Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.19 08:40:00 -
[1]
It is that time again for the next round of CSM candidates to announce their platforms. Therefore I'm here by announcing my candidacy. This will be my second time running for a spot on the Council, and with your support I can achieve this goal.
What makes me a good CSM candidate? Well, I've been playing EVE Online for nearly 5 years now. While the majority of my time has been spent out in 0.0 space I still venture into Empire and have alts that conduct business there on a daily basis through the market. I'm well-versed in many of the game mechanics that EVE is founded upon, and I have plenty of ideas on how to enhance gameplay for everyone, whether you live in Empire, Low-Sec, or 0.0 space.
What makes me an even better CSM candidate? There are a few reasons. First, I am a good communicator (and the people who know me snicker to themselves.) Alright, I need to expand on that statement. I have a distinct speech impediment which can make communication with me a challenge when an individual doesn't know how I pronounce specific words. Because of this I am very careful to enunciate and take the extra time to express my spoken words. More importantly I'm a team player and respectful of my peers when engaged in (sometimes) heated discussions. Secondly, I recognize that being on CSM takes a huge time commitment. I can fill this requirement and won't take the responsibility for granted. Lastly I have a very amicable personality and will bring that to the table in working with the other members of CSM.
Should you be concerned by the fact I'm a member of Goonfleet? No, I don't think you should. I've demonstrated through my actions that I'm a contributing member of the EVE Online community that cares are the game and the players who inhabit it. This can be further emphasized by the fact I've attended Fanfest twice and partaken in multiple roundtables at each time. I plan to attend the 2009 Fanfest too, I'm here to be a player for the duration of EVE online being around.
What sets me apart from the other CSM candidates? That is a loaded question. I'm not going to trivialize the other people running for CSM by saying I'm better than them. Everyone has their own life experience that influence how and why they play EVE Online. I believe that I can bring a fresh perspective the whole CSM process because of my challenging lifestyle. And I'll be expanding on this through my web site should you be interested in reading more about me.
My campaigning is mainly going to consist of posts here on the EVE-O forums and blog entries on my website. Anything that you read here will be detailed further on my website which will of course have blog entries but also another section consisting of my Proposals to improve EVE. I welcome all comments and questions and will respond to them in kind. This includes participating in interviews should they be requested.
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.19 08:42:00 -
[2]
Now that I've gotten the introduction out of the way, here are some of the Proposals I will be detailing on my website in the coming weeks.
0.0 Warfare: There needs to some adjustment. POS warfare is a drag for both parties involved and can be a huge timesink of suck. Yes, I said it: Suck. Being in Goonswarm I'm right in the middle of the action and have plenty of opinions on how things can be improved. Not only have I been following my own Alliance's moans and groans, I've seen what the rest of EVE Online thinks too. One big complaint is setting up and tearing down POS structures. I will be proposing "templates" and "queues" to lift some of the burden in deploying them. And another thing I believe the game needs are "fuel packs" to accompany the templates. It would involve same mechanics as producing off of a BPO where the numerous POS fuels are combined into one specific product.
0.0 Environment: The addition of wormholes did a lot to give everyone more options. I however want to see more added with the static areas, namely NPC space. There is mission running there but not much else that sets it apart from the rest of 0.0 territory. I would like to see the NPC AI enhanced for systems they hold Sov in. Just as players will aggressively defend their space the NPC should too!
Market/Contract Improvements: It would be nice to see how much of a specific item has sold in a station or system. As it is right now you can only see sales totals across the whole region. Create a new skill if you have to, because this would be an asset to all players. Concerning contracts, the ability to view more information from the list when a search is run would be highly desirable.
