These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Office of the Chairman: A ~chill place~ for constituent issues

First post
Author
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#381 - 2011-12-16 23:45:08 UTC
J Kunjeh wrote:
Oh Mittens, you're such a pretentious douchebag. But I must say, this is a mighty fine thread you've created here. Now if only the rest of the CSM weren't so damn lazy and would do at least half of the outreach their Chairman does...

I also must say, as much of a douche as you are, you've been a rather effective Chairman and I'm happy to hear you'll be running again for CSM7.


LOL Exactly my thoughts. I dont like the guy, but he is delivering as chairman of CSM.

Though i will still vote for Trebor or Twostep for CSM 7
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#382 - 2011-12-17 23:46:35 UTC
Camios wrote:

For some people the holy grail of game design for sov warfare would be a system that encourages both military entities to split their forces over many objectives. This would mean that each one of current huge fights would be replaced by a number of concurrent, smaller fights that can be handled more fluidly by our hardware, are more interesting (because )and are more fun.


Have you considered that perhaps the best system is one that allows both a distributed attack OR a single massive pitched battle based on the circumstances rather than just forcing people from one extreme to the other.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#383 - 2011-12-18 00:15:42 UTC
He said encourages, not forces.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#384 - 2011-12-18 00:18:10 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
He said encourages, not forces.


Sometimes I stop reading posts at the first sentence too
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#385 - 2011-12-18 00:43:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
Dear The Mittani,

Have You watched 2011 film "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"???

(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1340800/)

I have to say, after reading some of Yours "Sins" at tentonshammer I envision You as "Karla" (spy master of CCCP) who managed to infiltrate MI6's Circus (lets call it board of directors) and place a Mole in their ranks (main plot of movie is the search for the mole).

Karla never actually appear in the movie. Its a background character. Someone people talk about in whispers, even by his British counterparts. All the time people try to find who work for Karla, What Karla knows, what we know of Karla. etc...

If You haven't watched it Yet I urge You to do it, if You like good spy movies :)
Kitfox Mikakka
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#386 - 2011-12-18 07:58:11 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
That's a selling point. We ran our most successful newbie drive ever based on the fact that in EVE, and only in EVE, can you be complete and utter assholes to other players.


I'm one of those newbies and I can confirm the rather hands-off approach CCP takes to things like scamming, ganking, lying, and general skullduggery is a big draw of the game compared to most other big name MMOs.
Takara Mora
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#387 - 2011-12-18 15:33:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Takara Mora
Kitfox Mikakka wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
That's a selling point. We ran our most successful newbie drive ever based on the fact that in EVE, and only in EVE, can you be complete and utter assholes to other players.


I'm one of those newbies and I can confirm the rather hands-off approach CCP takes to things like scamming, ganking, lying, and general skullduggery is a big draw of the game compared to most other big name MMOs.


Yes! More Goons please! By all means, that's exactly the type of player that will ASSURE a great future for ALL of EVE ....

EVE Goonfleet Edition is just another small recruitment drive away :)

Naw, seriously, I may completely disagree with Bully / Be Bullied style of play, but indeed, it's a playstyle that is highly encouraged by not only the sandbox principle, but much more deeply than that, it actually feels like CCP PREFERS that style of play to all others ... queue the "Yes, you're playing in the wrong sandbox" posts now ...
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#388 - 2011-12-18 18:49:11 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
The forums ate my reply. I'm very much against the fact that the new forums devour posts and 'get ganked' all the time. What a pile of crap.


This is why I now copy every post that I write before posting ;)
Camios
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#389 - 2011-12-19 10:22:39 UTC
Yeep wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
He said encourages, not forces.


Sometimes I stop reading posts at the first sentence too


Well, mine was just a tought. As long as the game is playable and enjoyable I am for freedom and options, but it seems to me that anyway there's little place for this "distributed-fights-instead-of-single-massive-battle" thing in today's EVE.
Moreover I think that a distributed fight situation would be more enjoyable, with more strategy and tactics involved, and (incontroverbily) less likely to trigger performance issues, so it should be preferred over a massive battle. I asked if sort of a flexible system that allows the EVE military doctrine to evolve in this direction is being studied by CCP or lobbied by the CSM.


Temba Ronin
#390 - 2011-12-19 15:58:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Temba Ronin
Dear CSM Chairman since it is an indisputable fact that highsec ganking of players negatively impacts player retention, which in turns threatens the survival of EVE as a game we all can continue to play, I was curious as to if you would support a change in the killmail mechanics that would discourage highsec ganking of players whenever Concord action is triggered.

It would consist of this, the loss of the gank ship and it's value would count against the ganker but he would get no killmail for committing a crime and no addition to his kill versus loss isk ratio.

This way those who wish to pirate can have a more realistic experience, they are not credited for criminal activities as a reward but get to keep the loot their fellow pirates can grab from their victims wrecks and pirating as a profession remains profitable.

The hoodlums still can get all the carebear tears they claim to love so dearly but are restricted from pumping up their kill numbers with one sided combat encounters. This way killmails from this point forward will reflect those who really have the warrior spirit and not glorify the street corner gank thug.

That way if someone wants to earn killmails they can always engage in real pvp in lowsec, wormholes, nullsec, or declare war.

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

Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#391 - 2011-12-19 16:29:57 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
Dear CSM Chairman since it is an indisputable fact that highsec ganking of players negatively impacts player retention, which in turns threatens the survival of EVE as a game we all can continue to play, I was curious as to if you would support a change in the killmail mechanics that would discourage highsec ganking of players whenever Concord action is triggered.

It would consist of this, the loss of the gank ship and it's value would count against the ganker but he would get no killmail for committing a crime and no addition to his kill versus loss isk ratio.

