These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Jin'taan for CSM XII

First post
Author
Prometheus Hinken
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#21 - 2017-02-09 09:44:32 UTC
Your commitment to EVE and the CSM last year has been exemplary. I shall be voting for you again. Plus you have a giant America flag hanging on your wall, so that's a major +10.
Jin'taan
Pentag Blade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#22 - 2017-02-12 01:15:08 UTC
For those of you who are interested in how I see the CSM, I made a video here which I think sums it up nicely.
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#23 - 2017-02-13 19:12:45 UTC
I would like the fully endorse Jin in his reelection for the CSM. He has been a great asset in not just nullsec items but also the game as a whole. As many current CSM have stated it is better to endorse candidates who will better the game, and are more than just an alliance ticker. Jintaan is one of those people I can fully support as helping to make the game better for everyone.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

bardghost Isu
Unity of Suns
Warped Intentions
#24 - 2017-02-13 19:37:57 UTC
Jins got my vote.

Amazing guy that has done some amazing work to help bring the CSM back from what CSM 10 was viewed to be.
Adratea
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
#25 - 2017-02-14 15:50:21 UTC
Prometheus Hinken wrote:
Your commitment to EVE and the CSM last year has been exemplary. I shall be voting for you again. Plus you have a giant America flag hanging on your wall, so that's a major +10.


When is ProviBloc going to have their own flag? #MakeItSo

+1 vote for Jin'taan!
Kanzero
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#26 - 2017-02-18 12:40:29 UTC
Got my vote. Best CSM member.
Jin'taan
Pentag Blade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#27 - 2017-02-27 21:02:48 UTC
I've been lucky enough to catch both Ashterothi (from Crossing Zebras) and Matterall (from Imperium News Network). If you'd like to listen to some more casual discussion from me, take a listen!
Max Sneak
LightningStrikesTwice
Elemental Tide
#28 - 2017-02-28 17:55:25 UTC
Having known Jin since he were a podling, it has been a pleasure to see him grow and develop into the great young fella he is today.

He has demonstrated that he can bring consistancy and transparancy where possible to not just the CSM but also to the relationship between the CSM and CCP.

He has also evidenced what he has done and where he has helped to make an impact in the game.

Thus he will certainly get my vote.

With Respect

Max

oh, and I may be the one responsible for introducing him to tequila and whisky chasers. Twisted I would say can you remember the Notts meet but we know how that ended for you.

Bad Max.. Bad !
Tetsuko Yorimasa
Kiith Paktu
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#29 - 2017-03-01 19:24:27 UTC
Jin'taan president !
Nenwe
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2017-03-02 06:23:17 UTC
My vote is for you

And thank you one more time for bringing issues towards CCP that were bothering me.

For CSM 12

my top 5 issues for CSM 12 to take for CCP to consideration.

1. PVE missions are stagnant and have not seen any improvement in years and not talking about burner missions. (burners i find extremely annyoing as if you are required to fly specific fit to be able to even do it there is something wrong with it. Try do all burners with Minmatar ships for example doable maybe fun NO)

2. Battleships these back in the day felt good now these feel like big target/loot Piñata (hopefully CSM 11 results show up here and there will be change)

3. Marauders Allmost all other ships have gotten buffs and overhauls but Marauders still are the same they were when first introduced I love my marauders (all except the Gallante Kronos that thing is just bad) Even if the balance change would be to just make them comparable with eachother that would be start.) And i know Marauders are not the most popular ship well maybe they are not popular because it takes years to train the skills for all marauders and price is quite high and there has been no overhauls/improvements to marauders in Years.

4. Drones when will CCP see the light that drones are too strong compared to most other weapon systems. (drones are quite popular in FW i wonder why? most Exploration people are using drone setups because most exploration ships get drone bonuses how about adding exploration ships with other weapon systems also)

5. Ganking in hisec way too easy with little actual risk for you.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2017-03-02 07:51:00 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Hello Jin'taan,

We had a small discussion about Faction standings in my Assembly Hall proposal :
Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions.

Now I'm not going to ask if you actually conversed with CCP about it nor do I want to know the outcome of that discussion if in fact you actually did bring it to their attention.

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC
Alekseyev Karrde
Capitalist Army
Streamfleet
#32 - 2017-03-04 10:36:20 UTC
Big bump for my #1 ballot slot

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2017-03-04 20:30:38 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello Jin'taan,

We had a small discussion about Faction standings in my Assembly Hall proposal :
Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions.

