EVE Search - [CSM Candidate] Admiral IceBlock

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

[CSM Candidate] Admiral IceBlock

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.01 16:19:00 - [1] Hello, For people that know me, "hi", for others, "hi, nice to meet you". I am running for CSM for the first time to ******* CCP. Ingame, I am a CEO of a five year old corporation. I force people to volunteer to my needs, everyday, seven days a week. I enjoy it very much. Outofgame, I am part-time employee of the Coca Cola company. I like sex. I enjoy it too very much. Here is my cut & paste of my agendas: 1. POS sovreignity. Basically, sovreignity today is -ass-boring and I like many others hate it. The solution to the problem are many, but they should be discussed and acted upon. The current ty system has been in this game far to long. It is time something is done as it has broken the game too much already. I posted my idea in 2006. Now we are in 2009 and NOTHING has happend exept for "SoonÖ". Do you want to stand up to this bull**? No I thought as much. Now you can do something about it, and vote me as CSM! http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=388151 - Why the hell does an offline POS still has its shield intact? - POS GRINDING SHOULD BE REMOVED! - If we can not find another alternative together, CCP should make POS @ PLANETS dependent on sovreignity and POS @ MOONS for industry. 2. Region unbalance and diversity. Have you ever been annoyed by Fountain only having partial NPC sovreignity while other factions has the entire region sovreigned? - Why do some regions have all NPC sov, while others do not. - Why do some regions suck so much? - Every region should be diverse and special. 3. Risk vs. reward. - PvP. - Low sec, high sec and 0.0. - lvl4 agents GTFO to low sec and under.
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.01 16:26:00 - [2] Shinnen says: "vote Admiral Iceblock" Linkage
Wanna Kill Caldari Pernicious Creed	Posted - 2009.04.01 16:56:00 - [3] Is this a ****ing april fools or what ----------
Pelsson Amarr Corp 1 Allstars PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.01 19:18:00 - [4] Edited by: Pelsson on 01/04/2009 19:18:27 the man speaks the truth. He forced me to post in this thread... Vote for him I cant take this ass**** anymore
Jaabaa Prime Minmatar Quam Singulari PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.01 19:58:00 - [5] Edited by: Jaabaa Prime on 01/04/2009 20:08:44 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Hello, For people that know me, "hi", for others, "hi, nice to meet you". Hi 1: POS ****es me off no end, anything you could do to make it better simply makes the game better IMO. 2: I don't NPC much (read: EVER) and I'm not really interested in SOV stuff, but judging by what you said in (1) you get my vote here too. 3: Touches a nerve, there shouldn't be Lvl 4 agents in high sec, get them moved. And PvP Risk/Reward, all the modules should survive in <=0.4 space (MOAR LOOT) This candidate gets my vote for the next CSM term --
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.01 20:01:00 - [6] I support this candidate, idea and/or product. "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
Gunter Bahad Amarr	Posted - 2009.04.02 06:07:00 - [7] He gets my Vote ;D
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.04.02 08:42:00 - [8] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock I posted my idea in 2006. Now we are in 2009 and NOTHING has happend exept for "SoonÖ". Do you want to stand up to this bull**? No I thought as much. Now you can do something about it, and vote me as CSM! Due all respect, I suggest you do your homework. We already have had CCP commit to revamping the sov system. Quote: Have you ever been annoyed by Fountain only having partial NPC sovreignity while other factions has the entire region sovreigned? Diversity Quote: - Why do some regions have all NPC sov, while others do not. Diversity Quote: - Why do some regions suck so much? Diversity Quote: - Every region should be diverse and special. Div... Wait, that's what I have been saying all along! Quote:** 3. Risk vs. reward. - PvP. - Low sec, high sec and 0.0. - lvl4 agents GTFO to low sec and under. What do you suggest is done then? The CSM is already working on looking into the loot gathered from missions. We have also discussed the ISK faucets and how they work. What can you do to make a difference? (Please don't take offense if my tone is harsh. I think that you are qualified given your history, however I think you might have missed a few things)
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.02 17:11:00 - [9] Originally by: LaVista Vista Originally by: Admiral IceBlock I posted my idea in 2006. Now we are in 2009 and NOTHING has happend exept for "SoonÖ". Do you want to stand up to this bull**? No I thought as much. Now you can do something about it, and vote me as CSM! Due all respect, I suggest you do your homework. We already have had CCP commit to revamping the sov system. Okay. I have not found much specific except for "We are looking into it and will change it soon". However, most of EVE wants this changed ASAP, not next year. Originally by:** LaVista Vista Quote: Have you ever been annoyed by Fountain only having partial NPC sovreignity while other factions has the entire region sovreigned? Diversity This is like saying that ECM is balanced, because it is so diverse compared to other EW. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: - Why do some regions have all NPC sov, while others do not. Diversity This is like saying that the gankageddon was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other battleships. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: - Why do some regions suck so much? Diversity This is like saying that 12,000 m/s Vagabonds was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other ships. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: - Every region should be diverse and special. Div... Wait, that's what I have been saying all along! This is bal... Wait, three out of four of the above is nerfed, one is pending. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: 3. Risk vs. reward. - PvP. - Low sec, high sec and 0.0. - lvl4 agents GTFO to low sec and under. What do you suggest is done then? For one, reward should be balanced to risk. Making insane amount of ISK in high security is really unacceptable. You want to make ISK safely? Than it should take you more effort than mission farming. Originally by: LaVista Vista The CSM is already working on looking into the loot gathered from missions. We have also discussed the ISK faucets and how they work. What can you do to make a difference? (Please don't take offense if my tone is harsh. I think that you are qualified given your history, however I think you might have missed a few things) I am straight-forward and allergic to bull****. Good qualities to have when you want something done, bad if you want to "please the masses". I can make a difference with just being myself, with no lies or facets. Simple, realistic and very straight-forward, either you like it or you don't.
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.04.02 17:24:00 - [10] Quote: Okay. I have not found much specific except for "We are looking into it and will change it soon". However, most of EVE wants this changed ASAP, not next year. I doubt that it will be next year. But I have no control over that. Quote: This is like saying that ECM is balanced, because it is so diverse compared to other EW. Not really, because the problem you were all about was diversity. Quote: This is like saying that the gankageddon was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other battleships. Again, I beg to differ. By using that argument, you ignore the problem. Quote: This is like saying that 12,000 m/s Vagabonds was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other ships. Once again, I get the feeling you got me entirely wrong. Quote: For one, reward should be balanced to risk. Making insane amount of ISK in high security is really unacceptable. You want to make ISK safely? Than it should take you more effort than mission farming. I think everybody agrees with that. But you don't exactly put any good solutions to the table. Even CCP knows that there's a problem, so just saying that to them is a waste of time. Come up with clever solutions. It will serve you and everybody else much better

Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.02 17:29:00 - [11] Originally by: LaVista Vista I doubt that it will be next year. But I have no control over that. Not really, because the problem you were all about was diversity. Again, I beg to differ. By using that argument, you ignore the problem. Once again, I get the feeling you got me entirely wrong. I think everybody agrees with that. But you don't exactly put any good solutions to the table. Even CCP knows that there's a problem, so just saying that to them is a waste of time. What exactly did you mean mate, because to me it sounded like you're just saying, "oh some things (regions, ships, mechanics) are worse than others for diversity" And that sounds completely intentional, so from what you're saying I extrapolate that you mean some things are unbalanced for diversity. Which is completely bonkers in my opinion, and obviously also that of Iceblock. Linkage
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.04.02 17:40:00 - [12] Originally by: Shinnen What exactly did you mean mate, because to me it sounded like you're just saying, "oh some things (regions, ships, mechanics) are worse than others for diversity" And "diversity" - that sounds completely intentional, so from what you're saying I extrapolate that you mean some things are intentionally unbalanced for diversity. Which is completely bonkers in my opinion, and obviously also that of Iceblock. The universe was generated using a simulator. So everything we see is, supposedly, how the creation of an universe would take place in the real world. Everything is generated by random too. Moon resources etc. is by random too. So because of the diversity of regions, you DO have un-equal regions. For instance, KIA settled into Geminate because it has crap moons, making it safer for them. That makes space more interesting. You have regions which are fought a lot for, because they are worth a lot, and some to a less degree. I think that's fine, because else space would be static and all the same. In regards to ships, I laughed a bit when you mentioned ships. During my time on the CSM, people have tried to tell me that the pilgrim is awful and should be buffed. It just so happens that I more or less fly a pilgrim only, as of the last 6 months. I think it's the MOST awesome ship out there. It's extremely subjective what is good and what is bad. Because of the diversity of bonuses and the options you have with it, you naturally have ships which are worse than others on a subjective level. You can't define what's good and what's not, because it comes down to playstyle. The exact same goes for the KIA example. They wanted a quiet region where people wouldn't try to take their space. That's THEIR playstyle, they just wanted space where they could settle in and have a bit of fun. For a large alliance who wants to become rich, that's not desirable. But that doesn't mean it's bad space. TL;DR: It's extremely subjective. You can't define what's good and what is bad.
Edge Two Gallente Under The Edge	Posted - 2009.04.02 18:15:00 - [13] I dont really like what you stand for so you won't be getting my vote. Your just a clone of most alliance jerks who think they own eve. I don't care for 0.0 space, its full of alliance jerks. If you have something positive to say about us carebears who like empire then maybe i will check out your campaign in more detail, until then my vote goes some other place. But good luck ****ing CCP off, that on the other hand, does get my vote.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.02 20:02:00 - [14] Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: Okay. I have not found much specific except for "We are looking into it and will change it soon". However, most of EVE wants this changed ASAP, not next year. I doubt that it will be next year. But I have no control over that. I am from the soonÖ era, sceptical to anything without a date. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: This is like saying that ECM is balanced, because it is so diverse compared to other EW. Not really, because the problem you were all about was diversity. Quote: This is like saying that the gankageddon was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other battleships. Again, I beg to differ. By using that argument, you ignore the problem. The problem is that the "diversity" you speak of is not really diversity, it is imbalance. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: This is like saying that 12,000 m/s Vagabonds was balanced, because it was so diverse compared to other ships. Once again, I get the feeling you got me entirely wrong. That may be. Originally by: LaVista Vista Quote: For one, reward should be balanced to risk. Making insane amount of ISK in high security is really unacceptable. You want to make ISK safely? Than it should take you more effort than mission farming. I think everybody agrees with that. But you don't exactly put any good solutions to the table. Even CCP knows that there's a problem, so just saying that to them is a waste of time. Come up with clever solutions. It will serve you and everybody else much better In my eyes there is nothing clever about it. Just make it so, plain and simple. Change a few attributes and it is done. /whinage may commence after this. Originally by: LaVista Vista The universe was generated using a simulator. So everything we see is, supposedly, how the creation of an universe would take place in the real world ... You can't define what's good and what is bad. Diversity does not equal two, rich and poor regions. I want depth and meaning, more than just "this region is poor and people do not want it". If a region is poor, it should have other attractions besides "people does not want it". A car salesmen does not advertise a car with "this car is slow and people do not want to steal it". I would not be particularly interested. Even then I at least want an air conditioning and decent mpg. Else I would want the seller to show me something inbetween a lada and a mercedes slr. Surely there must be a good spacy car with good mpg if I sacrifice acceleration? -- Originally by: Edge Two I dont really like what you stand for so you won't be getting my vote. Your just a clone of most alliance jerks who think they own eve. I don't care for 0.0 space, its full of alliance jerks. If you have something positive to say about us carebears who like empire then maybe i will check out your campaign in more detail, until then my vote goes some other place. But good luck ***ing CCP off, that on the other hand, does get my vote. I guess one could call me a jerk. I don't care for high security space, it's full of carebear jerks...* Mocking aside, I have nothing against carebears. They are a part of the game. However, I have much against total security and "safe havens".
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.02 22:22:00 - [15] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock A car salesmen does not advertise a car with "this car is slow and people do not want to steal it". I would not be particularly interested. Even then I at least want an air conditioning and decent mpg. Else I would want the seller to show me something inbetween a lada and a mercedes slr. Surely there must be a good spacy car with good mpg if I sacrifice acceleration? At the risk of stating the obvious, a car salesman is trying to get money off you by selling you a car. CCP aren't trying to sell a region to you, that's not their job (an alliance might want to rent out or sell space, but then its desirability or lack of is that alliance's problem). Having both good regions that everyone wants and poor undesirable regions is a good thing, because it produces rivalries and competition. If every 0.0 region was of more or less equal value, there would be very little point in waging war with others to take their territory off them just to get more of the same, and 0.0 would quickly stagnate into lots of compact isolationist empires quietly. There already are a number of variables in the value of regions - some are good for ratting and mining, some for r64 moons, some with useful NPC hubs, some because of their proximity to Empire, or their strategic location, or because their low mooncount makes them easily defended... some for several of the above, and a couple are terrible for everything - and that's a far better situation than having all regions "balanced" into uniform blandness. That's not to say that new mechanics couldn't be added which introduced more variety (random example off the top of my head: planetary mining for Tech 4 materials) and that might have the side-effect of making some previously undesirable territory more valuable, but that should be a random side effect of introducing a new fun system, not a calculated effort to make all the regions 'fair'.
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.04.03 05:43:00 - [16] Originally by: Scatim Helicon Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 02/04/2009 22:34:38 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock A car salesmen does not advertise a car with "this car is slow and people do not want to steal it". I would not be particularly interested. Even then I at least want an air conditioning and decent mpg. Else I would want the seller to show me something inbetween a lada and a mercedes slr. Surely there must be a good spacy car with good mpg if I sacrifice acceleration? At the risk of stating the obvious, a car salesman is trying to get money off you by selling you a car. CCP aren't trying to sell a region to you, that's not their job (an alliance might want to rent out or sell space, but then its desirability or lack of is that alliance's problem). Having both good regions that everyone wants and poor undesirable regions is a good thing, because it produces rivalries and competition. If every 0.0 region was of more or less equal value, there would be very little point in waging war with others to take their territory off them just to get more of the same, and 0.0 would quickly stagnate into lots of compact isolationist empires quietly minding their own businesses. There already are a number of variables in the value of regions - some are good for ratting and mining, some for r64 moons, some with useful NPC hubs, some because of their proximity to Empire, or their strategic location, or because their low mooncount makes them easily defended... some for several of the above, and a couple are terrible for everything - and that's a far better situation than having all regions "balanced" into uniform blandness. That's not to say that new mechanics couldn't be added which introduced more variety (random example off the top of my head: planetary mining for Tech 4 materials) and that might have the side-effect of making some previously undesirable territory more valuable, but that should be a random side effect of introducing a new fun system, not a calculated effort to make all the regions 'fair'. I thought that was obvious when I wrote my post arguing about the very same thing. But thanks for writing it out so that everybody understands it.
Fi Vantage Minmatar New Ligion	Posted - 2009.04.03 06:05:00 - [17] Just to be clear to somebody who knows nothing about Sov, which part of Sov allows this "POS Grinding" and what was the original intent for the mechanics that had this unwanted effect of pos grinding. Also, how would you remove this, what would be the effect of removing this, how are these effects good instead of bad and what mechanics should be introduced to offset any of the bad stuff?
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.03 09:22:00 - [18] Edited by: Shinnen on 03/04/2009 09:26:18 Originally by: Scatim Helicon there would be very little point in waging war with others to take their territory off them just to get more of the same Originally by: Admiral IceBlock - Why do some regions suck so much? - Every region should be diverse and special. I think that Iceblock means here that he wants unique-ness of each region (diversity) without some 0.0 regions seriously sucking. In my opinion the same problem exists in empire... Linkage
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.03 09:25:00 - [19] "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.03 11:37:00 - [20] Originally by: Berilac lmao Admiral Iceblock, the all-American-Norwegian Hero! Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.

Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.03 18:00:00 - [21] Originally by: Fi Vantage Just to be clear to somebody who knows nothing about Sov, which part of Sov allows this "POS Grinding" and what was the original intent for the mechanics that had this unwanted effect of pos grinding. Also, how would you remove this, what would be the effect of removing this, how are these effects good instead of bad and what mechanics should be introduced to offset any of the bad stuff? POS grinding means one have to "farm POS" for sovreignity. Some systems have hundreds of moons. gg My ideas and discussion is located in the thread in my original post. For the rest, Shinnen described my intentions correctly. I am foreign kid on the block.
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.04 00:07:00 - [22] Please enjoy this image as a break from politics: "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.04 09:41:00 - [23] Originally by: Berilac Please enjoy this image as a break from politics: Based on this subliminal messaging alone, people should vote for IceBlock. Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.05 01:41:00 - [24] Vote Iceblock! "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
OrDeR Caldari THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.05 12:45:00 - [25] pen15

CCP Mitnal C C P	Posted - 2009.04.05 18:20:00 - [26] Cleaned. Changed images to links. Please post with respect. Mitnal Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us

Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.05 19:19:00 - [27] Originally by: CCP Mitnal Cleaned. Changed images to links. Please post with respect. Admiral Iceblock's CSM campaign is now the first and only to be DEV-Team endorsed. Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.05 19:33:00 - [28] I would just like to say that this is just a "sneak-peak top three" that I will mostly focus on if you guys vote me as CSM. I picked the three to be more real and not to drown you with walls of text with all kinds of rubbish, where you have to read several pages to actually see what I stand for. So, to make a standpoint, I picked the ones that are the most important to me and (as I feel it) the EVE community. But mind you, I stand for (and against) much much more.
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.08 04:24:00 - [29] This just in: Admiral IceBlocks real CSM portrait The Real IceBlock "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.08 07:44:00 - [30] Originally by: Shinnen I think that Iceblock means here that he wants unique-ness of each region (diversity) without some 0.0 regions seriously sucking. If every 0.0 region is worth (made up figure) 100bn a month, it doesn't really matter whether that value is from ratting or moon minerals or mining or whatever. It still removes an incentive to compete for a particular region. The current war in Delve and Querious is a good example - nobody in their right mind would simply abandon all the regions that Goonswarm previously occupied in the South east in order to occupy Delve, let alone drop Geminate and Scalding Pass as we did last year, if every region had the same value. The fact that Delve is one of the crown jewels of 0.0 and worth as much as 4 or 5 other regions combined is one of the major catalysts behind that conflict, and for that matter having that wealth concentrated into a small area is probably the key reason why BoB was a major power in the last 3 years or so.

Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.08 16:55:00 - [31] Originally by: Scatim Helicon Originally by: Shinnen I think that Iceblock means here that he wants unique-ness of each region (diversity) without some 0.0 regions seriously sucking. If every 0.0 region is worth (made up figure) 100bn a month, it doesn't really matter whether that value is from ratting or moon minerals or mining or whatever. It still removes an incentive to compete for a particular region. The current war in Delve and Querious is a good example - nobody in their right mind would simply abandon all the regions that Goonswarm previously occupied in the South east in order to occupy Delve, let alone drop Geminate and Scalding Pass as we did last year, if every region had the same value. The fact that Delve is one of the crown jewels of 0.0 and worth as much as 4 or 5 other regions combined is one of the major catalysts behind that conflict, and for that matter having that wealth concentrated into a small area is probably the key reason why BoB was a major power in the last 3 years or so. I'll have to disagree. This war is because of BoB, not because of "Delve" being "superior". I am not saying that every region should be worth the same, but every 0.0 region should be better than anything in empire space at least. Diverity and uniqeness should be applied to all the regions. Just random idea out of my arse; different agent missions in each region, more agents, more difference in ore, larger difference in moon materials, larger difference in system looks, larger difference in complexes, etc. etc. A lot could be done to make each and every region in EVE truly unique and better than empire space. For example, take a high security agent starsystem. It can host and support hundreds of players doing lvl4 agents making ISK. Most 0.0 regions can not host and support hundreds of players making ISK.
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.09 21:30:00 - [32] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock I'll have to disagree. This war is because of BoB, not because of "Delve" being "superior". The war itself is because of BoB, sure, but the 'Delve Gamble', Goonswarm abandoning the south east completely to take Delve for themselves, would be absurd if it wasn't for the fact that Delve has the moon mineral worth and high quality ratting space of several regions combined. Most likely, if Delve was 'just another region', we'd have treated it much as we did Geminate in the SMASH SMASH campaign - gone in, obliterated their capyards and towers, handed the region over to whoever wanted it and gone back home to Feythabolis. Plus, separating 'BoB' and 'Delve' as causes of the war is not so simple, Delve's vastly superior wealth compared to most other regions is a big part of what made BoB into the power they were in the first place. Quote: I am not saying that every region should be worth the same, but every 0.0 region should be better than anything in empire space at least. Diverity and uniqeness should be applied to all the regions. Just random idea out of my arse; different agent missions in each region, more agents, more difference in ore, larger difference in moon materials, larger difference in system looks, larger difference in complexes, etc. etc. A lot could be done to make each and every region in EVE truly unique and better than empire space. For example, take a high security agent starsystem. It can host and support hundreds of players doing lvl4 agents making ISK. Most 0.0 regions can not host and support hundreds of players making ISK. On this part, I pretty much agree, 0.0 should be the arena of high risk, high reward, and the fact that many of its regions are little better than highsec is something that should be fixed as soon as possible. My feelings are that the better way to approach this would be to reduce the value of highsec (by which I mostly mean L4s), but I'm sceptical that CCP is prepared to stand up to the storm of criticism this would attract from the legions of mission farmers.
Halo	Posted - 2009.04.16 15:07:00 - [33] Has my vote
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.04.20 23:52:00 - [34] You have my sword. "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.04.21 11:04:00 - [35] Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 21/04/2009 11:07:34 Originally by: Admiral IceBlock I am straight-forward and allergic to bull****. Good qualities to have when you want something done, bad if you want to "please the masses". That might be good qualities if you are a sergeant in the army, but certainly not when you are supposed to represent people besides your self and deal with people that are the same level as you. Well, at least I hope you aim at doing more than simply try to force through your own self orientated agenda, because I see very little point why others should support you in that and vote for you. I see you have listed some "problems" but I do not see you listing any well considered solutions. Except "beat it with a hammer until it works" solutions of course. Does overall game balance mean nothing to you? Do you even recognize potential bad side effects of your proposed changes?
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.04.21 12:38:00 - [36] Originally by: Berilac You have my sword. And my bow! Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Mallick Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.04.21 14:26:00 - [37] Originally by: Shinnen Originally by: Berilac You have my sword. And my bow! And my axe!
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.04.21 15:14:00 - [38] Originally by: Jowen Datloran That might be good qualities if you are a sergeant in the army, but certainly not when you are supposed to represent people besides your self and deal with people that are the same level as you. I represent what my "kind of players" feel is fair and balanced in EVE. If one has to please the masses, one ends up with nothing being done! Because wether you are capable of seeing it or not, EVE is divided in two major parts (probably more parts, but lets say two for simplicity), the hardcore and the softcore. Pleasing them both will just end up with the CSM being all about talks and not about doing; I am here to do things. Originally by: Jowen Datloran Well, at least I hope you aim at doing more than simply try to force through your own self orientated agenda, because I see very little point why others should support you in that and vote for you. It is not a "self oriented agenda". None of the changes purposed will have much if any effect on me. It is changes that I and many others feel are necassary for a well balanced and fun game experience. Originally by: Jowen Datloran I see you have listed some "problems" but I do not see you listing any well considered solutions. Except "beat it with a hammer until it works" solutions of course. My solutions are better than no solutions at all and I do not see you posting anything constructive except for your personal dislike. If you feel you can do better, what is stopping you? Originally by: Jowen Datloran Does overall game balance mean nothing to you? Do you even recognize potential bad side effects of your proposed changes? You can not just post "have you considered the negative of your solutions" and leave it be. Every solution has a negative side, be it mine, yours or any other. I see your post as a poor flame. You are trying to point errors by argumenting with _your_ feelings and not with facts. If anybody here is self-oriented, it is you!
