|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:00:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Thank you for making me smile. Actually roar with laughter.
Looking at the current " representatives " I can say that being good at e-politics is the last thing one can say of them.
Say what you will about the Mittani, but he has pretty much won EVE politics.
People who don't know very much about EVE like to spout off about the nullsec block of sheep voting for their alliance leader overlords. But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
Nullsec needs to offer a far more gratifying reward than high-sec, that's the risk vs reward mentality of EVE. The fact that players congregate into large blocs to mitigate that risk is the natural outcome of our species' politcal nature.
Why shouldn't these large alliances of people, who are forced to work together in a game where trust is nigh impossible be given greater access to resources than a person who logs in for a few hours a week to play a single player game?
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 20:48:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Zirse on 28/07/2011 20:48:09
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis on 28/07/2011 17:19:31 A "credible," highsec candidate would have to be campeigning long before anyone else due to the fact he or she would essentially be rallying a playerbase that is incredibly diverse, lazy, and fearful.
Hazarding a glance at the "highsec," forum names that would have a shot at garnering such support I don't see anyone who's game to do it. So if you want your opinions better represented and you're tired of our 0.0 politics hogging the show, I suggest you get out there and find a candidate who's willing to take on this task and be damned sure they're good at e-politics.
Well if you had bothered to read the whole thread it may have given you a clue that this is what it is all about. I'm not saying that getting hisec organised behind a slate of credible candidates is going to be easy. It is true that the people in hisec are individualistic in temperament and not easy to organise. I refute your implication that we are "lazy, and fearful." The "socialistic" nature of 0.0 is not something that appeals to me and I suspect many others. Why work for the priviledge of fitting someone else out with a Titan?
No, the contempt and disdain that it obvious in the utterances of people connected with 0.0 seems to me to be a more than convincing argument for getting a counterweight to the self-serving attitude of the 0.0 representatives on the current CSM. Anyone wanting to contact me in game is more than welcome. This is going to be hard to pull off, but it needs to be done for the sake of the game.
Look out nullsec, Jaxon Grylls is on the case.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.28 23:36:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Zirse
People who don't know very much about EVE like to spout off about the nullsec block of sheep voting for their alliance leader overlords. But each one of those sheep is a real person (with 5 or 6 accounts most likely) who is genuinely interested in nullsec affairs and on average, far more organized than the average high-sec dweller. Voting for an alliance leader doesn't make a nullsec player any less of an individual, just a smarter, self-interested one.
Nullsec needs to offer a far more gratifying reward than high-sec, that's the risk vs reward mentality of EVE. The fact that players congregate into large blocs to mitigate that risk is the natural outcome of our species' politcal nature.
Why shouldn't these large alliances of people, who are forced to work together in a game where trust is nigh impossible be given greater access to resources than a person who logs in for a few hours a week to play a single player game?
I am fairly certain I roamed null sec before Mittens even thought about starting in EVE. I have done about anything EVE has to offer, from missionrunning to sov war, small PvP, solo PvP, industry in all aspects, trade etc.
The null sec players however have to realise that they can nerf high sec to hell but that will mean they will nerf their 0.0 game too, since high sec can't exist without null sec and visa versa.
Null sec messed up a lot of the null sec life themselves but instead at looking how they themselves fecked things up it's easier to point in other directions. CCP made it possible to blue a lot of other alliances and corporations so they blue eachother to death in a few big coalitions and then they cry that 0.0 becomes stagnant.
There are enough options to increase a commercial infrastructure in null sec, but the very nature of null sec dwellers messes that up for themselves.
Ow and yes you can look at my KB stats and find them wanting a lot, but guess what, those stats mean jack cause they tell only a small insignificant part of the whole picture.
Go read up on Game Theory and come back when your done.
Alliance bloc proliferation is unavoidable in a sandbox, especially as the game grows.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 16:56:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Killer Gandry
Originally by: Zirse [Go read up on Game Theory and come back when your done.
Alliance bloc proliferation is unavoidable in a sandbox, especially as the game grows.
The fact is that most problems that exsist in EVE currently are player driven.
Exactly my point. Player driven and inevitable. Nullsec exists in a realist paradigm, where alliance continuance relies on doing what it takes to win rather than what is 'fun.'
Next time I promise to yield to the mighty intellect of Killer Gandry.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.29 21:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Killer Gandry Did you study to get this dimwitted or did it all come natural?
Seems if I talk to you like your Mitty does it might get through your thick skull.
People in nullsec dug their own problems and now they want high sec and CCP to undig them. That is the reality of null sec.
I can't even insult you because you fail so miserably at logic. What are you even trying to say?
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 02:32:00 -
[6]
EVERYONE CAN VOTE
Nowehere in the rulebook are non-nullsec players restricted from voting. The CSM has long been ignored by nullsec, to the point that the one one prior to this one was so unabashedly unrepresentative of nullsec that we as players organized to play a bigger role on this CSM.
Use this as an opportunity to rally yourselves and perhaps collectively wet your little carebear panties on the next CSM. Or don't, I don't care.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.07.30 14:58:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Killer Gandry For someone who doesn't care you attempt to be very vocal.
Just tired of the level of stupid.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.03 16:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: James Duar Edited by: James Duar on 03/08/2011 08:21:17
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes I really can't believe that these mega alliances have every moon covered with a moon mining POS, and can't spare the Powergrid/CPU for labs. The 0.0 power blocs *could* have all the invention slots they could use, but for some reason, they don't.
Are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?
If it was cheaper to run your own 0.0 invention slots, then people would do that. It isn't, as evidenced by the fact that no one has implemented it on a large scale, which should inform you that, perhaps, it is not fiscally or :effort: viable compared to just jumping to high-sec.
Were it effective, every alliance would do it, since if they did not they would lose their competitive edge against other alliances.
Research POSes aren't the difficult part. There are plenty of those in every alliance. The problem is the logistics of inventing in null and having to import most of your components, especially datacores.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.04 18:09:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jaxon Grylls
Originally by: Zirse
Exactly my point. Player driven and inevitable. Nullsec exists in a realist paradigm, where alliance continuance relies on doing what it takes to win rather than what is 'fun.'
Then what is the point of playing EVE. I may have got it wrong but I thought EVE was a *GAME* Unless someone is paying you to play of course!
Some parts of EVE are really fun, some parts are not. Try doing nullsec alliance logistics without wanting to take your own life on a nightly basis. But I think we all play this game more for the meta aspect than the actual half-baked space sim. It is fun belonging to an empire, protecting your borders and resources from other players in a persistent universe filled with political intrigue.
I'm not saying there is no room for improvement in nullsec. I think we'd all like to see an incentive for smaller fleet fights, but large ones are fun too.
|
Zirse
Minmatar ZED Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.05 20:45:00 -
[10]
Do you realize that nullsec encompasses a large portion of players and right now it is quite broken?
How is fixing that a bad thing for EVE or 'drinking the koolaid.'
|
|
Zirse
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.08.13 16:54:00 -
[11]
Originally by: FloppieTheBanjoClown
Originally by: Zirse Do you realize that nullsec encompasses a large portion of players and right now it is quite broken?
How is fixing that a bad thing for EVE or 'drinking the koolaid.'
It's possible to fix nullsec without taking the nerfbat to every other part of the game. Nerf wormholes? REALLY? Because they aren't dangerous enough with no local, no gates, no sovereignty, and no stable route for reinforcements?
I'd be curious to know the distribution of time spent in high/low/null/w-space. I've heard figures that say that the VAST majority of Eve players are in highsec. It stands to reason, then, that highsec should be the priority.
Now I understand that CCP wants to tempt more people out into the nullsec sandbox. The biggest barrier I see to that is lowsec. Do something to make lowsec more worthwhile and the switch to null becomes a gradual thing, rather than the "if I even stick my head out of highsec, it gets shot off" mentality I see among a lot of the carebears in high.
Aww, you're cute.
|
|
|
|