Now I'm not going to ask if you actually conversed with CCP about it nor do I want to know the outcome of that discussion if in fact you actually did bring it to their attention.

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC

Seems you're a bit indisposed at the moment to reply so I'll just post my rebuttal now.

This game was based on having a balance in 'Risk vs Reward' and 'Actions vs Consequences' which makes this game great. Currently the only way to repair negative Faction standings is to grind missions. It takes time for players to ruin Faction standings and it should take some time to repair those standings. In the past Characters use to be accountable for their actions in-game, now most everything has been dumbed down and turned into easy mode for the instant gratification crowd. That's something I don't want to see happen to Faction standings.

Currently the in-game aspects of Faction standings :
Positive Faction standings are the only way to access Cosmos Agents (one time access).
Positive Faction and Corporation standings are needed to access Research Agents.
All other Agents only require minimal amount of Faction standing for access (-2.00 or higher standing).
High Faction standings reduce Market Broker fees and Reprocessing fees in NPC stations.
At -5.00 or lower Faction standing, Empire NPC's will attack when in their space.

I think CCP made a big mistake when they removed the need to have Faction standings to anchor POS in high sec space. I'd like to see more content pertaining to Faction standings be added to the game but at this time my inquiry is based more on the effects of negative Faction standings.

I created and shared the 'Faction Standing Repair Plan' with the playerbase back in 2010. In my opinion players need more options available to repair negative Faction standings then what I've listed in 'The Plan'. Most of those Event Agents can only be accessed once in the characters life. A lot of players in-game don't even read the forums so they don't know that guide is available. In fact repairing negative Faction standings is a big task for experienced players. New players who haven't even learned the game yet can easily mess up their Faction standings right from the start without even knowing it, resulting in no access to half of Empire space.

Anyway these are some options I think would help players in-game.

Faction standing repair process be implemented in-game to be very intuitive, not obscure (tutorial perhaps).
Changes to Faction standings notify players with on screen pop up message (option to deactivate).
Actions that would cause negative Faction standing trigger on screen pop up warning (option to deactivate).
All Anti-Empire mission briefings have a warning to inform players those missions will incur negative Faction standings.
Implement Tags for Standings in-game based on similar game mechanics as Tags for Security.
Add NPC Agents to in-game Agent Finder for Faction standing repair (similar to proposal in my forum signature).

Once again good luck with the upcoming election.


DMC
Jin'taan
Pentag Blade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#34 - 2017-03-04 20:31:34 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello Jin'taan,

We had a small discussion about Faction standings in my Assembly Hall proposal :
Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions.

Now I'm not going to ask if you actually conversed with CCP about it nor do I want to know the outcome of that discussion if in fact you actually did bring it to their attention.

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC

Seems you're a bit indisposed at the moment to reply so I'll just post my rebuttal now.

This game was based on having a balance in 'Risk vs Reward' and 'Actions vs Consequences' which makes this game great. Currently the only way to repair negative Faction standings is to grind missions. It takes time for players to ruin Faction standings and it should take some time to repair those standings. In the past Characters use to be accountable for their actions in-game, now most everything has been dumbed down and turned into easy mode for the instant gratification crowd. That's something I don't want to see happen to Faction standings.

Currently the in-game aspects of Faction standings :
Positive Faction standings are the only way to access Cosmos Agents (one time access).
Positive Faction and Corporation standings are needed to access Research Agents.
All other Agents only require minimal amount of Faction standing for access (-2.00 or higher standing).
High Faction standings reduce Market Broker fees and Reprocessing fees in NPC stations.
At -5.00 or lower Faction standing, Empire NPC's will attack when in their space.

I think CCP made a big mistake when they removed the need to have Faction standings to anchor POS in high sec space. I'd like to see more content pertaining to Faction standings be added to the game but at this time my inquiry is based more on the effects of negative Faction standings.

I created and shared the 'Faction Standing Repair Plan' with the playerbase back in 2010. In my opinion players need more options available to repair negative Faction standings then what I've listed in 'The Plan'. Most of those Event Agents can only be accessed once in the characters life. A lot of players in-game don't even read the forums so they don't know that guide is available. In fact repairing negative Faction standings is a big task for experienced players. New players who haven't even learned the game yet can easily mess up their Faction standings right from the start without even knowing it, resulting in no access to half of Empire space.

Anyway these are some options I think would help players in-game.

