These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec Candidate

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#61 - 2014-12-01 19:23:26 UTC
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:
Dear Mr Belvar,

Thank you for taking an interest in my campaign. I hope that you will use your votes correctly come voting day... I had a conversation including someone on my corps that seemed to think that NOT VOTING was also sending a message.


Might I ask what you use your 1 man corps for?
Does being in a 1 man corps bring any advantages for you, as a player, over being in an NPC corps (other than taxes)?

This also comes to what people have been saying about looking that the corporation system as a whole?
You know that stuff about "social" corporations with no gameplay relevance... vs. corporations that want to build structures, do things and have gameplay relevance.

If your 1 man corporation is an entity that excerpts some direct influence on the game (eg dropping secure containers with messages) then there has to be a mechanism for someone to attack/stop you. This is EVE after all.
But if this one man corporations exists solely so that all your alts fly under the same banner... then that is a different matter, I think.

But why would someone want to stay in a one man corporation? Wouldn't joining a group of others enable more interaction and involvement? Maybe once the AWOX removal hits, that will reduce the one men corporations..?


War is not necessarily always about having a "fair fight", but I agree that the mechanism as it is, is hopelessly broken. Almost as bad as the bounty system.

Tora Bushido is also running for the CSM, and if you read his thread... and the linked interview... well you will see that he-who-is-probably-High-Secs-prime-War-Deccer has some ideas on making things more balanced. I read his interview, and I find some of his ideas good... but I will give him time to write his long post and present them before I steal them.



I use a one man corp to evade the 11% NPC tax rate. When running incursions/L4s the 11% is an irritating tax that serves to reduce your rewards. By joining a 1 man corp and just folding and reforming when you get wardecced, you avoid the 11% in taxes.

Joining multimember corps in highsec is pretty terrible right now. Awoxxing/wardeccs/theft make them basically useless. You can essentially capture all the benefits just by fleeting up and chatting, so all the corp does is give you donwsides.

Fundamentally the problem with highsec wars is you can't force people to fight. If necessary I will make 6 incursion/L4 alts, just dock up whoever gets wardecced, and play on one of the other ones. Since there is no way to punish docking up and playing on alts, wars themselves become a joke. Personally I think that highsec would be better off if we just got rid of non-mutual wars.

As far as Tora's ideas his main suggestion was to make it more expensive to dec smaller corps and cheaper to dec larger ones. Any analysis of his ideas must take into account that most of his income comes from deccing larger groups, so he has a pretty major conflict of interest.
Lanctharus Onzo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#62 - 2014-12-02 04:59:16 UTC
Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I an one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: podcast@capstable.net
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal

Executive Editor, CSM Watch || Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast || Twitter: @Lanctharus
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#63 - 2014-12-02 10:28:51 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


Also, if you want to declare you are running for CSM X yourself, feel free to start your own candidacy thread.
Do not hijack someone else's.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Beers Veldspar
Doomheim
#64 - 2014-12-02 10:39:33 UTC
I fully support Veers Belvar™ in his crusade for a better SafeSec.

Omniscient Oracle of New Eden, Incursion Hero, 6 months GCC timer advocate, Leader of bumping is bullying community, Ivy League space-lawyer, future permanent CSM member, the next level of human evolution, the epitome of modesty - Veers Belvar™
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#65 - 2014-12-03 22:42:47 UTC
ISD Ezwal wrote:
I have removed a rule breaking post.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


Also, if you want to declare you are running for CSM X yourself, feel free to start your own candidacy thread.
Do not hijack someone else's.


Thank you for your help!

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
Alan Mathison
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#66 - 2014-12-04 17:51:51 UTC
Hi Lorelei:

While doing other things, and evolving as time goes on, at this point I consider myself a "HiSec Carebear." As such your campaign is of interest to me. I don't like ganking, although I don't think it should be removed completely, and I very much don't care for the "content" that organizations like CODE say they provide.

Having said all of that, I do have some questions I'd like to ask.

Space has become littered with abandoned POS structures. What is your position on getting rid of them? I'd like to see, perhaps, a orbital degrading mechanic once the fuel is gone. This, then would open up the moons for pilots that will actually use them. The current mechanic, of course, involves Wardec-ing a possibly abandoned Corp and then sitting there for an extended period of time blapping the structures. I think something better is quite possible.

