep. All the troll checkboxes.

All you do is call me names, not a single argument. Afk Moon Goo is a serious problem and a reality, you're in denial if you don't believe that. Instalocks and gatecamps are bad designs, it's ok for null because sov and **** and you should be punished in null for running into camps but it's the main reason why low sec is bad, you can't punish pirates, being a pirate is literally the easiest pvp you can get.
Afk Moon Goo for CSM9.


Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#698 - 2013-03-29 20:08:15 UTC
So what you're really here for is to ***** about how moongoo works as a financial tool, after there's been indications that CCP might be working towards a better system for money generation for alliances, and you're bitching at some of the things which would help shift alliances' finances towards this by bitching about "you just want to nerf hisec" (and, of course, throwing some tripe about how nullsec needs to be nerfed the same way ... I don't even know what you're on about there, but do elucidate)? Moongoo does work in an suboptimal manner as a financial tool, but there are far, far better ways of going about getting it fixed than making a dedicated/gimmicky troll account and spouting gimmick troll memes. But I don't really expect you to come up with anything non-trolly.

And no, lowsec's main problems don't involve the word "gatecamp".

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Afk Moon Goo
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#699 - 2013-03-29 20:21:42 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
So what you're really here for is to ***** about how moongoo works as a financial tool, after there's been indications that CCP might be working towards a better system for money generation for alliances, and you're bitching at some of the things which would help shift alliances' finances towards this by bitching about "you just want to nerf hisec" (and, of course, throwing some tripe about how nullsec needs to be nerfed the same way ... I don't even know what you're on about there, but do elucidate)? Moongoo does work in an suboptimal manner as a financial tool, but there are far, far better ways of going about getting it fixed than making a dedicated/gimmicky troll account and spouting gimmick troll memes. But I don't really expect you to come up with anything non-trolly.

And no, lowsec's main problems don't involve the word "gatecamp".

Hey that's some pretty harsh words friendo, kinda rude.
That moon goo money shouldn't be used to suicide gank in high sec because noone is fighting in nullsec because lol politics and why fight when you can make easy money, that's a problem.
I'll keep it simple for you since you seems to have problems understanding my logic :
- afk income = ok
- afk income that can scale = bad
I seemed to have touched a chord, moongoo seems to be really important for you and I can understand why.
Yes gatecamp and instalocks are a bad designs when there is no way you can punish gatecampers, feel free to explain yourself tho, you seems confused maybe you should take some time to breath and think about your post I feel kinda bad for you when I'm reading your posts...
By the way I'm pretty sure you are misusing the word "troll", a different opinion with decent arguments is not a troll, you can disagree with me but I'm pretty sure you are the one "spouting" troll memes we are not in funnyjunk ahaha.
Thanks in advance friendo.

BearAfk Moon Goo for CSM9Bear
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#700 - 2013-03-29 20:25:14 UTC
Afk Moon Goo wrote:
when there is no way you can punish gatecampers

Get some frien...

Right.

Nevermind.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.