EVE Search - [CSM 6] Jonathon Silence

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

[CSM 6] Jonathon Silence

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.23 22:37:00 - [1] I would like to introduce myself to you all as a candidate for the 6th CSM. Why am I running for CSM 6? As a long time player of EVE I have always admired the grand vision of the game and the scope of possibility it produces, this in conjunction with the great work that has been done by the last 2 CSM's has focused my attention to the way CCP interacts with it's player base and the way the CSM has worked together to bring this interaction to a new level. My previous experience as the CCP QA delegate to CSM 1 (as CCP Lingorm) and the commitment that CCP Hellmar has consistantly shown has convinced me that good candidates and excellent team work from the CSM is going to build a better game and I would like to be a part of that. My goals for CSM 6 Excellence of execution. CCP has been trying to build on a theme of Excellence and CSM 5's solidarity showed CCP that what the player base thought of as Excellence was different from what CCP thought, but that a common ground exsisted and that by actually working together good results could be had. I want to continue this push of Excellence, keeping the CSM focused on getting good results for the issues that the player base raises. I am also a huge adherent of the API (twice running the API roundtable at the EVE Fanfest) and will be pushing for increased capability and functionality of the API. While there are a number of other issues that I am concerned with and will be pushing for a resolution on I am not set on what that resolution is. These issues are things like : Viability of Low Sec AFK Cloaking Player Owned Structures (POS) My History in EVE I have been playing EVE since March 2004, and other than for a short period in the middle of last year I have had atleast 1 account running at all time. I have been involved in most aspects of EVE over that time and have experienced the joys and the sorrows that EVE bring. Most recently I have been focused on Industry and the ISK that brings, but also the click-madness and rince and repeat slow interfaces that plague this part of EVE. My most famous moment in EVE was during the EVE Fanfest in 2005 during which I used the time on stage as the Player from Far Far away to Propose to my then girlfrien and now wife. Who am I really? My name is Shay McAulay, I am a 35 year old married (to an EVE player) Computer Programmer and Agile Systems Administrator for a large Insurance company in Auckland, New Zealand. I work for CCP from 2007 till the end of 2008 as the QA Engineering Team Lead. I have also worked in a number of other industries (always from a computing side but I still had to understand the industry) including (but not limited to) Telecomunications, Logistics, Consulting and Coaching (Scrum software Development). My Linkedin Profile. Other Information I am working on a site that will go into my goals in more detail but I have been a little busy over the last couple of days with work related to supporting our efforts in the wake of the Christchurch Earthquake, but will have it comepleted this weekend and will link it here.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.23 22:39:00 - [2] Reserved for later information.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.23 22:56:00 - [3] Edited by: Jonathon Silence on 23/02/2011 22:57:50 Edited by: Jonathon Silence on 23/02/2011 22:56:35 Originally by: The Djego What is on your mind to make low sec more viable? I have a couple of ideas that I would like to investigate further. Random Faction (NPC) patrols - The factions have random patrols through Low Sec that will act on any 'illegal' agression. Now these are not Concord, so they can be tanked and destroyed, difficult but not impossible. This will bring a random chance element to low sec. Making it a bit safer for people to enter, thus also increasing the profitability of pirating as the greater population means more opportunities. Ability for Players to build services - Whether this is done with a new POS system or as rental on parts of exisiting stations I would like to see players and corporations have the ability to build more services in low sec. We have a sortage of Labratories and in some places factories. I think Players and Low Sec would be a good way to look at solving this. I am not 100% sure on the actual implementation of this, but the service offered would have to be better than High Sec to offer extra inducement. Ability to sell kill rights - I think a good system that implemented this combined with a revamp of the Bounty system could also prove interesting, but need to study the possible ramifications for 'gaming' the system before really settling on anything. I have also seen some other suggestions that I would like to see looked into further for partial consideration (Viceroy comes to mind here). I am not 100% convinced that these will 'solve' the problem but I think they are worth examining and spending some time looking at the viability of.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.24 20:42:00 - [4] Originally by: El'Niaga Don't agree with Random Faction patrols......these will have a detrimental impact I think unless they drop something really nice, and if they drop something nice it'll just be pirated to death so that within 3 months no one goes after them. You can already put POS up. Just need to fix the code that allows you to rent slots in labs/assembly arrays to other entities, something that has existed in the code but never been fixed properly. Ability to Sell Kill Rights could be an interesting fix for the current bounty system. As I said, I am also not 100% convinced these will solve the issue. The Problem (As I see it) is that the risk/reward is not enough of an inducemnet when compared with the risk/reward or either high-sec or 0.0. So you either have to reduce the risk (random patrols or something else) or increase the reward. Now the risk in low-sec is very similar to (if not higher than) that is 0.0, which makes balancing the risk/reward equation even more difficult. So something must be done to deal with the risk before you can get a balanced progression from High through low to zero sec. This will nto be an easy (or easily accepted) fix. But to restore some balance something needs to be done. I am in favour of small changes to slowly try to bring things into balance rather than a complete rewite which introduces to many variables.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.25 08:06:00 - [5] Originally by: Imigo Montoya Nice to see other kiwis playing (from Dunedin myself), and even standing for CSM. I sincerely wish you all the best dealing with the Chch earthquake aftermath - Insurance is going to be important in the coming days/weeks. I see you mention AFK cloaking - what's your stance on the topic? Personally I see it as fine the way it is. I've been in systems with AFK cloakers hanging around and been able to get on with business as (mostly) usual. I've also gone to hostile systems and cloaked up to hunt. I also have kids. This means that I need to be able to step away from the game at a moment's notice. So in that sense, cloaking is a very important part of the game for me - it might be afk, it might not, but either way cloaking makes nullsec life feasible. OK, I am going to clarify here a bit. I am not against AFK cloaking, as such. I am against being able to 'camp a system' while not at the computer. People complain that 'botters' make money while not being at the keyboard. AFK cloaking has similar impacts in that it prevents people (and in some cases botters) from earning money for no 'real' risk. What I would really like to see is some method for 'Sovereign' Alliances to deal with Cloaked ships in their space. I would also like to see more of a penalty for putting a cloak on a ship that is not designed for it ... but this is a personal issue and is not high on my list of 'must do' items for the CSM. As for the situation where you are called from the PC, I think a better system would be to allow a ship to 'power-down' (once the agression timers are clear) and to basically go dark rather than have a module for dealing with those situation. Of course after powering down you will need time to power up you systems when you return ... but again person idea here and not directly related to the AFK cloaking issue. My belief is that EVE is a game all about risk and reward, but afk cloaking breaks that risk<>reward pattern.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.25 21:02:00 - [6] Originally by: Two Shots Jonathon Silence: Explicitly and literally, by what mechanic or process do you intend to get your pet topics pushed through to CCP when it has been expressly stated by CCP ever since the advent of the CSM that the CSM does not exist to be amateur game developers? Actually that is rather easy. For my 'pet' topics I will write them up clearly and post them in the CSM sections of the forums and try to get support. Then if enough support is gathered work with the CSM to make sure CCP understand the reasoning behind the request. In other words the way it s supposed to work. I admitt that I might personally work on the other members of the CSM to get more support. But No rule breaking .
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.25 21:09:00 - [7] Originally by: The Djego Well this would be a very big handicap for solo/small gang pilots while it doesn't affect the bigger gangs. Also it would make even fair fights(the rare, good ones) very likely to get one sided quick. Well you could just set up a science pos in low sec(lots of free moons), factory slots are a no issue in low sec. Well the idea itself sounds noble, however in general most people underrate the effort that it takes to hunt down individuals a lot. Kill rights against -5 and below players are worthless, you can engage them anywhere. Also kill rights against people in low Sec are not very valuable since you can shoot them anyway(you save the sec hit and 15 minutes GCC, thats it). The only thing left are kill rights vs people that only from time to time pop into low sec and do her regular stuff in high sec. However if this players are clever, they are hard to hunt down and this is mostly done by personal desire to do so, not really for real gains. Somebody that buys kill rights however doesn't have this desire, he is in for the gain. You could similar to this simply hire a merc corp, they pay the dec against his corp and hunt him down, the key here is that this is to expensive for most people so they think a bounty hunter will do it for less, even if he is pretty much in the same boat regarding the effort to do so. As I said, I am not 100% sure any of these will work completely. All I know is that Low-Sec is the poor neglected middle child and needs some love and support. As for the Lab's in Low-Sec, that is fine for any Lab work that has no material requirement and no 'output'. Because it is owned by a coporation that I am not a member of I cannot put stuff into the POS for the Lab to use to complete the work, nor can I collect any outputs (returning the original blueprint is not an output, but copies or invention prints are). I would like to make small changes first (like getting some mechanism for real public Science and Industry) and see how that changes things and then look at the next step. I guess what I am saying here is that I want to get a commitment from CCP to iterate over Low-Sec and give it some attention to make it more attractive.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.02.27 21:50:00 - [8] Originally by: zealottk I would be interested in hearing what your ideas are with POS There have been a number of good suggestions in threads like this > http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1208972 that I fully support. Personally I would like to ess a bit more variability in Both POS's and Planetary command centers. I hate the 'One Size' fits all needs mentality of fixed CPU and power levels. I would like to be able to either install more of one in preference over the other. So if I want a High Power POS I install more powerplants into it's available 'core' and install less Computer backs ... or if I am doing lots of industry and want the CPU then Install more Computer Banks and sacrifice power. The POS thing has been brought to CCP before, with little to no resolution, but I think this is one of those issues that the CSM needs to Ride CCP on. Continually re-presenting it till we get an answer.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.01 20:09:00 - [9] Originally by: Taram Caldar This doesn't address the situation where you are called away from the PC at all though. If my kid is upstairs crying or my wife needs my help waiting 15 minutes for an agro timer to clear isn't an option. I need to be able to warp to a safe and immediately cloak up so that I can go deal with the real-life emergency. RL > EVE and always will be. I agree that afk camping systems is 'teh lame' (I've personally never done it. Because I feel it's a lame tactic... and yes... to those who are currently hostile to me... that means if I'm in system I'm actually there and actually waiting for you to do something stupid so I can kill you ) but you need to remember that 'waiting for aggro timers' doesn't help those of us who have to run AFK NOW when you are talking about changes to the system. Personally I think having cloaks do 2 things: 1 use cap... 2 disable cap recharge. Make the cap drain small so that you could cloak for up to an hour or so but once that's done you need to de-cloak to recharge your cap. It solvs the 'afk camper' issue while allowing those who have to suddenly run afk to do so. They can always come back within 1hr or so and log off. That's not a bad idea. Will add that to the options that should be presented to CCP. I agree that the cap drain on 'official' cloaking ships should be lower.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.02 03:37:00 - [10] Edited by: Jonathon Silence on 02/03/2011 03:40:25 Originally by: Internet Lawyer Doing what, exactly? What have you been doing all this time? LOL. Big question. I started of as a Miner in Celestial Horizon Corporation, joining their Empire combat arm and fighting in a number of wars (vs BDCI/Sharks, Mercenary Frigates/Forces, DVN, VOTF) before moving to 0.0 and basing in VNGJ-U in Feythabolis where I initially ran the Ice mining department and flew in and FC'ed local defense gang's (in more wars like The 5, and a number of other wars after the formation of Ascendant Frontier - ASCN, where I was a member of teh High Command). I got promoted (or was that demoted) into running parts of our POS defense and industry supply chain (running freighter loads of Passive targetters from Empire to 0.0 after building them in High Sec). Was involved in the logistics for most of CLS's outpost deployments as well as the Titan Deployment. I became the CEO of CLS after the collapse of ASCN and the retirement of CYVOK. It was my job to oversee the evacuation of Feythabolis after brokering a final surrender and ceasefire with Blacklight. We then moved to the Dorne regions where I handed over the CEO to SamuraiJack when I became a Dev and my characters got renamed and I was no longer allowed to associate with my previous corp mates on an in-game level. I moved my toons into an alt-corp that I had had hanging about and turned it into a small scale production Corp that grew to run a reseach POS and invested heavily into Capitalship BPO's, researching them and running endless copies for sale. I also build Tech 1 ships for sale from this corp, mainly battleships and battle cruisers but some other ships as well. When I left CCP I re-established my contacts with CLS and rejoined the corp while still keeping the other corp running as a smaller going concern and ISK generation enterprise. While in CLS I became the Sales manager for the Tech 2 department for about 18 months. This involved the selling of all the produce from CLS controlled Tech 2 bpo's and the results of their invention onto the markets in Jita, Ammar, Oursleart(sp?) and Rens as well as some sales into Drone Regions. I did some experiments with Wormholes and such as it was one of the features I was involved with just before I left CCP. After this I got a bit of EVE burnout and left CLS back to my small corp and took a break. I returned about 4 months ago and have been very active again (my joy of playing is as strong as ever again), I have refocused on Industry and have committed deeply into PI (High Sec based at this time but that may be changing soon hopefully) and have also started doing some more market manipulation and Sovereignty structure development. Originally by: Internet Lawyer What does that mean? Did you cause / fix the boot.ini thing? Actually fix boot.ini? No but I was one of the 2 QA people on shift when it was deployed (the other being CCP Mindstar) when it was discovered. I remember having to call my boss at 1am and wake him up, but he went back to sleep thinking it was a practical joke, so I called in the CTO and did most of the organising of the 'fix' effort until higher-ups where called in, even them CCP Mindstar and I where often consulted on the state of the issue as we had the most experience with it. I think CCP Mindstar and I did a 36 hour straight stint discoving the issue (from reports on the forums and in the IRC Channel's) finding the actual circumstances of the issue and breaking a number of CCP forum posting rules around not modifying players posts, which we where doing when someone posted incorrect information on the issue as it began causing additional problems with the false information going round (I was later 'slapped on the wrist as I broke the rules, but as I did it for the right reasons all was forgiven). I even Hillmar the CEO buy CCP Mindstar and I a drink later to thank us for our quick action.
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.03 01:03:00 - [11] Well the official list is out and I am listed nicely in the middle. What is interesting is the number of New Zealand Candidates that are running this time. I should contact them and see what we have in common and organise drinks or something. What is also interesting is the number of 'I will represent your issues' candidates. Buy this I mena Candidates that have expressed "Only a desire' to represetn 'The EVE Players'. While I personally find this laudable, I think Candidates should also have opinions on something why else would they be doing this? Just my thoughts, would be interested to hear what you think. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.03 22:38:00 - [12] Originally by: Atnaw So back to AFK cloaking. I would assume the problem is not people just leaving the PC cloaked for a few hours in a system. But people who go AFK all day deliberately (probably with alts covering several systems) to be annoying while they go to work or whatever - not just AFK, but AFH (Away From Home) with no mouse clicks or anything. I know it irritates me. I'm surprised that if there isn't any activity on an account after 2 hours that the server doesn't boot them. Surely its unnecessary load on the server? I would agree here, people leaving to deal with 'Real-Life' is not an issue in my eyes (others might see it different). As for the AFH, I can agree that it breaks my risk/reward concept of EVE. I have always seen EVE as a balance of Risk/Reward for all activities and the AFK Cloaking offers little to no risk for a large reward in disrupting your targets operations, hence my oposition to it. If it is someone there actively 'hunting' then that is different. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.03 23:17:00 - [13] Originally by: SamuraiJack 1) Logistics. Apparently CCP think its too easy. Its about time someone sat them down and made them do a logistics chain. See how easy they think it is when doing long boring freighter runs to keep 0.0 systems and markets stocked. I also would love to see the CSM pushing for making ihubs and upgrades smaller to allow JF's to carry them. If ccp truely want small allainces to populate 0.0 then they need to change teh current mechanics which HEAVILY favour the "omg we love your tears" griefer crowd who have no interest in sov but happily camp the empire/0.0 pipes. 2) POS's. BADLY needs redoing completely. Seperating from regular corp roles so there can be more security with private pos's. EG. POS roles not allowing global access to build slots etc. Maybe even Allaince roles reviewing to allow Research pos's to be useful. 3) PI/Market. Does Eve seriously have enough market/industrialists to support a fully player driven market. Given the HUGE spikes in PI goods. (Specifically POS fuels) maybe an artifical cap of the NPC sell orders would be in order. I also worry primarily about the market as eve's new chars will be hard pressed to get equipment if they all have to go to jita to get "rare" mods that no one else is interested in. EG reg t1 gear. Knowing SJ, I read this as questions about my stand on these issues. 1) 0.0 Logistics is hard, time consuming and risky, even counting the changes of Jump Freighters and Jump Bridges and Titan bridges there is still a large risk, thus alliances take large actions to reduce teh risks (blobing the freighter runs up and having large escort fleets), this in turn means the attacker has to bring more firepower to attack the logistics train, so the defender brings more defense ... rinse and repeat. All this does is add to the blob mentality. Supply chain and the risk/reward in operating them is something CCP should be constantly monitoring. Am I against Jump bridges/titan bridges. No but I think the risk/reward level needs to be looked at to balance it with other logistics options. If these means introducing other logistics options then I am more than willing to try that and give feedback to CCP. 2) Agree completely. POS's are no longer the mainstay of holding a system, they are an industrial resource for mining and production and need to be rebalanced to align with this use. As for the interface adn genarl POS system I agree and have mentioned the 'Flogging a dead horse' POS thread a number of times as something the CSM should be taking to CCP. 3) As a heavy investor in PI, I like theisk I am making, but I think we need more information about the uptake and use of PI. Like mnufacturing to meet supply maybe we ned to allow those that are doing it to do more easier or make it easier for others to do to get them interested. This certainly needs looking at. I know that balance is unbalanced because I can make more on a time invested basis from my PI than I can from a time investment for mining minerals ... and that is not right. As for making it easier (to get more people doing it) I put a couple of suggestions into the 1000 papercuts thread, the primary one is allowing players to import and export to corp hangers from PI Starports. A lot of time is spent collecting the output from the planets and then moving it round to secondary manufacturing points. I know personally if I could export it all to a corp hanger and then have a single character fly round and collect it then that would be much better. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.05 08:33:00 - [14] Originally by: Salene Gralois As far as i know there was never any mention of mining having to be more profitable than PI in isk/h. Setting up a good PI-chain takes more effort and skill (personal, not sp's) as well as a better understanding of eve's market than mining to make it work right. Right now it's no longer as cheap to run a POS compared to pre-PI; but neither are capital module production or t2 production. However, even if current prices aren't great, Eve has changed since 2003 and it is now much easier to acquire isk in any profession. Your right there is no mention of that limitation, but it is a good balance rule. It should not be possible for a passive income source to earn you more than an active compareable one. I am not complaining to much cos it is making me lots of isk, but it causes me a few balance concerns and some inflation concers as well. If isk becomes more available etc. etc. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.05 21:16:00 - [15] Originally by: Bruce What is your stance on adding missile turrets to ships? Its the only major weapon system still magically appearing from the center of the ship. From a functionality point of view, it does not make much of a difference. But from and asthetic, and as a primary missile user, I would live to see they missiles actually 'come from somewhere' on my ship. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.06 19:55:00 - [16] Originally by: BigSako well, when we are already talking about AFH/AFK cloakers, then what do you think about AFH un-probe-able frigates/ships? I know, it is possible to d-scan them down, and I have already d-scaned GSC's and unscanable ships down a few times. Still, it's the same issue as having the cloak run 23.5/7, you just have the ECCM running 23.5/7 and/or some low-slot items that improve your strength. Maybe those items should also be changed to drain a lot more capacitor, because at this moment you can train a character that can use a frigate with ECCM mods in less then 2 days, and you can just have him sitting in a system for being there and disturbing operations of anyone. I have heard about unprobe-able ships and in general the idea of 'unlocate-able' passive ships (ships with no at the keyboard pilot) break my perception of EVE. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.08 01:45:00 - [17] Already have the 'Corp Permissions' thing on my mind. Not part of my platform (as though I want it, if it does not get enough support then I am not going to 'rage quit') but certainly something I would like to see 'fixed'. Proposal thread here > Corp Permissions This is an updated version of teh User/Role/Group paradigm tweaked a little to handle EVE. Tell me what you think. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.09 04:07:00 - [18] So voting has opened. I urge you all to vote. If not for me (though I will appreciate if you do) then for someone else that is standing and representing what you want to see in EVE. Cheers. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.09 22:44:00 - [19] New CCP Tweet: 15k pilots/4.3% of eligible pilots already voted for the #csm6 elections, up from 1.3%/4k votes at the same point last election This is freakin awesome ... the level of support that this Election is getting is just enormous. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.13 17:37:00 - [20] Thank you for your support and votes. Jonathon Silence Candidate for CSM6 EVE Online thread http://www.shay-4-csm.net/Information Site[/ur
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.13 22:37:00 - [21] Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson Biomass yourself. Reroll Jonathan Silence. Profit. End the proliferation of misspelled names! Spelling was choosen deliberately. I did not want the 'an' spelling. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.15 08:36:00 - [22] Originally by: Scheroba Dear Mr. Silence; From the outside it looks like you have what it takes to be a CSM. However, in your OP you state you wish to improve the viability of low sec. Do you have any (in game) experience in Low sec ? if so, in what capacity? Do you also realize that (IMO) all the "improvements" you list is solely geared towards making low sec into hi sec, carebear paradise. Do you foresee any "improvements" geared towards the natural inhabitants of low sec, AKA pirates? Correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems to me you are trying to make pirating even harder then it already is. is this by design? I know, more (carebear) traffic could be considered a boon to pirates, almost in a similar vain as the introduction of HIC's has been an unexpected boon to pirates. "low sec is broken" is a mere Point of View, do you subscribe to that PoV ? if the answer is yes, then what are your qualifications to make that determination ? Best Regards, Scheroba Good questions. Low-Sec Experience - Running anti-pirate combat gangs, hauling industry stuff between high-sec and low sec, running POS's in lowsec as base points to 0.0, mining ... lots of mining and some mission running. Pirates in Low-Sec : Mostly i am initially trying to attract more carebears into low sec, but I still want the danger there, but it is just going to be a bit harder for the low-sec pirate, but the riches would be more from more carebears. Long term I would like to see a network of low-sec gates only useable by low security status 'pirates', a sort of pirate gate network. I would also like to see a ransom function so that a pirate can ransom the cargo and potentially either get more isk or get more of teh cargo than would generally drop from a killed ship. I do not condone any mechanism that then forces the pirate to 'live-up' to his end of the bargin, but would suggest a counter that records the number of 'ransoms' against a toon vs. the number of destroys so give the ransomee some idea of what sort of faustian bargin he is getting into :). I do not think that low-sec is "Broken" I just think that currently there is too much risk for the level of reward. by reducing the carebear risk we increase teh reward factor of both sides and by looking at other 'compensations' for the pirates to even out the increased risk to them we should be able to strike a good balance that will be 'palatable' to both sides, neither will love it, but both should gain from the changes, which is my ultimate goal. Pirates trade off new gates and better targets for an increased risk of operating in low-sec (I am not talking about a huge increase either, my NPC spawn would be like 10/8/6/4% for .4/.3/.2/.1 sort of idea, they do not scramble and they do slighly more damage than gate guns, so you can tank them for a while, but not for ever, combined with gate or station guns the tank time shrinks, but it is not insta-pop like concord). Does that answer your question? Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.15 20:56:00 - [23] Originally by: Scheroba It answers some of the questions. your low-sec experience seems biased toward carebear, antipirate, which is fine, each to their own. you want to buff carebears, nerf pirates, check. Granted, more carebears means more targets, but why make it even harder on pirates and easier on the carebears? IMO, you should walk the proverbial mile in the shoes of a pirate, before you become, in my mind, a credible voice. That being said, i (kinda) like the idea of -10 SS gates only, my only concern is how to make it balanced. I've actually had a (RL) discussion about the this subject with Teadaze, which also highlighted the over-poweredness of these gates. The ransom thingie is something i'd very much like to see. I thank you for your time answering my questions. Though i would like you to walk the previously mentioned mile in the shoes of pirate, before, IMO, you make (somewhat blanket) statements like "make life harder for the pirate". Enjoy the free bump. Best Regards; Scheroba Granted most of my low-sec is more carebearish than pirate. While not being a pirate myself, I still agree that it is a valid choice of 'play-style'. I guess what I am trying to say is that in MY OPINION the major issue with low-sec is that for the level of reward offered, and the level of risk involved it is not a good investment. Risk approximately the same as 0.0 for much less reward. I think the rewards offered in Low-sec are about right, if we increase the rewards all that will do is attract the 0.0 Alliances to setup shop in Low-Sec to harvest the rewards, then neither the Pirates nor the high-sec carebears win. Factional warfare is becomming more blob like, which inturn means less opportunities for pirates (technically they could blob up and join the escaltion circle, but for me (and some good friends that are Pirates) Pirates have always been about small quick raids over large blob warfare, and I would want to encourage that mentality to continue. But to do that you have to encourage more 'easy' targets into low-sec not more large groups. It is not an easy issue to 'solve' in one step. And truthfully I am not supposed to solve it, I can make suggestions to CCP, and if I get onto the CSM I can give feedback on their suggested fixes, but I do not solve it. I have some ideas that I will suggest CCP investigates. But as I stated before I am not out to ruin the low-sec experience for Pirates, and would not support any solution that did, I would just like a bit more balance, but in a way that will bring greater opportunity for the pirates (though they might have to work a bit harder to fully realise them). As for the Gate network thing, I can also see ways to 'exploit' the system, but I am sure that there will be some other ways to counter most of the negative effects of this. Again, these are ideas of mine, they are not set in stone, the only thing that is set in stone is I want CCP to look at low-sec and how they can increase use levels of the systems. Thanks for listening. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.17 20:50:00 - [24] Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow Bump... you owe me a vote, Jonathon I would except I have already Cast all of mine ... Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.19 01:56:00 - [25] Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow Originally by: Jonathon Silence I would except I have already Cast all of mine ... So you're saying you're a Premature Elector? More like following the good instructions of Vote Early, Vote Often. Better than waiting for an opportunity that never arrives. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.20 07:33:00 - [26] Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow My own advice comes back to haunt me... Now isn't that Ironic ... don't ya think. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.20 22:41:00 - [27] Originally by: Moeziz Jonathan, I wanted to let you know that I put in a very enthusiastic vote for you today. I wish you well with your CSM experience! Thank you for the vote of Confidence. And more importantly, thanks for Voting. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.21 20:25:00 - [28] Originally by: Ghost Miner101 Just wanted to let you know that I voted for you. I may be just one voice in a crowd but at least its a voice. Good luck and I hope you can help CCP keep this game one that many can enjoy into the future. And thanks for the EVE mail. The personal(ish) touch is always kinda nice. And just my two bits. Always keep this in mind... You cant pleae them all but you can make them bih less. Thank you for your vote. And keeping CCP on track for the betterment of this game is my goal. Jonathon Silence** http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me
Jonathon Silence Thorny Rose Enterprises	Posted - 2011.03.22 20:32:00 - [29] Well the elections are almost over and I am happy with the way things are shaping up. Congratualtions to all teh other Candidates and good luck on the final results. If there is anyone still out there that has not voted for me ... then please do so. I will see you all on the otherside of the counting process. Jonathon Silence http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1472967 Vote for Me

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.