UI Improvements: I must say that I'm pleased with many of the additions to UI that CCP has made since my last CSM campaign run. It was a major part of my platform and seeing the changes leaves me very satisfied. There are still more things to improve on, however. Namely the overview, a column needs to be added for "State" which reflects what POS modules are doing: Online, Onlining, Anchored, Unanchored, Incapacitated. When your Dreadnaught is in siege you are already dealing with a slow lock time. Having it lengthen further by wasting lock cycles is a huge frustration! Also, when are we going to get an Aggression Timer countdown for 0.0 combat? Do it already!
CCP Policy Visibility: I'll get into this more on my website, but I feel that the rules (of game and forum) need to be spelled out better. The official Wiki is up, and now it needs to be fleshed out further. I've read so many accounts of one GM doing one thing while another does the complete opposite! There needs to be more consistency.
Lowsec Revitalization: There isn't much activity going on in lowsec space beyond people constructing capital ships, gaining access to/from 0.0, or the occasional pirates. I propose that level 4 mission agents be relocated to lowsec. With increased reward for those missions there needs to be risk. Another thing that would encourage more lowsec traffic is an increase to rat bounties. These incentives would help draw people from highsec and give pirates more options (targets) too.
And Much Much More: My website will be updated with further thoughts. A few things on the list are giving Logistics Ships a hull rep range bonus, Mothership role improvements, Evemail Filters/Folders, T3 ship innovations, and plenty of ways to make holding Sov more exciting in a Constellation.
I hope this post has given you a decent overview of my platform and what I hope to accomplish should I be elected to CSM. It has been said that CCP will be taking a closer look at revamping 0.0 warfare in the upcoming year and I want to be a part of that process. Not to mention Walking in Stations is another thing I'm very interested in. Both of these things will be huge for the game and I will dedicate my time to ensuring it will please the EVE Online community.
|
Bunyip
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.04.20 09:14:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Bunyip on 20/04/2009 09:14:19
0.0 Warfare: Agreed, and CCP is closely looking at this too. I expect much to happen regarding this in the near future, but that future is in CCP's hands, based on their workload.
0.0 Environment: I can agree with more pirate-faction NPC space, but not with the improved AIs....yet. The AI will gradually weed it's way into 0.0 space, but mostly in commander spawn tactics.
Market/Contract Improvements: I think one of the last things the market system needs is more datacalls, as it's already overworked with the current system. The sales per system is something that you need to acquire from research, not just a blanket statement. The better contract searches I can agree with though.
UI Improvements: Well, yes, the UI does need to be improved, but you can already see the state of the modules by looking at the POS structure. Admittedly, I've only setup POSes, I've never sieged them, but even still, I can't see how this would improve the system as it is. CCP should be looking into this as we speak (hopefully). The UI improvements I would recommend would be an improved layout so that people don't get a headache from the overflow of information.
CCP Policy Visibility: Yes, their policy is currently being worked on, especially with the whole BoBzoku incident. However, as a CSM, that won't be in your responsibility, as we're only liaisons.
Lowsec Revitalization: Move level 4 agents to low-sec?!? There's already risk enough in high sec, as most of the agents are in trade hubs and player interference is a common thing. Low-sec does need to be improved, but that should be done by boosting it, not by nerfing high-sec. Low-sec has level 5 missions, which is enough - I ran one level 5 mission and wound up in my cloning station. Also, people who don't want to leave high-sec never will. It's the nature of the beast, and the reputation that low-sec has, even if it isn't fully deserved, is the part that needs working on.
And Much Much More: I agree that Moms need an improvement, but the Evemail should soon be hit with a sledgehammer and reassembled. T3 is a new introduction, so give it some time. Sovereignty is also hopefully being looked at with intense scrutiny.
That said, I do think you could be a valuable asset to the CSM. Remember that a CSM is only an elected official to filter through the forums and coalesce the data into a usable concept for CCP to consider. Best of luck though.
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.20 22:45:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Bunyip
0.0 Environment: I can agree with more pirate-faction NPC space, but not with the improved AIs....yet. The AI will gradually weed it's way into 0.0 space, but mostly in commander spawn tactics.
Not so much adding more NPC space but improving the AI there. Why should more intelligent NPC be restricted to Missions and Wormhole space? It would be a way to keep nearby Alliances stimulated with combat even if their space isn't threatened at that moment. Take Venal for an example where Guristas have Sovereignty. When they aren't off fighting a war, RZR could send their troops there to attack Guristas towers and camps. All of these would be randomly generated by the game system and as a result limit chances of "perceived abuse/favortism."
Originally by: Bunyip
Market/Contract Improvements: I think one of the last things the market system needs is more datacalls, as it's already overworked with the current system. The sales per system is something that you need to acquire from research, not just a blanket statement.
I wasn't aware of the current system being overworked. If that is the case then it is unfortunate.
Originally by: Bunyip
UI Improvements: Well, yes, the UI does need to be improved, but you can already see the state of the modules by looking at the POS structure. Admittedly, I've only setup POSes, I've never sieged them, but even still, I can't see how this would improve the system as it is. CCP should be looking into this as we speak (hopefully). The UI improvements I would recommend would be an improved layout so that people don't get a headache from the overflow of information.
When there are 20-60 Dreads hitting a POS, having to select the module on overview and then find it in space to see if it is online is a complete pain in the ass. If you've got brackets turned off you are in for even more suffering. Nevermind the fact of having modules grouped together and you can't tell if one you selected is "Online" among the cluster of "Incapacitated" ones. This all goes for repairing modules too.
Originally by: Bunyip
CCP Policy Visibility: Yes, their policy is currently being worked on, especially with the whole BoBzoku incident. However, as a CSM, that won't be in your responsibility, as we're only liaisons.
It'd be my responsibility to convey what the players have complaints about and this has been one everyone has grumbled about at one point or another.
Originally by: Bunyip
Lowsec Revitalization: Move level 4 agents to low-sec?!? There's already risk enough in high sec, as most of the agents are in trade hubs and player interference is a common thing. Low-sec does need to be improved, but that should be done by boosting it, not by nerfing high-sec. Low-sec has level 5 missions, which is enough - I ran one level 5 mission and wound up in my cloning station. Also, people who don't want to leave high-sec never will. It's the nature of the beast, and the reputation that low-sec has, even if it isn't fully deserved, is the part that needs working on.
Perhaps if a new standings system were added to the game which allowed for people in lowsec to pay for additional protection as a buffer for getting used to the harsher environment. If they've been running Missions for the entity in control of that system (racial faction or corporation owning local stations?) or bribing them a ship could spawn should they be attacked which would attempt to intercept the pirate and give a chance to escape? The very same pirates could do similar things via bribing so a blind eye is turned towards them attacking people in that area.
Originally by: Bunyip That said, I do think you could be a valuable asset to the CSM. Remember that a CSM is only an elected official to filter through the forums and coalesce the data into a usable concept for CCP to consider. Best of luck though.
Agreed. Thank you for responding to my introduction, Bunyip.
|
ChowMung
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 12:01:00 -
[5]
Needs more of that video from last year!
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 04:00:00 -
[6]
Originally by: ChowMung Needs more of that video from last year!
That may or may not happen again. I haven't decided yet.
|
Venomire
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 17:47:00 -
[7]
Voted before, will vote again.
|
Pax Anima
Gallente Red Viper Flying School
|
Posted - 2009.04.24 19:08:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Pax Anima on 24/04/2009 19:08:58 Hi Avalloc,
You are highly qualified for the council, however, I'm not sure you are my candidate. If you could answer a few questions so I could better appreciate you.
First, you say not to be concerned that you are a Goon. This is absolutely fair, and I hope no one writes you off for this. However, I would be cautious to vote for you simply because I would prefer CSM politics not go down the route of real life party politics. Goon's have had (correct me if I'm wrong) 2 members on the 1st CSM and 1 on the second. Can you think of any topic in which you, vs. Darius JOHNSON in particular might not totally agree on. This may help clear up for me at least, how your own personal beliefs are not on a solely Goon agenda.
