These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Issler Dainze for CSM7! Hear the bears roar!

First post
Author
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#41 - 2012-01-27 01:49:08 UTC
I actually wonder if it is possible to not have NPC corps. Does the game coding require everyone to be in some corp?

New players are always in an NPC corp, after all.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2012-01-27 02:03:48 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Issler Dainze wrote:
I definitely think NPC corps have a place in Eve. But I am not sure that perfect safe havens in a lot of Eve activities is the right place.

Issler


NPC corp members are not safe, not by a long shot. They get can flipped, suicide ganked and Ninja'd quite often. Probably because they can't dish out very much retribution due to the current game mechanics.

Those who say being in a NPC corp is safe don't know jack. A few months ago I was assassinated in a 0.7 system at a Radar site by 1/2 dozen Merc players in Battleships. It was a hit paid for by another player who brought forum rage into the game as grief play.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#43 - 2012-01-27 02:17:25 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
I definitely think NPC corps have a place in Eve. But I am not sure that perfect safe havens in a lot of Eve activities is the right place.

Issler


NPC corp members are not safe, not by a long shot. They get can flipped, suicide ganked and Ninja'd quite often. Probably because they can't dish out very much retribution due to the current game mechanics.

Those who say being in a NPC corp is safe don't know jack. A few months ago I was assassinated in a 0.7 system at a Radar site by 1/2 dozen Merc players in Battleships. It was a hit paid for by another player who brought forum rage into the game as grief play.


I agree they aren't safe, I've certainly died when in them. So point taken. It's all about balance in the end. The NPC corp discussion clearly will be very interesting!

Issler
Miranda Etxebarria
Transgalactic Imports and Exports
#44 - 2012-01-27 02:18:03 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Traders - there was a time when a person could make a living running trade. Seems to no longer be the case.


Not sure if serious.

But I am quite curious to see what kind of platform would get the approval from such a diverse target audience.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#45 - 2012-01-27 02:29:16 UTC
Miranda Etxebarria wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Traders - there was a time when a person could make a living running trade. Seems to no longer be the case.


Not sure if serious.

But I am quite curious to see what kind of platform would get the approval from such a diverse target audience.


I've started with a scatter gun approach to be sure. I just have a strong conviction a lot of players are not represented by the current power block focused CSM. The idea earlier of a slate of candidates working together with specific areas of focus is where I expect is us to converge.

I am serious about this and I hope others will join. There is no reason a minority of Eve should control the CSM. CSM6 has made it clear to a much larger audience that the CSM does affect CCP. For folks out there like myself the reject the notion that "null is the end game" (a sandbox by definition has no end game) and that CCP needs to hyperfocus on null.

I hope this is the way to make sure CSM7 makes CCP realize he majority of Eve could care less about supercaps and sov and would love something as simple as making mining better, keeping PvE fresh or making high sec more dynamic.

Issler Dainze
Voice of Reason CSM 7 Candidate
Miranda Etxebarria
Transgalactic Imports and Exports
#46 - 2012-01-27 02:35:31 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Miranda Etxebarria wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Traders - there was a time when a person could make a living running trade. Seems to no longer be the case.


Not sure if serious.

But I am quite curious to see what kind of platform would get the approval from such a diverse target audience.


I've started with a scatter gun approach to be sure. I just have a strong conviction a lot of players are not represented by the current power block focused CSM. The idea earlier of a slate of candidates working together with specific areas of focus is where I expect is us to converge.

I am serious about this and I hope others will join. There is no reason a minority of Eve should control the CSM. CSM6 has made it clear to a much larger audience that the CSM does affect CCP. For folks out there like myself the reject the notion that "null is the end game" (a sandbox by definition has no end game) and that CCP needs to hyperfocus on null.

I hope this is the way to make sure CSM7 makes CCP realize he majority of Eve could care less about supercaps and sov and would love something as simple as making mining better, keeping PvE fresh or making high sec more dynamic.

Issler Dainze
Voice of Reason CSM 7 Candidate


Sure, and I applaud your effort. I just thought the notion of being unable to make a living trading was weird. But I'm looking forward to seeing your proposals.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#47 - 2012-01-27 02:40:59 UTC
Miranda Etxebarria wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Miranda Etxebarria wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Traders - there was a time when a person could make a living running trade. Seems to no longer be the case.


Not sure if serious.

