Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 11:31:00 -
[1]
Being comparatively new to the forum, I have not been able to find any references to a body to represent the interests of people living in hisec. Having read both the minutes of the CSM/CCP meetings in May and also a number of posts to Jita Park I am concerned that 0.0 maybe making a move to shift the balance of EVE to favour lowsec in mining, invention and so on. A Couple of threads Here and Here seem to show a campaign aiming to convince CCP that the proposals coming from the CSM have the full support of all sections of the game. I feel that this is to promote the interests of the corps and alliances in 0.0 at the expense of the other areas of the game. Some other posters have suggested that a forum should be opened to allow hisec residents to coordinate their responses and ultimately to put forward candidates for the next CSM so as to safeguard the interests of hisec. I agree and would like to hear from others interested in setting up such a forum, if there is not somewhere already for this purpose.
I should say that personally I have no interest in standing as a candidate in any future election, the NDA insisted on by CCP makes this impossible as I have an aversion to gagging clauses of any kind.
|
Oooooh Aaaaah
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 13:25:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Oooooh Aaaaah on 18/07/2011 13:25:04
Originally by: Cedille Mureau A Couple of threads Here and Here seem to show a campaign aiming to convince CCP that the proposals coming from the CSM have the full support of all sections of the game.
I fail to see where any of the threads you're linking says anything you claim them to. The first is some guy expressing his gratitude towards the CSM for going to iceland on short notice, discussing the latest PR fiasco concerning virtual goods and force-feeding players CQ. It is entirely unrelated to any null/highsec issues which weren't even talked about at that particular emergency summit. The second one is proposing more work on highsec because the majority of characters is located in highsec, which is the exact opposite of what you claim it to say...
|
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 16:49:00 -
[3]
O.K. Thanks for the feedback.
Let me see if I can make things a litle clearer.
The first post, on first glance, has nothing to do with the moves to enhance the opportunies for 0.0. It's a peaen of praise for the CSM. The reason I highlighted it was because the OP has a very short employment history yet seems to have knowledge of the timescales involved in the meetings, something I was not aware of, and I have been following the election and so on quite closely. The second poster also has a short employment history but again seems to know a lot about the benefits and disadvantages of 0.0 versus hisec.
I'm not the only one to notice the short history of the first poster by the way. To me, the fact there have been two posts both supporting, in different ways, the stance of CSM seems to be curious, I'll not put it any stronger than that.
What I'm trying to point out is that there *seems* to be some sort of effort to boost the standing of the proposals about giving 0.0 advantages not shared with other sectors and that the posting of two supportive posts by characters with short histories, who should be less informed than more long-standing players, is an anomaly. It smacks of "astro-turfing" to me. It could be that I have not been paying close enough attention to the CSM and its schedule etc. or it could be that old age and paranoia are taking their toll.
What I feel is more important is that hisec should try and organise a mechanism to ensure that the residents are sufficiently represented so as not to be unduly disadvantaged in any changes mooted for the future.
|
Oooooh Aaaaah
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 18:40:00 -
[4]
I see - so regarding the second thread, you're not referring to the OP but some other guy in the thread.
I wouldn't pay any attention to character age on Eve-O forum postings, as most people use disposable alts to do that (I think this character only has a couple of months on her back without ever being in any corp - it's an untrained scouting alt I have on one of my accounts and I biomass those frequently to avoid anyone associating her arrival with that of my other character ;)).
I still fail to see how the first post relates to anything with highsec/nullsec priorities, as he thanks the CSM for discussing the MT issue in an emergency meeting. Again: High/nullsec balance was not discussed there (in case you think he refers to the recently released transcripts in which those matters indeed were discussed - those were from the regular may meeting, not the emergency july meeting the OP is talking about).
|
D'Leh Mannuck
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 19:54:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Lot of typical 0.0 bullcrap
I think you are the one who has to grow up and realise that 0.0 isn't and never will be the ultimate goal for all players. A lot of people don't have fun playing the big lag battles where it takes 10 minutes to lock a target and then you MAYBE can get a shot off. A lot of people don't have fun flying in pure gank fits to shoot easy targets and then roflmao them. A lot of people stay in high sec because why would they let the null sec carebears dictate their gameplay?
Instead half of null sec is napping eachother and in return the other half naps themselves too. And then the tears come because all of a sudden there are only a few frontlines. Socalled hardcore PvPers crying they don't get enough targets to shoot at and blaming the high sec players for not comming to null sec.
If the socalled hardcore PvP=ers want to PvP so passionatly I am sure they can get all the PvP they want in 0.0.
Ow wait they can't. Half is blue and the other half is too far away or god forbid, they might be able to kick your l33t arse back to the crib.
Want 0.0 less stagnant? Make blue list a very short list so only like max 1 or 2 alliances can get set blue. Max 5 corporation.
Red setting not possible cause that would make it too easy to see who's really neutral and who is only neutral due to not being in the blue setting.
But heck, that wont happen cause then 0.0 would really become a dangerous place to live at and you would have to do more than blaming people who don't give a rats arse about your playstyle for not following it.
|
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 21:33:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah
So I'd agree with him that the best way to make the game more interesting and less repetitive for highsec players is to create more incentives for them to finally move out into the real world (0.0).
Nooooo! "Move out into the real world 0.0" This is exactly my point, I'm a carebear and not ashamed to admit it. I DON'T want to move to 0.0. I play EVE to relax, my real life is stressful enough. So I invent a little, run missions, have some PI etc. etc. I don't need any more adrenalin rushes from PvP or have to keep looking over my shoulder to see what's behind me, nor do I want to be a "Master of the Universe"tm. I want to be allowed to play as I want to and not as some mega-corps/alliance or CCP think I should. My money is accepted by CCP as readily as the blackest pirate or CEO of a huge alliance. If you want to build an empire complete with Titans, Stations etc. be my guest but please allow me to play EVE in a way that suits me. To do otherwise is to infringe on the equal rights I have to enjoy playing a game that so many people love and have invested so much time and money in.
|
Oooooh Aaaaah
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 21:38:00 -
[7]
Originally by: D'Leh Mannuck
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Lot of typical 0.0 bullcrap
A lot of... Nah - I wont get down to you level....
Despite your rather emotional inflammatory post, I'll give a serious answer.
I don't even have a single character in a sovholding alliance. Guess what - I don't enjoy flying around like a drone once a year, clicking a broadcast in my fleet window and hitting F1 either, because I for one don't consider that to be pvp.
There's NPC 0.0, wormhole 0.0, Lowsec - all without blobwarfare, structure-grind, napfests and all that.
I also agree that sov 0.0 people are for the most part the biggest carebears of them all. Actually, that's the fascinating thing: The carebears still not moving to sov 0.0, despite it being just as safe for a carebear not interested in pvp as highsec - as the guy in the other thread said: The biggest 0.0 entity until recently consisted of 50k carebears with no interest to pvp ever and they did fine for quite some time. These guys wouldn't leave their sanctums eben whilst their space-empire was crumbling.
Hell - haven't been there in a while, but getting ganked in motsu in a tengu is more likely than getting killed in some pocket in sov 0.0 with a bubble camped entry.
So what exactly is your point?
Are you complaining there's not enough pvp in sov 0.0, so you stay in highsec because you get more pvp with empire wardecs? Good for you - don't go there.
Are you not interested in pvp at all, but miss 'higher level content' in Highsec? Join an alliance and go to carebear sov 0.0 for high level carebearing or go to a wormhole for a little more adventure.
Are you interested in pvp but are annoyed with wartargets hiding in stations all day long in high? Go to NPC 0.0/lowsec.
Do you want more background stories for the red crosses you shoot at in your Golem?
Actually, this intrigues me - what do you people expect CCP to do with highsec? More varied background stories for the red crosses you shoot at in your officer fit golems?
|
Oooooh Aaaaah
|
Posted - 2011.07.18 21:51:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Cedille Mureau
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah
So I'd agree with him that the best way to make the game more interesting and less repetitive for highsec players is to create more incentives for them to finally move out into the real world (0.0).
Nooooo! "Move out into the real world 0.0" This is exactly my point, I'm a carebear and not ashamed to admit it. I DON'T want to move to 0.0. I play EVE to relax, my real life is stressful enough. So I invent a little, run missions, have some PI etc. etc. I don't need any more adrenalin rushes from PvP or have to keep looking over my shoulder to see what's behind me, nor do I want to be a "Master of the Universe"tm. I want to be allowed to play as I want to and not as some mega-corps/alliance or CCP think I should. My money is accepted by CCP as readily as the blackest pirate or CEO of a huge alliance. If you want to build an empire complete with Titans, Stations etc. be my guest but please allow me to play EVE in a way that suits me. To do otherwise is to infringe on the equal rights I have to enjoy playing a game that so many people love and have invested so much time and money in.
Well - that's an honest answer - and it's in your best right to play as you wish, but the same question as to the above poster applies: What do you want added to highsec then?
(Besides Sov 0.0 not being the murderous, harsh place where you live in constant paranoia - it's carebear heaven where you can grow your own complexes, which you can then run in a supercarrier if you wish, with a few entry points 20 jumps away from your location which are bubble-camped by a bunch of wannabe-pvpers in your alliance. If yomething slips through, they'll warn you in your intel channel, giving you plenty of time to safe up even if you were afk at the time...).
Also, I'm really just wondering: What do you people make all these isk for if you don't intend to do anything that could put something at risk. One day (or maybe you already do) you have your fully officer fitted machariel in which you can run an AE in 10 minutes and an additional 100 bill isk on your account. And then what? If you never put anything at risk, you don't need isk to replace it obviously, so why are you still generating them?
|
Franz Zjivago
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 03:27:00 -
[9]
Could someone explain why wets are so anoyed with HighSec carebears?
Is it so gratifying to kill newbs so you cant wait for us to come to lowsec or 0.0
for me it sounds like UFC champions who only wants to go against untrained foes, ehh cause you know we (atm) dont stand a chance :)
for a new player low sec is just GANKland, you will run in to GANKgangs in their T2 (or better) fitts and whatever you bring as a new player you dont stand a chance.
So that means that if you want some quality game time as a casual player, HighSec it is cause otherwise you will spend 3-4 hours looking at your pod, and that to me is what wets is trying to sell to new players as the "real eve" :p
|
Van Derka
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 05:20:00 -
[10]
would lowsec survive if 70%+ of players didnt toil away in highsec?
I think not!
Which side is your bread buttered on, because if you drop highsec, you mite be losing the bread...
|
|
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 09:32:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Cedille Mureau on 19/07/2011 09:33:23 Edited by: Cedille Mureau on 19/07/2011 09:33:05
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Well - that's an honest answer - and it's in your best right to play as you wish, but the same question as to the above poster applies: What do you want added to highsec then?
Also, I'm really just wondering: What do you people make all these isk for if you don't intend to do anything that could put something at risk. One day (or maybe you already do) you have your fully officer fitted machariel in which you can run an AE in 10 minutes and an additional 100 bill isk on your account. And then what? If you never put anything at risk, you don't need isk to replace it obviously, so why are you still generating them?
To answer your first point, nothing, or at least nothing to the disadvantage of other sectors of the game. What I'm really going on about is what I perceive to be a move by certain parties in the CSM to give 0.0 an unfair advantage over the rest of us and trying to get some kind of mechanism together to ensure that the likes of Goonswarm do not dominate CSM and skew the game for their benefit. Hisec is notoriously hard to get a consensus in, in part I think, because of all the new players but also because it has people like me, who want to go their own way in small corps, run by themselves and not as a part of a mega alliance dancing to the tune of the senior members. Remember BoB?
On your second point, my alts have never made more that ISK 300 million between them. The two senior ones do have over 50 million SP between them though. That's why I play, to develop my characters, to find out how to do different things and to explore how far I can go with the skills I have. I lose ships and other stuff, especially drones and let me tell you a T2 heavy drone costs a fair bit to replace. So it's not all risk free; but that is my point, I play to relax, not be the next Napoleon or Bill Gates. EVE for all its virtues is after all only a game.
What seems to be getting lost in all this is my main reason for starting this thread. To try and see if we can organise some sort of action to stop anyone biassing the game in their favour. I would welcome anyone interested in setting up such a mechanism to contact me ingame and I'll try and set something up.
|
Oooooh Aaaaah
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 14:28:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Oooooh Aaaaah on 19/07/2011 14:29:34 @Franz: I (personally) am not annoyed with highsec carebears, nor do I have an interest in ganking noobs or getting them into nullsec - it's the old players living in highsec. There seems to be a problem from a game design-perspective. CCP had a natural progression in mind - of course you can go to 0.0 when you're 2 hours old, but taking a pve/pvp career as an example for the majority, it's learning to fly lvl 4 in a BS, do that for a while, make enough money so a BS loss doesn't hurt you anymore, get bored of it and then move on to 'higher level content'. And there's the 'problem' (I don't really have a problem with that as long they don't complain about the lack of higher level content when it's in front of their noses and called 0.0) - some never make that transition and that's probably because high sec is too comfortable for them compared to nullsec. Obviously, this needs changing - similar to EAF's - if a frigate is flown by even less people than titans or black ops, there must be something wrong with it compared to all the other ships. If a majority of players never moves out of highsec, there must be something wrong with lowsec/0.0.
@Cedille: I don't particulary like the 0.0 sov alliances, but currently, the unfair advantage is on highsecs side. These people conquered their space empires (well - except Goonswarm who had their space donated), they build an infrastructure, pay sovbills and occasionally defend it. However, they are limited to 1 (expensive) outpost/system, hence have a limited supply of inventionslots and so on, they don't even have access to lots of necessary ressources (datacores) - basically everything in 0.0 industry is at such a large disadvantage, everything is imported from highsec.
Compare that to highsec: no sovbills, no teamplay, no investment, no buildup, no risk and effort required, ~10 free Stations/System full of production/inventionslots. People moving to sov 0.0 must be either really craving for that endgame content or plain dumb (well - unless you have a techmoon ;)).
If you want to stick to yourself, that's perfectly fine, but eve is an MMO and should reward teamplay, effort and risk. That's fair.
|
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 15:41:00 -
[13]
@Oooooh Aaaaah.
It's becoming obvious that I am not making myself clear. I don't want to stop anyone doing whatever they like in EVE. What does concern me is the apparent attempts to skew things to favour those sections of the playerbase that are in 0.0
I've been playing EVE for over 5 years now and although cursed with a limited attention span and even worse memory I can't ever recall see CCP stating that the idea of hisec is to prepare new players for the excitement and rewards of 0.0 and nothing else.
As for the hardships of living in 0.0 I read in another post (can't locate it at the moment) someone saying that a lot of 0.0 residents also have an alt in hisec for just those logistical things i.e. manufacturing, invention, research and so on, so I fail to see that 0.0 are disadvantaged if, as you say, hisec is disproportionately advantaged over other sectors of EVE. They enjoy the perks of hisec just like the rest of us. What is causing a bit of a stink is the perception that certain elements in the CSM want to boost 0.0 at the expense of the rest of EVE.
I won't be posting on this thread again as I want to make a start in setting up some kind of organisation to counter what I see as the undue influence of 0.0 on the CSM and to democratically do something about it. I will be watching this thread though, to see if anyone has thoughts on where hisec should go next on this topic.
|
Issler Dainze
Minmatar Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 18:19:00 -
[14]
There were a number of candidates that ran for the last election that would have tried to create a more balanced focus in the CSM. Sadly none of us that would have provided a high sec point of view were elected. Until the general Eve population takes an active interest in the CSM elections you can expect the CSM to be just the large powerblocks that can get their minions to vote.
I hope some day the majority of Eve players (casual PvE types often derided as care bears) will realize the CSM is a real force in the future of Eve and they will actually get someone that would share their views of how Eve should evolve elected.
Preferable someone that wouldn't get removed for NDA breaches and that doesn't throw sporks when angered. :-)
Issler Two time CSM member Voice of Reason Candidate
|
Kevric
Lament of the Phoenix The Covenant.