EVE seems to be popularly seen as more than a game, perhaps moving into the hobby realm. I'm aware that some discussions have been held with regard to finding a way to bring a more casual player or a more casual play-style option into EVE. Would you advocate this? If so, how might this be done without fundamentally changing the nature of the game? Would it?

It seems a given that CSM X and CCP will look at dealing with the SovNull question this term. Beyond that, from a gameplay perspective, what would you advocate as the next priority?

EVE players seem to be quite passionate about the game, yet it is said that the voting rate for CSM elections is lower than that of even the United States midterms. Does this diminish the validity of the CSM? What would you like to do to combat the voter apathy that we see and effectively educate the voters on the reality of what the CSM can effectively do?

Finally, and most importantly, do you like cats? :-)

Thanks much!

-- Alan Mathison, Explorer & Industrialist, Star Tide Industries
Beatrix Dacella
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2014-12-05 13:34:55 UTC
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:


High Sec is worth fighting for!

I want to do what I want to do. I do not want to be a part of massive 1000 ship fleets. I just want to transport stuff, and occasionally mine things. Maybe a mission or two. Is that too much to ask?
Griefers, gankers, bumpers, "content creators" stop me having my fun, and stop me wanting to play. Gankers have been nerfed and Carebears have been buffed in the past... but despite everything there is still no "balance". If I have to expose my mining/transporting self to the wild and evil whims of others, then I would like to be able to have (at least) a 50:50 chance of winning. At the moment it is not so... this needs changing! You say that you are "creating content", but I dont't want your content! I am creating my own content happily flying my freighter/retriever around!


Lorelei Ierendi wrote:


4) Wardecs.

The war dec mechanic is broken. There have already been talks/suggestions about enabling player groups that are not eligible for "war deccing" but also not eligible to put up POS or POCOS.... This is a central theme to New Player Retention, and not to be ignored.


Unfortunately I could not support this platform based on these two sections. It comes across very much as grr gankers, it is not for you to say 'I don't want your content' and make yourself immune from it.

I'd be interested to hear your version of 'balance' that you say is missing, despite the constant nerfs to ganking over time. How far do things need to go before they are 'balanced'? What is your vision of that state?
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#68 - 2014-12-05 20:36:04 UTC
Alan Mathison wrote:
Hi Lorelei:


Hi Alan!

Alan Mathison wrote:
While doing other things, and evolving as time goes on, at this point I consider myself a "HiSec Carebear." As such your campaign is of interest to me. I don't like ganking, although I don't think it should be removed completely, and I very much don't care for the "content" that organizations like CODE say they provide.

Having said all of that, I do have some questions I'd like to ask.

Space has become littered with abandoned POS structures. What is your position on getting rid of them? I'd like to see, perhaps, a orbital degrading mechanic once the fuel is gone. This, then would open up the moons for pilots that will actually use them. The current mechanic, of course, involves Wardec-ing a possibly abandoned Corp and then sitting there for an extended period of time blapping the structures. I think something better is quite possible.


I know what you mean. As I write, one of my alts is sitting in his Typhoon firing torpedoes at a POCO that I am sure is no longer needed by the one-man corps that put it there... a long time ago. That is really tedious!

I would not be against having some form of decay that requires a corporation that owns structures to be active*, and interact with them.

Or how about removing the "reinforced" timer from some things that get shot at... if they are from an "inactive*" corporation... so there is no 24 hour timer to be active.

*inactive could be defined in several ways, but for example either refuelling... or not having a director logging in for a specific amount of time...?

Alan Mathison wrote:
EVE seems to be popularly seen as more than a game, perhaps moving into the hobby realm. I'm aware that some discussions have been held with regard to finding a way to bring a more casual player or a more casual play-style option into EVE. Would you advocate this? If so, how might this be done without fundamentally changing the nature of the game? Would it?


All play styles should be possible... but I thought that that was the point of EVE. There are already casual players here, and playing, so I don't think per se that the game needs to be fundamentally changed! What we have seen is that social interaction increases the chance of player retention. (This is where I probably say that thing again, that I have said earlier in my thread about "social corporations" that have no real ability to impact anything in the game).

Alan Mathison wrote:
It seems a given that CSM X and CCP will look at dealing with the SovNull question this term. Beyond that, from a gameplay perspective, what would you advocate as the next priority?


The New Player Experience.
Providing new players with the tools to learn to play and have fun. For example: There are many out there that have seen the latest "this is EVE" trailer, and want to be a part of that... we need to take that starting enthusiasm and somehow keep it going... before people get fed up whilst running against the learning cliff.

Alan Mathison wrote:
EVE players seem to be quite passionate about the game, yet it is said that the voting rate for CSM elections is lower than that of even the United States midterms. Does this diminish the validity of the CSM? What would you like to do to combat the voter apathy that we see and effectively educate the voters on the reality of what the CSM can effectively do?


The CSM is what it is. If the EVE players are not interested in it, then that is their own fault. Everyone has a chance to vote.

Firstly, I would love to see an option for the players that are actively interested in the game, or are actively interested in the CSM but not any of the candidates to have a "none of the above" option when voting. Then we could get reliable statistics on the apathy of the EVE players.
And stealing an idea from another candidate, maybe CCP could implement a POPup (like the downtime popups) so that everyone on log in gets a pop up saying "don't forget to vote for the CSM" during the last week of the campaigns?

And as to your question about cats:

I like cats as much as the next person, but where I live, domestic-cats-gone-feral are a real problem for all manner of wildlife.
I would advocate responsible cat ownership!

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
Raziel Walker
NPC Tax Evasion Corp
#69 - 2014-12-08 08:29:55 UTC
You stance against gankers and wanting your mining vessel to have a 50% win chance eliminates you as a serious candidate.

You are in a pve ship facing someone who fitted his ship for the single purpose of killing you. If you fit for the sole purpose of tanking his damage can he still solo gank you while making a profit?

What makes you a better candidate to vote for as Mike Azariah or Sugar Kyle?
Their goal is to improve eve for everyone. Your goal seems to be improving eve for carebears while nerfing gameplay of people that are not you.
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#70 - 2014-12-08 19:59:32 UTC
Thank you for taking the time to read my Campaign Thread!

Beatrix Dacella wrote:
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:


High Sec is worth fighting for!

I want to do what I want to do. I do not want to be a part of massive 1000 ship fleets. I just want to transport stuff, and occasionally mine things. Maybe a mission or two. Is that too much to ask?
Griefers, gankers, bumpers, "content creators" stop me having my fun, and stop me wanting to play. Gankers have been nerfed and Carebears have been buffed in the past... but despite everything there is still no "balance". If I have to expose my mining/transporting self to the wild and evil whims of others, then I would like to be able to have (at least) a 50:50 chance of winning. At the moment it is not so... this needs changing! You say that you are "creating content", but I dont't want your content! I am creating my own content happily flying my freighter/retriever around!


Lorelei Ierendi wrote:


4) Wardecs.

The war dec mechanic is broken. There have already been talks/suggestions about enabling player groups that are not eligible for "war deccing" but also not eligible to put up POS or POCOS.... This is a central theme to New Player Retention, and not to be ignored.


Unfortunately I could not support this platform based on these two sections. It comes across very much as grr gankers, it is not for you to say 'I don't want your content' and make yourself immune from it.


What do war decs have to do with Gankers? (Other than CODE. seem to have a war dec thing starting up....)

I do not want to make myself "immune" to it. I think I already mentioned a couple of times in the thread words to the effect of "I am not campaigning for a Theme Park EVE, because CCP will never make one."

Beatrix Dacella wrote:
I'd be interested to hear your version of 'balance' that you say is missing, despite the constant nerfs to ganking over time. How far do things need to go before they are 'balanced'? What is your vision of that state?


For example:

Give me the tools to keep me safe.
Allow me to decide to use them, or take the risk not to.

The New Player Experience does not (as it stands) prepare new players, also new carebears, for life in EVE. I've played through the tutorials on more than one alt... and there was nothing there about D-SCAN. There was nothing there about how to fit a ship according to the current theories and trends for PVP or PVE. There wasn't even anything like a friendly nudge in the right direction.

OK, you could say that "Google is your friend" but there are enough of us Care Bears out there that have not mastered the intricacies of efficient internet searching... how about (for example) an EVEmail automatically for every new character (firstly introducing the new guy to the functionality (or presence of) EVEmail) that has a couple of helpful links... wikis... EVE Uni... stuff that a new guy might like to read?

Press the information into the hands of us Carebears. Then see what we do with it. If we do nothing, then that is our choice/fault... but it ought to be a choice... and just trying to Google EVE brings up a lot of old Information, and information of dubious quality.

And I believe that I have also said that I would LOVE to have the Caldari Navy Intelligence Secure Self Destruct module... that is 99.5% guaranteed to destroy my ship, all mods, all cargo et cetera. It is, of course, an active mod... but if I am not AFK or dicking around I can make sure that those gankers don't get their hands on my shinies!

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#71 - 2014-12-09 20:42:12 UTC
Oh look, another carebear wanting to turn hisec into a risk-free Disneyland.

When EvE becomes a milquetoast WoW of hisec fappery, we will be able to look back through successive CSM members like Ripard Teg, Mike Asariah and this carebear as the clapping seals who didn't fight CCP on behalf of preserving the sandbox and our HTFU traditions.

But then it will be too late.

tldr;
Do NOT elect carebears like this to the CSM.

F

Would you like to know more?
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#72 - 2014-12-09 20:59:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Lorelei Ierendi
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Oh look, another carebear wanting to turn hisec into a risk-free Disneyland.


Not exactly. But if you had read what has been written, you would have known that. For example the post directly above yours!

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
Don Cordelion
Doomheim
#73 - 2014-12-10 12:03:58 UTC
CCP keeps repeating that new player retention is much better for players that join player corporations yet wardecks make high sec carebear corporations foolish affair. We really need change that even if it means having corp-lite and tears of some high sec PvP'ers.
Cade Devereaux
Doomheim
#74 - 2014-12-10 12:44:01 UTC
Don Cordelion wrote:
CCP keeps repeating that new player retention is much better for players that join player corporations yet wardecks make high sec carebear corporations foolish affair. We really need change that even if it means having corp-lite and tears of some high sec PvP'ers.


Thats a part of EVE.

EVE is not, nor is it supposed to be, easy. Most things in EVE you have to fight for and nobody is gonna hold your hand while you figure out how to do it. The first corp I ever joined got deced into oblivion cause most of the members didn't want to fight. Such is life, but saying that high sec wars are why players don't stay in EVE is kinda silly.
Don Cordelion
Doomheim
#75 - 2014-12-10 13:11:23 UTC
Cade Devereaux wrote:

Thats a part of EVE.

EVE is not, nor is it supposed to be, easy. Most things in EVE you have to fight for and nobody is gonna hold your hand while you figure out how to do it. The first corp I ever joined got deced into oblivion cause most of the members didn't want to fight. Such is life, but saying that high sec wars are why players don't stay in EVE is kinda silly.


No, CCP is saying that player retention is much higher when you get players to socialize. Nothing silly with that, makes perfect sense.
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#76 - 2014-12-10 18:51:07 UTC
Thank you for taking time to read my thread!

Raziel Walker wrote:
You stance against gankers and wanting your mining vessel to have a 50% win chance eliminates you as a serious candidate.


Well I am serious. Just because I do not say all the things you agree with, does not make me any less serious. That 50% chance can be achieved in a myriad of ways....

One of the first among them would be teaching new players... having some kind of tutorial... about DSCAN and how to use it. If I am paying attention to DSCAN then it is harder for the catalysts (or atrons) to get close enough. That is worth a few percentage points right there.

The problem is... there is nothing letting new players know about DSCAN...
There is no official guide to sensible fitting... or even really the basics.

Like I said... give me the tools to do what I can, and then if I choose not to do it, then it is my fault.

Raziel Walker wrote:
You are in a pve ship facing someone who fitted his ship for the single purpose of killing you. If you fit for the sole purpose of tanking his damage can he still solo gank you while making a profit?


Probably not. At least not if I do it properly.

Raziel Walker wrote:
What makes you a better candidate to vote for as Mike Azariah or Sugar Kyle?


Vote for me and them, if you want. There is room for more than one High Sec member on the CSM. One of my main points is also to try and get people to vote, at all. So even if you don't want to vote for me, and want to make sure that I have no success... please vote for someone! That way we know you care!

Raziel Walker wrote:
Their goal is to improve eve for everyone. Your goal seems to be improving eve for carebears while nerfing gameplay of people that are not you.


Oh. At the start I thanked you for reading my thread.
I should just have thanked you for replying to my thread. I don't know what I am saying that would be a "nerf" to gankers... for example? In fact some gankers might claim that with the Faction Police, CONCORD, the Barge buffs... that they have a significant disadvantage, and in the interests of coming up to 50% they need some love too...

Funny that the gankers don't say that...

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
Lorelei Ierendi
We Care A Lot
#77 - 2014-12-12 21:25:19 UTC
And on the subject of "gankers".... is there anyone out there that would want to tell me what that particular "crowd" might view as important for the next year?!?

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/
J'Poll
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#78 - 2014-12-14 12:18:46 UTC  |  Edited by: J'Poll
Don Cordelion wrote:
Cade Devereaux wrote:

Thats a part of EVE.

EVE is not, nor is it supposed to be, easy. Most things in EVE you have to fight for and nobody is gonna hold your hand while you figure out how to do it. The first corp I ever joined got deced into oblivion cause most of the members didn't want to fight. Such is life, but saying that high sec wars are why players don't stay in EVE is kinda silly.


No, CCP is saying that player retention is much higher when you get players to socialize. Nothing silly with that, makes perfect sense.


A. Socializing isn't the same as joining a corp. But judging by the stupidity of what is going on in NPC corps, I can't blame people and CCP for saying that joining a corp is better.

B. Only stupid ******** indy corps do get wardecced.

A friend of mine, miner by heart, has been in an indy corp for nearly 3 / 3.5 years now...And only once saw a wardec, which was when he just joined.

It's those that make themself a target in one way or another that get wardecced.

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
Tisiphone Dira
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2014-12-14 15:21:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tisiphone Dira
All miners already have a 99% chance of winning a gank attempt. The fight starts long before my guns start firing.

I am a lion. I have set up camp in a region, I have scouted it out. Of all the miners, I have selected you to engage solo. Why is that? Because you are a sickly gazelle, I saw you stumble while I was hidden in the grass.

The big strong tanked procurers and skiffs (and even well tanked rets and macks) won our engagement before it even started. I scanned everybody, checking for a weak tank or antitank, I checked your bio for anti-lion propaganda. Their shields warded me off and their bios, while not positive and compliant, were at least neutral, so they remain safe. I have no reason to call in the rest of my pride to send a message. Others in my region will continually bring concord to protect them. Or post falcon sentries to jam me, or camp the gates to protect their pocket. Some will keep an eye on local and watch for my scout, they will warp off before I get there. The fact that I started firing on you means that I have pegged you as a wounded gazelle who is too focused on eating the grass, look up once in a while would you? The ones I gank voluntarily gave up their 99% chance in favor of yield. That choice has consequences, that is what EvE is all about.

Now then, you do seem a bit confused about some of the mechanics and what goes into ganking. I hereby invite you to try it out for yourself. I don't believe you can fairly take this anti-ganking position as a CSM candidate without having explored what actually goes into successfully suicide ganking somebody. That 50% thing is nonsense, but because you haven't seen it from our end, you wouldn't know. Prove you have an open mind, gank something (barge/exhumer).

E: To be honest, I don't trust you enough to tell you what I find important as a ganker, what's stopping you taking that and just running an an anti-(whatever I say) platform. You need to prove yourself first. The info is already out there though...

E2: The above edit seems like a real problem for a 'high-sec' candidate

There once was a ganker named tisi

A stunningly beautiful missy

To gank a gross miner

There is nothing finer, cept when they get all pissy
Sylphy
TSOE Po1ice
TSOE Consortium
#80 - 2014-12-19 08:44:29 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:

Griefers, gankers, bumpers, "content creators" stop me having my fun, and stop me wanting to play. Gankers have been nerfed and Carebears have been buffed in the past... but despite everything there is still no "balance". If I have to expose my mining/transporting self to the wild and evil whims of others, then I would like to be able to have (at least) a 50:50 chance of winning. At the moment it is not so... this needs changing! You say that you are "creating content", but I dont't want your content! I am creating my own content happily flying my freighter/retriever around!


I'm interested in how you think you would be able to represent highsec when you clearly have no desire to represent some highsec players, specifically gankers, bumpers and other content creators? Also, do you think your inability to distinguish bad guys (griefers) from good guys (gankers, bumpers and content creators) would impair your judgement?


If there wasn't this stupid rule in place, where X spots on the CSM are actually pre-reserved (and are held by the same entities, who are all basically their own team), we could have 2 sides from each of the categories we'd want represented (High, low, null, w-space, +other areas)

The character does not represent the views/opinions of its Corporation or Alliance.