Faction standing repair process be implemented in-game to be very intuitive, not obscure (tutorial perhaps).
Changes to Faction standings notify players with on screen pop up message (option to deactivate).
Actions that would cause negative Faction standing trigger on screen pop up warning (option to deactivate).
All Anti-Empire mission briefings have a warning to inform players those missions will incur negative Faction standings.
Implement Tags for Standings in-game based on similar game mechanics as Tags for Security.
Add NPC Agents to in-game Agent Finder for Faction standing repair (similar to proposal in my forum signature).

Once again good luck with the upcoming election.


DMC


Goddamnit, I was just typing up my response.
Jin'taan
Pentag Blade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#35 - 2017-03-04 20:39:31 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello Jin'taan,

We had a small discussion about Faction standings in my Assembly Hall proposal :
Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions.

Now I'm not going to ask if you actually conversed with CCP about it nor do I want to know the outcome of that discussion if in fact you actually did bring it to their attention.

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC


I quite enjoyed the discussion we had there, and hope that you felt it was as productive as I did, even though our overall assesment of the issues didn't really align in that circumstance. At the end of the day I believe that the fact that your plan exists is a symptom of the overarching problem with standings, in that they are incredibly complex and unintuitive to the average player, as they're not communicated particularly well in both terms of how they work, and the consequences of lowering them.

I wouldn't propose any changes directly, as I don't think that's a good way to talk to CCP on a topic like this, however I have - as a result of you bringing it up - tried to discuss with CCP on what they feel the intent and value of the standings system is for the game, and how we can better utilize it for those aims.

I know that's not the answer you're looking for, and that you're dissapointed nothing has been changed, but that's the reallity of the CSM and how it works. At the end of the day we're not CCP's boss and I think anyone who is going to try and tell you that they'll make CCP do something is not only wrong, but will actively hurt the CSM when they're on it. Our job is to give the community feedback on topics (as we have) and provide expert knowledge on subjects that CCP don't have the same depth of understanding that we do.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2017-03-04 22:29:28 UTC
Jin'taan wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:

Seems you're a bit indisposed at the moment to reply so I'll just post my rebuttal now.

-Rebuttal-


DMC

Goddamnit, I was just typing up my response.

Shocked

Sorry about that, wasn't sure when you'd be back.

Blink


Jin'taan wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello Jin'taan,

We had a small discussion about Faction standings in my Assembly Hall proposal :
Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions.

Now I'm not going to ask if you actually conversed with CCP about it nor do I want to know the outcome of that discussion if in fact you actually did bring it to their attention.

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC


I quite enjoyed the discussion we had there, and hope that you felt it was as productive as I did, even though our overall assesment of the issues didn't really align in that circumstance. At the end of the day I believe that the fact that your plan exists is a symptom of the overarching problem with standings, in that they are incredibly complex and unintuitive to the average player, as they're not communicated particularly well in both terms of how they work, and the consequences of lowering them.

I wouldn't propose any changes directly, as I don't think that's a good way to talk to CCP on a topic like this, however I have - as a result of you bringing it up - tried to discuss with CCP on what they feel the intent and value of the standings system is for the game, and how we can better utilize it for those aims.

I know that's not the answer you're looking for, and that you're dissapointed nothing has been changed, but that's the reallity of the CSM and how it works. At the end of the day we're not CCP's boss and I think anyone who is going to try and tell you that they'll make CCP do something is not only wrong, but will actively hurt the CSM when they're on it. Our job is to give the community feedback on topics (as we have) and provide expert knowledge on subjects that CCP don't have the same depth of understanding that we do.


Hello Jin'taan and thanks for the reply,

I definitely appreciate you taking the time to review and discuss that proposal with me in the Assembly Hall. Thank you once again for doing that.

I realize that CSM doesn't have any power to make CCP do anything they don't want to do. Also I agree with most everything you've posted here. Now I may be wrong but doesn't CSM also provide feedback to CCP on topics that the community is concerned with as well ?

Granted there's not a lot of players currently rage posting about Faction standings in the forums. Not to sound like I have a big ego but the reason for that is due to me posting 'The Plan' back in 2010. Over the past 7 years it has helped countless amount of players to rectify what seemed like an unsolvable issue. Because of that I've been praised and referred to as the 'Consummate Faction Standing Expert' in the forums.

Now don't get me wrong, I enjoy the Eve fame for that but as I said before, there's a lot of players in-game who don't read the forums and don't know that guide exists. They've basically accepted the fact they're cut off from engaging in available content due to negative Faction standings. Repairing those standings is a big task even for experienced players who are familiar with 'The Plan'. New players who haven't even learned the game yet can easily mess up their Faction standings without even knowing it right from the start, resulting in no access to half of Empire space.

Since I'm referred to as the Faction standing expert in the forums, I just wanted to provide some feedback through the CSM for CCP to consider. These options would definitely help players in-game.

Faction standing repair process be implemented in-game to be very intuitive, not obscure (tutorial perhaps).
Changes to Faction standings notify players with on screen pop up message (option to deactivate).
Actions that would cause negative Faction standing trigger on screen pop up warning (option to deactivate).
All Anti-Empire mission briefings have a warning to inform players those missions will incur negative Faction standings.
Implement Tags for Standings in-game based on similar game mechanics as Tags for Security.
Add NPC Agents to in-game Agent Finder for Faction standing repair (similar to proposal in my forum signature).

Once again good luck with the upcoming election.


DMC
Valkorsia
Spartan Vanguard
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#37 - 2017-03-05 16:50:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkorsia
Caring, compassionate, considerate, knowledgeable. He cares about the player community, is considerate of others and compassionate about his work with CCP as a CSM.

Sir Jin'taan is an easy choice for me. His knowledge of the game and the issues facing players is - in my opinion - second to none. He is considerate of others and will hear debates on many sides of an issue, yet present a balanced, fair conclusion. I am thankful for the opportunity to play this game and communicate with him daily. He also has an extremely sexy FC voice and remains calm and collected under all circumstances.

A shining star in Eve. You have my vote, Sir Jin'taan.
PirateGorex
Spartan Vanguard
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#38 - 2017-03-06 19:37:09 UTC
Valkorsia wrote:
Caring, compassionate, considerate, knowledgeable. He cares about the player community, is considerate of others and compassionate about his work with CCP as a CSM.

Sir Jin'taan is an easy choice for me. His knowledge of the game and the issues facing players is - in my opinion - second to none. He is considerate of others and will hear debates on many sides of an issue, yet present a balanced, fair conclusion. I am thankful for the opportunity to play this game and communicate with him daily. He also has an extremely sexy FC voice and remains calm and collected under all circumstances.

A shining star in Eve. You have my vote, Sir Jin'taan.


^^ This says it all.

Done.
Jin'taan
Pentag Blade
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#39 - 2017-03-08 10:51:05 UTC
Thank you all for your kind words and recommendations, and hopefully your votes as well. If you have any further questions, let me know, I'd be happy to answer them. Also, I just put out CSM XI's last Quarterly Review, which contains some of the thoughts of us on both the past term, and the ongoing election. I'm also happy that the CSM Podcast, hosted by Apothne, has been able to hit it's stride this time with third episode up. I really hope we're able to continue this into the CSM 12 term :)
Cochise Chiricahua
The Inglourious Bastards
#40 - 2017-03-08 14:26:47 UTC
07 Candidate!

First, thank you for your time and effort (both present and future) in representing the capsuleers of New Eden! They’re much appreciated.

I’m preparing to cast my vote in the CSM12 elections. After reading the information you submitted, though, I still have a question.

By way of background, I started in Eve as a hauler, moving freight in T1 industrials and gradually working my way up in both ships and cargo. However, I repeatedly found my progress impeded by gankers who would destroy my ship and steal my cargo. In low- and null-sec space, that’s to be expected. You place your bet and take your chances. In high-sec space, however, this is very frustrating. Why have high-sec space at all then? This frustration drove me into anti-ganking, and I’ve been a proud member of Thomas en Chasteaux's High-Sec Militia for several months now.

So, my question. Where do you stand on high-sec ganking? I’ll concede that ganking is a legitimate style of game play, as CCP has ruled. But I also feel that it should be difficult and dangerous (for the ganker) in the 30% of New Eden designated as high-sec space. In particular, I’d like to see CCP tweak the game mechanics so that the criminal flag generated by looting a ganked freighter in high-sec space follows all players who handle that loot, and otherwise make looting more realistic. (Thomas en Chasteaux's ideas, not mine.)

As a member of the CSM, would you present such an idea to CCP? Would you push for its adoption? What other game changes might you consider to make high-sec ganking more difficult and less profitable?

Regards,
Cochise Chiricahua.
Previous page123Next page