Jita Park Speakers Corner

double post

I have already stated publicly that I am 100% behind the idea of a w-space primary, and would happily be a part of it. I want to see the candidate who is willing to do his or her best for the majority of our community get elected, and if it's not me, then I will gladly back someone else.

I posted in this forum, because for all the talk of a primary that has happened over the last few months, nothing concrete has come of it. No dates have been set, and no information has been made available to the potential candidates or the community regarding its organization or timing. We are getting down to the wire here with just over two months to go, and something needs to happen.

In order for people to make an informed decision when the primary does happen, they need to know where the various candidates stand on issues the community feels are important. After the primary, whoever the community decides they want on the CSM can make a post in the appropriate forum and get the prerequisite votes or likes.

*hugs* ;)

On a related note though, just to clarify, Cipreh, are you planning to push for making it easier to evict any WH or just the high end ones?
I ask because personally I consider it much easier to evict someone in a heavily fortified C5/6, sure, AHARM for example, than someone in a heavily fortified C2, such as several TLOST corps for example.

Also, why do you feel this is actually needed at all?
I mean, people are always complaining that WHs are too empty so how would making evictions easier help bring more people into WHs to populate them?

At no point did I say I wanted to make it easier to evict anyone, just that the current dynamics breed complacency, and I feel there should be more of a risk to the various styles of game play, whether it's exploration, PvE, or industry that are common in w-space, to bring it in-line with the rewards.

Now I am not saying make the sites harder, but I feel the difficulty and risk in these activities should come from other players, more then by anything CCP adds to the game. The changes I have talked about in my previous posts have all touched on ways to improve on bringing people into contact with each other more often, to drive conflict.

I am working on it, but if you read the minutes, CCP *may* be changing the voting system which would make a primary unneeded. I am trying to get confirmation from them, which should be this week (hopefully) that the changes will happen. If not, I am planning on running a primary.

To be fair Zarak, you do come off as a maniac when you post.

Eh, well I suppose Jack did troll any sub optimal t3/capital fit that got linked in corp. But he does that everywhere to everyone in fairly equal measure, including these forums. The only major grief Jack caused me was leaving to join AHARM and crimping my home ops in the AU TZ .

-1 vote

I would have to argue against the removal of some of the empty c5's idea personally. There are fairly decent groups of people who are not able to roll around in 30+ man t3 gangs with dread and carrier support at a whim, nor to call on large alliance structures to help disperse one. Lowering the total number of holes would only increase the dominance of groups that can and accelerate stagnation in a newly shrunken pool. Increasing the frequency that you will roll into the same people over and over again, has boring written all over it.

You won't really do much to drive conflict because these groups could not compete to begin with so they will just spend more time pos'ed up, all you have done is lower the number of options for people.

Most people complain about never getting fights when they are part of organizations that have a reputation for blobing the crap out of any sort of fight with a wall of superior firepower. Once scouts see your ticker, they simply decide they would rater play LoL or watch a movie than bash their heads against a gang they already know will likely outnumber and outclass them by virtue of their killboard alone, and they pos up. So what you have done is instead of increasing conflict, you have increased the potential for blue balls and aggravation.

I heard the idea tossed around a while back that sleepers could be allowed to attack pos's. Maybe this could be examined to help rid w-space of undefended farming holes. Have the damage/penalties scale with time or something so that a system can not receive a head shot overnight but that its residents can not simply ignore the sleepers and continue to farm sites and leave the existing throwaway tower to die in the interim. The existing incursion mechanics could be used to deny loot of any kind during one of these assaults. Possibly utilize the penalties from an incursion site as well so that a 2-3 man farming operation will not be able to defend(or leave) a system that has been sieged overnight, but that a relatively small organization, with the appropriate amount of work, could do it.

^ Note that the above may be a terrible idea when analyzed by the troling hive mind of these forums but you get what I am going after here.

I respectfully disagree with you man, this thread is about a WH CSM representative, and we need a common voice in there.