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 18:38:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Edited by: Oooooh Aaaaah on 19/07/2011 14:29:34 @Franz: I (personally) am not annoyed with highsec carebears, nor do I have an interest in ganking noobs or getting them into nullsec - it's the old players living in highsec. There seems to be a problem from a game design-perspective. CCP had a natural progression in mind - of course you can go to 0.0 when you're 2 hours old, but taking a pve/pvp career as an example for the majority, it's learning to fly lvl 4 in a BS, do that for a while, make enough money so a BS loss doesn't hurt you anymore, get bored of it and then move on to 'higher level content'. And there's the 'problem' (I don't really have a problem with that as long they don't complain about the lack of higher level content when it's in front of their noses and called 0.0) - some never make that transition and that's probably because high sec is too comfortable for them compared to nullsec. Obviously, this needs changing - similar to EAF's - if a frigate is flown by even less people than titans or black ops, there must be something wrong with it compared to all the other ships. If a majority of players never moves out of highsec, there must be something wrong with lowsec/0.0.
@Cedille: I don't particulary like the 0.0 sov alliances, but currently, the unfair advantage is on highsecs side. These people conquered their space empires (well - except Goonswarm who had their space donated), they build an infrastructure, pay sovbills and occasionally defend it. However, they are limited to 1 (expensive) outpost/system, hence have a limited supply of inventionslots and so on, they don't even have access to lots of necessary ressources (datacores) - basically everything in 0.0 industry is at such a large disadvantage, everything is imported from highsec.
Compare that to highsec: no sovbills, no teamplay, no investment, no buildup, no risk and effort required, ~10 free Stations/System full of production/inventionslots. People moving to sov 0.0 must be either really craving for that endgame content or plain dumb (well - unless you have a techmoon ;)).
If you want to stick to yourself, that's perfectly fine, but eve is an MMO and should reward teamplay, effort and risk. That's fair.
I've played in hisec and in 0.0. Why would I want to stay in 0.0? Making it easier for people like Mittani or Vuk Lau to cash in on RMT's is not my idea of "higher level content."
Just sayin'.
|
Kevric
Lament of the Phoenix The Covenant.
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 18:44:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah
Originally by: Cedille Mureau
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah
So I'd agree with him that the best way to make the game more interesting and less repetitive for highsec players is to create more incentives for them to finally move out into the real world (0.0).
Nooooo! "Move out into the real world 0.0" This is exactly my point, I'm a carebear and not ashamed to admit it. I DON'T want to move to 0.0. I play EVE to relax, my real life is stressful enough. So I invent a little, run missions, have some PI etc. etc. I don't need any more adrenalin rushes from PvP or have to keep looking over my shoulder to see what's behind me, nor do I want to be a "Master of the Universe"tm. I want to be allowed to play as I want to and not as some mega-corps/alliance or CCP think I should. My money is accepted by CCP as readily as the blackest pirate or CEO of a huge alliance. If you want to build an empire complete with Titans, Stations etc. be my guest but please allow me to play EVE in a way that suits me. To do otherwise is to infringe on the equal rights I have to enjoy playing a game that so many people love and have invested so much time and money in.
Well - that's an honest answer - and it's in your best right to play as you wish, but the same question as to the above poster applies: What do you want added to highsec then?
(Besides Sov 0.0 not being the murderous, harsh place where you live in constant paranoia - it's carebear heaven where you can grow your own complexes, which you can then run in a supercarrier if you wish, with a few entry points 20 jumps away from your location which are bubble-camped by a bunch of wannabe-pvpers in your alliance. If yomething slips through, they'll warn you in your intel channel, giving you plenty of time to safe up even if you were afk at the time...).
Also, I'm really just wondering: What do you people make all these isk for if you don't intend to do anything that could put something at risk. One day (or maybe you already do) you have your fully officer fitted machariel in which you can run an AE in 10 minutes and an additional 100 bill isk on your account. And then what? If you never put anything at risk, you don't need isk to replace it obviously, so why are you still generating them?
For some people isk=points. Why should you be caring what they do or do not spend them on? Maybe they just like the idea of racking them up.
|
Steph Wing
Gallente Transfixion Reverberation Project
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 19:15:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Cedille Mureau
As for the hardships of living in 0.0 I read in another post (can't locate it at the moment) someone saying that a lot of 0.0 residents also have an alt in hisec for just those logistical things i.e. manufacturing, invention, research and so on, so I fail to see that 0.0 are disadvantaged if, as you say, hisec is disproportionately advantaged over other sectors of EVE. They enjoy the perks of hisec just like the rest of us.
Let me see if I've got this straight: Your arguing that hisec and nullsec are actually balanced against one another, and as evidence you cite that most nullsec players have alts in hisec to do the stuff there that they can't in 0.0.
Well damn son, why don't more hisec players have alts in nullsec then?
Quote: What is causing a bit of a stink is the perception that certain elements in the CSM want to boost 0.0 at the expense of the rest of EVE.
Quit dancing around the bush and just come right out and say it. Here, I'll do it for you: "TheMittani is a big meany-head who wants to ruin the game for everybody because that's all Goons ever want to do."
Quote: I won't be posting on this thread again as I want to make a start in setting up some kind of organisation to counter what I see as the undue influence of 0.0 on the CSM and to democratically do something about it. I will be watching this thread though, to see if anyone has thoughts on where hisec should go next on this topic.
"Hai guise, there's a problem here and I demand that it be fixed. Good luck coming up with a solution for me, I'll be over there."
|
Cedille Mureau
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 20:24:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Steph Wing
"Hai guise, there's a problem here and I demand that it be fixed. Good luck coming up with a solution for me, I'll be over there."
Well thanks for making me post again, but as you seem to have nothing constructive to say, I'd better try and explain, again.
I'm not saying that 0.0 and hisec are in competition with each other, just that there appears to be an attempt to skew the game in favour of 0.0 This affects WHS as well. I can't say,never having been through a wormhole, yet, but reading posts from WHS residents it seems as if things are tough enough there already without taking away the resources that are available to them ABC ore for example.
The reason I said that I would not post on this thread again is that I want time to go and do something about a situation that seem to me to be in danger of upsetting the balance of the game.
If you take the time to read my posts you will see that I have no intention of going to 0.0. A good reason not to have an alt there, do you think?
You don't know me so stop trying to put words in my mouth. You might think that's what I mean, I couldn't possibly comment.
Now if there is nothing else, I'll get back to try setting up some kind of organisation to see if we can get some hisec representatives onto the next CSM.
Thank you
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.07.19 21:42:00 -
[19]
I have 11 characters. 1 - in null sec. 3 - in low sec. 7 - in high sec.
Null sec players are almost forced to have multiple accounts with piles of characters in high sec. This throws off these statistics dramatically. Though I'm about 2/3 high sec, I would have no problem with CCP nerfing high sec into dust.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
Steph Wing
Gallente Transfixion Reverberation Project
|
Posted - 2011.07.20 00:13:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Cedille Mureau Well thanks for making me post again..
I didn't make you do anything. You're an autonomous agent capable of free will and decision making. You chose to post. Gj btw.
Quote: I'm not saying that 0.0 and hisec are in competition with each other, just that there appears to be an attempt to skew the game in favour of 0.0
The two halves of that statement are mutually incompatable. Either nullsec is in competition with hisec, or there's no danger of one being "skewed" (which seems to be your favorite word) over the other.
Quote: If you take the time to read my posts you will see that I have no intention of going to 0.0. A good reason not to have an alt there, do you think?
A very good reason indeed. You've just made my case for me.
Quote: Now if there is nothing else, I'll get back to try setting up some kind of organisation to see if we can get some hisec representatives onto the next CSM.
Thank you
Good luck with that. I expect you'll be posting again soon.
|
|
Kerrisone
|
Posted - 2011.07.20 23:26:00 -
[21]
Short of a CCP implementing a method for players to join and form political parties, and even probably limiting them to a certain number I honestly can't see rallying the hisec players behind select candidates. Hisec players are by nature disjointed and spread out in all 'walks' of life no eve mail or chat can reach large segments of them like alliance mail can to direct them to vote or look at candidate X.
At best a dedicated group of players could feasibly form a 'party' out of game and promote it on the forums in game and with limited scope through a corp/alliance though that just presents a target. Such a dedicated 'team' could nominate, endorse and support select candidates that present a balanced view but are of course going to favor certain non gameplay breaking/nerfing positions. A model for some policies is the vote match site:
http://match.eve-csm.com/step_2.php
to at least provide a few issues in addition to those of late with which candidates could be measured against. The largest issue with and 'hisec' candidate or party is the universal disdain from 00, lowsec and the 'internet pirates' who see hisec as the thing they need to nerf/destroy into oblivion. Presenting a position that seeks to buff hisec or nerfs 00/low sec is destined to fail as many feel hisec is 'just right' or 'too right'. Looking to buff it will draw out the easily rallied 00/lowsec players and their alts to defeat anyone they see as potentially looking to nerf their precious 'pirate/grief' style of play. That's all assuming you can get enough disjointed independents together to even vote for their best interest for a candidate(s) who actually are worth voting for.
In short if electable hisec candidates are willing to not nerf that which they don't like but seek balance while still protecting hisec then an organization dedicated to getting out the vote might be able to help one or more get on the CSM with various methods, a channel, forums posts, blogs, events, etc.
At least until/if CCP ever allow or implement a 'party' type system to let players 'register' for a party and receive communication w/o being made obvious targets for griefing/war decs. It seems the best way to get the word out to vote or look at these candidates is a CCP implemented method that doesn't exist yet and likely won't exist ever.
Even then you face CCP who are in favor of players going to 00, because that is what they can sell EVE as 'build your empire' 'fight in huge battles' yada, yada, going off to do PVE or constructing a manufacturing empire is a nice line but lacks the art/video to draw people in. An entire CSM of hisec candidates would only be able to do so much in CCP's vision of pushing many more players into 00, and they indeed have said hisec is 'supposed' to be 'temporary' on your way out to 00 etc.
Originally by: Ghoest Ill watch what you do not what you say.
|
Tuggboat
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.07.22 23:32:00 -
[22]
Agree with OP, but in a literal sense we need another Forum, A separate forum. What goes on in high sec is the meat and potatoes of this game. We shouldn't even have to talk to those people. Those people are annoying and mess with my relaxation time. Those people are just awful. I don't know whats wrong with those people. Its like their fingers are attached to their butt that they speak out of. Yes those people should be in a different game, a whole different server even. Banish them to singularity. Give those people Singularity forum. Since isk flows like water for them, playing with 100 isk ships out to be like being on a level playing field for those people. Those people could maybe even get monocles for 100 isk. We could also ask for forum features to filter out those people. Those people just make noise. They are like children with a new bell. Maybe null sec should be the children's section.
|
Gaylord Buttafuko
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 00:03:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Tuggboat . Its like their fingers are attached to their butt
Super post!
Hi I live in highsec too (i only play for icarna). Can we attach our fingers to each others butts in the future?
|
Tuggboat
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.07.23 10:38:00 -
[24]
But dude, your lips are so real they belong in null sec
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 10:41:00 -
[25]
Well if the discussions about hisec representation have not convinced you by now that we need to put up a slate of hisec candidates fro the next CSM perhaps the following diatribe from Mittani might.
Originally by: Fee Seas Edited by: Fee Seas on 26/07/2011 22:46:53 Edited by: Fee Seas on 26/07/2011 22:46:38 Re-posted (minus permission) from a thread on the forums of EVE University (in all of its insignificance).
Quote:
This thread owns. I'll drop a proper reply because I have a soft spot in my heart for Unistas, like all newbies (the other two major newbie-obsessed entities in EVE being GSF and TEST).
1. Of course we knew that wormholes were 'nullsec'. Whoever wrote that line in the minutes - probably Trebor, Meissa or Two Step - misrepresented what occured. We were surprised, however, that you could day-trip into wormholes and mine ABC from hisec.
2. I don't give a **** about wormholes or wormhole issues. That also means that I'm not expending any political capital 'chasing' an ABC nerf in wormholes. I think it's stupid, but it's a trivial issue compared to the sucking chest wounds that impact this game and wormholes aren't my area of space. If you're spazzing about the comment, odds are that you are, yourself, a trivial person.
3. CSMs represent their voters. They might claim to represent the entire playerbase. If they have that delusion, good for them; I operate in a realm of political realities.
4. Probably due to e-fame, of the 5365 votes I received, only 1700 came from my own alliance (we ran exit polls to determine the approx GSF count). If you voted for me, as far as I'm concerned, you deserve realposts and can evemail me anytime with your concerns about whatever. If you didn't vote for me, I don't care about your opinion, and might go out of my way to actively antagonize you because, as a sadist, I enjoy hurting people I dislike.
5. If you think the election was 'rigged' you're a joke. Nullsec is incredibly organized in order to survive. CSM5 demonstrated to nullsec that power in the hands of the ignorant could be incredibly damaging to the game, so Nullsec seized the CSM by out-organizing everyone else.
6. There's a tremendous amount of influence and power within the CSM, but it's not a explicitly delineated power. This means that babbys who don't understand how power works see it as powerless - which suits me fine, because then they don't vote and tell their friends not to vote. This makes it easier for someone who's organized and motivated - like me - to win. Babbys can make badposts about how the CSM is powerless, I'll have quiet conversations at 3am in bars in Reykjavik with key devs to try to convince them to fix the broken areas of the game. Win-win. This is already paying off with TiDi, Iterative Ship Balance, and I hope - judging from the public statements in interviews and such - supercapital balancing.
7. I'm 'arrogant' because I don't care what most people think, and I'm secure in my life and my position ingame. I've 'won' EVE - accomplishing various goals I set for myself (every man's 'win EVE' is dfferent) - so many times now that I don't really give a **** anymore. The Great War was won, I did a bunch of crazy espionage crap and I've successfully led one of the best blocs in the game. If that makes me arrogant, whatevs - New Eden tramples the humble.
http://forum.eveuniversity.org/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=45565&start=90
Well, "arrogant" is one way of putting it, contemptuous of and derelict in his duty to ALL the players of EVE, self-serving, self-righteous might be a few more that he might like to add to his CV.
As for the number of votes cast in his favour as P.T. Barnum is reputed to have said "You can fool some of the people all the time ..." Those people who voted for candidates from 0.0 and are now being ignored, or worse, might like to reconsider who they cast a vote for next time.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 11:55:00 -
[26]
There are no "hi-sec" representatives in the CSM, because there were no "hi-sec" candidates that were as voteworthy as the 9 best "0.0" candidates.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
D'Leh Mannuck
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 13:24:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Malcanis There are no "hi-sec" representatives in the CSM, because there were no "hi-sec" candidates that were as voteworthy as the 9 best "0.0" candidates.
Leave it to a carpal Tunnel Syndrome victim to come with an answer like that.
There might be that other reason that 0.0 blockvoted like mad to get their candidates in and due to the fact there were too many high sec candidates, which couldn't get a blockvote, the dispersion of votes there kept em out.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 14:28:00 -
[28]
Originally by: D'Leh Mannuck
due to the fact there were too many high sec candidates, which couldn't get a blockvote, the dispersion of votes there kept em out.
My point exactly. We need to have a slate of credible hisec candidates to ensure that we are adequately represented on the next CSM to ensure that the our interests are adequately protected. Which with the current CSM is not going to happen.
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 17:18:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 28/07/2011 17:19:31 A "credible," highsec candidate would have to be campeigning long before anyone else due to the fact he or she would essentially be rallying a playerbase that is incredibly diverse, lazy, and fearful.
Hazarding a glance at the "highsec," forum names that would have a shot at garnering such support I don't see anyone who's game to do it. So if you want your opinions better represented and you're tired of our 0.0 politics hogging the show, I suggest you get out there and find a candidate who's willing to take on this task and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari Red Horizon Inc Cascade Imminent
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 17:38:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Thank you for making me smile. Actually roar with laughter.
Looking at the current " representatives " I can say that being good at e-politics is the last thing one can say of them.
Do not fear death so much but rather the inadequate life. |
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:00:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Thank you for making me smile. Actually roar with laughter.
Looking at the current " representatives " I can say that being good at e-politics is the last thing one can say of them.
Say what you will about the Mittani, but he has pretty much won EVE politics.
People who don't know very much about EVE like to spout off about the nullsec block of sheep voting for their alliance leader overlords. But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
Nullsec needs to offer a far more gratifying reward than high-sec, that's the risk vs reward mentality of EVE. The fact that players congregate into large blocs to mitigate that risk is the natural outcome of our species' politcal nature.
Why shouldn't these large alliances of people, who are forced to work together in a game where trust is nigh impossible be given greater access to resources than a person who logs in for a few hours a week to play a single player game?
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:30:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 28/07/2011 20:30:30
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Thank you for making me smile. Actually roar with laughter.
Looking at the current " representatives " I can say that being good at e-politics is the last thing one can say of them.
The current reps were elected by voting blocks at the alliance/coalition level so their need to politik is not as dire as someone who's representing a veritable hoard of un-related mission runners, miners, traders, industrialist, suicide gankers, wardecers, explorers, and whatever else the highsec carebears do. I wouldn't go so far as to say they're politically inept, Mittens seems to have a much larger fan-base than just GS and co. evidenced by the fact he got many more votes than were cast by his constituents.
But yes, any rep. for the squalid masses is going to need massive e-political clout on the level of Chribba to even begin to draw out the numbers needed to compete with nullsec blocks. Since I more often than not find myself agreeing with the alliance reps I don't really care if this happens or not, but i'm really skeptical of anyone who suggests it could happen.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:42:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 28/07/2011 17:19:31 A "credible," highsec candidate would have to be campeigning long before anyone else due to the fact he or she would essentially be rallying a playerbase that is incredibly diverse, lazy, and fearful.
Hazarding a glance at the "highsec," forum names that would have a shot at garnering such support I don't see anyone who's game to do it. So if you want your opinions better represented and you're tired of our 0.0 politics hogging the show, I suggest you get out there and find a candidate who's willing to take on this task and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Well if you had bothered to read the whole thread it may have given you a clue that this is what it is all about. I'm not saying that getting hisec organised behind a slate of credible candidates is going to be easy. It is true that the people in hisec are individualistic in temperament and not easy to organise. I refute your implication that we are "lazy, and fearful." The "socialistic" nature of 0.0 is not something that appeals to me and I suspect many others. Why work for the priviledge of fitting someone else out with a Titan?
No, the contempt and disdain that it obvious in the utterances of people connected with 0.0 seems to me to be a more than convincing argument for getting a counterweight to the self-serving attitude of the 0.0 representatives on the current CSM. Anyone wanting to contact me in game is more than welcome. This is going to be hard to pull off, but it needs to be done for the sake of the game.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:48:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Zirse on 28/07/2011 20:48:09
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 28/07/2011 17:19:31 A "credible," highsec candidate would have to be campeigning long before anyone else due to the fact he or she would essentially be rallying a playerbase that is incredibly diverse, lazy, and fearful.
Hazarding a glance at the "highsec," forum names that would have a shot at garnering such support I don't see anyone who's game to do it. So if you want your opinions better represented and you're tired of our 0.0 politics hogging the show, I suggest you get out there and find a candidate who's willing to take on this task and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Well if you had bothered to read the whole thread it may have given you a clue that this is what it is all about. I'm not saying that getting hisec organised behind a slate of credible candidates is going to be easy. It is true that the people in hisec are individualistic in temperament and not easy to organise. I refute your implication that we are "lazy, and fearful." The "socialistic" nature of 0.0 is not something that appeals to me and I suspect many others. Why work for the priviledge of fitting someone else out with a Titan?
No, the contempt and disdain that it obvious in the utterances of people connected with 0.0 seems to me to be a more than convincing argument for getting a counterweight to the self-serving attitude of the 0.0 representatives on the current CSM. Anyone wanting to contact me in game is more than welcome. This is going to be hard to pull off, but it needs to be done for the sake of the game.
Look out nullsec, Jaxon Grylls is on the case.
|
Gaylord Buttafuko
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 22:26:00 -
[35]
Is that kinda like Bear Grylls, but in highsex?
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 22:46:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Well if you had bothered to read the whole thread it may have given you a clue that this is what it is all about. I'm not saying that getting hisec organised behind a slate of credible candidates is going to be easy. It is true that the people in hisec are individualistic in temperament and not easy to organise. I refute your implication that we are "lazy, and fearful." The "socialistic" nature of 0.0 is not something that appeals to me and I suspect many others. Why work for the priviledge of fitting someone else out with a Titan?
No, the contempt and disdain that it obvious in the utterances of people connected with 0.0 seems to me to be a more than convincing argument for getting a counterweight to the self-serving attitude of the 0.0 representatives on the current CSM. Anyone wanting to contact me in game is more than welcome. This is going to be hard to pull off, but it needs to be done for the sake of the game.
Good luck with that. If being "social," doesn't appeal to you though, i'm almost certain you're off to a poor start. Of course, stranger people have been elected.
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari Red Horizon Inc Cascade Imminent
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 23:28:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Zirse
People who don't know very much about EVE like to spout off about the nullsec block of sheep voting for their alliance leader overlords. But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
Nullsec needs to offer a far more gratifying reward than high-sec, that's the risk vs reward mentality of EVE. The fact that players congregate into large blocs to mitigate that risk is the natural outcome of our species' politcal nature.
Why shouldn't these large alliances of people, who are forced to work together in a game where trust is nigh impossible be given greater access to resources than a person who logs in for a few hours a week to play a single player game?
I am fairly certain I roamed null sec before Mittens even thought about starting in EVE. I have done about anything EVE has to offer, from missionrunning to sov war, small PvP, solo PvP, industry in all aspects, trade etc.
The null sec players however have to realise that they can nerf high sec to hell but that will mean they will nerf their 0.0 game too, since high sec can't exist without null sec and visa versa.
Null sec messed up a lot of the null sec life themselves but instead at looking how they themselves fecked things up it's easier to point in other directions. CCP made it possible to blue a lot of other alliances and corporations so they blue eachother to death in a few big coalitions and then they cry that 0.0 becomes stagnant.
There are enough options to increase a commercial infrastructure in null sec, but the very nature of null sec dwellers messes that up for themselves.
Ow and yes you can look at my KB stats and find them wanting a lot, but guess what, those stats mean jack cause they tell only a small insignificant part of the whole picture.
Do not fear death so much but rather the inadequate life. |
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 23:36:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Zirse
People who don't know very much about EVE like to spout off about the nullsec block of sheep voting for their alliance leader overlords. But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
Nullsec needs to offer a far more gratifying reward than high-sec, that's the risk vs reward mentality of EVE. The fact that players congregate into large blocs to mitigate that risk is the natural outcome of our species' politcal nature.
Why shouldn't these large alliances of people, who are forced to work together in a game where trust is nigh impossible be given greater access to resources than a person who logs in for a few hours a week to play a single player game?
I am fairly certain I roamed null sec before Mittens even thought about starting in EVE. I have done about anything EVE has to offer, from missionrunning to sov war, small PvP, solo PvP, industry in all aspects, trade etc.
The null sec players however have to realise that they can nerf high sec to hell but that will mean they will nerf their 0.0 game too, since high sec can't exist without null sec and visa versa.
Null sec messed up a lot of the null sec life themselves but instead at looking how they themselves fecked things up it's easier to point in other directions. CCP made it possible to blue a lot of other alliances and corporations so they blue eachother to death in a few big coalitions and then they cry that 0.0 becomes stagnant.
There are enough options to increase a commercial infrastructure in null sec, but the very nature of null sec dwellers messes that up for themselves.
Ow and yes you can look at my KB stats and find them wanting a lot, but guess what, those stats mean jack cause they tell only a small insignificant part of the whole picture.
Go read up on Game Theory and come back when your done.
Alliance bloc proliferation is unavoidable in a sandbox, especially as the game grows.
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari Red Horizon Inc Cascade Imminent
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 10:23:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Zirse [Go read up on Game Theory and come back when your done.
Alliance bloc proliferation is unavoidable in a sandbox, especially as the game grows.
You should stick to theory then because most 0.0 nubs have the faintest clue about reality. Sadly enough most high sec nubs know just as much.
The fact is that most problems that exsist in EVE currently are player driven.
Do not fear death so much but rather the inadequate life. |
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 16:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Zirse [Go read up on Game Theory and come back when your done.
Alliance bloc proliferation is unavoidable in a sandbox, especially as the game grows.
The fact is that most problems that exsist in EVE currently are player driven.
Exactly my point. Player driven and inevitable. Nullsec exists in a realist paradigm, where alliance continuance relies on doing what it takes to win rather than what is 'fun.'
Next time I promise to yield to the mighty intellect of Killer Gandry.
|
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari Red Horizon Inc Cascade Imminent
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 17:42:00 -
[41]
Did you study to get this dimwitted or did it all come natural?
Seems if I talk to you like your Mitty does it might get through your thick skull.
People in nullsec dug their own problems and now they want high sec and CCP to undig them. That is the reality of null sec.
Do not fear death so much but rather the inadequate life. |
Super Chair
Caldari Hell's Revenge
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 18:20:00 -
[42]
Just dont vote for nullsec players for CSM unless theyve previously served on the CSM and proven to be level headed people after good game design, not e-tards who think CSM is just a joke and a means to further along their alliances nullsec agenda and make money off RMT. Chances are a highsec player will be more level headed than this CSM.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 21:41:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Killer Gandry Did you study to get this dimwitted or did it all come natural?
Seems if I talk to you like your Mitty does it might get through your thick skull.
People in nullsec dug their own problems and now they want high sec and CCP to undig them. That is the reality of null sec.
I can't even insult you because you fail so miserably at logic. What are you even trying to say?
|
Gwen Bailen
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 22:02:00 -
[44]
As long as "votes" are based on forums/reading login news - there will never be a representative part of Eve's player base.
The day you get a popup "Do you want this? YAY/NO?", its democratic, but don't ever think Eve was ever anything but major powerblocks running the game.
CSM is voted in by 90% of the people who have an agenda. Its like real world politics. It's not representative, and it's aparently what CCP wants.
Only whine is, you pay $15 to the powerblocks.
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 02:16:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Gwen Bailen The day you get a popup "Do you want this? YAY/NO?", its democratic, but don't ever think Eve was ever anything but major powerblocks running the game.
So I take it you're new then?
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 02:32:00 -
[46]
EVERYONE CAN VOTE
Nowehere in the rulebook are non-nullsec players restricted from voting. The CSM has long been ignored by nullsec, to the point that the one one prior to this one was so unabashedly unrepresentative of nullsec that we as players organized to play a bigger role on this CSM.
Use this as an opportunity to rally yourselves and perhaps collectively wet your little carebear panties on the next CSM. Or don't, I don't care.
|
Killer Gandry
Caldari Red Horizon Inc Cascade Imminent
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 10:03:00 -
[47]
For someone who doesn't care you attempt to be very vocal.
Do not fear death so much but rather the inadequate life. |
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 14:58:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Killer Gandry For someone who doesn't care you attempt to be very vocal.
Just tired of the level of stupid.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:22:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Andski
What, you think the CSM's purpose is to represent the playerbase?
Ha.
CSM members represent their constituents, not the playerbase as a whole. dealwizit~
No, that's been made perfectly plain. Just the vested interests you are involved with.
But I'm glad to have it from the horse's mouth.
Might make the job of booting you lot out at the next CSM election easier.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.08.02 03:01:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Originally by: Andski
What, you think the CSM's purpose is to represent the playerbase?
Ha.
CSM members represent their constituents, not the playerbase as a whole. dealwizit~
No, that's been made perfectly plain. Just the vested interests you are involved with.
But I'm glad to have it from the horse's mouth.
Might make the job of booting you lot out at the next CSM election easier.
heh, entitlement complex
|
|
Asuri Kinnes
Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 06:12:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Edited by: Oooooh Aaaaah on 19/07/2011 14:29:34 @Franz: I (personally) am not annoyed with highsec carebears, nor do I have an interest in ganking noobs or getting them into null-sec - it's the old players living in high-sec. There seems to be a problem from a game design-perspective. CCP had a natural progression in mind - of course you can go to 0.0 when you're 2 hours old, but taking a pve/pvp career as an example for the majority, it's learning to fly lvl 4 in a BS, do that for a while, make enough money so a BS loss doesn't hurt you anymore, get bored of it and then move on to 'higher level content'.
And there's the 'problem' (I don't really have a problem with that as long they don't complain about the lack of higher level content when it's in front of their noses and called 0.0) - some never make that transition and that's probably because high sec is too comfortable for them compared to null-sec.
Obviously, this needs changing - similar to EAF's - if a frigate is flown by even less people than titans or black ops, there must be something wrong with it compared to all the other ships. If a majority of players never moves out of highsec, there must be something wrong with low-sec/0.0.
It's *not* so "obvious" that this needs changing. There are many reasons why someone might not move out to 0.0 having nothing to do with "being a care-bear". Some people just can't take eve so serious as to commit to 0.0. Some find it hard to *care* what happens to 2500 other people they have no connection to. Some get mistreated in 0.0 corps and don't bother going back. How many times has it come up (here and elsewhere) "XYZ Corp doesn't do **** for the alliance - they never fly pvp!" When, in fact, they mine/invent/build? I've read it on CAOD, Gen. Discussion and Scrapheap (now Failheap). Part of the problem is might be the perception (right or wrong) about the nature of the communities in 0.0...
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah @Cedille: I don't particularly like the 0.0 sov alliances, but currently, the unfair advantage is on high-secs side. These people conquered their space empires (well - except Goonswarm who had their space donated), they build an infrastructure, pay sov-bills and occasionally defend it. However, they are limited to 1 (expensive) outpost/system, hence have a limited supply of invention slots and so on, they don't even have access to lots of necessary resources (data-cores) - basically everything in 0.0 industry is at such a large disadvantage, everything is imported from high-sec.
I really can't believe that these mega alliances have every moon covered with a moon mining POS, and can't spare the Powergrid/CPU for labs. The 0.0 power blocs *could* have all the invention slots they could use, but for some reason, they don't.
Originally by: Oooooh Aaaaah Compare that to high-sec: no sovbills, no teamplay, no investment, no buildup, no risk and effort required, ~10 free Stations/System full of production/invention slots. <snippage>
If you want to stick to yourself, that's perfectly fine, but eve is an MMO and should reward team play, effort and risk. That's fair.
Ugh, I'm tired and I can't devote more thought to this (it's 2:11 a.m.) - I'll be back.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Ammzi
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 07:16:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Zirse But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
I would like to call out loudly BULL**** on that statement. More organized? Oh the laughs. You mean endless CTA's and setting your alarm clock? I have met dozens of x-nullsec players who left due to the massive amount of nullsec-political drama between alliances and within them.
Contrary to popular belief, highsec pilots are very capable of organizing. The incursion runners are a physical daily proof of it. We organize blacklists, public statements and events for over 1000 incursion runners. If a future CSM is to support our daily milk and honey then you can easily expect a large group of supporters from incursion runners.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 08:20:00 -
[53]
Edited by: James Duar on 03/08/2011 08:21:17
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes I really can't believe that these mega alliances have every moon covered with a moon mining POS, and can't spare the Powergrid/CPU for labs. The 0.0 power blocs *could* have all the invention slots they could use, but for some reason, they don't.
Are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?
If it was cheaper to run your own 0.0 invention slots, then people would do that. It isn't, as evidenced by the fact that no one has implemented it on a large scale, which should inform you that, perhaps, it is not fiscally or :effort: viable compared to just jumping to high-sec.
Were it effective, every alliance would do it, since if they did not they would lose their competitive edge against other alliances.
|
Asuri Kinnes
Caldari Adhocracy Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 15:41:00 -
[54]
Originally by: James Duar Edited by: James Duar on 03/08/2011 08:21:17
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes I really can't believe that these mega alliances have every moon covered with a moon mining POS, and can't spare the Powergrid/CPU for labs. The 0.0 power blocs *could* have all the invention slots they could use, but for some reason, they don't.
Are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?
If it was cheaper to run your own 0.0 invention slots, then people would do that. It isn't, as evidenced by the fact that no one has implemented it on a large scale, which should inform you that, perhaps, it is not fiscally or :effort: viable compared to just jumping to high-sec.
Were it effective, every alliance would do it, since if they did not they would lose their competitive edge against other alliances.
Why yes, I am familiar with the concept. Go back and read the persons statement that I was replying to. I.E. "these alliances are limited to one station/system, and can't even get invention slots..."
My point was that it can be done other ways and, WH corps do it all the time. No, it's not as easy as hi-sec.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:48:00 -
[55]
Originally by: James Duar Edited by: James Duar on 03/08/2011 08:21:17
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes I really can't believe that these mega alliances have every moon covered with a moon mining POS, and can't spare the Powergrid/CPU for labs. The 0.0 power blocs *could* have all the invention slots they could use, but for some reason, they don't.
Are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?
If it was cheaper to run your own 0.0 invention slots, then people would do that. It isn't, as evidenced by the fact that no one has implemented it on a large scale, which should inform you that, perhaps, it is not fiscally or :effort: viable compared to just jumping to high-sec.
Were it effective, every alliance would do it, since if they did not they would lose their competitive edge against other alliances.
Research POSes aren't the difficult part. There are plenty of those in every alliance. The problem is the logistics of inventing in null and having to import most of your components, especially datacores.
|
Kerrisone
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:02:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Ammzi
Originally by: Zirse But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
I would like to call out loudly BULL**** on that statement. More organized? Oh the laughs. You mean endless CTA's and setting your alarm clock? I have met dozens of x-nullsec players who left due to the massive amount of nullsec-political drama between alliances and within them.
Contrary to popular belief, highsec pilots are very capable of organizing. The incursion runners are a physical daily proof of it. We organize blacklists, public statements and events for over 1000 incursion runners. If a future CSM is to support our daily milk and honey then you can easily expect a large group of supporters from incursion runners.
Then whoever organizes them should have gotten them to vote and maybe we'd have a more balanced CSM or one with more representatives who were more engaged in the game/community. If they all did vote then the statement remains true the larger group of highsec players need to be more organized and connected to their 'game/space' etc to vote for people that best represent them.
By the very nature of highsec people are more apt to be on thier own even if they form corps/alliances they all are not so tied together like in null where you need your friends and know your enemies with centralized leadership to make announcements etc. Highsec is harder to get a message out to 'everyone' as their isn't a pyramid of leadership through corps and alliances that have the vast majority of players in highsec in them.
Originally by: Ghoest Ill watch what you do not what you say.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 09:52:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Zirse
Exactly my point. Player driven and inevitable. Nullsec exists in a realist paradigm, where alliance continuance relies on doing what it takes to win rather than what is 'fun.'
Then what is the point of playing EVE. I may have got it wrong but I thought EVE was a *GAME* Unless someone is paying you to play of course!
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 18:09:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Originally by: Zirse
Exactly my point. Player driven and inevitable. Nullsec exists in a realist paradigm, where alliance continuance relies on doing what it takes to win rather than what is 'fun.'
Then what is the point of playing EVE. I may have got it wrong but I thought EVE was a *GAME* Unless someone is paying you to play of course!
Some parts of EVE are really fun, some parts are not. Try doing nullsec alliance logistics without wanting to take your own life on a nightly basis. But I think we all play this game more for the meta aspect than the actual half-baked space sim. It is fun belonging to an empire, protecting your borders and resources from other players in a persistent universe filled with political intrigue.
I'm not saying there is no room for improvement in nullsec. I think we'd all like to see an incentive for smaller fleet fights, but large ones are fun too.
|
Poetic Stanziel
Gallente EVE University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 19:16:00 -
[59]
Kelduum Revaan for CSM7!
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 09:04:00 -
[60]
So insults, hyperbole and poo-flinging apart, we're back to where we started: there are no "hi-sec" representatives on the CSM because no-one running on the "hi-sec" platform had the organisational skills or the motivation to get themselves elected. It's not inherent to the process that "hi-sec" reps dont get elected; Ankhemthingy and Dierdre Vaal both ran on a hi-sec focused platform and got elected. If there was a credible, intelligent candidate who ran on a platform of genuinely reforming hi-sec rather than just BAN GRIEFERS PUT ARKANOR IN 1.0 MISHUNS GIEF X-TYPE L3WTZ NAOW than I'd be quite happy to give them one of my votes.
But at this stage I'm just waiting for someone to make the suggestion that CCP reserve CSM seats for "hi-sec" representatives...
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 10:47:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Malcanis
But at this stage I'm just waiting for someone to make the suggestion that CCP reserve CSM seats for "hi-sec" representatives...
I don't think that has even been discussed. It's certainly not something I would advocate.
No, the proper, democratic way is to be more organised than anyone else and this is something that I and others are doing right now.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 11:00:00 -
[62]
That's good to hear (and I genuinely mean that). There is so much that could be done to make Empire gameplay more exciting. A working bounty system alone would have a whole cascade of positive knock on effects. And no one could argue with a straight face that the wardec system doesn't need reform. Faction Warfare desperately needs updating - the potential is there to make PvP accessible to new players and provide some really good fun.
And then there's things like smuggling, black markets and so on, although they're more of a lo-sec focus.
I look forward to reading your manifesto.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Cedille Mureau
Gallente Institute of Archaeology
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 18:12:00 -
[63]
Well! If anyone asks me why I have no intention of moving to 0.0 then I think this from CCP Greyscale's latest blog Link should be answer enough; I quote "Nullsec provides an area in which players can amass and exercise power over other players" Does that appeal to you? Because it certainly does not to me.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 19:40:00 -
[64]
Not much to say about Greyscale's blog but looks like they are drinking the 0.0 koolaid. SeeLink
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 20:45:00 -
[65]
Do you realize that nullsec encompasses a large portion of players and right now it is quite broken?
How is fixing that a bad thing for EVE or 'drinking the koolaid.'
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.08.06 10:02:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Malcanis on 06/08/2011 10:03:29
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls Not much to say about Greyscale's blog but looks like they are drinking the 0.0 koolaid. SeeLink
Where exactly do you think all the tritanium that empire miners mine and the faction ammo that empire missioners sell goes to? Who do you think buys it?
If there's one thing that every intelligent, self-interested hi-sec denizen should hope for, it's that 0.0 is "fixed", and fixed soon.
EDIT: And it's that awareness of the interdependency of the empire/nullsec economies - and that what affects one plyer thereby affects everyone else - that seems to distinguish the so-called "0.0" candidates. It's an awareness that you would do very well to acquire if you genuinely wish to get elected to the CSM.
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.06 10:36:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Jaxon Grylls on 06/08/2011 10:36:14
Originally by: Malcanis It's an awareness that you would do very well to acquire if you genuinely wish to get elected to the CSM.
Nope, I have no intention of standing for the CSM for personal reasons. What I am trying to do though is to organise hisec better and put forward a number of credible candidates who will take a broader view of the role of the CSM. Like I said previously, we're working on that.
|
Malachor Jankor
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.08.06 23:53:00 -
[68]
I have seen Cedille complain in post after post about null sec, the CSM, and The Mittani but I have yet to see a single constructive post about the improvements (s)he would like to see in high sec.
Perhaps the OP could start a thread about high sec and the problems there and what (s)he recommends be done to fix it and perhaps get involved with the few members of the CSM that do have a vested interest in high sec.
As a relatively new (have played off and on for several years) player that spends pretty all my time in pvp free I see all the different play styles as parts of a whole. Rather than jump up and down and complain about the CSM (and a lot of them are petty childish complaints considering that these are people playing a game and not receiving a paycheck) why don't you be a positive force in the debate? All this us vs. them attitude makes it hard for me to take you seriously.
|
Cedille Mureau
Gallente Institute of Archaeology
|
Posted - 2011.08.07 10:51:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Malachor Jankor I have seen Cedille complain in post after post about null sec, the CSM, and The Mittani but I have yet to see a single constructive post about the improvements (s)he would like to see in high sec.
Perhaps the OP could start a thread about high sec and the problems there and what (s)he recommends be done to fix it and perhaps get involved with the few members of the CSM that do have a vested interest in high sec.
As a relatively new (have played off and on for several years) player that spends pretty all my time in pvp free I see all the different play styles as parts of a whole. Rather than jump up and down and complain about the CSM (and a lot of them are petty childish complaints considering that these are people playing a game and not receiving a paycheck) why don't you be a positive force in the debate? All this us vs. them attitude makes it hard for me to take you seriously.
Thank you for the invitation to reply. As you may or may not have heard a small group is currently setting up an organisation to address this. If anyone would like to contribute to this effort please contact Jaxon Grylls in game. He has taken the lead on this as I am in infrequent player and have a lot to do in RL so cannot give the amount of attention this subject needs. We have set up a mailing list and ingame channel (external forum to follow, thanks Lakitel) and if you contact Jax he will be able to point you in the right direction. Thank you.
|
Dusty Warrior
|
Posted - 2011.08.08 21:31:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Gwen Bailen As long as "votes" are based on forums/reading login news - there will never be a representative part of Eve's player base.
The day you get a popup "Do you want this? YAY/NO?", its democratic, but don't ever think Eve was ever anything but major powerblocks running the game.
CSM is voted in by 90% of the people who have an agenda. Its like real world politics.
It's not representative, and it's aparently what CCP wants.
Only whine is, you pay $15 to the powerblocks.
Exactly!
Thus the reason I'm suggesting this. -->
The best thing for the CSM would be for it to fade into history much like ship spinning.
Once the CSM is gone, implement a periodic 1-3 questionaire to be answered by the whole community during the login process.
The implementation would then allow everyone, from nub to the old vets a voice... not just the ones who have the time to troll forums.... like myself.
|
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
|
Posted - 2011.08.13 02:57:00 -
[71]
My CEO and I were talking about this a few hours ago, trying to think of ways to get the carebears involved in CSM elections so that those of us not interested in being beholden to one of the Mighty Nullsec Alliances actually has representation. Given the sheer number of highsec residents there are, anyone able to rally enough of them should easily be able to be elected to the CSM. The problem is getting them to care.
After reading the notes on the idea of removing ABC from wormholes, it's clear that our current crop of CSMs are largely ignorant of major parts of the current game mechanics. I've not even played the game for 18 months and I find myself wondering what possessed some of these people to think they really know the game.
CAREBEARS UNITE!
(disclaimer: I'm not exactly a carebear, I just live in highsec because the guys I game with do)
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
|
Posted - 2011.08.13 03:04:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Zirse Do you realize that nullsec encompasses a large portion of players and right now it is quite broken?
How is fixing that a bad thing for EVE or 'drinking the koolaid.'
It's possible to fix nullsec without taking the nerfbat to every other part of the game. Nerf wormholes? REALLY? Because they aren't dangerous enough with no local, no gates, no sovereignty, and no stable route for reinforcements?
I'd be curious to know the distribution of time spent in high/low/null/w-space. I've heard figures that say that the VAST majority of Eve players are in highsec. It stands to reason, then, that highsec should be the priority.
Now I understand that CCP wants to tempt more people out into the nullsec sandbox. The biggest barrier I see to that is lowsec. Do something to make lowsec more worthwhile and the switch to null becomes a gradual thing, rather than the "if I even stick my head out of highsec, it gets shot off" mentality I see among a lot of the carebears in high.
|
Zirse
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.08.13 16:54:00 -
[73]
Originally by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
Originally by: Zirse Do you realize that nullsec encompasses a large portion of players and right now it is quite broken?
How is fixing that a bad thing for EVE or 'drinking the koolaid.'
It's possible to fix nullsec without taking the nerfbat to every other part of the game. Nerf wormholes? REALLY? Because they aren't dangerous enough with no local, no gates, no sovereignty, and no stable route for reinforcements?
I'd be curious to know the distribution of time spent in high/low/null/w-space. I've heard figures that say that the VAST majority of Eve players are in highsec. It stands to reason, then, that highsec should be the priority.
Now I understand that CCP wants to tempt more people out into the nullsec sandbox. The biggest barrier I see to that is lowsec. Do something to make lowsec more worthwhile and the switch to null becomes a gradual thing, rather than the "if I even stick my head out of highsec, it gets shot off" mentality I see among a lot of the carebears in high.
Aww, you're cute.
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
|
Posted - 2011.08.14 13:35:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Zirse Aww, you're cute.
My physical attractiveness has no bearing on how right I am :)
Obviously the current model doesn't work. If we want more people to get interested in doing more than mission grinding with their buddies, we need to create compelling reasons to do so. I think if we make lowsec something more than the pirate haven it typically is today, we'll see null pick up a lot of newcomers and explorers as low fills out more.
The most frequent gripe I hear about null is how empty it is. The best way to solve that problem is to draw people out of highsec. You don't do that by nerfing highsec, that will make the game less palatable to new players and give us a stagnant game. You do that by giving them a pathway out to null besides "join corp X and follow orders".
|
Malcom Vincent
|
Posted - 2011.08.17 09:20:00 -
[75]
Originally by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
Originally by: Zirse Aww, you're cute.
My physical attractiveness has no bearing on how right I am :)
Obviously the current model doesn't work. If we want more people to get interested in doing more than mission grinding with their buddies, we need to create compelling reasons to do so. I think if we make lowsec something more than the pirate haven it typically is today, we'll see null pick up a lot of newcomers and explorers as low fills out more.
The most frequent gripe I hear about null is how empty it is. The best way to solve that problem is to draw people out of highsec. You don't do that by nerfing highsec, that will make the game less palatable to new players and give us a stagnant game. You do that by giving them a pathway out to null besides "join corp X and follow orders".
New players won't know the background for changes that was made prior to them joining, so it won't affect them.
Lowsec boosting, sounds fine. I think thats included in the long-term plan though.
You can't simply cater to the majority of the players to bring a game in balance. You have to consider minorities too. Right now thats just null-sec dwellers which is fine.
|
Jaxon Grylls
|
Posted - 2011.08.23 09:54:00 -
[76]
"Nullsec provides an area in which players can amass and exercise power over other players"
Calling all Napoleons.
Well if this doesn't want to make you rush over to 0.0 then I don't know what will!
|
Aryndel Vyst
Amarr GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.08.23 15:10:00 -
[77]
High sec doesn't need a representative because CCP has been doing a pretty good job of being it's advocate forever since they treat it with kid gloves and baby blankets.
|
Steph Wing
Gallente Transfixion Reverberation Project
|
Posted - 2011.08.30 18:35:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Steph Wing on 30/08/2011 18:35:07 I, for one, welcome an organized attempt by the hi-sec crowd to get a CSM representative elected.
...if only because then they'll stop whining about how the CSM isn't listening to them. That, or it'll fail miserably. Either way it's democracy in action!
|
Sgt Lurch
|
Posted - 2011.08.31 08:34:00 -
[79]
Been playing a year and a half, not the time or motivation to leave high sec and really wouldn't want to be forced to vote for what's best for the game as a whole or even who would be best to represent that.
|
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Amarr Divine Power. Atlas.
|
Posted - 2011.09.04 08:33:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Kevric
For some people isk=points. Why should you be caring what they do or do not spend them on? Maybe they just like the idea of racking them up.
Hey I wanna run a bot to rack up a lot of isk. Why do you care what I do with my account or my isk? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |