These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Thoric Frosthammer for CSM X

First post First post
Author
Rakai Yudhos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2015-02-18 18:20:05 UTC
BUMP FOR THORIC CSM 10 Big smile

Blind Ratter

StupidGenius Charante
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-02-20 06:10:26 UTC
Recently, Thoric sat down with us over at Cap Stable for an interview, you can find it here: http://capstable.net/2015/02/18/thoric-frosthammer/
Synchope
Jolly Codgers
Get Off My Lawn
#43 - 2015-02-20 06:12:39 UTC
Vote for Thoric!
Skymea
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2015-02-20 06:13:27 UTC
+1 for a great leader!

Delusions of Adequacy - Get Off My Lawn

Dackota
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#45 - 2015-02-20 06:31:06 UTC
I hold Thoric in extremely high regard personally, he has been an extremely good alliance leader for us. I also agree with his views on Eve and where the game should go, so he will have my vote. There are a lot of LAWN members on here showing support, please dont take that as a sign of nepotism but rather a genuine belief that if Thoric is involved in something it will likely be better for it.

Nutsin Ackabursk
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2015-02-20 09:22:02 UTC
THORIC for CSM 10
Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
#47 - 2015-02-20 11:21:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Speedkermit Damo
Thoric Frosthammer wrote:


My ideas aren't specifically related to support for large coalitions. The point I'm making is that stagnation, and the lack of a place for smaller entities in NullSec, aren't the fault of larger coalitions.


Not sure I agree with this. The stagnation is very much the fault of the coalitions in my opinion. Smaller entities are virtually extinct because the coalitions either killed them all or swallowed them up. I don't see how any sov mechanic that CCP introduces could prevent anyone from forming a massive blob if that's what they are determined to do.

I agree with you on risk aversion, which is the cause of the coalitions.

EDIT - You make some good points regarding risk-aversion in other posts.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Thoric Frosthammer
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#48 - 2015-02-20 18:13:23 UTC
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Thoric Frosthammer wrote:


My ideas aren't specifically related to support for large coalitions. The point I'm making is that stagnation, and the lack of a place for smaller entities in NullSec, aren't the fault of larger coalitions.


Not sure I agree with this. The stagnation is very much the fault of the coalitions in my opinion. Smaller entities are virtually extinct because the coalitions either killed them all or swallowed them up. I don't see how any sov mechanic that CCP introduces could prevent anyone from forming a massive blob if that's what they are determined to do.

I agree with you on risk aversion, which is the cause of the coalitions.

EDIT - You make some good points regarding risk-aversion in other posts.



Speedkermit, I think there are a number of ways they can introduce mechanics - not just sov mechanics, but game mechanics, that can create diminishing returns when you go full blob. Just a few random examples could include diminishing returns on links for larger fleets, perhaps an increase in signature size for individual members of a fleet as it got larger. Perhaps ecm could be tweaked to have a small aoe effect that might discourage simply orbiting an fc and hitting f1 on command.

I haven't thought any of those through completely, so I disclaim their being GoodIdeas(tm) by themselves, but accept them as an illustration of game mechanics that could tone down n+1 combat

Numbers will always matter, but you can at least make it so that if you can get CLOSE, you can count on not being completely outclassed. Which would encourage fights.

Also, the thing about large coalitions.... people play games to win. If the best way to play is accumulating a large coalition, people will take that path. (And don't mistake it for easy mode. The politics of a large coalition are hard, or you wouldn't see so many organizations failscading) Blaming people for making a winning move, or telling them they shouldn't do so because you would prefer to win once in a while is pretty much the anathema of a sandbox game. Generally speaking, the answer if most people aren't having fun in your game is to create new content and rulesets that allow people of all sizes to have achievable, fun goals. CCP has had some great successes and epic failures in that realm over the years. All I can do is offer my point of view on what worked and didn't over the course of the past decade or so.
VeryWorshipful Brother Hodious
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2015-02-21 07:00:17 UTC
+1 Thoric for CSM X.

I agree with a lot of his ideas, and think that it would be good to have him on the CSM.

You have my vote
Mon Kiera
Carniffles Corp
#50 - 2015-02-21 14:14:28 UTC
another worthwhile candidate
Caribou apex
Blitzkrieg.
Mild Inconvenience
#51 - 2015-02-21 21:10:46 UTC
THORIC IS THE FUTURE of EVE!!!!!
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
#52 - 2015-02-22 04:31:11 UTC
Gyges Skyeye
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#53 - 2015-02-22 07:12:42 UTC
Dackota wrote:
I hold Thoric in extremely high regard personally, he has been an extremely good alliance leader for us. I also agree with his views on Eve and where the game should go, so he will have my vote. There are a lot of LAWN members on here showing support, please dont take that as a sign of nepotism but rather a genuine belief that if Thoric is involved in something it will likely be better for it.



I would like to echo this. Us lawn member's here showing support are doing so because we appreciate the dedication and competency that we've known Thoric for in his duties as our alliance leader. Perhaps one of the most important distinctions I'd like to raise is that being an alliance leader in Eve is a volunteer job. Thoric isn't getting paid for any of the time he spends here. He has no eve-media site generating ad-revenue for him. He is doing this because he has a passion and care for this game and the community that shares it. All of us players of Eve would be very fortunate as a community if we get to enjoy having Thoric as a CSM member.
Skymea
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2015-02-22 09:22:18 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMoUyfUFEmY

Delusions of Adequacy - Get Off My Lawn

Skymea
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2015-02-23 03:57:20 UTC
This is the part where you watch my video.

Delusions of Adequacy - Get Off My Lawn

Demented471
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2015-02-23 03:58:11 UTC
Thankfully Thoric Frosthammer is not an aspirant of our lord and savior Micro-Jump-Drive

There was once was a man from Jita..

Inbred Amarr
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#57 - 2015-02-23 03:59:37 UTC
This is relevant to my interests.
Alterari Phoenix
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#58 - 2015-02-23 04:00:02 UTC
From thorics favorite problem child lets take a moment to realise how good of a leader this man is. i mean come on he deals with me on a daily basis :D
<3
Skymea
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2015-02-23 04:26:43 UTC
good night sweet prince

Delusions of Adequacy - Get Off My Lawn

Shaniqua Oakland
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2015-02-23 04:34:40 UTC
Although my discussions with Mr. Frosthammer have been limited, he's shown the traits I idealize in a leader and a representative:
calm.
ready to listen.
has done his research.
values logic over volume.

Best Regards,
-Shan