This way those who wish to pirate can have a more realistic experience, they are not credited for criminal activities as a reward but get to keep the loot their fellow pirates can grab from their victims wrecks and pirating as a profession remains profitable.

The hoodlums still can get all the carebear tears they claim to love so dearly but are restricted from pumping up their kill numbers with one sided combat encounters. This way killmails from this point forward will reflect those who really have the warrior spirit and not glorify the street corner gank thug.

That way if someone wants to earn killmails they can always engage in real pvp in lowsec, wormholes, nullsec, or declare war.

lol

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Temba Ronin
#392 - 2011-12-19 16:43:44 UTC
Dear CSM Chairman since many profess to want more combat activities an opportunities in nullsec I am wondering if you would support a change in the Faction War mechanics that would enable Empire factions to declare war on player owned sov systems in nullsec that would become mission targets for players as individuals or as an incursion type fleet.

To more accurately reflect human nature it is unlikely that the Empires would ignore the increasing power of nullsec mega alliances without pushing back and grabbing more systems for themselves. Incursions into player owned sov space could be organized and rewarded like they are to repel the Sansha. Additionally the faction whose NPC corp members are the most numerous in the conquest of a player owned sov system would get to claim sov of the system and any player owned corp that participated in the conquest would be granted an office in an NPC station in the newly conquered null region.

This has many benefits, it gets npc corp members involved in faction warfare without limiting their ability to safely traverse Empire space, it gives player owned sov alliances something to do beyond attacking their smaller neighbors, it would create potentially huge battles on a more frequent basis, it gets a lot more people into having a stake in nullsec, and it would force the game to grow.

To get the fleet or mission runner to the player owned sov system a series of jump bridges accessible only to mission runners or incursion fleets could be established in dead space zones throughout lowsec and nullsec. If you really support more activity in nullsec and more people having an interest in nullsec i ask you to both support and help improve this idea.

Nullsec and EVE in general is on the precipice of stagnation an I believe making the game playing experience both more dangerous and rewarding will infuse a much needed dose of action based playability.

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

Temba Ronin
#393 - 2011-12-19 17:02:21 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Temba Ronin wrote:
Dear CSM Chairman since it is an indisputable fact that highsec ganking of players negatively impacts player retention, which in turns threatens the survival of EVE as a game we all can continue to play, I was curious as to if you would support a change in the killmail mechanics that would discourage highsec ganking of players whenever Concord action is triggered.

It would consist of this, the loss of the gank ship and it's value would count against the ganker but he would get no killmail for committing a crime and no addition to his kill versus loss isk ratio.

This way those who wish to pirate can have a more realistic experience, they are not credited for criminal activities as a reward but get to keep the loot their fellow pirates can grab from their victims wrecks and pirating as a profession remains profitable.

The hoodlums still can get all the carebear tears they claim to love so dearly but are restricted from pumping up their kill numbers with one sided combat encounters. This way killmails from this point forward will reflect those who really have the warrior spirit and not glorify the street corner gank thug.

That way if someone wants to earn killmails they can always engage in real pvp in lowsec, wormholes, nullsec, or declare war.

lol

You haven't had a solo kill against anybody who could fight back in how long Scat? Ooohhh your pvp skills are soooo scary, lol. Thanks for proving my point.

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

Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#394 - 2011-12-19 22:10:47 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
You haven't had a solo kill against anybody who could fight back in how long Scat? Ooohhh your pvp skills are soooo scary, lol. Thanks for proving my point.


Honouerable solo kills are indeed the mark of greatness in Eve.
Imigo Montoya
BreadFleet
Triglavian Outlaws and Sobornost Troika
#395 - 2011-12-19 23:05:35 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
Summary:
Remove killmails from suicide ganking
Allow NPC corps to take over player sov systems


Ah, no and no.

Killmails are simply a record of a kill, k/d ratio isn't everything. Besides, it's really not such a one-sided fight, at least not in favour of the ganker - the gankee gets unbeatable, irresistible NPCs spawning to fight with them.

NPC corps have no place in player sov systems, that's what NPC sov space is for and NPC corp players are welcome to move there already.
Forum Fighter
Doomheim
#396 - 2011-12-20 01:33:55 UTC
Dear Goons,

Where will you head to after WN and Raiden spank you?

Freeport IRC space!

Bearer of the 1600mm Tinfoil Hat

May Zonday
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#397 - 2011-12-20 04:53:51 UTC  |  Edited by: May Zonday
Forum Fighter wrote:
Dear Goons,

Where will you head to after WN and Raiden spank you?

Freeport IRC space!


Hold on, I'll answer that once we're done bathing in the blood of aborted Titans.

wait hahaha white noise can't afford that their russian masters sell off all their tech moon isk for caviar baths.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#398 - 2011-12-20 05:08:01 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
Dear CSM Chairman since many profess to want more combat activities an opportunities in nullsec I am wondering if you would support a change in the Faction War mechanics that would enable Empire factions to declare war on player owned sov systems in nullsec that would become mission targets for players as individuals or as an incursion type fleet.


One, you don't need to declare a war on anyone to shoot them in nullsec.

Two, what's stopping you from getting a few friends together and going on an "incursion" into any alliance owned space right now?


Do you people seriously need an NPC to tell you everything to do step by step?
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#399 - 2011-12-20 10:27:45 UTC
Temba Ronin wrote:
Dear CSM Chairman since it is an indisputable fact that highsec ganking of players negatively impacts player retention,

Why do you have to go and crap all over the Chairman's nice thread like this?

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.

Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
#400 - 2011-12-20 11:47:49 UTC
I'm sure that if NPC corps or factions can wardec player entities, the reverse would also be true. I'm sure the little carebear forgot to think about that.

Personally I'd love the watch the nullsec vs highsec show :)

First to take jita gets a cookie ;P