Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 10:17:00 -
[31]
Originally by: The Economist
As far as I'm concerned the whole point of it is to provide a little transparency to the goings on within CCP and help avoid tinfoil-hattery on the epic scale of several well-known threadnaughts and perceived/imagined issues of the past few years.
That was the original idea of CSM. But if you believe the trolls, CCP changed it and converted it into a PR trick.
|
Tzar'rim
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 10:22:00 -
[32]
Originally by: The Economist Edited by: The Economist on 29/04/2008 10:16:00 I wouldn't vote for any candidate using the CSM as some kind of personal soapbox from which to lobby CCP about their pet peeves with regard to game design and balance.
As far as I'm concerned the whole point of it is to provide a little transparency to the goings on within CCP and help avoid tinfoil-hattery on the epic scale of several well-known threadnaughts and perceived/imagined issues of the past few years. Not to give a select few some kind of direct channel to the devs with which to attempt to influence the direction and design of the game; which from the sounds of some of the candidates' forum utterances, some of them believe is the case.
Edit: just realised that this was directed at csm candidates but meh, I stand by my opinion and hope I'm not alone.
You're not alone, bolded for truth.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 11:04:00 -
[33]
Goumindong would be the last person i would want as all his ideas and calls for nerfs involve no real in game experience flying the ships in gangs or in actual combat.
|
Demos Colodan
Caldari 101st Space Brigade - Wings of Destiny Utterly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 12:15:00 -
[34]
On my personal opinion, I wouldn't vote some of these Goon peoples. Question is why! I think, that these guys are not just headin in for the game itself. Rather they are standing for an interest of an alliance of more than 4000 people (not to forget the homies and buddies in addition) who, certainly, have enough informal in-game power which might be "completed" by the factor of more direct lobby work via one or two "CSM-Goons". _______________________________________________________________
|
Demos Colodan
Caldari 101st Space Brigade - Wings of Destiny Utterly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 12:16:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Demos Colodan on 29/04/2008 12:16:22 *delete* |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 17:03:00 -
[36]
Originally by: lecrotta Edited by: lecrotta on 29/04/2008 11:29:01
Goumindong would be the last person i would want as all his ideas and calls for nerfs involve no real in game experience flying the ships in gangs or in actual combat.
A candidate should have a solid background in the aspects of eve he has opinions on carebears on carebear issues pvpers on pvp issues with even these issues divided into sub groups each with positive and negative proponents.
Please keep the lies and slander to a minumum. I both have ample in game experience in gangs and actual combat.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 17:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: lecrotta
Goumindong would be the last person i would want as all his ideas and calls for nerfs involve no real in game experience flying the ships in gangs or in actual combat.
A candidate should have a solid background in the aspects of eve he has opinions on carebears on carebear issues pvpers on pvp issues with even these issues divided into sub groups each with positive and negative proponents.
Please keep the lies and slander to a minumum. I both have ample in game experience in gangs and actual combat.
As i have said before i do not consider 206 kills and 24 losses over 18 months "real" in game experience considering all the aspects of pvp that you wish to change.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 18:14:00 -
[38]
Originally by: lecrotta
As i have said before i do not consider 206 kills and 24 losses over 18 months "real" in game experience considering all the aspects of pvp that you wish to change.
Experience is not measured in kills and losses. It can be a good indicator, but it has no bearing on the pilots skills, ability and knowledge of the systems. You should also note that many people who do meet your criteria for kills and losses agree with me on many of the core issues.[I think especially ironic was Dinique over at SHC saying how terrible i was at ship balance and then proposing changes that i had been saying were my ideal changes for the ship for quite some time].
Anyway, here is an example that shows why experience is not measured in kills and losses. Which pilot is better, the one who fights when he cannot win, or the one that runs away when he cannot win? Clearly the answer is the one who runs away when he cannot win. And we do a lot of that in GS[though we certainly make mistakes all the time], even though we have a reputation for suiciding into fleets. A good example. A few weeks ago, i got to be active nearly every day of the week on fleet ops in a BS defending and assaulting POS's. This earned me one loss and about 10 various kills, and maybe 3 or 4 kills in real good combat. This happened for various reasons, but none of them detracting from my experience. The other day i had time to go out and do some random roaming PvP and all it garnered was shuttles and pods[because that was all that was around aside from the large bob ****-off gang that engaging would have slaughtered us], and then another i get to bait and kill a rapier and gisti-b crow. But none of these are good indicators of my experience because they don't tell the whole story.
