These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Kelduum Revaan - Running for CSM7

First post First post
Author
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#21 - 2012-02-08 15:26:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Also, best of luck with your campaign! I certainly believe High Sec more voices on the council.

I share many of the same beliefs and goals as you (I hate seeing new players washed out of the game in frustration), we just disagree somewhat on the most effective method of empowering new players.

Keep in touch, there will be plenty of time for more good conversations about new player issues.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2012-02-08 15:35:30 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

It's also why I've explained that the Mittani's "hate fuels war in 0.0" philosophy, while likely true, is a psychological element that is completely alien to low sec culture. It's also why the plans he repeatedly endorses for linking the FW sovereignty systems with 0.0 sovereignty systems are functionally D.O.A. in terms of being anything that will actually benefit Faction Warfare.

For CCP, linking the two is about laziness when it comes to development time. For The Mittani, it's about making sure if anything breaks, it happens to the FW crowd and not to his players in 0.0 space.


At the summit, CCP suggested testing new capture mechanics on FW; the idea didn't originate with me. There was no discussion of 'linking' the systems as you imply.

Stop trying to use me as a boogeyman and mentioning me in every other post, or if you do it, you should at least get the facts straight.

~hi~

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#23 - 2012-02-08 15:40:21 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Shazzam Vokanavom wrote:
Big difference between making things difficult for others to war dec EvE-Uni and a view of wanting sensible consensual war dec mechanics.

There is no such thing as a SENSIBLE consensual war dec mechanic.


False. Players can Faction Warfare. - its basically just a massive consensual war dec mechanic.

It was supposed to be much more, but was broken from the beginning mechanically, and so up until the recent plexing fix the permanent flashy status of the enemy has been the entire appeal to Faction Warfare the last three years. The ability to have a massive pool of war dec targets to fight with, without having to endure gate fire. (which is also why I'm in strongly in favor of less gate fire, in less situations throughout low sec)

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Andrea Griffin
#24 - 2012-02-08 15:56:37 UTC
I don't support any Eve-Uni candidate due to their abuse of the wardec mechanics (the Infamous Eve-Uni DecShield).
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-02-08 16:09:42 UTC
dec-shield candidate lol
The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#26 - 2012-02-08 16:11:53 UTC
actually kelduum saying that 'people being -10 in hisec should be unable to board ships' on his recent twitter blurb is something both alarming and pathetic

~hi~

Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#27 - 2012-02-08 16:58:52 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
dec-shield candidate lol

And yet:
CONCORD wrote:
Sicarius.. Declares War Against Ivy League
From: CONCORD
Sent: 2012.02.08 16:18

Sicarius.. has declared war on Ivy League.
Within 24 hours fighting can legally occur between those involved.

I wouldn't call that immunity.

Anyway, on a related note, here's an alternative way wardecs could possibly work: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=67445&find=unread
roigon
TURN LEFT
HYDRA RELOADED
#28 - 2012-02-08 17:12:32 UTC
So you are mr neutral as well as mr "let's put forth a idea that will mostly benefit e-uni".

Now really it's not much of a issue since most voters won't even read these threads, but are you trying to sabotage your own campaign message? Do you perhaps not want to run as CSM but were forced into it and now trying to ruin your chances?
Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#29 - 2012-02-08 17:14:22 UTC
The Mittani wrote:


Yea, apparently I didn't phrase that very well.

In short though -10 sec status people in hisec should have the local police follow and point/web/neut/jam them (depending on sec status of the system), otherwise the low security status becomes a mild inconvenience, rather than something which should be a hinderance.

I have no problem with ganking, piracy or whatever someones chosen method would be to get there, but security status should mean just a little more than it does currently - after all, EVE is about the repercussions.
The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2012-02-08 17:19:45 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
The Mittani wrote:


Yea, apparently I didn't phrase that very well.

In short though -10 sec status people in hisec should have the local police follow and point/web/neut/jam them (depending on sec status of the system), otherwise the low security status becomes a mild inconvenience, rather than something which should be a hinderance.

I have no problem with ganking, piracy or whatever someones chosen method would be to get there, but security status should mean just a little more than it does currently - after all, EVE is about the repercussions.


the faction police does exactly that from the moment you board a ship. did you not know this?

~hi~

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#31 - 2012-02-08 17:30:59 UTC
What I am looking for a candidate is for them to:

1. support some sort of casual pvp via a contract system
2. enhance WIS
3. upgrade the mission system
4. make PI more like sim city
5. push to open up story lines for jove (possible WH expansion)
6. make FW include pirate missions like (kill so many people in system A)
7. make referendums for important CSM decisions… (if its real important we should all vote for it) this would be for major game changing things such as refocus and such
8. eliminate clone costs for players over 4 years old (to encourage pvp for old vets)
9. gethe fith subsystem for Tech III ships
10. kill all super caps (as in a real counter to them not this crap that I will only fly super caps now so give me back my sp cuss I cant use drones sh*t)
11. a way to integrate PI and ship crews and have an effect on your ships performance

Basically a CSM who represents the old vet casual pve/pvper

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#32 - 2012-02-08 17:34:53 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
the faction police does exactly that from the moment you board a ship. did you not know this?

I'll have to double check as its some time since I tried it, but they take a while to arrive, then either don't point, or they web then point, which is rather silly.

Until I've checked, consider the suggestion rescinded.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#33 - 2012-02-08 17:49:36 UTC
Darn it, Kelduum, what you are supposed to look at is how to avoid Orca maintenance bays being used by outlaw pilots for suicide runs in high sec. Possibly by classifying that allowing an outlaw to use your maintenance bay marks you as aiding the person (makes sense I think) and makes the outlaw flag switch to you.

But in general a whole rewrite of Crime Watch is needed (you should already know what that is), and that would likely take care or make a better option for this issue by itself.

I would like to vote for you, but I am not being impressed here.

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#34 - 2012-02-08 17:49:55 UTC
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
the faction police does exactly that from the moment you board a ship. did you not know this?

I'll have to double check as its some time since I tried it, but they take a while to arrive, then either don't point, or they web then point, which is rather silly.

Until I've checked, consider the suggestion rescinded.


it takes about six seconds for them to arrive, they web then point. if they pointed first there'd be no way to escape them though i suppose you could fit a wcs. they also jam, so you need to fit spurs/equivalent racial eccm implants and overheat eccms on your ship. loss is certain, a successful gank is not certain, and profit is usually impossible

the point: until you've ganked in hisec yourself, don't talk about how ganking in hisec works/doesn't work. your idea there seems to be 'ban hulkageddon' and that ain't happening, unless you want to provoke every hisec war/merc corp + every hisec pirate to come crap up your thread

there's nothing wrong with being an eve-uni candidate, you have a big constituency and you should represent them and i expect you to win a seat, just don't opine on things you don't understand

~hi~

Deen Wispa
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-02-08 18:14:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Deen Wispa
Andrea Griffin wrote:
I don't support any Eve-Uni candidate due to their abuse of the wardec mechanics (the Infamous Eve-Uni DecShield).


Actually, it's because of this issue and that it forced CCP to consider fixing hisec wardec mechanics in 2012 that I would consider supporting this candidate.

Had Eve-Uni not taken advantage of the broken mechanics and the publicity brought upon it, CCP would not be considering revising wardec mechanics for 2012. And many of you who complain and moan about how lame hisec wars are would still be moaning without any hope of CCP fixing it.

For years, people moaned and complained about the broken wardec mechanics. For years, CCP ignored it. And finally, someone brought it to light even it meant he was the scapegoat. So as much as some of you hate to admit it, you should actually be thanking Kelduum's for bringing this issue to the forefront.

Having said all of that, I would like to hear more about specific issues that Kelduum will run on before casting a ballot of course.

High Five. Yeah! C'est La Eve .

Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#36 - 2012-02-08 20:19:36 UTC
Jowen Datloran wrote:
Darn it, Kelduum, what you are supposed to look at is how to avoid Orca maintenance bays being used by outlaw pilots for suicide runs in high sec. Possibly by classifying that allowing an outlaw to use your maintenance bay marks you as aiding the person (makes sense I think) and makes the outlaw flag switch to you.


The problem there is that the Orca pilot could simply eject the ship from the maintence bay, or leave the Orca themselves. Theres any number of ways that flagging someone for someone elses action could go hilariously wrong, so it's pretty unlikely CCP would do something like that.
Callean Drevus
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2012-02-08 21:32:30 UTC
I endorse this person

Developer/Creator of EVE Marketeer

Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#38 - 2012-02-08 22:23:12 UTC
"Our members are free to make their own choices" (from Eve University rules)

I freely choose to endorse Kelduum for CSM and wish him every success in the upcoming election.
Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2012-02-08 22:50:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyrrashae
Kelduum Revaan wrote:


Yea, apparently I didn't phrase that very well.

In short though -10 sec status people in hisec should have the local police follow and point/web/neut/jam them (depending on sec status of the system), otherwise the low security status becomes a mild inconvenience, rather than something which should be a hinderance.



Ever tried actually doing anything in hisec--aside from just transitting it in something small and fast--whilst blinky-blinky, assuming you are more of an "empire-space generalist," than a through-and-through losec pilot?

Going by this perfectly absurd carebear tripe, I didn't think so.

E: It becomes increasingly clear that you, Kelduum, either,

A) May genuinely want to represent a diverse demographic, yet know little or nothing about large aspects of same, and what their/our interests are.

B) Actually don't want to represent anyone but E-UNI and desire "special entitlements" under the aegis of same that, for all practcal purposes, exempt you and yours from the non-consensual PvP-informed sandbox that all other players must deal with. I most ardently hope this is not the case, as if it is, then you are doing your students a grave disservice, and have been for some time.

I'd like to believe that it's (A), but I'm far too old not to know better. Still one can dream, eh?

[/cynicism]

Ni.

Reppyk
The Black Shell
#40 - 2012-02-08 23:54:46 UTC
Just pointing another error that wasnt seen :

Kelduum Revaan wrote:
2. I would support a rework of the wardec mechanics which would put a little power to end the conflict in the hands of the 'defender', however this should not be without significant cost and/or danger. Similarly, the ability of mercenaries to get involved in ongoing conflicts without the normal warmup timers its something that is sorely missing at the moment.
You shouldnt speak when you don't know. And that's about highsec wardecs, your speciality ; I'm not sure I would like to see someone with so little EVE-knowlegde getting a CSM chair, because your points of view on lowsec/00 NPC/00 sov/WH could be questionnable (hey, mind you, I have even seen Mittens in a ship twice).
So, a few days ago I helped saving a tower (as a mercenary). I docked in the system, joined the corp, warped to the evil pilots and ganked them. "Warm up timers" ? 30s, and that's only because I didnt want to use an exploit.
It's a good thing that you're willing to deal with the wardec problem, because atm it's really ******. But dude, you made the dec shield. Your ideas will just make something even worst and exploitable.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !