EVE Search - [CSM 6 ] Vile rat for CSM

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

[CSM 6 ] Vile rat for CSM - We can fix this.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:14:00 - [1] Vileratforcsm.org Greetings friends, it is time to discuss the future of the game we are all guilty of playing, Eve-Online. I have sat patiently hoping that things would change on their own, that CSMs of the past would press to have the core issues addressed but all I've seen are minor changes around the margins. The state of things are not good and those who follow the political game can clearly see that events are leading to a conclusion instead of a continuation of the sandbox environment we've all enjoyed. The dream of one day becoming the new strong power to press your claim to eve's overarching story is dying and the notion that 'every ship counts' has become a lost and forgotten phrase. When battles occur they are slideshow presentations between massive power blocs and frankly your contribution does not matter at all. Things must change and this change I fear is beyond the ability of those 0.0 stakeholders in power because intended game mechanics make the necessary change an inferior choice if you want to be the strongest, the best. So what's wrong? A great many things. From ship balance in the form of whole classes of ships becoming obsolete to the lack of economic scarcity making losses matter little to all involved. There are a distinct lack of goals once you take those first feeble steps into the unprotected space of lowsec/0.0 and this makes gameplay stangnant and pointless. Once my original corp Goonfleet made their start in a little pocket of Syndicate eventually rising to become a power who could influence events. Unfortunately this possibility seems out of reach and foreign to those starting today. You join with a massive power bloc or you get crushed if you attempt it without and there are few exceptions to this rule. What can we do about it? I offer you no simple solutions, because quite frankly there are none. I am not offering you a checklist of impossible implementations that will be shattered in the first meeting with CCP, that would be irresponsible. Nobody running for CSM can promise that they will make Assault Frigates better nor can they promise that they can make mining worthwhile again and if they are they are lying to you. I can however promise you a voice in the direction of this game and the knowledge that I understand what's wrong. I know the key elements that are causing stagnation and rot that are ruining the game. I pledge to keep these issues at the forefront in every meeting and press for real solutions that will break this cycle of decay. Like many of you I am concerned about massive bloc warfare silencing any other activities and I am concerned about the prevalence of supercapitals which have ruined the importance of any other ship class. I am concerned about the broken production system that causes massive bottlenecks in certain moon minerals that break intended income distribution and I am concerned about having other end game goals aside from watching a stop motion broken combat system where you sit back and hope the enemy becomes more frustrated with the mechanics and logs off before you do. This isn't how this was supposed to be when we started and this is certainly not what this place can be. I promise you nothing but my undivided focus on bringing pressure to fix these core issues and I ask for your vote so that I may be your voice in the CSM.
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:17:00 - [2] Current game mechanics allow 'power blocs,' mega-alliances that control large swathes of space. Previous changes to sovereignty mechanics only served to accelerate the rise of bloc-level politics. Nullsec player behavior has grown in sophistication and has bypassed intended game mechanics. This clearly wasn't intended, and I vow to work with CCP to come up with solutions. There are no goals for smaller entities in sovereign 0.0. Currently, there is no goal that a small group can achieve that a larger group cannot achieve more effectively. There should be goals that a smaller-sized fleet can achieve in 0.0 for which larger groups would be less well-suited. Current game mechanics favored far less diverse fleet compositions than in days past. Currently, fleets favor a more homogenized fleet makeup. (ie, "Drake blob," "Alphafleet") Fleets should be encouraged to incorporate a wider variety of ships to ensure success. Larger ships are increasingly making smaller ships obsolete. This is especially true in the divide between subcapitals, capitals and supercapitals. Capitals and supercapitals should exist to support a subcapital fleet; not replace it. There should be measurable disincentives for using top-heavy fleet compositions. There is a distinct lack of balance across racial lines. Economic scarcity is beginning to break down for more wealthy players. Eve was designed as a world where taking losses matters. There is an increasing number of super-wealthy pilots who are all-but-immune to losses. Some of these pilots are benefiting from previous game mechanics and CCP action that gave them continuing advantages. (T2 BPO lottery, ultra-rare ship giveaways) Others benefit from massive disparities in moon mineral prices. Others are benefiting from ostensibly-illegal behavior (botting). There should be a greater focus on drawing ISK away from players of all income levels. There should also be an increased dedication to combating automated ISK generation. Mining is a sub-par method of accruing wealth and minerals compared to other methods. PVP is the core of the game, but it's too difficult to find it in reasonable proportions. The differences between PVP in empire, lowsec and nullsec are vast. The risks and rewards of operating in low security space make it far less appealing than either empire or 0.0 space. Faction warfare has become a largely irrelevant and underdeveloped form of gameplay. There should be a serious effort made to balance risk and reward in low security space. But more importantly, I don't just want the opportunity to bring my own ideas to CCP. I want to bring them your ideas on how to improve Eve Online. I vow to give all player concerns, ideas and criticisms a fair chance. Mail me with your concerns to bring to CCP.
EnderCapitalG Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:21:00 - [3] I support this product and/or service.
Ganthirthor Magnus	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:22:00 - [4] I support vile rat
The Mittani GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:22:00 - [5] Notice: Vile Rat isn't promising you the moon and stars. He doesn't claim that he'll suddenly become a ~game designer~ when elected and magically be able to fix blasters. Unlike just about everyone else running for CSM, Vile Rat isn't lying to you. Sins of a Solar Spymaster: my ~fair and balanced~ column TheMittani @ Twitter
Divus Bene	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:22:00 - [6] I support this product and/or service.
Tyreal Magnus Caldari Thunderwaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:25:00 - [7] Vile Rat actually plays eve online. Vote for him!
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:27:00 - [8] Originally by: Tyreal Magnus Vile Rat actually plays eve online. Vote for him! I unironically love to play eve-online.
OhThis GuyAgain	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:28:00 - [9] What makes you qualified/motivated to speak out about balancing the game for all players, rather than just those in nullsec?
Captain Pitts Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:30:00 - [10] Best man for the job.

Kismeteer GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:34:00 - [11] Please consider honesty over falsehood. If you only know Goons for griefing, think about the fact that we can't grief if Eve Online has no players. We do actually play the game too. And the CSM can only make recommendations like the skill queue, which everyone knew in Beta needed to be implemented. Yet it didn't happen till how many CSM cycles later? If you honestly think CSM can force them to fix blasters (which need fixed!), or fix Electronic Attack frigates, you're kidding yourself. Only person who can fix this stuff is CCP. -- Kismeteer, carebear extraordinaire
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 19:45:00 - [12] Originally by: OhThis GuyAgain What makes you qualified/motivated to speak out about balancing the game for all players, rather than just those in nullsec? Actually a very good question. As to motivation, all aspects of eve play into each other. You can't look at 0.0 as its own entity when what happens in empire directly impacts 0.0 gameplay and vice versa. The economy, the learning path, everything leads in theory from one to the other and tie in. If you aren't motivated to make all aspects improve then you're fooling yourself. As to qualifications I think our forced relocation to empire has granted us a wonderful recent opportunity to enjoy all it had to offer! Seriously though I play in empire as well. I've spent a great deal of time in 0.0 and find it fun but the core gameplay issues aren't all that different from what you'd experience in highsec. You rat, you mine, you run missions, you grow corportations and relationships just like in 0.0 and anybody who thinks that empire means safe hasn't played this game for very long.
Mynxee Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2011.02.25 20:02:00 - [13] I assume that you are familiar with the many frustrations expressed by CSM5 related to communications bottlenecks and a certain lack of CCP engagement with the CSM, particularly on Incarna. What concerns or thoughts do you have regarding bottlenecks like that and possible methods for overcoming them? Chair, CSM5 CSM6 Page on Facebook--keep up with all candidates in one place!
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.25 20:24:00 - [14] Originally by: Mynxee I assume that you are familiar with the many frustrations expressed by CSM5 related to communications bottlenecks and a certain lack of CCP engagement with the CSM, particularly on Incarna. What concerns or thoughts do you have regarding bottlenecks like that and possible methods for overcoming them? This would qualify as a "hard question with no easy answers". CCP will respond as much or as little as they want to. I could throw a simple statement about lots of vodka and a sizable amount of lobbying but that would be simplifying it to a great extent. Going into this all candidates must first realize that we're running out of chances to get them to see things from our perspective but let me say it this way. This is going to take a lot of work. This is going to take an amazing amount of us doing our homework, it's going to take a large amount of collaboration between the CSM delegates to formulate a solid coherent front that keeps CCP focused on these issues. If we can't come together and get our ducks in a row before we even begin dialogue with CCP then our priorities will be scattered and diluted. If we can't form that united front then I don't see how we're going to be able to have any more impact than in the past so that'll be a key part of what must happen. Knowing the candidates as I do it's no surprise that you have a sizable number of Lawyers and even Foreign service members going for this, all people that know how to convince and make people see things the way they do. So no easy answer. We're going to break the bottleneck because we're too damn stubborn and care far too much about the future of this game to let our concerns die.
Raidek Minmatar Bad Kitty Inc. Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2011.02.25 21:29:00 - [15] I support Vile Rat, The Mittani and a unified CSM.
Ayame Tenischa Exile Consortium Nihilists Social Club	Posted - 2011.02.25 23:13:00 - [16] I support Vile rat and MEANINGFULL changes to EVE through the CSM. You have my vote, and those I can convince to see the light. ;)
iP0D	Posted - 2011.02.25 23:25:00 - [17] It's not so hard really. CCP gave CSM the tools to do it. It's called "pressure management", you achieve that by applying a little bit of clarity on workflow, and a healthy bit of accountability. How? Simple. But only possible if the CSM as a whole does it, without falling for social engineering or the party line. Have everything transparant and visible to everyone (an NDA slap does not prevent - as we have seen - from making clear the heart of the matter, it only hides the ugly and the details). Community with each other and with CCP and the general public on all. And do all that consistantly. Next time a team incarna runs away because CSM is evil, or a lead game designer runs for the hills for new shiny and complains about customers, but also next time a good team in CCP delivers well or engages well, that combination provides that pressure management. Since it is all public, transparant, consistantly kept visible and communicated that can greatly aid both playrs and CCP alike, but also very well expose when failure happens (and who, and why). Constructively, obviously. And independant media help, as does social networking. Originally by: Vile rat Originally by: Mynxee I assume that you are familiar with the many frustrations expressed by CSM5 related to communications bottlenecks and a certain lack of CCP engagement with the CSM, particularly on Incarna. What concerns or thoughts do you have regarding bottlenecks like that and possible methods for overcoming them? This would qualify as a "hard question with no easy answers". CCP will respond as much or as little as they want to. I could throw a simple statement about lots of vodka and a sizable amount of lobbying but that would be simplifying it to a great extent. Going into this all candidates must first realize that we're running out of chances to get them to see things from our perspective but let me say it this way. This is going to take a lot of work. This is going to take an amazing amount of us doing our homework, it's going to take a large amount of collaboration between the CSM delegates to formulate a solid coherent front that keeps CCP focused on these issues. If we can't come together and get our ducks in a row before we even begin dialogue with CCP then our priorities will be scattered and diluted. If we can't form that united front then I don't see how we're going to be able to have any more impact than in the past so that'll be a key part of what must happen. Knowing the candidates as I do it's no surprise that you have a sizable number of Lawyers and even Foreign service members going for this, all people that know how to convince and make people see things the way they do. So no easy answer. We're going to break the bottleneck because we're too damn stubborn and care far too much about the future of this game to let our concerns die.
Internet Lawyer	Posted - 2011.02.25 23:28:00 - [18] This one shows promise!
Prime Radiant Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.26 02:44:00 - [19] Vile rat is the best of rats and will do great things for all. X's SABRE
Marconus Orion Global Criminal Countdown	Posted - 2011.02.26 04:06:00 - [20] Originally by: Vile rat I am concerned about the broken production system that causes massive bottlenecks in certain moon minerals that break intended income distribution You say 'break' intended distribution. How so? You point out things that you view as being broken. This implies that you can see things that are not broken. What about moons would you like to see happen so they are not broken?

Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.26 04:18:00 - [21] Originally by: Marconus Orion Originally by: Vile rat I am concerned about the broken production system that causes massive bottlenecks in certain moon minerals that break intended income distribution You say 'break' intended distribution. How so? You point out things that you view as being broken. This implies that you can see things that are not broken. What about moons would you like to see happen so they are not broken? The moons are fine. They haven't changed. Tweaks in production that shift bottlenecks around are poorly implemented and cause great damage to game balance.
Marconus Orion Global Criminal Countdown	Posted - 2011.02.26 04:33:00 - [22] Large fleet battles are epic, so is small scale PvP. Do you feel it is possible for both to co-exist? What are you thoughts on jump bridges in regards to logistics and power projection? Do you have a Black Ops battleship? If so, do you get to use it much or how you would like to? What ship do you secretly love no matter how broken it gets, if any? There is a ton more people playing the game than five years ago. What are your thoughts on the increase in players per system and that 'into the vast unknown' feeling? Is it still there for you? Your last truly satisfying small scale PvP experience where strategy, experience and skills were used in every aspect that gave you felt good about?
Profiteering	Posted - 2011.02.26 05:27:00 - [23] Im going to dis you goonswarm people because of your ceo, HES LYING. Now go troll his post.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry	Posted - 2011.02.26 05:51:00 - [24] No longer must we be subject to the sycophancy of the CSMs of the past. A vote for Vile Rat is a vote for the well-being of all and not just the priveleged elite.
Ackbarre Minmatar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.26 12:35:00 - [25] I support Vile Rat and The Mittani for CSM. As well as that other guy White Tree. You will have all my votes.
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.26 15:40:00 - [26] Originally by: Marconus Orion Large fleet battles are epic, so is small scale PvP. Do you feel it is possible for both to co-exist? Absolutely. No question they both can exist and should exist. The problem is mostly goals, there's no achievable goal in the game that can be accomplished with a small group (that's worth doing) where a larger group isn't the best counter. Hratli Smirks did a good write up (it's on K.com if you're interested) of a "king of the hill" style lowsec goal that would be a good achievable idea that would help to fix this issue. Really when you reach the end there's one goal and in my opinion that's where things fall apart. Quote: What are you thoughts on jump bridges in regards to logistics and power projection? I don't approve of anything that would reintroduce tedium such as making people jump 40 jumps just to get back and forth to empire. That's not to say I think you should have a safe run of it. Two separate issues in play here and they aren't necessarily two sides of the same coin. You can have quick logistics without it being safe logistics. Quote: Do you have a Black Ops battleship? If so, do you get to use it much or how you would like to? I did. It blew up because I was a dumbass. I like the concept of the ship but it's just a mini titan without the fun part at this point and not very fun to fly. We get a lot of use out of them inserting bombing squads and there's a great deal of utility in that but they're just support ships. Quote: What ship do you secretly love no matter how broken it gets, if any? I would love for dreads to be worth flying again. I'm a bit bitter about what supercapitals have done to the usefulness of regular cap fleets. That whole implementation is just so broken right now. Quote: There is a ton more people playing the game than five years ago. What are your thoughts on the increase in players per system and that 'into the vast unknown' feeling? Is it still there for you? That fell apart when bloc warfare became the norm. Now you have people huddled into hubs and it's become boring as HECK. Can you imagine something like ISS happening again? The blue pill? Small groups owning little outposts holding small areas independently? No of course not. They would be crushed the day they dropped the outpost egg. My first day in game I was in a Punisher in Syndicate and I've never known anything but "you're likely going to die if you aren't really careful and smart" and the game is a lesser place for that being rare these days. Quote: Your last truly satisfying small scale PvP experience where strategy, experience and skills were used in every aspect that gave you felt good about? Our directors sneak off from time to time to Querious in our alts and Mittani yammers on about HIS SABRE and Khefron goes on about his billion isk drake and I usually jam hella dudes in my Falcon. It's not much but what you're asking for is damn hard to find without having another 40 ships float in mid fight. Every fight these days is a gank or a trap and the lack of achievable small scale goal contributes to this in a big way.
Widemouth Deepthroat	Posted - 2011.02.26 16:19:00 - [27] What is your position on jump bridge removal/nerf?
ImmaSplodeYou HAMMERHOUSE	Posted - 2011.02.26 23:25:00 - [28] Don't let the name fool you, as long as you don't spam in his intel channels vile rat is a very nice and very smart man, who would be an excellent choice as a CSM candidate A vote for VR is a vote for a better EVE!
Doggsbody Lame Duck Logistics	Posted - 2011.02.26 23:53:00 - [29] I actually thought that the rumours that NC and Goonswarm gad planned a massive campaign to claim all seats on the CSM were a joke until I read this. Pitiful, depressing and shameless. Bad enough that NC / Goons have killed 0.0 alliance warfare through lazy defence pacts. Even worse that they're now manipulating the playerbase into voting them in to positions where they can control CCP policy to suit their own self-preservation. Shame on you, Vile Rat. The sooner this game is reclaimed by genuine players the better.
Vile rat GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.02.27 01:36:00 - [30] Originally by: Doggsbody I actually thought that the rumours that NC and Goonswarm gad planned a massive campaign to claim all seats on the CSM were a joke until I read this. Pitiful, depressing and shameless. Bad enough that NC / Goons have killed 0.0 alliance warfare through lazy defence pacts. Even worse that they're now manipulating the playerbase into voting them in to positions where they can control CCP policy to suit their own self-preservation. Shame on you, Vile Rat. The sooner this game is reclaimed by genuine players the better. So I suppose I'm not getting your vote huh?



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.