Then of course there is the standard "play time" issue.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 19:27:00 -
[39]
While i understand that a individual can gain some experience in 18 months i find it hard to reconcile the fact that you make claims of experience enough to know that things need changing in all the varied forms of pvp in eve. While your stats clearly show otherwise, and you also point out yourself that your game/play time is a issue in regards to your lack of kills and losses implying that you cannot log in and play much and that also adds to your lack of actual in game experience.
Now i am not saying that you are not entitled to an opinion or that on occasion you may be right. But you claim first hand knowledge of problems with the game when your ideas clearly come from others whine's about life and eve not being fair because they lost a few ships or cannot out think or fly a enemy.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 21:15:00 -
[40]
Originally by: lecrotta Now i am not saying that you are not entitled to an opinion or that on occasion you may be right. But you claim first hand knowledge of problems with the game when your ideas clearly come from others whine's about life and eve not being fair because they lost a few ships or cannot out think or fly a enemy.
Slander again. My ideas do not come from others "whine's about life and eve not being fair because they lost a few ships and cannot out think of fly an enemy". To the contrary they are amalgamations between the better of eves players who think that the state of the game is a problem.
Should i say that the people whom I argue against simply have no skill and bury that lack of skill and intelligence behind overpowered tactics? So when someone comes along and says "hey this is overpowered" they naturally flock to defend the mechanic which makes them look better than they are?
Should i instead say that these people are unable to see a difference between a wish to balance the game and a wish to nerf other players? That they think any part of the game that is unbalanced
No that would dilute my argument and do disservice to the people with whom I am arguing against as you do yourself by making this accusations.
The arguments that people are using to defend the things that I am attacking are the same arguments that they used to defend other overpowered tactics which have been nerfed for the good of the game[remote doomsdays and speed mods come to mind, the defending case is pretty much the exact same as it was before the first nerf, and is just as wrong]. And the case has not changed much.
Quote: While i understand that a individual can gain some experience in 18 months i find it hard to reconcile the fact that you make claims of experience enough to know that things need changing in all the varied forms of pvp in eve. While your stats clearly show otherwise, and you also point out yourself that your game/play time is a issue in regards to your lack of kills and losses implying that you cannot log in and play much and that also adds to your lack of actual in game experience.
As i have explained stats do not show the entire picture. Do i have a killmail on the carriers i helped kill in the campaign against Corm and Rise?[Truncated, not that it would matter, i was shooting at fighters most of the time]. Do the killmails show the intelligence of the people i fight against? No[otherwise the recent solo rapier kill would read 'olol don't bump a battlecruiser off a station in an aggressed cruiser you dolt' instead of what it does otherwise].
Regarding time to log in and play yes, my time is restricted, though not more than most people, and nor would this matter as lessons are not learned immediately but in time.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
|
Talkuth Rel
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 21:33:00 -
[41]
I'm not voting for any Goon, or anyone else whose group/personal history is contrary to the betterment of the game and the purposes of the CSM.
Also not voting for anyone who couldn't put forth the effort to make a good first impression by actually listing useful information about themselves and their campaign in their CSM candidate profile submission.
And I'm not voting for anyone who refuses to clearly state their position. They are either being deceitful in trying to be all things to everyone, or are comletely uninformed and ignorant of the important issues, or are incapable of forming an opinion and arguing a point of view. None of these are conducive to a successful CSM
Originally by: LaVista Vista Well, i was actually discussing this with Jade recently.
Isn't it better to be biased, than just saying "Vote for me, I'm not biased, and i will listen to everybody"?
To me, it shows to me that a biased person actually knows something, where the non-biased person, doesn't.
I'll definetely agree here, I want to know a candidate's mind before I trust him with my vote. Everyone has a bias, I just want to know what bias I'm getting before I vote.
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Also, according to some people, my whole document about the state of the economy(10 pages or so), said nothing. Also, isn't a good politician a person who can write alot, but say nothing, yet have the listener hear what he wants to hear?
Um, no, that may describe a successful politician, but definetely not a good politician, there's an important distinction. Such a politician may be elected repeatedly, but he is not likely good for the interests of those he represents. Saying nothing and letting everyone hear what they want is just another method of lying through your teeth and obscuring the truth. It also does not speak well to your skills as a communicator if you can't convey your ideas clearly so that everyone understands your meaning. If everyone has a different understanding of what you say, there is a definite problem. Either you are incapable of communicating properly, or you are being intentionally vague.
|
MongWen
Farmer Killers United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 22:07:00 -
[42]
I would not vote for a person that is not open with the voters and a person that can not work in a team setting.
------------------------- Vote MongWen For The CMS. [Campaign Site]
|
illusha
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 03:41:00 -
[43]
Men. I want hot women to represent my Caldari ancestory. I want Olivia Wilde, Cheryl Cole, Carla Bruni, Jessica Alba(without being pregnant), Sara Varone, Jillian Grace, Giada de Laurentiis, Ali Larter, Ivanka Trump, Padma Lakshmi, Rachel McAdams, Brooke Burke, Gisele Bundchen, Beyonce, Megan Fox, Adriana Lima, Marisa Miller, Alessandra Ambrosio etc.....
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 10:01:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 30/04/2008 10:02:41 I wouldn't vote for anyone on the candidate list that hasn't even bothered to enter a proper motivation there, and those that haven't been on the forums for weeks, if at all.
Even the candidates that some express doubts towards put some effort in their campaign, and at least they HAVE standpoints and participate in discussion. That can't be said of over half the candidates in the list.
- I LOVE PVPers I HATE griefers
Consider voting for me in the CSM elections. You are invited to look at my campaign website, where more information is available |
Leandro Salazar
The Blackguard Wolves Black Star Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 10:33:00 -
[45]
Personally I would not vote for any Goon. Whatever their true motivations might be, I am fairly sure they don't have anything to do with the good of EVE. Quite the opposite if you ask me.
You want ME for the CSM!
There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction
|
Kehmor
Caldari PAK
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 13:24:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Goumindong
Then of course there is the standard "play time" issue.
If you have serious issues with play time then how on earth do you expect to commit the time neccesary in order to be a valid CSM canidate? Violence isn't the answer, it is the question. The answer is yes. |
Ethaet
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 13:41:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Ethaet on 30/04/2008 13:42:55 I would not vote for: -Any goons -Members of any large alliance -Pure pvp players
-Roleplayers (not a definite no but unlikely unless they recognise not everyone wants to roleplay)
-Anyone with little or no campaign information --------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. [yellow]There you go. Now that wasn't so hard [/yellow |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 13:54:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Ethaet Edited by: Ethaet on 30/04/2008 13:42:55 I would not vote for: -Any goons -Members of any large alliance -Pure pvp players
-Roleplayers (not a definite no but unlikely unless they recognise not everyone wants to roleplay)
-Anyone with little or no campaign information
Wow, that is a bold statement. Kudos for actually posting that.
But i do wonder, where does that leave you in terms of possible candidates? I mean, even I could be in a major alliance(I'm not btw), but that doesn't mean I'm a bad person, nor represent my alliance.
|
Ethaet
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 14:58:00 -
[49]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Ethaet Edited by: Ethaet on 30/04/2008 13:42:55 I would not vote for: -Any goons -Members of any large alliance -Pure pvp players
-Roleplayers (not a definite no but unlikely unless they recognise not everyone wants to roleplay)
-Anyone with little or no campaign information
Wow, that is a bold statement. Kudos for actually posting that.
But i do wonder, where does that leave you in terms of possible candidates? I mean, even I could be in a major alliance(I'm not btw), but that doesn't mean I'm a bad person, nor represent my alliance.
Well, small alliances are fine as are small corps, npc corps, etc. I just wouldn't vote for any BOB/RA/goon/northern alliance/any other large alliance as, even if they say they won't, they will have their own interests, which is something that, in my opinion, people shouldn't have if they want to be on the CSM. --------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. [yellow]There you go. Now that wasn't so hard [/yellow |
Jeetah
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 15:51:00 -
[50]
I wouldn't vote for someone whose names I can't spell, and I wouldn't for for someone who thinks the tempest is fine as it is (because it isn't). |
|
Breha Organa
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 17:02:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Serenity Steele Candidates who are incapable of civil, objective or logical debate. I don't fancy spending 3 days locked in a room with people unwilling or incapable of delivering results
Ditto... Actually, I am looking forward to seeing the face of "the real" Jade Constantine... whose alliance is KOS to my corp. Seriousy, though... you can search for all comments posted by any of us. Any candidate who resorted to name calling and personal attacks on the forums has the potential to make our days together extremely long indeed.
|
goodby4u
Logistic Technologies Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 08:44:00 -
[52]
Sephra star. |
Parsec84
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 10:18:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 30/04/2008 10:02:41 I wouldn't vote for anyone on the candidate list that hasn't even bothered to enter a proper motivation there, and those that haven't been on the forums for weeks, if at all.
Do you not share the same views as your Alt
I thought you were Anti Goumidongbut you have gone back and edited your post.
|
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 10:24:00 -
[54]
And who's alt might you be? |
Dierdra Vaal
Caldari Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 11:17:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 04/05/2008 11:18:03 Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 04/05/2008 11:17:46 Any candidate who doesn't put effort into getting elected. There are 64 candidates but there are quite a few who put no or barely any effort into getting elected. If they cannot do that, then I doubt they can put in the effort required to run the CSM.
Other than that, I must say I place question marks at any Goon candidate. I cannot help but wonder if a candidate from an alliance that has stated they play a different game ("You may be playing EVE Online, but be warned: We are playing Something Awful."), and have their 'threadnaught' is the best person to be looking out for fun and balance of this game. Perhaps they really do want the best for Eve Online, but it sometimes seems to conflict with the behaviour of their alliance.
Ok, let me just put on my flak jacket now ;) |
Sir Substance
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:35:00 -
[56]
i wont be voting for anyone in goon.
they have at least three candidates forward.
three from one alliance?
given their behavior in game, i can only presume they are trying to extend their unpleasant influence into RL as well, but getting a voting committee on the council.
initially i was very cautious of Leandro Salazar, because of his alliance. but i must admit, the man has brains and foresight. i hvae challenged him a few times as to his ideas, but i think that whether his proposals benefit me or not, they will at least be sound ones. thats relaly all one can ask for. |
John Blick
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 14:54:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Pooka Edited by: Pooka on 29/04/2008 01:08:07 Edited by: Pooka on 29/04/2008 01:06:30 Won't support any one from the Goon hive, Bob, or any one who is pure PVP.
I will vote for those who are for solo play, belive in Empire as fairly safe space and industrailes and the little guys.
You desribed me! |
MirrorGod
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 16:28:00 -
[58]
-Anyone who has the intent to change the way concord works -anyone who thinks eve shouldn't be a cold, cruel, dog eat dog world. -Fluff.
Basically, anyone who would threaten the ways of EvE or try and make it even remotely similar to WoW. I'm not saying I'd only vote for a -10, the pilot's sec status or Kill history doesn't matter to me. What does matter is someone who understands that EvE is the way it is for good reasons, and there should be no desire to radically change that. |
Gekkoh
Caldari Circle of Steel Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 21:16:00 -
[59]
To be blunt, I won't vote for anyone that comes across as a pushy *******.
That doesn't mean having strong convictions about the future course of Eve... it's all a matter of presentation. You get far more done with reasoned discussion than inflamed argumentation. |
Arduron
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 16:24:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Ethaet Edited by: Ethaet on 30/04/2008 13:42:55 I would not vote for: -Any goons -Members of any large alliance -Pure pvp players
-Roleplayers (not a definite no but unlikely unless they recognise not everyone wants to roleplay)
-Anyone with little or no campaign information
Woohoo! I meet all those criteria lol... (not that I am saying I am your best candidate, but please do have a look at my campaign thread, and my website if you are interested). :)
Originally by: Serenity Steele Candidates who are incapable of civil, objective or logical debate. I don't fancy spending 3 days locked in a room with people unwilling or incapable of delivering results
I totally agree with this lol... I don't know if I could handle a 3 day flamewar translated to real life lol...
But I also want to say that so far I have yet to see any council members that are not able to make rational arguments for their causes... Including the goons that everyone is slamming so hard, although I do agree that anyone backed by a large alliance will likely have "other" agendas as well which I don't like too much, but we will see how things pan out.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |