These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Wich csm representative is for miners ?

First post First post
Author
Serene Repose
#61 - 2015-02-25 23:56:36 UTC
The real question is: Which CSM candidate ISN'T lying his/her @$$ off 'cause (of course) this is politics, and simply everybody knows how that works? In an environment where it's in vogue to hate miners, I'd suggest miners don't have a snowball's chance in Hell. Your management team doesn't care about that either. Why should the CSM?

(Let management bring back sanity from the WoW refugees, not some player-populated public relations gimmick.)

Brought to you by Get A Clue, Inc. All rights reserved.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Richard Tsasa
#62 - 2015-02-26 01:36:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Richard Tsasa
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Heh, I missed this thread until now.

Mining is currently ridiculously boring, so dull that most people do it as close to AFK as they are able (either via CCP approved methods like AFK-ish mining, or via bannable offences like botting). This needs to change.

Player actions offer some of the solution to keep mining interesting by making it dangerous, but it is my feeling that the system for mining is broken enough to need serious work.

I would endorse changes to mining mechanics that incentivise miners to work together and field fleets with combat escorts to protect them from both player and NPC dangers. Currently this is not even remotely sensible to do.

Until then, I will shoot the AFK miners (both doing it myself and facilitating other gankers) and help thin out your competition.



Edit: For what it's worth I do also endorse Steve R for CSM as his in-game actions are those of a producer that will actively defend himself in-game when his interests are threatened. More miners and producers should follow his lead.



I now understand much better your position on Mining in EVE now Sabriz Adoudel, and how you think it should be done. Thank you very much for your assistance.

A Dinosaur on a Spaceship. Imagine that... wait... don't. It's not pretty. (forum alt alert)

Jenshae Chiroptera
#63 - 2015-02-26 02:51:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
As to Sabriz and boring:

I like mining, it is when I kick back, relax with the corp / fleet / alliance. When I check my EVE mails, read the forums a bit, get some work done at home.

AttentionArrowI find mining very social.
If a stupid mini-game were introduced, I would stop mining and probably just spin my ship.

Hakuren Shidou wrote:
kinda curious i was looking into the csm forum section but WHO stands for miners ?
Me.
Best example here.
I have mined in all types of space, high sec, low sec, NPC null sec, worm holes and SOV null sec.

I want miners to have more ability to stand and fight. I do stand for a lot of other things too.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Kiryen O'Bannon
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#64 - 2015-02-26 05:15:56 UTC
Miners should vote for Sugar Kyle because she represents basically everyone.

Eternal Father, King of birth, /Who didst create the heaven and earth, /And bid the planets and the sun/ Their own appointed orbits run; /O hear us when we seek thy grace /For those who soar through outer space.

Glathull
Warlock Assassins
#65 - 2015-02-26 06:10:23 UTC
I'm going to run for CSM next year. Purely on a solo mining platform. All of the solo miners will vote for me. But I'll secretly be backed by CODE.

It's really the only way to out-do mittens in terms of pure meta gaming. So this is what I'm going to do.

Bonus points to me for actually spelling out my evil miner awoxing plan more than a year in advance. You've been warned, miners. Do not vote for me next year, no matter what sweet delicious ganker tears I promise. I'll be paying CODE billions of real life dollars to vote for me.

I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#66 - 2015-02-26 07:53:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Mining is currently ridiculously boring
For you... I believe ganking is ridiculously boring, so let's change that in ways I think would make it more interesting regardless of what you think.

Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I would endorse changes to mining mechanics that incentivise miners to work together and field fleets with combat escorts to protect them from both player and NPC dangers. Currently this is not even remotely sensible to do.
Except you wouldn't do this by supporting improvements to mining, you'd do this by supporting making it ludicrously difficult to make isk from without offering yourself up as a target to gankers. You want to force players to have to defend themselves by engaging with you, knowing full well they will lose. You want to give yourself more exciting targets, that's all this is. You don't care what miners actually want, and you seem to think that conflict is everywhere yet the only conflict that should be increased is the type with guns.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#67 - 2015-02-26 07:56:50 UTC
I think that Lucas Kell is the only person I'd vote for if I thought (as he does) that miners require representation.

Of course, I think the CSM is guff.

But that's just my opinion, man.
Sisohiv
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2015-02-26 08:00:25 UTC
All I know for certain is I got 40 shuttles I won't ever use.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#69 - 2015-02-26 08:52:43 UTC
Why do people feel the need to suggest changes to mining when its fine? The whole ganker story in highsec is at its peak, why **** with that?

Mining doesnt need to be changed, the fact you can do it AFK is what the appeal is. Take that away with stupid minigames or repetitive NPCs and people will just go do something else.

Mining outside highsec needs to be buffed and miners need to stop being such pussies and accept they can be killed, but the mining itself is fine. Funny to hear nonminers talking about changes to it when no miner ive ever met has a single problem.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#70 - 2015-02-26 09:22:49 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
The real question is: Which CSM candidate ISN'T lying his/her @$$ off 'cause (of course) this is politics, and simply everybody knows how that works? In an environment where it's in vogue to hate miners, I'd suggest miners don't have a snowball's chance in Hell. Your management team doesn't care about that either. Why should the CSM?

(Let management bring back sanity from the WoW refugees, not some player-populated public relations gimmick.)

Brought to you by Get A Clue, Inc. All rights reserved.



I love posts like this. They reassure me that most people who don't really have any business voting won't.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#71 - 2015-02-26 09:26:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
most people who don't really have any business voting won't.


How I wish this were true, but you can count on my non-vote and making sure no one receives it!
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
When Fleets Collide
#72 - 2015-02-26 09:37:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Ria Nieyli
baltec1 wrote:
Oh you couldn't be more wrong. By exercising your democratic right and voting for the correct candidates you are making sure not only that **** gets done but that **** gets done right. CCP cannot afford to flunk this test and so they need the best advice possible from the most experienced people in the game.


You can not vote and still be more of an influence than if you only vote and do nothing afterwards. Same deal IRL, voting guarantess you nothing. You have to pester your representatives constantly if you want them to actually represent you.
Valedictio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#73 - 2015-02-26 10:27:48 UTC
I believe voting is getting that bad CCP is now giving out free stuff to encourage voting, as everyone likes free stuff.

That said, The CSM NEEDS to have people who have a wealth of experience in this game, Personaly I have done Null/Empire PvP, Mining, and a lot of the indy side which is my preferance, playing since the beginning of 2008, however I would not consider myself as CSM material due to the ammount of time and effort required for it.

I have a lot of respect for the Serious Candidates the majority of which due to the nature of the game have naturally elevated to positions of power withing the larger blocks, They have the experience which is needed even if some of that is outdated.

Hence I would prefer experienced people helping to decide the future direction and improvements to the game, Null sec is stagnating due to the current mechanics and drastically needs an overhaul to improve it, not simply for the benefit of the blocks but more for the line members themselves.

Anyone who would consider their vote as irrelevant doesn't seem to comprehend what the CSM is for, it is OUR voice of concern to CCP, sometimes it is ignored, sometimes small nuggets of gold can be passed over to improve OUR experience of the game.

Ignore all the propoganda rubbish and make your own decision of what you want, it may make a differance, to abstain from voting does nothing to help your form of playstyle get improved.

and now for some more of the same from the Constructive Feedback Consortium.

Human Torch time and ..........'FLAME ON'

Samsara Toldya
Academy of Contradictory Behaviour
#74 - 2015-02-26 11:01:20 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I would endorse changes to mining mechanics that incentivise miners to work together and field fleets with combat escorts to protect them from both player and NPC dangers. Currently this is not even remotely sensible to do.


Missing the balance.
If a mining/industry corp would be forced to have armed forces to achieve one of the lowest income in game... what about the other playstyles?
Like... mercs/ganker corps won't be able to undock until their mining corpmates delivered 2 million m³ Veldspar per week?
Miners need combat pilots - combat pilots need miners?

Sure, I'd like to see those CODE. or Marmite mining fleets out there. As you said: Currently it's not even remotely sensible to have mining chars in your merc/ganker corporation and that need to change.

It's like station traders needing bodyguards to keep the captains quarter door closed.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#75 - 2015-02-26 14:26:45 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Oh you couldn't be more wrong. By exercising your democratic right and voting for the correct candidates you are making sure not only that **** gets done but that **** gets done right. CCP cannot afford to flunk this test and so they need the best advice possible from the most experienced people in the game.


You can not vote and still be more of an influence than if you only vote and do nothing afterwards. Same deal IRL, voting guarantess you nothing. You have to pester your representatives constantly if you want them to actually represent you.


You can resolve this apparent dilemma by voting for people who want the same things you do.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#76 - 2015-02-26 14:46:23 UTC
Wait.. there's free stuff?
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2015-02-26 14:55:55 UTC

Shuttles, Ma. We get cool CSM shuttles..

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Ma'Baker McCandless
The McCandless Clan
#78 - 2015-02-26 14:57:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ma'Baker McCandless
Sibyyl wrote:

Shuttles, Ma. We get cool CSM shuttles..



I hear you get those even if you dont vote.

Anything else?

Considering activating my third eye if theres a good reason to randomly assign favour to three folk

EDIT: Ah no point on the third account, it could only have got the shuttle if active yesterday
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
When Fleets Collide
#79 - 2015-02-26 15:17:49 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Oh you couldn't be more wrong. By exercising your democratic right and voting for the correct candidates you are making sure not only that **** gets done but that **** gets done right. CCP cannot afford to flunk this test and so they need the best advice possible from the most experienced people in the game.


You can not vote and still be more of an influence than if you only vote and do nothing afterwards. Same deal IRL, voting guarantess you nothing. You have to pester your representatives constantly if you want them to actually represent you.


You can resolve this apparent dilemma by voting for people who want the same things you do.


Don't get me wrong, I did. It's just that if you really want to be a driving force, however minute it may be, only voting isn't enough.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#80 - 2015-02-26 15:19:46 UTC
Valedictio wrote:
... Anyone who would consider their vote as irrelevant doesn't seem to comprehend what the CSM is for, it is OUR voice of concern to CCP, ...
I disagree because not enough people vote.
If an alliance can throw together a slate and get a bunch of those elected then people aren't voting enough for other candidates.

It isn't the whole of EVE that is represented.
It is a few large alliances and coalitions that don't even make up 25% of the players.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.