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.04.23 18:40:00 - [39] Your inherent rage against criticism and your weak ad hominen argumentation makes me giggle. Good luck with your campaign. I even bumped you to the top of the forum. ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Berilac Amarr Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.04.23 21:59:00 - [40] Originally by: Jowen Datloran Your inherent rage against criticism and your weak ad hominen argumentation makes me giggle. Good luck with your campaign. I even bumped you to the top of the forum. Admiral IceBlock for CSM doesn't discriminate against supporters, all votes are accepted by us! Unfortunately, nobody can predict his where his inherent rage will direct him next. I personally will attempt to direct it like the fury of a unguided torpedo at the enemies of the denizens of New Edan. Vote IceBlock! "A vote for Admiral Iceblock is a vote for Freedom"

Jonan Hannon Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.23 23:01:00 - [41] I would vote for you but I'm allergic to ice, a block beat me up as a child and admirals won't let me play in the Admiralty building
Miss Sweetie	Posted - 2009.04.27 17:47:00 - [42] His got my vote
Maliente Nevor	Posted - 2009.04.27 19:57:00 - [43] That you want to get things done is good in my book, and if you do get elected I hope that you will stick it out through the negotiations and deals that you will have to make in order to get your points on top of ccp's agenda. You have certainly played the game long enough to know a lot about weak and strong sides of the game. About some regions of eve sucks and others not, well it was already covered above so I will just add that the way it is now gives a lot of diversity through the choices we as players make when we decide somewhere in EVE to call home. A good home for one person sucks beyond for another. that's just as RL, so I would like to hear more on what type of diversity would you be pushing for? As for risk vs. rewards, I don't really get what you hope to achieve by pushing more people into lowsec? What is the purpose of that? By doing such a move, EVE could very likely en up having less players, which would make the game smaller for us all. If one wants to fight in empire there is a game mechanic for that, by bribing concord to declare war on someone. It sucks being on the receiving end of that, but no complaints, as it's part of the game. I don't really see that moving even more activity of combat type(ie L4's) into lowsec/0.0 would bring anything more to the game? It's my understanding that still the amount of money to made in 0.0 by FAR outstrips what you can make in empire!?!? Does it not? Looking forward to your reply and I wish you luck, but am not convinced that you have a clear enough agenda which actually will bring new value to the CSM, so I stand as of yet undecided.
Serpents smile	Posted - 2009.04.28 08:21:00 - [44] Quote: ** ass ty bull** GTFO Near 10% of your CSM introduction consists of swear words. Voting for someone who is incapable of formulating his ideas without getting rude is not my idea of voting wise. Next to that you're unable to spell correctly the word 'Sovereignty', which is, as it reads, your greatest beef with the game. In short you come over as a rude, angry, twelve year old. Maybe you'll get my vote next time when you've grown up a little bit.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.04.28 11:40:00 - [45] Originally by: Maliente Nevor About some regions of eve sucks and others not, well it was already covered above so I will just add that the way it is now gives a lot of diversity through the choices we as players make when we decide somewhere in EVE to call home. A good home for one person sucks beyond for another. that's just as RL, so I would like to hear more on what type of diversity would you be pushing for? It is "ok" to suck to a certain degree. Still, I feel that a 0.0 region should excel more than a high security system with lvl4 agents. As I mentioned, a high security system can probably sustain over 100 players. 100 players ratting in 0.0, well, I think you need more than one region. As for diversity, I'd like each region to have some sort of speciality besides different NPC's. Drone regions is a good example, their NPC's drop components instead of loot. That is something unique, and that is what I want to achieve for each and every region. Some people like drone regions because of this while others don't; different riches, same value = uniqueness. But my vision behind diversity is more than ISK related. Looks, feels and aswell as station and stargate models; I want it all to be unique and special. I want people to feel and see the difference between a screenshot of Venal and Curse. Diversity and depth is key. When I first started the game, I flew around wanting to see and "explore" space. After a couple of jumps, I noticed all the systems pretty much looked the same. I've never enjoyed travelling ever since. :\ Originally by: Maliente Nevor As for risk vs. rewards, I don't really get what you hope to achieve by pushing more people into lowsec? What is the purpose of that? By doing such a move, EVE could very likely en up having less players, which would make the game smaller for us all. If one wants to fight in empire there is a game mechanic for that, by bribing concord to declare war on someone. It sucks being on the receiving end of that, but no complaints, as it's part of the game. I don't really see that moving even more activity of combat type(ie L4's) into lowsec/0.0 would bring anything more to the game? It's my understanding that still the amount of money to made in 0.0 by FAR outstrips what you can make in empire!?!? Does it not? A mission runner in high security can make some serious ISK without ever risking himself to other players. In 0.0 you risk your life and ship to reap the benefits. In empire space one can get 40-50m per hour without risking your 100m ISK ship. In 0.0 space one can get 30-40m per hour by risking your 100m ISK ship. The point is not really about "I want to fight". It is to make it more inline with 0.0. There are many different ways to achieve the same thing. I want it achieved. How it will be achieved depends on CCP with CSM influence, aswell as you the voters (dependent on who you vote on). E.g. #1 Do not remove all level 4 from high security, only the once with quality 0 and upwards and spread level 4 agents equally around their respective region. In some systems you can run 4 level 4 agents at the same time. That can be changed. NOTE: High security only. E.g. #2 Keep the level 4 agents as is in empire space, but increase 0.0 spawn rate or size to make it "greener".
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.04.28 11:45:00 - [46] Edited by: Admiral IceBlock on 28/04/2009 11:46:40 Originally by: Serpents smile Quote: ** ass ty bull** GTFO Near 10% of your CSM introduction consists of swear words. Voting for someone who is incapable of formulating his ideas without getting rude is not my idea of voting wise. Next to that you're unable to spell correctly the word 'Sovereignty', which is, as it reads, your greatest beef with the game. In short you come over as a rude, angry, twelve year old. Maybe you'll get my vote next time when you've grown up a little bit. My english is not great because of foreign. Go figure. I swear a lot? I probably do. Anyways, flamebait alt, 1 out of 10. GG!
Pa1nbringr The Royal Syndicate Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:47:00 - [47] Darth solo told me he's not available to post atm but he said he's voting for iceblock. He said his pvp experience will best suit the fixing of arty and un****ting missiles. -
Pa1nbringr The Royal Syndicate Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 23:23:00 - [48] I forgot to say, I am also voting for iceblock, because he knows people like me. -
Bonny Lee Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.05.06 11:18:00 - [49] Edited by: Bonny Lee on 06/05/2009 11:18:23 You got my vote. I like your view of 0.0 and lvl4-Empire inbalance.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.06 12:40:00 - [50] Quote: 1. What are you thinking about the current situation with Supercapitals (especially Titan) and do you see are problem in the increasing numbers of them. If yes do you have already ideas at hand to stop Fleets being victims of multiple DDs. (One Titan per Region, One DD per System, Changing DDs, etc.) I have not really taken a standpoint on this. But I do agree that there is a problem, especially when one can field upto 10 at a time. One DD per system, region, etc. I think can be exploited. E.g. Friendlies DD somewhere in system or in the region to prevent hostile DD. I am kinda fond of the idea that when a Titan DD's it can not warp or jump for 10 minutes. I believe a Titan should not be what we say in Norwegian; "T°m og r°m", which basically means "Ejeculate and run". You should "ejeculate" and stay, nowhere to run and nowhere to hide nomatter what kinda whale it might be. Quote: 2. Whats your opinion to great power-blocks in EvE like the NC or the Anti-Bob-Coalition. Do you see any problems there? Should it be possible for big Alliances to hold that big amounts of Space? I see this as a problem. Currently, the problem lies in the players with their NAP-squad-type-of-leadership "safety-in-numbers" analogy and game mechanism. Due to how sovreignity works with POS's, all you need is to blob the enemy to kingdom come and you'll win. Quote: 3. How could 0.0 be easier accessible for the medium-sized Alliances without having to nap every powerblock around causing bigger&bigger blobs. Is this in your mind when you are discussing the reform of the sov-system? Do you see a problem here? That is what I am trying to achieve with a change in the sovreignity system. I really hate the numbers game and I truly hate the tedious system where one have to shoot POS's for hours and hours. This is a game, it should be challenging and fun, not boring and monotonus.

Blade2006 Caldari ZERO T0LERANCE Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.05.06 14:48:00 - [51] Edited by: Blade2006 on 06/05/2009 14:53:28 Ice, my guns are yours ... also my vote m8 ...
Pa1nbringr The Royal Syndicate Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.08 12:48:00 - [52] Iceblock is supported by the older pvp/pirate community. vote for him -
Courthouse Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.08 15:33:00 - [53] It would appear that your entire CSM run is based on a newcomer to null sec player's gripe with POS warfare and the risk/reward from Empire/0.0. I would like to know what expertise the CEO of a 34 man corporation that appears to really only have been in one spaceholding alliance for a month can bring to the table that is fresh, exciting and is not reminiscent of the previous CSMs that spent the last year pounding their heads against a wall to get any sort of meaningful change to 0.0. Please understand that I'd love nothing more than to stack the CSM with 5 or more representatives from 0.0 alliances so that we can get some meaningful discussion to come out of the group instead of more empire carebear circlejerking and promises to 'look into' changes at a later date. I have concerns that you don't understand 0.0 well enough yet to formulate an answer to several questions that wasn't a reiteration of an obfuscated point you made earlier or shows any real understanding of sovereignty or space empire management.
Weight What	Posted - 2009.05.08 22:36:00 - [54] Edited by: Weight What on 08/05/2009 22:36:47 Originally by: Courthouse It would appear that your entire CSM run is based on a newcomer to null sec player's gripe with POS warfare and the risk/reward from Empire/0.0. I would like to know what expertise the CEO of a 34 man corporation that appears to really only have been in one spaceholding alliance for a month can bring to the table that is fresh, exciting and is not reminiscent of the previous CSMs that spent the last year pounding their heads against a wall to get any sort of meaningful change to 0.0. Please understand that I'd love nothing more than to stack the CSM with 5 or more representatives from 0.0 alliances so that we can get some meaningful discussion to come out of the group instead of more empire carebear circlejerking and promises to 'look into' changes at a later date. I have concerns that you don't understand 0.0 well enough yet to formulate an answer to several questions that wasn't a reiteration of an obfuscated point you made earlier or shows any real understanding of sovereignty or space empire management. Yes, but then all you have are 0.0/PVPer circlejerks e. Though I do agree with your other points! ----------------------------------------------- Annonymous, trading as "Weight What".
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.08 23:18:00 - [55] Edited by: Shinnen on 08/05/2009 23:22:14 Originally by: Courthouse I would like to know what expertise the CEO of a 34 man corporation that appears to really only have been in one spaceholding alliance for a month >one spaceholding alliance for a month >one spaceholding alliance >one Ever heard of an alliance called Stain? Hell, even the original -V- or freaking SMASH? I hope you realise Iceblock as been playing for over 5 years and that the game isn't as old as the dotlan logs show? He has an insane amount of experiences in all fields. More than some out of game website shows. Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.08 23:47:00 - [56] Originally by: Courthouse It would appear that your entire CSM run is based on a newcomer to null sec player's gripe with POS warfare and the risk/reward from Empire/0.0. I would like to know what expertise the CEO of a 34 man corporation that appears to really only have been in one spaceholding alliance for a month can bring to the table that is fresh, exciting and is not reminiscent of the previous CSMs that spent the last year pounding their heads against a wall to get any sort of meaningful change to 0.0. Please understand that I'd love nothing more than to stack the CSM with 5 or more representatives from 0.0 alliances so that we can get some meaningful discussion to come out of the group instead of more empire carebear circlejerking and promises to 'look into' changes at a later date. I have concerns that you don't understand 0.0 well enough yet to formulate an answer to several questions that wasn't a reiteration of an obfuscated point you made earlier or shows any real understanding of sovereignty or space empire management. I don't understand why I even bother to make an effort when you obviously didn't. But I will try to point out to you how wrong you are and hope that you in the future hire people to do the research for you. Normally to such response as yours I would simply write "Hi, I'm IceBlock, I live in and around Jita where I mine veldspar and has been since 2003. I too, like to carebear!". To prevent any more misunderstandings I'll just proceed: Hi, I'm IceBlock. I started playing in 2003. I am what you can call an EVE veteran. I have been a CEO for over five years. I am what you can call a CEO of a five year old corporation. We have been in Stain Empire which controlled Stain (NPC region FYI so does not really count), Paragon Soul and Esoteria. You were not yet born. We have been in Veritas Immortalis which controlled Great Wildlands (NPC region FYI so does not really count) and Scalding Pass. You were still not yet born. We have been in SMASH Alliance which controlled Geminate (1 NPC system FYI, but in this case still counts). Again, you were still not yet born.¿ However, in the last two years you are right. We have simple not BOTHERED with POS and Sovreignity because its BORING! Thanks for your time.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.08 23:52:00 - [57] This is my idea for Faction Warfare to make it more dynamic on basis-level. This is all of ideas I have to offer for Faction Warfare I'm afraid. NOTE1: STATION AND GATE SENTRY GUNS SHOULD HAVE NO EFFECT IN FACTION WARFARE NOR HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH FACTION STANDINGS. THEY ARE FOR CONCORD USE ONLY! NOTE2: THIS IS JUST A DRAFT OF WHAT I WAS THINKING. MAYBE NOT ALL MAKES SENSE ETC. BUT IT IS JUST AN IDEA! Each faction has one region or constellation of no more than 10-15 systems. These systems are so called "safe" systems with 1,0 security status and are newbeginner system. Basicly, the 10-15 systems consists of 1,0 which can not be taken. These systems are sovreignity 4 by default and can not be changed. Each faction should have a number of statistics that can be influenced by the players; income, size, strength and systems. Each system has a faction sovreignity (unsure of timeframe accomplish each level): Sovreignity 0 means that the system is contested. Each of the contesting factions has small to large miltia NPC presens around their appropriate gates with the size (and strength) of the miltia dependent on faction treasury. Sovreignity 1 means small militia NPC presense around the system. Sovreignity 2 means medium miltia NPC presense around the system. Sovreigntiy 3 means large miltia NPC presense around the system aswell as enabling faction income from said system. Sovreingity 4 means large milita NPC presens around the system, militia NPC commanders (those we hear about in the chronicles etc. etc.) and provides standard faction income. The income of each faction should be from player run agent missions aswell as additional systems owned/conquered by said faction. Each system has an income modifier depending on their security status, the higher security status the higher income, 0,9 giving best income. The size of each faction should be from the players currently in the militia. The size determins an extra income multipler to compensate for the large size difference between the factions. E.g. random thing Caldari = 1000 = 2000/1000 = 2 Amarr = 250 = 2000/250 = 8 Minmatar = 250 = 2000/250 = 8 Gallente = 500 = 2000/500 = 4 The strength of eact faction is dependent on income, size and systems in control. The income of said faction is used to determind the size and strength of militia NPC. Each militia NPC lost drains the faction treasury by x amount. So for the players to weaken the other faction one can destroy their NPC presense. When said faction has 0 treasury, NPC's are weak and consist mainly of frigate squadrons. The sovreignity of said system is gained by player presense aswell as "mini-plexes" on each planet. These "mini-plexes" are just something to show that you are "invading/conquering the planet". Max attainable Sovreignity is 3. One can only contest a system which is next to a system said faction already owns, this due to faction logistics. -_- The "mini-plexes" are complexes on each planet in said system. These complexes contains "planetery defense" and "planetary platforms" in orbit. You are suppose to destroy these to be able to take the planet.
Rebnok H A V O C	Posted - 2009.05.10 05:19:00 - [58] Anyone who has been on endlees pos ops should vote for this guy
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.12 13:10:00 - [59] Be sure to get your votes in guys. ;)
Courthouse Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.12 14:20:00 - [60] Hey, thanks for addressing my post. You're right, I didn't check your employment history when I logged in, so I suppose I had that coming. That being said, when I apply for a job, I usually list my previous applicable employment and references on my resume, not just that I worked at McDonalds one summer when I was 15 and then hope that the interviewer asks for other references.

Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.12 14:31:00 - [61] Vote for iceblock and get rid of pos-killing gangs once and for all! Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Bonny Lee Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.05.12 16:26:00 - [62] done ;) and got some votes for you in my alliance too.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.12 17:44:00 - [63] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock - Blasters. Is this some kind of false advertising to get votes? From another Thread: Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Problem I see is blasters and speed; MWD'ing in range hurts. :\ and Originally by: Admiral IceBlock The problem i see within Blaster users today is that many of those who are old school Blaster pilots doesn't want to accept it that Blasters isn't the pwn machine anylonger. The reason for the web nerf was to not let the Large guns be the pwn machine and let them kill everything. The reason Web was changed was the Nano nerf and people complained to die in Web range to easy. Unfortunaly many people don¦t understand the real meaning of Web range for Blasterships that have not billion ISK tanks and 90% faction Webs like in the fancy Vid you refered to. Also MWDing in range don¦t hurts, it is the basic thing that seperates Blaster Ships from others and should be her main drawback(and we allready have preaty deacend Lasers for people that don¦t like this). To low damage to keep up with the heavy tanks of today and a to weak web to hold down and hit your target on the other hand actualy are problems that are very real(the problems of solo Blaster ships that fighting in Blaster range). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.13 09:39:00 - [64] Originally by: Courthouse Hey, thanks for addressing my post. You're right, I didn't check your employment history when I logged in, so I suppose I had that coming. That being said, when I apply for a job, I usually list my previous applicable employment and references on my resume, not just that I worked at McDonalds one summer when I was 15 and then hope that the interviewer asks for other references. Fair enough, but I did say this at the start: Quote: Ingame, I am a CEO of a five year old corporation.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.13 09:47:00 - [65] Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Admiral IceBlock - Blasters. Is this some kind of false advertising to get votes? It sure as hell is not. Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Problem I see is blasters and speed; MWD'ing in range hurts. :\ If one could instantly appear at 0 km anywhere with a blaster ship it would be fine. However, a blaster ship is a damage ship, MWD'ing 30 km hurts no matter what and you apply little damage while speeding forward. I just stated what I think is the basic problem. How we fix it can be many. Originally by: The Djego and Originally by: Admiral IceBlock The problem i see within Blaster users today is that many of those who are old school Blaster pilots doesn't want to accept it that Blasters isn't the pwn machine anylonger. The reason for the web nerf was to not let the Large guns be the pwn machine and let them kill everything. The reason Web was changed was the Nano nerf and people complained to die in Web range to easy. Unfortunaly many people don¦t understand the real meaning of Web range for Blasterships that have not billion ISK tanks and 90% faction Webs like in the fancy Vid you refered to. Also MWDing in range don¦t hurts, it is the basic thing that seperates Blaster Ships from others and should be her main drawback(and we allready have preaty deacend Lasers for people that don¦t like this). To low damage to keep up with the heavy tanks of today and a to weak web to hold down and hit your target on the other hand actualy are problems that are very real(the problems of solo Blaster ships that fighting in Blaster range). This is not my opinion I'm afraid. If you see on the start of the post. Quote: My friend NightmareX has a strong view; I was posting it for a friend. Sorry for not making it more obvious.
MonsooN WinD Amarr Esquires Of Questionable Intention	Posted - 2009.05.13 11:12:00 - [66] Got my vote, and my alts
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.13 18:20:00 - [67] Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Edited by: Admiral IceBlock on 13/05/2009 09:50:45 Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Admiral IceBlock - Blasters. Is this some kind of false advertising to get votes? It sure as hell is not. Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Problem I see is blasters and speed; MWD'ing in range hurts. :\ If one could instantly appear at 0 km anywhere with a blaster ship it would be fine. However, a blaster ship is a damage ship, MWD'ing 30 km hurts no matter what and you apply little damage while speeding forward. I just stated what I think is the basic problem. How we fix it can be many; more damage, when you first come close you should rip. higher falloff, to make damage while you approach. better tracking, when you first come close you should hit good. etc. etc. Personnaly I prefer more damage, but I won't limit myself to one option. So how they get fixed does not matter, just that they get fixed. I would prefere Damage to, still I see the need to sort kitting and tracking issues within Web range first(preferable with a slight bonus to the Web power) to bring back the solo and heavy tackling abilty that made this ships still dooing ok during the nano age(if you managed to catch someone you actualy had him tackeled not like slowed down a bit with the actual 60% Webs). Dont get me wrong, Im not only interested in this one point and preaty mutch agree on the many other thing like Rockets(and some other Missles) and AKs/Artis, since the problems are also preaty obvious. Im actualy happy to see all this points at least in one candidates opener that also recognize the need of some readjustments to the Patch that is now allready over 6 Month on the server. Originally by: Admiral IceBlock Originally by: The Djego and Originally by: Admiral IceBlock The problem i see within Blaster users today is that many of those who are old school Blaster pilots doesn't want to accept it that Blasters isn't the pwn machine anylonger. The reason for the web nerf was to not let the Large guns be the pwn machine and let them kill everything. The reason Web was changed was the Nano nerf and people complained to die in Web range to easy. Unfortunaly many people don¦t understand the real meaning of Web range for Blasterships that have not billion ISK tanks and 90% faction Webs like in the fancy Vid you refered to. Also MWDing in range don¦t hurts, it is the basic thing that seperates Blaster Ships from others and should be her main drawback(and we allready have preaty deacend Lasers for people that don¦t like this). To low damage to keep up with the heavy tanks of today and a to weak web to hold down and hit your target on the other hand actualy are problems that are very real(the problems of solo Blaster ships that fighting in Blaster range). Originally by: Admiral IceBlock This is not my opinion I'm afraid. If you see on the start of the post. Quote: My friend NightmareX has a strong view; I was posting it for a friend. Sorry for not making it more obvious. Then accept my apologies, didn¦t get this. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Mary Arwrayth Xenotech Ventures Incorporated	Posted - 2009.05.14 13:20:00 - [68] The blasters issue is good to hear, but I have to admit the same problem is now apparent with Torpedos, their range has been so nerfed, many are turning to cruise missiles for their weapon of choice. Perhaps a significant boost to the long-range t2 torps could negate this, but it used to be that someone would train t2 torps and be set for all short-medium range engagements. Now you'd have to train t2 cruise missiles too. Anyway... just saying that the problem that blasters have also applies to the nerfed torps. Secondly, the issue with MWDing in webrange has now also been made increasingly problematic with the warp scrambler boost. 1 tackler with a warp scrambler, makes the already slow triple trimarked, plated Megathron a stationary slab of rock that ships with longer optimal ranges can then easily take you out. Would like to hear some opinions on this :3 --===-- EIBI
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.15 14:06:00 - [69] I too am annoyed by the webifier nerf, especially when I consider what effect this have on close range ships. A little patch on the wound would be to add a falloff of 5km or 10km. E.g. If falloff is 10km and the target is 15km away. Webifying the target would have 50% percent effect (50% of 60%). When target is at 12,5km it would have 75% effect (75% of 60%). Or another patch on the wound would be to make webifiers have 90% effect @ 1km and let it decrease to 60% @ 10km. Why I pointed out rockets as a individual point is because rockets to me has always been subpar. I think they should be frigate sized torpedoes and not autocannons with projectiles. Still all missiles need to be looked at. Personnally I would just revert the changes and turn missiles back to what they were. Also, I remember a certain CCP DEV posting that Missiles should be "all damaging without the need of any bonuses due to some ships having twin-weaponsystems e.g. Typhoon." Still waiting on that change thou! And a random idea of mine; Remove ECCM and make ECCM scripts for Sensor Boosters. Also increase Sensor Booster activation level to 30 sec. to limit instant-switch of script.
Sha Kharn Minmatar STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.16 16:04:00 - [70] You get my votes, all 9 of em when i get off my lazy ass and log em in. Good to see a vet still about who cares about the important stuff. Good luck bud.

Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.05.19 11:57:00 - [71] Vote Admiral Iceblock - today! Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.05.23 21:05:00 - [72] I wish there was a way to see vote-progression. :P Oh well, not many days left. :)
Shinnen Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.05.25 20:57:00 - [73] good luck!!!!! Plus, if there are things that you don't like about Eve, click HERE because it will help.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.