These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Psychotic Monk for CSM9

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#101 - 2014-04-01 21:56:32 UTC
Morihei Akachi wrote:
I'm not in a position to speculate about anyone's motives in this thread, nor is anyone else. I am interested to hear Monk's position on the E1 affair, though. If none is forthcoming, I won't be voting for him.


If he shows up in more than one of those recordings as a participant in Erotica1's antics. Do you really need some lame justification?

You already have the answer you are looking for.

Mr Epeen Cool
Morihei Akachi
Doomheim
#102 - 2014-04-02 06:41:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Morihei Akachi
Mr Epeen wrote:
Do you really need some lame justification?

No, not really. But I think it’s good to give people the benefit of the doubt. Does Monk still stand to the whole bonus room thing? Or has the discussion of recent days led to a reconsideration in any respect? I don't want to assume his present stance purely and simply on the basis of his past involvement.

"Enduring", "restrained" and "ample" as designations for starship components are foreign to the genre of high-tech science fiction and don’t belong in Eve Online. (And as for “scoped” …)
Reiisha
#103 - 2014-04-02 07:37:43 UTC
Just because it's allowed or possible in EVE doesn't mean it needs to be represented...

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#104 - 2014-04-03 00:45:20 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Sephira, if letting the air out of the balls was a legal move in a game that strongly featured letting the air out of the balls, I would be all for it.

Zappity, having been on the defense and having been successfully defended against in these situations, I feel that defenders have a great number of advantages in these situations. I don't think they need more of them in a generalized non-specific way, but I do feel like they should know more about them. Honestly, each of the major types of content creating gameplay has several very strong counters, the shortcoming is only in the knowledge or will of those that would apply them.

Care to comment further on the quote below? This is along the lines that I was thinking:

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Asking a dedicated PVP ship to defend a mining fleet can often lead to mind numbing boredom for the PVP pilot, so we're providing the option for players to make sacrifices in their mining ships to allow self-defense.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#105 - 2014-04-03 02:31:22 UTC
I'm not sure exactly what your question is, but let me try and take a stab at what I think it might be.

The answer does not need to lie in a combat ship waiting around with a mining fleet to defend it.

Since you brought up a quote about sitting around defending a mining fleet, I'm going to assume that you're talking about either suicide ganking or safari, so let me be explicit about some of the options that allow someone to defend against these things without having some extra dude sitting around doing nothing.

Suicide ganks:

1) Put a fleet boost that helps your raw EHP on the Orca you were grouped with anyways. That wildly increases your gank-resistance.
2) Be in any way a less desirable target than the miners in the next belt. Methods of doing this might include:
a) flying a tankier mining boat
b) showing a tanking effect of some kind, like you see when an invuln is active
c) have ECM drones out
d) Fit a damage control (assuming your gankers are ship scanning, which they often are)
3) Take note when -10s come into system or undock. Start aligning as soon as you notice this
4) Hit dscan and take note when suicide-gank ships appear on close scan (for reference, popular ones are the Catalyst, Vexor, Thorax, Brutix, Talos and Tornado.) Leave when this happens.

Safaris (I'm going to assume you've already made the mistake of letting the awoxer into your corp):

1) Have ECM drones avalible
2) When you invite someone to your fleet, take note in the fleet composite window what boat they're flying. Seeing a combat boat coming to a mining op is a bad sign.
3) Have a blackbird in the ship bay of your Orca.
4) Have any kind of remote reps or jams either in the cargohold of your orca or in your cargo hold alongside a mobile depot to refit even some unbonused ships (remember, all it takes is one jam to thwart an awox.)

This is just a quick bit of 30 second advice that does not touch on the larger issues of the subtleties of your playstyle or where you're based or any of that more ephemeral stuff that can protect you.

So if you're trying to make the arguement that miners in highsec must be immune or even safer because they are too vulnerable, I would strongly argue that the only tool they need in addition to what they already have is education.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#106 - 2014-04-03 03:25:37 UTC
Yeah, the Procurer/Skiff buff matters a lot more in nullsec, where no way in hell do you have an Orca in the belt with you (helloooooooooo target) and one of the main threats is an AFK cloaky camper. Improved combat capabilities mean that Procurers and Skiffs can be used in place of higher-yield boats to better thwart solo troublemakers (and maybe even small blops groups, depending on pilot skill). Awox logi mean that adding more DPS to some mining boats will do ****-all to kill an awoxer, and suicide ganks are meant to be completed so quickly that applied DPS is likely useless. After all, CONCORD will do way, way more than you can.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#107 - 2014-04-03 05:15:25 UTC
To be honest I don't really know what I'm asking, having never mined. I just sense missed gameplay and player interaction opportunities in highsec in particular.

At the moment, a miner is interacted with (ganked). No problem. I would like to see additional mechanics which promoted team play to defend against this without resulting in the boredom Fozzie mentioned. Don't know what and just thought that you might have had insights given your play style.

If such mechanics could be figured out I'd actually ask for a nerf to solo miner safety.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#108 - 2014-04-03 07:24:12 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:
Yeah, the Procurer/Skiff buff matters a lot more in nullsec, where no way in hell do you have an Orca in the belt with you (helloooooooooo target) and one of the main threats is an AFK cloaky camper.


Monk,

Do you agree with the above poster that AFK players represent a threat to other players? If so, in what way do you feel they are a threat?


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Snupe Doggur
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#109 - 2014-04-03 17:58:12 UTC
Snupe Doggur wrote:
What was the most enjoyable part of your Bonus Round participation, Monk? What was least enjoyable? How did you happen to become involved?

I would like to add one more question: to what extent did you share in the "take" of Bonus Rounds, Psychotic Monk?
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#110 - 2014-04-03 20:48:36 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting them.

The Rules:
10. Discussion of warnings and bans is prohibited.

Such matters shall remain private between CCP and the involved user. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through email or private messaging. CCP respect the right of our players to privacy and as such you are not permitted to publicize private correspondence (including petition responses and emails) received from any of the aforementioned parties.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything.
Clockwork Pineapple
#111 - 2014-04-04 02:28:49 UTC
Hello.

Currently the Serpentis are the only pirate faction in the game that don't have a rated 6/10 and 9/10 DED complex available to be run. These sites have been on the "coming soon" list for quite a few years, but no further news or information has been released. Would you be willing to request that CCP introduce these sites to the game so that areas like syndicate that rely on running sites as the main form of income can continue to grow and prosper?
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#112 - 2014-04-04 20:56:53 UTC
I'd still like to hear some thoughts on the recent controversy. You were on my suggested ballot last time, and I (and others) would like to hear your opinions. To avoid falling afoul of ISD's rules here, lets not talk about specific bans or actions by CCP, but lets talk about where you think a line should be drawn on behavior in and out of game.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#113 - 2014-04-04 23:51:16 UTC
Monk, what changes do you feel could be made to have a positive impact on player retention in eve?

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Abla Tive
#114 - 2014-04-05 15:00:50 UTC
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#115 - 2014-04-05 15:51:38 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Meilandra Vanderganken
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2014-04-06 10:56:15 UTC
High sec content creation, I like that!
Xeihun Khamez
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#117 - 2014-04-06 11:16:37 UTC
You have my vote, and I'm leaving Catalyst wrecks all through Highsec encouraging others to vote as well.
Esha Amphal
Doomheim
#118 - 2014-04-06 17:02:02 UTC
CSM9 Issue Panel: War Decs | Declarations of War Podcast

Do your vote ballot a favour and set aside an hour to have a listen. This will give you a clearer idea about Psychotic Monk, in his element perhaps discussing mechanics that relate strongly to hi-sec, but also his impressive communication skills and charismatic tendencies. These qualities are always in demand on the CSM - it's all fine and good if you understand game mechanics inside and out, but if a candidate struggles to communicate that knowledge... that should give you, the voter, pause.

Psychotic Monk brings up many excellent points that the other candidates overlook in the matter of war decs. Pieces under threat of combat just as valuable as pieces being attacked, for example, and the issues with war decs stemming from greater issues with corporation mechanics as well. While the other candidates were content to place varying levels of restrictions on war dec offenders and defenders, Monk took the host Alekseyev Karrde (CSM7 member) by surprise and pushed for more incentives and motivations for staying within a corporation. Better, more worthwhile corporation establishments. More encouragement and rewards for standing your ground and meeting the risk of a war dec head on, rather than dissolve the corp you're in and start fresh.

Considering that Psychotic Monk was the only 'criminal mind' on the panel, I found it fairly ironic that he was the only one to directly point at the source of the problem and give -constructive- feedback on how to move forward.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#119 - 2014-04-06 20:32:49 UTC
Esha Amphal wrote:
...and give -constructive- feedback on how to move forward.

I would feel more confident about a candidate who also gave some feedback in their own thread.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#120 - 2014-04-06 21:31:14 UTC
Sadly I have to agree with Zappity. I actually put a vote in behind Monk last elections and would have done so again this time, as I feel that the Ganker/Criminal playstyle is an important part of EVE even if we don't like it that much when we receive it. However Monk hasn't answered the hard questions in this thread, only the nice soft questions as well as not giving feedback even though we are past the date he said he would be back by, which leaves me feeling his campaign is based on popularity issues rather than seriousness, & that he won't be as effective as other options.