Second, I would assume(which I probably shouldn't) That statistically # of players in high security vs. low security are significant enough to warrant representation. Though it is not your own play style, is there any subject with regards to high security that you would pursue. (I would be surprised if you needed the high sec vote to get in to CSM, however it's always nice when you can say you've won by a landslide.)
And if you could forgive this ridiculous habit I have when meeting people, what is your favorite type of dog?
Thanks.
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 03:09:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Pax Anima You are highly qualified for the council, however, I'm not sure you are my candidate. If you could answer a few questions so I could better appreciate you.
Thank you for the questions. :)
Originally by: Pax Anima Can you think of any topic in which you, vs. Darius JOHNSON in particular might not totally agree on. This may help clear up for me at least, how your own personal beliefs are not on a solely Goon agenda.
Well, Darius JOHNSON and I have have very different personalities. I would venture to say I'm quite a bit more amicable than him in dealing with people. We both however want to see the game grow stronger whether it is for empire players or those out in 0.0 space. The "Goon agenda" runs the same as all 0.0 entities for the most parts. We want 0.0 to be (potentially) enjoyable and fun for everyone. Of course we want our enemies to "suffer" but within the rules of the game and not by cheating. We want to see the game as fair for everyone who plays it and no favoritism shown.
Originally by: Pax Anima Second, I would assume(which I probably shouldn't) That statistically # of players in high security vs. low security are significant enough to warrant representation. Though it is not your own play style, is there any subject with regards to high security that you would pursue.
I would like to see the high security players have a little more excitement in their gameplay. The great thing about EVE that WoW (for example) lacks is the capability to be a truly dynamic environment. Blizzard pretty much controls everything a WoW player gets to enjoy and the players have limited options in terms of doing things outside the box(the Designers created.) The ability to have scripted Events (which location are generated randomly) would be a great thing for High sec. Players who wish to take part would warp to the "beacon" that appeared within the system. Maybe the use of Sleeper AI would be great for this too. After a specific time the beacon would vanish and by the next downtime and uncleared parts of that Event are despawned.
Originally by: Pax Anima And if you could forgive this ridiculous habit I have when meeting people, what is your favorite type of dog?
Which breed? Labrador retrievers. :)
|
Xerious Biz
|
Posted - 2009.04.25 21:06:00 -
[10]
Do you have any thoughts on the drone issues?
Ending on a rather unsensitive note, and feel free to ignore this question: Have you been to CCP HQ before? Do they cater to your accessibility needs, do you forsee problems, should you be elected?
good luck
|
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.26 23:02:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Xerious Biz Do you have any thoughts on the drone issues?
I believe the drone UI needs a lot of love. I'm not entirely sure of the best way to address it but I have some ideas. Having the name of what they're aggressed on would be a big help, for one. Next there needs to be better notification when they're targeted by a hostile so you can start reacting before they start taking damage. Their distance from you, and their target's distance would be nice in that UI. It doesn't need to be cluttering up the Overview which is enough of a mess when there are drones all over the battlefield.
The AI really needs some help. Any ability CCP can add for controller to give the drones scripted instructions would rock. "If you start taking damage: evade."
Originally by: Xerious Biz Ending on a rather unsensitive note, and feel free to ignore this question: Have you been to CCP HQ before? Do they cater to your accessibility needs, do you forsee problems, should you be elected?
good luck
I don't mind this question at all. In fact I'm rather open about my disability and welcome any inquiries concerning it.
I've been to CCP HQ twice now. Once during Fanfest 07 week and second time during Fanfest 08 week. Both times the reason for my visit is winning the "Office Tour Auction" CCP ran to benefit the Child's Play charity. :) They were very accommodating both times, especially considering a few CCP employees helped me get up a spiral staircase in the Office because the elevator was down due to construction.
|
Navtiqes
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 12:49:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Navtiqes on 04/05/2009 12:49:51 In wormhole space CCP have delayed local channels as something of an experiment to see how players react and adapt.
What are your thoughts on how this has worked out, and how do you feel about keeping or entirely removing the local channel from Eve? |
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.06 05:41:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Navtiqes Edited by: Navtiqes on 04/05/2009 12:49:51 In wormhole space CCP have delayed local channels as something of an experiment to see how players react and adapt.
What are your thoughts on how this has worked out, and how do you feel about keeping or entirely removing the local channel from Eve?
The topic of applying the same effect of local in wormholes is a bit of a mixed bag for me. I'm not fond of it being implemented without the addition of more game mechanics that function off of it.
To give you an example, there needs to be a benefit to holding Sov in a given system when hostiles come into your territory (if local were changed.) An advanced warning system that notified people friendly to the Sov-holding Alliance would be ideal. I would also urge the addition of a way to disable this advance warning to give crafty invaders a way to penetrate enemy territory.
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.06 05:44:00 -
[14]
I'm going to be slow to respond to further inquiries until Sunday evening, the 10th since I'll be attending EveVegas. If by chance you'll be there too, do not hesitate to come up and say hello.
I've also updated my web site with new content and will be adding much more on Monday.
|
Tom Harry
|
Posted - 2009.05.08 12:56:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Avalloc
Originally by: ChowMung Needs more of that video from last year!
That may or may not happen again. I haven't decided yet.
Why? What was in the video? |
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.11 03:34:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Avalloc on 11/05/2009 03:34:28
Originally by: Tom Harry
Originally by: Avalloc
Originally by: ChowMung Needs more of that video from last year!
That may or may not happen again. I haven't decided yet.
Why? What was in the video?
Here is one of the internal Goonswarm videos. And no, Ambulation isn't a main focus of my current platform.
Yes, I have a sense of humor.
Click to view video.
|
Temporalis
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 06:30:00 -
[17]
Looks like somebody found Windows Movie Maker!
|
DaiTengu
Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 07:38:00 -
[18]
YOU should vote for Avalloc
I did.
|
Footfist Headknocker
|
Posted - 2009.05.15 07:28:00 -
[19]
Voted Avalloc cause he's like a goon Kennedy |
Keltsar
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 04:40:00 -
[20]
Avalloc has a ton of experience with EVE and will really make a difference! |
|
The Qat
Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 04:41:00 -
[21]
Voted for Avalloc because of his sense of humor and because he knows EVE like almost no one else.
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 05:03:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Avalloc on 18/05/2009 05:05:00 I have changed my view of the highsec/lowsec/nullsec income situation. Previously I stated that level 4 missions should be moved to lowsec which is no longer the case. Mission and npc bounty rewards for lowsec should be increased. Nullsec (0.0 space) should have rat bounties increased as well, so that it yields the highest reward over that of mission running in highsec. Reward the people who are actively getting their ships blown up or destroying them which in turn stimulates our EVE economy.
|
Vera Faulk
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 07:33:00 -
[23]
Avalloc is a pretty chill dude.
|
Agnor Stanvoic
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 10:15:00 -
[24]
avalloc for csm |
Kif
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 05:44:00 -
[25]
Avalloc may look ******ed but I assure you he is not
|
Avalloc
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 07:48:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Avalloc on 20/05/2009 07:52:09 Thank you for the support. :)
Should you wish to vote for me here is an easy link to use.
|
Jarlewski
|
Posted - 2009.05.22 01:18:00 -
[27]
voted!
i really like your approach and your website is pretty sweet
|
Bary OBama
|
Posted - 2009.05.25 07:19:00 -
[28]
I voted for this guy.
|
Avalloc
|
Posted - 2009.05.31 23:50:00 -
[29]
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my supporters.
And now the work begins. :) |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |