In the interests of disclosure, I support Mike for CSM, So I'm not going to throw him easy questions... I tend to agree with him that Hi-sec is OK as is, if you feel it's 'too safe' for everyone involved, I'd agree... and as soon as you set this game up so that if you are involved in a suicide gank you lose your pod I'll endorse making ganking 'easier'.

You like to talk about 'risk vs reward' and I'd say that with ganking, it's skewed in favor of the ganker... yeah, most exhumers and mining barges got a buff, they've needed it, but they are still destroyable, yet a fast-warping dessy in a high-sec, high-traffic system (Like Sivala) is VERY hard to catch and kill, even if you have kill-rights... so gankers are safe in over 90% of their time with the use of alts... how is this different than the situation you complain about with miners?

For people who use low SP dedicated alts, and even those who don't, losing your pod is no big deal. You really shouldn't need to fit implants to gank, getting a buddy is just better and cheaper.

So yea, if you frame it solely in terms of firepower and chance of survival, the miners seem to be at a disadvantage, but when you throw all the other variables; the need for coordination, timing, teamwork and the ability to eat a financial loss, then it is not so skewed anymore.

Allow me to present undeniable evidence that the miner does not fear getting ganked. There is absolutely no reason to mine ice is 0.5 systems. Ice does not run out. It is available in the same quantity in 0.7 systems. The high sec ice miner clearly completely disregards system security when they jam into a 0.5 ice belt. This is clear indication that they do not die often enough for it.

Oh look, the arrogant Podside carebear CSM candidate.

Just find the time to listen to him, this guy is always spreading his disgusting themepark message, you can feel his hate when we talks about emergent gameplay and everything that makes sandbox mmo-rpg's great.

Ganking someone because you think you can make a profit may be a form of emergent gameplay, but simply because those of us who have been targeted at some time in the past (Never lost a mining ship due to ganking yet that I can recall, lost a hulk to a stealth bomber when I was in null, and a retriever when I fell asleep at the keyboard while mining in a belt) lack the ability to fight back in any meaningful way when we are targeted, and attempt to either find ways to strike back, or argue against the 'let us kill the high-sec miner, he's tasty' crows when they claim we're all bots, DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE SAND BOX!

-The removal of mineral loot from the 0.0 drone regions sent highsec mining profits through the roof

CONCORD, kill rights, bounties and at the end of the day war dec and/or mercs to do it for you.

How many more tools do you need? If you're NOT opposed to the sand box what nerf, buff, or level of protection at the cost of emergent gameplay would be "enough" to get the aforementioned "we" to finally stop the endless lobbying for CCP handouts at the expense of the unique draw of EVE Online?

By the way, over the last 2 years?

-CONCORD has been buffed repeatedly
-Insurance has been removed from suicide gankers
-Mining barges received a substantial HP increase
-Kill rights have been turned from a nearly useless feature to a sellable/transferable "kill my ganker" card
-Bounties have been turned from a nearly useless feature to an actually meaningful socioeconomic PVP activity

AND

-The removal of mineral loot from the 0.0 drone regions sent highsec mining profits through the roof

If by chance you do get elected I hope you show all of us wrong and do good work.

My stand on NPC corps. In the beginning they are a necessity. Players starting out need a safe haven while they learn what the game is iike. But later, their benefits start to be come a bit more . . .extreme.

I'd love to see the numbers to show whether the raising of taxes of the NPC corps actually had the intended effect of moving people to player corps. Was the change in tax rate enough?

Immunity to wardecs needs to come at a price , , , but have we correctly set that price. Face it, it is not just the 'carebears' who live under that shield. Lots of null players have hauler alts motoring along under the same umbrella.

People keep talking about risk-reward comparisons but I think we also need to talk safety-cost. Yes, you can be safe but it shoudl bear a price tag. I think the newbie corps should have next to NO taxes but only allow people who still qualify for Rookie Chat. Until I see the numbers of the last tax hike I cannot say whether jacking the rates higher would be a good idea. Or whether it would be more beneficial to tax other activities.

This is one of the key things that CSM members have a chance to do, make more informed decisions.

I'd like chance to get that information to make those decisions properly based on the history of the issue, not on a knee-jerk reaction to save the carebears or kick them out into the cold harsh universe.

Best decisions come when you understand the question and have thought about all the consequences.

m

My stand on NPC corps. In the beginning they are a necessity. Players starting out need a safe haven while they learn what the game is iike. But later, their benefits start to be come a bit more . . .extreme.

I'd love to see the numbers to show whether the raising of taxes of the NPC corps actually had the intended effect of moving people to player corps. Was the change in tax rate enough?

Immunity to wardecs needs to come at a price , , , but have we correctly set that price. Face it, it is not just the 'carebears' who live under that shield. Lots of null players have hauler alts motoring along under the same umbrella.

People keep talking about risk-reward comparisons but I think we also need to talk safety-cost. Yes, you can be safe but it shoudl bear a price tag. I think the newbie corps should have next to NO taxes but only allow people who still qualify for Rookie Chat. Until I see the numbers of the last tax hike I cannot say whether jacking the rates higher would be a good idea. Or whether it would be more beneficial to tax other activities.

This is one of the key things that CSM members have a chance to do, make more informed decisions.

I'd like chance to get that information to make those decisions properly based on the history of the issue, not on a knee-jerk reaction to save the carebears or kick them out into the cold harsh universe.

Best decisions come when you understand the question and have thought about all the consequences.

m

This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.

Most people who talk about hisec straight have no clue as they're not hiseccers. Veteran hiseccers are rare to come by as hisec burns out players before they really become veterans. They move elsewhere or leave the game as veteran hiseccers are not supposed to exist despite hisec is the majority of the game.

This leads to some common misconceptions, and I see the ugly nose of one of them in your post: namely, the assumption that "making life uncomfortable for group X will drive them into insert-your-pet-cooler-group". No. Make NPC corps unbearable and people will either start one-man corps or leave the game. Make one-man corps unbearable and people will rather leave the game than move to larger player corps.

A player determined to be in the invisible majority (and so to play mostly solo in hisec and on a casual schedule) will either do that or play another game. In the long run he will find himself in the short end of CCP's development efforts and will leave nonetheless, thus -I'll repeat- veteran hiseccers become a rare sight.

Currently hisec pushes players into a dilemma: do else or leave. And they leave.

I think eve players are more determined and resourceful then you give them credit for.
Btw who said anything about making player corps unbearable?

When I reach 200 I won't fool around with any secret gamesmanship. I'll let you know I have enough.

m

Candidates will be informed by email when they pass the 200 vote threshold.

According to the dev blog relevant to the elections



I get the mail, I make the post.

m

Could a large organized group troll endorsements?

Excellent question, I'll see if I can find an answer

m

I really want to know about the question Darth asked.

Can someone bait and switch enough that you are endorsed and then not?

Could a large organized group troll endorsements?

Excellent question, I'll see if I can find an answer

m