But I am quite curious to see what kind of platform would get the approval from such a diverse target audience.


I've started with a scatter gun approach to be sure. I just have a strong conviction a lot of players are not represented by the current power block focused CSM. The idea earlier of a slate of candidates working together with specific areas of focus is where I expect is us to converge.

I am serious about this and I hope others will join. There is no reason a minority of Eve should control the CSM. CSM6 has made it clear to a much larger audience that the CSM does affect CCP. For folks out there like myself the reject the notion that "null is the end game" (a sandbox by definition has no end game) and that CCP needs to hyperfocus on null.

I hope this is the way to make sure CSM7 makes CCP realize he majority of Eve could care less about supercaps and sov and would love something as simple as making mining better, keeping PvE fresh or making high sec more dynamic.

Issler Dainze
Voice of Reason CSM 7 Candidate


Sure, and I applaud your effort. I just thought the notion of being unable to make a living trading was weird. But I'm looking forward to seeing your proposals.


Of, the trading comment. I am basing that more on things I used to see a lot of folks doing that I rarely hear about any more. In our corp we see steady stream of players new to Eve. Used to be a time when we'd see them get thier fist Badger ot Mammoth and grind goods between regions, being pretty satisfied with the isks that made at that stage of their life in Eve. I don't see that as much anymore.

Again, this is the sort of stuff that might very well be dropped from the focus of the party. Once we get going we should be able to figure out the "right" focus.

Thanks for contributing to the discussions already!

Issler Dainze
Voice of Reason Party CSM 7 candidate
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2012-01-27 02:49:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Issler Dainze wrote:


The question really should be "what is an NPC corp intended to be"? Maybe NPC corp members are restricted in ship types of activities? Or some type of modification of war dec that removes the shield is the answer.

I don't claim to know how to solve the problem but I'd love to participate in a serious discussion of the issues.

I believe the intent of NPC Corps was to provide an avenue for pilots unwilling to join a corporation to play eve while still having a corp channel to socialize in (because the devs have stated strong feelings on that players should interact in an MMO). It was not intended as an easy metagaming tool, a special mode for maxed out veteran bears who want to opt out of PvP while ratting/hauling billions without a care in the world or to be New Eden's logistical backbone that puts those who want to work as a team at a competitive disadvantage. Perhaps it was intended to be a entry point for rookies at one point, but if it was, in it's current form it is unrecognizable.

Wanting to play EVE solo is an entirely valid stance I feel and because of that disagree with Malcanis/Xorv's suggestion that NPC Corps should be merged with FW. I agree with DeMichael that being a lone wolf in EVE is perfectly fine, but think his entitlement to special no-wardec mode to do it with is the antithesis of everything EVE is about and his ability to do so through NPC corps is the source of the majority of EVE's risk/reward problems. Playing EVE solo and choosing not to share commitments with other players should have consequences, not just benefits.

I've talked about the improvements to PvE, but taking away NPC Corps and letting them be wardec'd individually solves a lot of PvP metagaming problems too. The neutral RR-alt trend or NPC scout in highsec shouldn't be protected at all times; their ass should be next on the line of people eating a wardec from the other corp. Convoluted aggro fixes for the latest FOTM trick used by combat alts aren't as needed; next time you go after a corp, you tack on the alts they brought along last time for good measure.
Ghazu
#49 - 2012-01-27 03:48:36 UTC
lol why is wis on the bottom of the list

http://www.minerbumping.com/ lol what the christ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2299984#post2299984

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#50 - 2012-01-27 05:59:20 UTC
Ghazu wrote:
lol why is wis on the bottom of the list


Please don't assume the order of the list to be the priority of the issues. WiS is something I think should be a high priority to make sure someone keeps it in CCPs plans.

Issler
Bernie Nator
Mathonian Industries
#51 - 2012-01-27 06:22:41 UTC
So you're young to unite all those people but leave wormhole alliances out of it? So Much for that balance you proposed.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#52 - 2012-01-27 06:25:50 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Wanting to play EVE solo is an entirely valid stance I feel and because of that disagree with Malcanis/Xorv's suggestion that NPC Corps should be merged with FW. I agree with DeMichael that being a lone wolf in EVE is perfectly fine, but think his entitlement to special no-wardec mode to do it with is the antithesis of everything EVE is about and his ability to do so through NPC corps is the source of the majority of EVE's risk/reward problems. Playing EVE solo and choosing not to share commitments with other players should have consequences, not just benefits.


I can't speak for Malcanis, but I never intended or viewed my stance of having all NPC corps tied into Faction War as anti solo play. The whims and demands of NPCs are much more easily managed than those of real players, and the bonds between players of the same faction are not the same as those of a Corp or an Alliance. So being dragged into a Faction War is much more accommodating than being part of Player Sovereignty Wars for casual players. There's a cost though as the NPCs in half of Highsec won't protect you, they'll shot at you.. nevermind the opposing Factions players. If you want to be independent of the NPC factions then you should be in a player corp and be fully subject to Wardecs as they were pre P alliance wardec nerf.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#53 - 2012-01-27 06:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: DeMichael Crimson
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

I believe the intent of NPC Corps was to provide an avenue for pilots unwilling to join a corporation to play eve while still having a corp channel to socialize in (because the devs have stated strong feelings on that players should interact in an MMO). It was not intended as an easy metagaming tool, a special mode for maxed out veteran bears who want to opt out of PvP while ratting/hauling billions without a care in the world or to be New Eden's logistical backbone that puts those who want to work as a team at a competitive disadvantage. Perhaps it was intended to be a entry point for rookies at one point, but if it was, in it's current form it is unrecognizable.

Wanting to play EVE solo is an entirely valid stance I feel and because of that disagree with Malcanis/Xorv's suggestion that NPC Corps should be merged with FW. I agree with DeMichael that being a lone wolf in EVE is perfectly fine, but think his entitlement to special no-wardec mode to do it with is the antithesis of everything EVE is about and his ability to do so through NPC corps is the source of the majority of EVE's risk/reward problems. Playing EVE solo and choosing not to share commitments with other players should have consequences, not just benefits.

I've talked about the improvements to PvE, but taking away NPC Corps and letting them be wardec'd individually solves a lot of PvP metagaming problems too. The neutral RR-alt trend or NPC scout in highsec shouldn't be protected at all times; their ass should be next on the line of people eating a wardec from the other corp. Convoluted aggro fixes for the latest FOTM trick used by combat alts aren't as needed; next time you go after a corp, you tack on the alts they brought along last time for good measure.

I'm going to address each section here and show you what consequences we have to deal with for not being in a Player corp.

Nowhere in the game description does it say we have to join a player corp or do PvP battle. It says we can join a player corp if we wanted to which would allow more opportunity in game. Being in an NPC corp, we're basically on my own, none of our corp mates can come help if someone in a player corp steals our loot. Even if fleeted with other players from the NPC corp before the aggression, only the gang leader or owner of the loot would be able to retaliate. Yet if we take the player corp loot, his whole corp can jump on us. I used to accept that as payment for being tax free, however we now pay tax which doesn't do anything for us.

Before anyone says it's payment for being WarDec free, no it's not. The no WarDec option is to protect player corps. If the WarDec option existed, us players in NPC corps would go on the warpath. Last time I checked, there was over 600 players in my NPC corp chat. The price of not being in a player corp is no access to POS. Because of that we have to deal with very long waiting times for most Science and Industry slots in high sec. We have to do a lot of searching and travel to find open slots. And yes I go into low sec too.

You talk about alt scouts hiding in NPC corps and doing RR. That's a problem with combat mechanics, not the NPC corp being active. If someone does RR, they should be flagged red and become part of the battle since they decided to get involved with the conflict. As for scouts, doesn't have to be in a NPC corp. Shouldn't matter anyway since this is supposed to be about high sec game mechanics.

As for not being active with other players, I already said I fleet with others when needed. I socialize with a lot of different players in various chat channels including local. As I said earlier, the major problem with being in NPC corp is we pay tax yet we can't do retaliation as a small gang if a gang member is aggressed while fleeted in high sec.

Bernie Nator wrote:
So you're young to unite all those people but leave wormhole alliances out of it? So Much for that balance you proposed.

W-hole Alliances? Isn't W-Hole space the same as Null Sec or 0.0 Alliance space?

I might be mistaken but I thought the 'Voice Of Reason Party' was a platform for independent corps, single player PvE careers, Industrialists, RP and high sec game mechanics? If not then I better go find another party.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#54 - 2012-01-27 07:28:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
So all those effects on the game and other players I described is mitigated because you can't gang up on a can flipper/salvage thief.

Ban NPC Corps.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#55 - 2012-01-27 08:58:26 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Wanting to play EVE solo is an entirely valid stance I feel and because of that disagree with Malcanis/Xorv's suggestion that NPC Corps should be merged with FW...


That might be Xorv's stance; it's the polar opposite of mine:

Malcanis wrote:
So, again, what we should be looking to do is open up opportunities for chosing a level of risk and reward appropriate to their requirements rather than simply punish people for not wanting to join a player corp. One obvious way of doing this is to allow players a free choice of NPC corp and then attach different terms and conditions to membership of those corps... membership of different NPC corps might give access to different activities and privileges but might also involve obligations and risks. Did you know that Caldari corporations fight amongst each other? And that there's a war on (that might well involve the military organisations). Some NPC corps even have a presence in lo-sec......but then what privileges or opportunities does membership confer? Zero NPC corp tax? access to better missions than other NPC corp members? Faster faction standings increases?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Roime
Yamagata Syndicate
Shadow Cartel
#56 - 2012-01-27 12:23:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Roime
I don't classify myself according to the sec status of whatever system I might currently be based from, but I support this initiative and wish you good luck!

About NPC corps- I wish they were all treated like universities/educational institutions. Most of them actually are unis, but they should have a graduation mechanism based on certificates.

After you receive the required certificates you graduate from the starter institution, get a diploma and a special graduation gift, and either move on to a player corp (obviously you could leave for a player corp before graduating) or gain access to a NPC corporation. This NPC corp should have some advantages compared to the starter corps, not sure about the details.

Those who fail to graduate would be booted from the Uni after a certain period, and end up in a corp that has higher taxes, and is wardeccable.

.

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#57 - 2012-01-27 16:55:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Epeen
I'll tell one thing I'd like to see and why.

I would like the ability to delete skills I don't want. No refund. No trade. Just delete them.

Why you ask?

1) This is a sandbox game where we should have the means to make our own decisions and accept the consequences of them.

2) I have a lot of characters. Most of them are three to six years old. They're focused for the tasks I have set for them. The old character creator used to hand out about 800k SP willy nilly and it just irks me to look at these nicely focused characters and see a block of skills that I never wanted and will never use.

3) I'm just that anal guy who likes to see a nice skill board with only the skills I desire on it.

So... do you have any thoughts on this? Would you be interested in adding this small change to your platform?

Mr EpeenCool
Ka P'lah
Doomheim
#58 - 2012-01-28 05:22:56 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:
Im a carebear... and are going to do the same as 90% of eve...
not vote... Bear




Ugh All too true... (but I hope you do, Tore) Wouldn't take near all that huge non-voting-for-CSM bloc of EVE players to make a difference for themselves, would it? Every aspect/playergroup in EVE is equally valid as long as the people using that playstyle are enjoying themselves, I'd say ('cause...um...it's a game, and that's kinda the point, right?) - the pirate as well as the prospector, the 0.0 powerblock as well as the highsec fuel block... All the different people and activities going on in this giant space-box make it the game we all like (but why do we have to put down others if they do different things than we do? - c'mon now...maybe one person likes to make spaceships into expanding clouds of superheated tritanium particles and another just likes to make spaceships, one person wants to sit in a station and play the market and another wants to fight in fleet actions...it's all good).
Right now the representation on the CSM is unbalanced. 0.0 players are overrepresented. To their credit, that is because they are organized . Now, 0.0 security space absolutely needs to be represented, as it is an essential part of what makes EVE EVE - but - it is far from the only group of players in EVE. The "silent majority" of EVE players are not letting themselves be heard, and that's the main problem. Wouldn't take much; just vote and let the CSM folks know what we would like to see that would make our game more fun.
Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#59 - 2012-01-28 06:07:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyrrashae
Supported.

I've flirted with the idea of candidacy myself, but...meh: Politics, not my thing, it would seem.

E: I should clarify, supported in principle. Specific support/lack thereof depends on where candidates will stand on things like:

1) Actually fixing losec
2) Bringing the risky "safer, but never 100% safe" element back to hisec (and ideally, pushing for an end to pants-on-head stupidity like the now-legal dec-shielding exploit).

Ni.

Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2012-01-28 06:10:37 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:
Im a carebear... and are going to do the same as 90% of eve...
not vote... Bear



And then spend the rest of the next CSM's term complaining about the result, mustn't forget that.

E: Argle-Bargle!!

Ni.