Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2071
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:01:38 -
[1] - Quote
Yup, wouldn't really be an election if I didn't run now would it?
I am Mike Azariah, Hisec resident, and I am tossing my hat in the ring for CSMX.
I have served on the previous CSM8 and am a member of CSM9 and am still willing to keep doing what I am doing.
CSM is a team effort so it is hard to take credit for things that are done but there are one or two that I feel I have had a stronger hand in. I fought to keep some form of drone assist active. I pushed for the Bowhead ship. Most of all I have tried damn hard to keep the lines of communication between the players and the CSM and on through to CCP open. Podcasts, blogs, I will drop into fleets or do side conversations.
I listen to players.
Doesn't mean I always agree with them but I listen and if I say I will take it up with CCP, I have.
I expect a few folks will post into this thread trying to hang a label on me and some of them will be accurate . . . and some won't. The ones I accept are Carebear (although I do PvP from time to time), Casual player (although there are days when I spend 'too damn long on that computer' to quote my wife), A reasonable person to talk to (although I do confess I like the nickname Northern Troll) and last but one of my favourites . . . Anarchist (Thanks, Sion).
I am passionate about balance of game, about the new player experiences, about keeping the game a solid deep challenge for new and old players. I have seen the roadmap and I want to continue to be a part of the paving crew.
So I ask for your support.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2071
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:02:18 -
[2] - Quote
reserved oh and first
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
260
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:09:28 -
[3] - Quote
Worth voting for just to keep that moustache on the CSM.
EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest)
21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia
www.evedownunder.com
|
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
82
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:15:07 -
[4] - Quote
I'll vote for you, this will make three times. I haven't been disappointed yet and thank you for your service, you're out in the community and I appreciate your hard work.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
332
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:17:39 -
[5] - Quote
Mike will be on my list - he is a strong representative for many who would otherwise go unrepresented and thus a needed voice. He is highly communicative and gets bonus 'stache points.
Author of Interstellar Privateer
Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
|
Drackarn
Quantum Cats Syndicate
47
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:27:21 -
[6] - Quote
Certainly is one of my top 3 candidates given his previous excellent work on the CSM.
http://sandciderandspaceships.blogspot.com/
|
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
343
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 05:30:13 -
[7] - Quote
Good luck! It's nice to have a highsec person on the CSM, and someone who appreciates PvE play. Will definitely support! |
Coffee Rocks
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
333
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 06:53:01 -
[8] - Quote
A vote for Mike is a vote for freedom.
http://www.thecoffeerocks.com
Twitter: **@thecoffeerocks |-á**Steam: CoffeeRocks-á
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=327221
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1618
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 07:46:20 -
[9] - Quote
'bout time. Good stuff!
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
4822
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 12:54:12 -
[10] - Quote
I have no idea why Mike is crazy enough to run for a third term, but if he is crazy enough to run, I am crazy enough to vote for him (not at #1, that is for wormhole folks)
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
|
Jayne Fillon
442
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 13:29:16 -
[11] - Quote
Hi Mike. :D
You'll be on my ballot, keep up the great work.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Loch Bannon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 14:48:07 -
[12] - Quote
You've got my vote. Thanks for the hard work the last couple of years.
"I fly from an 'od'. -áThere is no 'pee' in it, let's keep it that way."
--Lochness
|
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc. V.L.A.S.T
16
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 16:23:33 -
[13] - Quote
Had you #1 on my ballot since July
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1313
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 16:34:20 -
[14] - Quote
Immediate +1 from me. The CSM must have its righteous mustache!
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
827
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 17:27:48 -
[15] - Quote
I voted for Mike each time he ran in the past, why stop now? +1 Mike for CSM X !
I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY
Youtube: /asayanami
Twitter: @asayanami
The Anthology
|
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Conference Elite CODE.
1176
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 17:33:09 -
[16] - Quote
Mike, what would you like to see done to increase interactions between players in high security space, both in terms of forcing players to work together, and having them work against each other?
New player resources:
Uni Wiki - General Info
Eve Altruist - PvP
Belligerent Undesirables - High Sec Pvp
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2076
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 17:46:53 -
[17] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Mike, what would you like to see done to increase interactions between players in high security space, both in terms of forcing players to work together, and having them work against each other?
I want to see the tools for social groups strengthened, mailing lists enlargened. I would really like to see an entirely new set of mechanics for people who hang together for specidc things (like CODE, Bombers Bar, Redemtion road, mining fleets, mission teams and incursions to focus on the hisec sort of thing). Grouping is the glue that makes this an MMO and we need to keep working on the tools that help that.
But I DO take issue with your wording of the question. We should never have to FORCE folks into groups or interactivity. There are people perfectly happy to play solo, to be the lone wolf hunter or the quiet single industrialist. There is nothing wrong with that and we shouldn't punish them for that style of play. Casual players face this the most since often they have limited game time to be online or odd hours and so they find it difficult to be reliable in a social group and they self isolate.
tl:dr So I want CCP to develop the tools to facilitate interaction but I do not want to force it.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Saeger1737
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
961
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 19:50:02 -
[18] - Quote
+1 I'll vote for mike because voting for tora or code seems rather suicidal.
Cheers mike, even though I don't know who you are... Lol |
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc. V.L.A.S.T
17
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 20:29:07 -
[19] - Quote
Another canadate has mafe issue of acessablity of Eve for the visually impaired and those with hearing disabilitys. In CSM10 what would be. Your ideas on addressing this issue? |
Mark726
Project Compass Holdings
127
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 20:50:28 -
[20] - Quote
I've been voting for you for as long as I can remember voting, and I have no intent on stopping now. +1.
Author, EVE Travel
Author, EVE Lore Survival Guide
|
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2079
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 21:20:23 -
[21] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:Another canadate has mafe issue of acessablity of Eve for the visually impaired and those with hearing disabilitys. In CSM10 what would be. Your ideas on addressing this issue?
As you have said, I do make an issue of trying to make Eve accessible. I talk to folks with borderline cases and forward their suggestions to appropriate UI folks.
-insert obligatory ;Eve has sound?' joke here-
I try to remind UI and art teams about people with colour-blindness and visual acuity issues. Hell I usually wind up cranking the chat font up about 5 steps.
If elected to CSM10 I would continue what I have been doing all along.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
512
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 21:30:04 -
[22] - Quote
You are an EVE player who once posted that high-sec reward should not be nerfed because so much else depends on it.
Do you believe that other areas of space should be made more profitable relative to high-sec in order to drive conflict and higher population densities outside of high-sec? What would you say if I accused high-sec reward and profitability of making struggles for resources in other areas less meaningful?
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
New Order Diplomat, contact me for all your New Order enquiries!
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2080
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 21:44:58 -
[23] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:You are an EVE player who once posted that high-sec reward should not be nerfed because so much else depends on it.
Do you believe that other areas of space should be made more profitable relative to high-sec in order to drive conflict and higher population densities outside of high-sec? What would you say if I accused high-sec reward and profitability of making struggles for resources in other areas less meaningful?
Calls for nerfing highsec income are usually based on the idea that 'they are playing it wrong so we need to FORCE them to play our way.' I disagree with that style of thinking. If you want to make another portion of New Eden have an advantage such as industrialism in low and null, I was in favour of that.
If you start quoting risk/reward I will ask what risk afktars in null suffer. Or rental agreements. Some things are not a matter of risk they are a matter of EFFORT. TIME. A miner may not be doing glorious battle but his effort is soemthing he is willing to do. Why should we asdk that he do it in places where anybody can pop him for the fun of it (more so than they already can in highsec)
The generalization of 'more profitable regions' is just that, too general. I think each section of space has appropriate activities and then some edge cases. It is smarter to carebear in relative safety. It is better to run industry where YOU are the government (null sov). Profit margins for a trade center in low should be higher because of the risks that they take.
But give me a good reason why we should nerf highsec rewards. Then ask if that same reason applies to other regions.
Or is it you just want more targets in your space?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Praetor Siderium
CRIMMSEN
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 22:23:57 -
[24] - Quote
I listen to numerous Eve podcasts and I'm pretty sure I've heard Mike on every one of them. What I've learned about him is that he doesn't care for just one aspect of the game, he cares about the entire game. I don't know if I always agree with his positions but I respect the fact that he presents his positions with a veritable heap of information as to WHY he feels the way he does, and why he thinks things should or should not be changed. He reads the forums to make sure he remains in touch with the rest of the player base and he makes a FRIGGIN list of things to check into. I'm not sure how he manages to play the game let alone spend time with his family and work.
He is a voice of reason and sanity in a place where crazies often get the most attention. +3 votes from me Mike.
PS - Thanks for all your hard work with the Newbros
PPS - I'm gonna go buy a "holidy" card this weekend and send it out next week |
mr ed thehouseofed
Wrought iron Industries
27599
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 14:14:09 -
[25] - Quote
gets my vote
i want a eve pinball machine... -áconfirming -áCCP Cognac is best cognac
|
Mangala Solaris
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1164
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 14:51:14 -
[26] - Quote
In my CSM capacity I have worked alongside Mike for approaching two years now and he has been tireless in his work on your behalf. I will certainly recommend you all have him high on your ballots come the elections. He deserves a third term!
RvB Ganked: EVE's Number One Weekly Public Roam
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
228
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 17:07:55 -
[27] - Quote
Hi Mike,
I have questions/concern about new players and getting them integrated into the game. I think most people agree that the quality of a new player's Eve experience in the game (and ultimately the time the stay playing Eve) depends greatly on the initial social contacts that they make. Ideally, they will shortly after finishing the tutorials end up in a good corp that can not only teach them, but support them in the activities they find most enjoyable. However, getting newbies into the correct corp can be challenging, and I am concerned that many new players can end up in small, incompetent (for lack of a better word) or downright exploitative corps which are unable or unwilling to help new players learn the game making their initial Eve experience more frustrating.
So firstly, do you think enough is being done to help guide new players into competent corporations that are interested in training new players? Do you have any ideas on what additional mechanisms could be implemented to help new players find not only a social environment where the thrive, but into corporations willing to train and support them?
Secondly, there are upcoming changes in Rhea which will facilitate the "spamming" of new players with corporation invitations and a proposal in the last CSM minutes (pg. 78) to ban intracorp agression in highsec. Together, these will remove two "checks" on this spamming behaviour that is so prevalent in other games, as there will now be zero risk in accepting new players into your corporation. This will make a strategy of "spam inviting" in starter systems to gather new players into an exploitative corp that has excessively high taxes or a low ore buy-back program a viable one, and one that will have a detrimental effect on the experience of new players.
So, what can we do to help prevent new player's lack of knowledge of game mechanics from being exploited by nefarious, or just clueless CEOs? Personally, I think this is a strong argument against changing the intracorp aggression mechanics, but assuming they go through, what can be done to limit the danger of new players ending up in terrible/exploitative corps and just quitting the game?
Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10 is a good idea.
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2085
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 18:11:09 -
[28] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: So firstly, do you think enough is being done to help guide new players into competent corporations that are interested in training new players? Do you have any ideas on what additional mechanisms could be implemented to help new players find not only a social environment where the thrive, but into corporations willing to train and support them?
Secondly, So, what can we do to help prevent new player's lack of knowledge of game mechanics from being exploited by nefarious, or just clueless CEOs?
I edited his quote so I could focus on the questions.
Do I think enough is being done for new players? Hell, no. That is why I am in the Rookie Help Chat and why I am organizing Operation Magic School Bus. I have said for YEARS that we need to find some way to encourage the corps that actually help new players (as opposed to prey on them) Whether it be by tax breaks, some sort of non-isk recognition, whatever. If we ever manage to make sorp and alliance skins I would say the helpers get theirs FIRST.
What can we do to help players against nefarious CEOs? You mean like the ones already spamming in newbie systems to join their corp (which has the low low tax rate of 50-75%? Or the ones who set up mining groups for thier own personal sources? Spam isn't coming, it is already here. I am of two minds on this one. One: It IS Eve and as long as the rules are logical and apparent then some of the burden SHOULD be on the players. BUT this is why I agreed with the removal of awox. The rule was counter-intuitive and dumb. So yes CCP should have some very minor protections for new players in the starting and career systems I do think some of the burden alos belongs with the players.
But damn, we need a better system to show them there is more than mining and missions. To encourage them to be social, to make them part of our community.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Hiasa Kite
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
39
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 18:45:05 -
[29] - Quote
You'll be getting a vote from me, Mike. Good luck! |
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
512
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 21:52:53 -
[30] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Amyclas Amatin wrote:You are an EVE player who once posted that high-sec reward should not be nerfed because so much else depends on it.
Do you believe that other areas of space should be made more profitable relative to high-sec in order to drive conflict and higher population densities outside of high-sec? What would you say if I accused high-sec reward and profitability of making struggles for resources in other areas less meaningful? Calls for nerfing highsec income are usually based on the idea that 'they are playing it wrong so we need to FORCE them to play our way.' I disagree with that style of thinking. If you want to make another portion of New Eden have an advantage such as industrialism in low and null, I was in favour of that. If you start quoting risk/reward I will ask what risk afktars in null suffer. Or rental agreements. Some things are not a matter of risk they are a matter of EFFORT. TIME. A miner may not be doing glorious battle but his effort is soemthing he is willing to do. Why should we asdk that he do it in places where anybody can pop him for the fun of it (more so than they already can in highsec) The generalization of 'more profitable regions' is just that, too general. I think each section of space has appropriate activities and then some edge cases. It is smarter to carebear in relative safety. It is better to run industry where YOU are the government (null sov). Profit margins for a trade center in low should be higher because of the risks that they take. But give me a good reason why we should nerf highsec rewards. Then ask if that same reason applies to other regions. Or is it you just want more targets in your space? m
All of null-sec, both in the CFC and outside of it are PVP areas where anyone may freely engage anyone. Ratting ships from all sides die, routinely, as a product of hostile action, as such losses are usually accepted and prepared for as part of the risks of living in the area. The effort required for solo PVE can be minimized just as much whether you are in high-sec or null-sec, and I would assert that the main factor in balancing the incomes would be the risks players face when operating in each area.
Large scale sovereignty warfare moves at a glacial pace, you may see it as less "risky", and thousand man fleets fighting over sovereignty objectives are not an immediate part of the risks facing each sides' ratters. Null-sec sovereignty deals more with alliances fighting at a large strategic scale. The risks posed to individuals making an income are more to do with small-gang pvp, which can exist anywhere in null-sec. Small-gang warfare targeting ratters and renters are still very much alive, the two powerblocs do it to each other, and often support smaller "pirate" groups operating in each others' space.
In stark contrast, there are far more limited options for directly engaging individuals making an income in high-sec. Individuals can easily evade wardecs. Suicide ganking has reached the point where only highly organized entities do it regularly.
It may be a smarter player choice to PVE in safer areas, but as a matter of having a better game, more dangerous areas should be more rewarding relative to high-sec. Features like incursions which give a high-level of income in high-sec break the reward incentive for people to attempt to make money out of low-sec, null-sec and wormhole space. The incentive for making money in high-sec must decrease relative to the incentive for making money in other areas of space if PVP is to have a higher stake in the way individuals have income.
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
New Order Diplomat, contact me for all your New Order enquiries!
|
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2086
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 00:09:10 -
[31] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:The incentive for making money in high-sec must decrease relative to the incentive for making money in other areas of space if PVP is to have a higher stake in the way individuals have income.
The incentive for making more isk is the same every where so I assume you mean the means. Right?
Look, we can play this point counterpoint all day because you missed what I was saying. I am NOT trying to ruin or even change your gameplay when we discuss ways of making isk but I, in return, ask the same. Do not look to nerf someone else to make your own situation be better. Look to improve your own space, make it attractive.
It is like real estate . . . graffiti on the next block over might make yours look better, relatively, but it is a downward spiral and in the end, few want to live anywhere nearby. If we make highsec untenable then we block a distinct portion of the game population who have no want or need to go to low or null. THAT hurts the whole game.
Make your space better . . . not by making someone elses space worse but by actually making your space BETTER. As a result the whole game will benefit.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
514
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 01:06:56 -
[32] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Amyclas Amatin wrote:The incentive for making money in high-sec must decrease relative to the incentive for making money in other areas of space if PVP is to have a higher stake in the way individuals have income. The incentive for making more isk is the same every where so I assume you mean the means. Right? Look, we can play this point counterpoint all day because you missed what I was saying. I am NOT trying to ruin or even change your gameplay when we discuss ways of making isk but I, in return, ask the same. Do not look to nerf someone else to make your own situation be better. Look to improve your own space, make it attractive. It is like real estate . . . graffiti on the next block over might make yours look better, relatively, but it is a downward spiral and in the end, few want to live anywhere nearby. If we make highsec untenable then we block a distinct portion of the game population who have no want or need to go to low or null. THAT hurts the whole game. Make your space better . . . not by making someone elses space worse but by actually making your space BETTER. As a result the whole game will benefit. m
What I am saying is that areas outside of high-sec must be more attractive for making isk relative to high-sec if we don't want the game to devolve into e-sports where players and groups can easily recover losses in the "safe-zone" of high-sec.
Groups like CFC and The New Order actively attempt to disrupt high-sec economic activity because we understand the impact that the wealth it produces has on the rest of the game. If capital pilot owners on both sides mine in high-sec or run incursions, would it not be in our interest to disrupt and hurt such activities? If producers in high-sec are in direct economic conflict with our own industrialists, would it not be in our interest to slaughter them en-mass? Conflict comes to high-sec because it is connected to every area of the game. If the humble high-sec miner, mission runner, incursion runner or industrialist who do not want to leave high-sec were not in economic competition with the rest of the game, you would certainly see less effort put into their extermination.
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
New Order Diplomat, contact me for all your New Order enquiries!
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
48
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 07:42:58 -
[33] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Amyclas Amatin wrote:The incentive for making money in high-sec must decrease relative to the incentive for making money in other areas of space if PVP is to have a higher stake in the way individuals have income. The incentive for making more isk is the same every where so I assume you mean the means. Right? Look, we can play this point counterpoint all day because you missed what I was saying. I am NOT trying to ruin or even change your gameplay when we discuss ways of making isk but I, in return, ask the same. Do not look to nerf someone else to make your own situation be better. Look to improve your own space, make it attractive. It is like real estate . . . graffiti on the next block over might make yours look better, relatively, but it is a downward spiral and in the end, few want to live anywhere nearby. If we make highsec untenable then we block a distinct portion of the game population who have no want or need to go to low or null. THAT hurts the whole game. Make your space better . . . not by making someone elses space worse but by actually making your space BETTER. As a result the whole game will benefit. m *snip* If the humble high-sec miner, mission runner, incursion runner or industrialist who do not want to leave high-sec were not in economic competition with the rest of the game, you would certainly see less effort put into their extermination.
Doubtful. It's one thing for Miniluv or CODE to target known logistics alts and alt corps of enemy power blocs. It's quite another to massacre every freighter that enters a pipe system.
Even if nullsec was far and away the best place to do industry you would still see people doing it in highsec and you would still kill them so your argument is pointless justification. But that is to be expected from james 315's followers. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
354
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 10:54:19 -
[34] - Quote
Mike, I always have fun talking with you, feel like I can approach you with any of my ideas I think are worth doing more than just throwing at a wall to see what sticks and when we disagree on things, you can articulate your point to even someone as hard headed and opinionated as me.
+1 for mikes continuation on CSM. +1 for letting mike continue to use the developed relationships and skills to be an effective part of CSM.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4188
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 17:08:16 -
[35] - Quote
i see mike as one of the more active csm on the forums, soliciting opinions and visibly reading and responding to feedback threads. i don't regret voting for mike in the past and i'll vote for him again despite his being a horrid dirty carebear
Mike Azariah wrote:Calls for nerfing highsec income are usually based on the idea that 'they are playing it wrong so we need to FORCE them to play our way.' I disagree with that style of thinking. If you want to make another portion of New Eden have an advantage such as industrialism in low and null, I was in favour of that.
given these conditions, - if players were avoiding activity in dangerous space due to rewards not stacking up to the effort/time/risk, - when players would otherwise enjoy activity in that space including hazards (i believe players generally gravitate to the most optimal method for an activity regardless of 'fun factor'), - when making changes would probably cause players who would prefer to play there to move there, - when making changes would not cause safer space to have inoptimal rewards for effort/time/risk for those who would prefer to remain, - and when changes would create additional or more enjoyable pvp/piracy encounters for everyone who desires such gameplay, i feel 'making more targets move to this dangerous space' would be a good goal, because it's adding to the entertainment value of the game by presenting more engaging options for those who want to take them
that's not reason for simply nerfing the 'better' options, though. it's a hypothetical circumstance that may justify a certain goal. i imagine there's many paths to achieving the goal, and by taking the most obvious, nerfing something, you're possibly ignoring more effective or less disruptive options
Quote:I think each section of space has appropriate activities and then some edge cases. It is smarter to carebear in relative safety. It is better to run industry where YOU are the government (null sov). Profit margins for a trade center in low should be higher because of the risks that they take. i think it'd be ideal to have any given activity have about equal viablity in all areas of the game. for example, shooting red plus signs. pete might like lowsec belt ratting over running highsec missions, but before the clone tags were introduced, pete only ran missions because he when belt ratting he felt he was wasting his time. now with mordus rats and clone tags, pete flies around lowsec belts and enjoys his pve hours more than before. pete sometimes runs into pies but even with the bother and the hazard, the isk is more worth his time now
e: uh wow that last bit has nothing to do with what's quoted. i guess it wanted it as a positive example of making space more appealing to people who might want to play there |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
15840
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 17:25:25 -
[36] - Quote
I endorsed Mike for CSM 8 on a long shot - I didn't think he had all that good a chance of getting elected, but I thought it was definitely worth trying to help an advocate for the "little guys" of EVE get elected, because I believe that a CSM with a diverse range of experience and viewpoints is a stronger, more effective CSM.
Mike repaid that that endorsement a hundred times over in CSM8, and then gave us an encore for CSM9. The argument that the individual, the loner, the casual needs a representative is as strong as ever, and Mike's proven ability to speak up effectively for that constituency, and his two terms of experience in delivering that voice make him an inarguable choice for the role.
I strongly urge you to find a place on your preferences for Mike.
Vote Mike Azariah!
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Xander Phoena
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
502
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:13:11 -
[37] - Quote
Mike Azariah is one of my most very favourite people in all of New Eden. And that's before I even take into account the amazing work he has contributed to CSM9. You should vote for him - I will be.
www.crossingzebras.com
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1319
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:39:58 -
[38] - Quote
Much of the ISK/hr that high sec activity can generate is because high sec is the beating heart of the EVE economy. Would you agree that part of the problem with nullsec income in particular isn't just the risk, but the fact that it's a nearly pure ISK faucet that hardly requires any interaction with other players--and their wallets? Given that a neck-punch to high sec might just bring the whole game's economy to its knees, wouldn't it be better to figure out how to get players to interact profitably? If you could get the ISK transfer/ISK injection ratio in null sec to roughly the same proportion that mission running enjoys in high sec, that would be a huge buff to null sec income, but with the same or less ISK injected.
Unfortunately, that would be a very tall order. But do you think that it's the right track, or do you have a better idea?
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
632
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:53:51 -
[39] - Quote
+1 vote from me. every little bit helps. |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2096
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:13:56 -
[40] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Much of the ISK/hr that high sec activity can generate is because high sec is the beating heart of the EVE economy. Would you agree that part of the problem with nullsec income in particular isn't just the risk, but the fact that it's a nearly pure ISK faucet that hardly requires any interaction with other players--and their wallets? Given that a neck-punch to high sec might just bring the whole game's economy to its knees, wouldn't it be better to figure out how to get players to interact profitably? If you could get the ISK transfer/ISK injection ratio in null sec to roughly the same proportion that mission running enjoys in high sec, that would be a huge buff to null sec income, but with the same or less ISK injected.
Unfortunately, that would be a very tall order. But do you think that it's the right track, or do you have a better idea?
Man you ask think questions with a lot of layers.
To the first part? No, null does make a fair amount of isk in their own space. They just don't talk about it as much. So null is not the impoversished waif some make it out to be.
It WOULD be better to help players interact but, as I have said before, not FORCE them to do so. There ARE some players who take solace in quietly mining or running missions. I know, I am, at times, one of them. To gut highsec would not move players to other regions, some it would move to other games.
As for the last part I wrote a huge paragraph and then realized I was tapdancing too close to my NDA boundaries for my own taste. But I can say in more general terms that a lot of commonly held beliefs of how things are in Eve are based on faulty premises.
But back to my key point. I do not want to ruin one space to benefit another. Each space should have its own draw and its own reason to be there.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
|
Lanctharus Onzo
Alea Iacta Est Universal Brave Collective
55
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 03:19:12 -
[41] - Quote
Hello Mike!
Just so that you know, I haven't forgotten about you. We just have been busy fighting in Catch. So to be completely fair and not make you feel excluded:
Good to hear that you have decided to run again.
As you are aware we at the Cap Stable Podcast interviewed you during your run for CSM9 and we wish to do the same this year for CSM10.
Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/
As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:
Email: [email protected] Twitter: @CapStable Or via our contact form
We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.
Sincerely,
Lanctharus Onzo Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal
Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast
Twitter: @Lanctharus
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1320
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 18:22:16 -
[42] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Man you ask think questions with a lot of layers.
I'm not so much interested in answers--which is why my questions are generally too big to answer--as I am in revealing thought processes. CSM strikes me as involving a strong analytical component, so I like to watch the candidates think.
Mike Azariah wrote:As for the last part I wrote a huge paragraph and then realized I was tapdancing too close to my NDA boundaries for my own taste. But I can say in more general terms that a lot of commonly held beliefs of how things are in Eve are based on faulty premises.
But back to my key point. I do not want to ruin one space to benefit another. Each space should have its own draw and its own reason to be there.
I can't really argue against :NDA:, but it's a shame that I won't get to see that paragraph, given that it's what I was angling for. Still, I'm sure it's the best answer you can give, and it's tantalizing. I agree 100% with your key point.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1654
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 19:41:59 -
[43] - Quote
A vote for Mike is a vote for continuing down the road to nerfdom, and slow water-torture death of the non consensual conflict traditions EvE was founded on.
Mike offers the usual platitudes of every liberal social engineer to have haunted real world political circles, that he is all about the 'middle ground', 'whatever makes sense', or that he doesn't 'go to extremes'...while constitutions lay shredded, and freedom lays destroyed.
Any CSM or candidate that refuses to swear an oath to the EvE constitution, that they will never support any change that reduces player conflict, and will only embrace changes that increase player conflict, should be summarily removed from consideration. Mike does not subscribe to this pledge.
In past years EvE was defined by its HTFU nature, the non-consensual hard fit, the live or die by your wits ethos that made it special and different from WoW. Mike would take us down that WoW road while pretending not to, while espousing 'middle ground' platitudes. Yes, Mike is a 'nice guy'...while he is slitting EvE's throat and refusing to acknowledge he is doing it.
There is no middle ground between food and poison, just poisoned food.
Once you deem HTFU as the food keeping EvE alive, and nerfs the poison to one day kill it, there is no rationalizing a mixture of the two. One is good, one is bad, a middle-ground mix is where disingenuous evil lies.
A vote for Mike is a vote for Disneyland in hisec and making EvE into WoW, period; he would just go about it slower than more up-front carebear radicals, and then years from now perhaps say "I never intended for that to happen..', when all that is left is dust.
However, if you do want to turn EvE into a pansy dreamland disneyland of WoW in space, Mike is indeed your man.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
48
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 03:50:41 -
[44] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:A vote for Mike is a vote for continuing down the road to nerfdom, and slow water-torture death of the non consensual conflict traditions EvE was founded on.
Mike offers the usual platitudes of every liberal social engineer to have haunted real world political circles, that he is all about the 'middle ground', 'whatever makes sense', or that he doesn't 'go to extremes'...while constitutions lay shredded, and freedom lays destroyed.
Any CSM or candidate that refuses to swear an oath to the EvE constitution, that they will never support any change that reduces player conflict, and will only embrace changes that increase player conflict, should be summarily removed from consideration. Mike does not subscribe to this pledge.
In past years EvE was defined by its HTFU nature, the non-consensual hard fit, the live or die by your wits ethos that made it special and different from WoW. Mike would take us down that WoW road while pretending not to, while espousing 'middle ground' platitudes. Yes, Mike is a 'nice guy'...while he is slitting EvE's throat and refusing to acknowledge he is doing it.
There is no middle ground between food and poison, just poisoned food.
Once you deem HTFU as the food keeping EvE alive, and nerfs the poison to one day kill it, there is no rationalizing a mixture of the two. One is good, one is bad, a middle-ground mix is where disingenuous evil lies.
A vote for Mike is a vote for Disneyland in hisec and making EvE into WoW, period; he would just go about it slower than more up-front carebear radicals, and then years from now perhaps say "I never intended for that to happen..', when all that is left is dust.
However, if you do want to turn EvE into a pansy dreamland disneyland of WoW in space, Mike is indeed your man.
F
An absolute bear would also say the same thing in reverse. If there's one thing I've learned about Mike in the 2+ years he's been a regular on Podside is that he doesn't deal in absolutes.
If you are a full blooded CODE adherent, interested in murder for murder's sake or a super bear who wants 100% safety. Mike is not the candidate for you.
He is the candidate for those who can respect a balanced and well-rounded perspective. |
Sugar Smacks
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 08:19:36 -
[45] - Quote
Some of your ideas would of been nice.
The last people i vote for are the ones with no ideas. We have enough political figures like that. |
Anslo
Scope Works
24116
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 18:07:29 -
[46] - Quote
Mike 'Balls of Steel' Azariah. You have my vote, oh gentleman and scholar.
[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2103
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 19:37:58 -
[47] - Quote
Sugar Smacks wrote:Some of your ideas would of been nice.
The last people i vote for are the ones with no ideas. We have enough political figures like that.
What subject would you prefer? Eve is a huge place with lots of facets.
But maybe you misunderstand the purpose OF the CSM
We don't make the Roadmap. We don't design the game or demand new features. Instead we help CCP with ideas that they have and bring modifications or ideas from YOU the electorate. We may filter those ideas (face it, some ideas on the forums are bad) but it is not upon us to write all the great next new things as a council of players.
BEST way to see where I stand is to read the minutes of the CSM, I have served for almost two years so a lot of what I have said and thought is a matter of record. Or, if you have a particular cause . . . ask. I will answer as I did Feyd, above. Obviously he was not happy with my answer and I am ok with that. I say what I think, not what I think you want.
If reading the minutes is tl:dr then check out any number of podcasts (I do get about and hit a fair number of them) or wait for that interviews Lanctharus and others will be doing.
The Bowhead was NOT my idea, but I liked it and pushed for it. Damn glad to see it coming into the game.
You are electing a council to speak, for you, for the game as a whole.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
281
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 11:19:44 -
[48] - Quote
You've been worth my vote in the past, and you remain so in the future :)
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Alan Mathison
EVE University Ivy League
24
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 15:32:25 -
[49] - Quote
Hi Mike!
Amazingly, I think I've checked "Like" on this thread more than any other, ever. Your ideas and mine seem to align quite closely.
Having said that, I'd like to ask you some questions I'm asking the candidates I'm seriously considering, if I could.
Space has become littered with abandoned POS structures. What is your position on getting rid of them? I'd like to see, perhaps, a orbital degrading mechanic once the fuel is gone. This, then would open up the moons for pilots that will actually use them. The current mechanic, of course, involves Wardec-ing a possibly abandoned Corp and then sitting there for an extended period of time blapping the structures. I think something better is quite possible.
EVE seems to be popularly seen as more than a game, perhaps moving into the hobby realm. I'm aware that some discussions have been held with regard to finding a way to bring a more casual player or a more casual play-style option into EVE. Would you advocate this? If so, how might this be done without fundamentally changing the nature of the game? Would it?
It seems a given that CSM X and CCP will look at dealing with the SovNull question this term. Beyond that, from a gameplay perspective, what would you advocate as the next priority?
EVE players seem to be quite passionate about the game, yet it is said that the voting rate for CSM elections is lower than that of even the United States midterms. Does this diminish the validity of the CSM? What would you like to do to combat the voter apathy that we see and effectively educate the voters on the reality of what the CSM can effectively do?
Additionally, I am friends with a legally blind Capsuleer and someone else early in the thread brought up the issue of accessibility. You responded to him saying that you're active and you'll continue doing what you have done in the past. For those of us NewBros in the audience, could you please expand on that or give us some reference links if you have them?
Finally, and most importantly, do you like cats? :-)
Thanks so much!
--
Alan Mathison, Proud Sophmore, EVE University
The YC117 CSM Election. VOTE! "Or I don't even wanna know you."
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1664
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 15:38:51 -
[50] - Quote
Urziel99 wrote: An absolute bear would also say the same thing in reverse.
But EvE's traditions and original founding wasn't based on a 100%-safety mindset though was it Urziel? To the contrary, it was founded on HTFU.
Urziel99 wrote: If there's one thing I've learned about Mike in the 2+ years he's been a regular on Podside is that he doesn't deal in absolutes.
If you are a full blooded CODE adherent, interested in murder for murder's sake or a super bear who wants 100% safety. Mike is not the candidate for you.
He is the candidate for those who can respect a balanced and well-rounded perspective.
'middle grounders' who don't believe in an overriding EvE constitution centered on HTFU are destroying EvE in slow paper cuts under the guise of such 'well rounded' BS platitudes. The point you are missing is that CCP is quite adept at slitting their own throats by themselves thank you very much, without our so-called player representatives giving them cover to do it!!
The player-CSM should be Gandalf on the f#ckin bridge, telling CCP "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!" whenever they go to implement any change that would decrease non consensual conflict from status quo.
Mike's middle-ground mindset however is like Gandalf saying "Ok, you Orcs are allowed to pass, perhaps only one or two Goblins too, but I sure won't let the Balrog pass..gosh no, look at how balanced I am guys!"
There is no middle ground between food and poison. Protect the damned sandbox, or at least be open and honest about your ultimate endgame of turning EvE hisec into WoW slowly over time, hoping people wont notice what your really about with your 'balance' self delusion.
We have noticed. The nerfs must stop. NO more. Focus on new content, instead of breaking existing mechanics that create conflict and renounce our HTFU traditions.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
|
Sunrise Aigele
Pemberley Enterprises BadWrongFun
40
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 15:50:14 -
[51] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:There is no middle ground between food and poison.
Strictly speaking, this is not true. More often than not, whether a substance has toxic effects is a question of dosage, and possibly ambient pressure. It would be more accurate to say that there is only middle ground.
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2129
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 16:50:29 -
[52] - Quote
Alan Mathison wrote:Hi Mike!
Amazingly, I think I've checked "Like" on this thread more than any other, ever. Your ideas and mine seem to align quite closely.
Having said that, I'd like to ask you some questions I'm asking the candidates I'm seriously considering, if I could.
Space has become littered with abandoned POS structures. What is your position on getting rid of them? I'd like to see, perhaps, a orbital degrading mechanic once the fuel is gone. This, then would open up the moons for pilots that will actually use them. The current mechanic, of course, involves Wardec-ing a possibly abandoned Corp and then sitting there for an extended period of time blapping the structures. I think something better is quite possible.
EVE seems to be popularly seen as more than a game, perhaps moving into the hobby realm. I'm aware that some discussions have been held with regard to finding a way to bring a more casual player or a more casual play-style option into EVE. Would you advocate this? If so, how might this be done without fundamentally changing the nature of the game? Would it?
It seems a given that CSM X and CCP will look at dealing with the SovNull question this term. Beyond that, from a gameplay perspective, what would you advocate as the next priority?
EVE players seem to be quite passionate about the game, yet it is said that the voting rate for CSM elections is lower than that of even the United States midterms. Does this diminish the validity of the CSM? What would you like to do to combat the voter apathy that we see and effectively educate the voters on the reality of what the CSM can effectively do?
Additionally, I am friends with a legally blind Capsuleer and someone else early in the thread brought up the issue of accessibility. You responded to him saying that you're active and you'll continue doing what you have done in the past. For those of us NewBros in the audience, could you please expand on that or give us some reference links if you have them?
Finally, and most importantly, do you like cats? :-)
Thanks so much!
In reverse . . . I have a Maine Coon watching me answer so Yes, I like Cats. (She is a big cat, don't want to cross her)
Legally blind is a tough one as there IS going to be a limit where the Video in video game will be hard to get around but I fight for UI ability to enlarge text. Icons that are easily distinguished. And consideration of people with red/green colour blindness. This is something near and dear to me as my own vision begins to fade. A lot of it comes down to having bigger clearer fonts and multiple clues as to what is going on so if you miss one another might catch.
Does low voter turnout diminish our validity? That depends on what you consider the measure of validity. Those of us who get elected SHOULD try their best to represent the players regardless of whether they were elected by 5% or 75%. There is nothing in the White Paper that says we can do a half-assed job if the voter turnout is low. I do what I can to promote the election (well especially since I am in it) and hit the streets calling for not just votes for me but voting in general. I have high hopes that CCP will do more to promote the election this year. BUT 2 things are beyond my reach. First. It is in large blocks best interest if the voter turnout is small. Then the weight they swing can be more easily brought to bear so do not expect a lot of groundswell support from the larger alliances to 'get the vote out' Oh they will work hard, internally, but not with the population as a whole. Secondly, I am one voice. If you want to see a greater voter turnout then join in, help get the word out and get corp mates, fleet chat, posts on the forums, twitter, whatever . . . do your part to educate your neighbour on the issues, the candidates, that there even IS a bloody election. The community as a whole needs to step up their game and not just look at the 30+ candidates and ask . . . 'well why didn't you do more?'
http://static.squarespace.com/static/5183c058e4b065e39b3de2ee/t/5442ee20e4b0b8e2e81f9f48/1413672513331/NewEVEStratPlan.png this shows where CCP plans on going. The new star systems and stargate potential make the lore and player in me giddy. But I do not want to rush the soc/corp/alliance materials to get through to it. That stuff needs to be done right so it holds up for a good long time.
I AM a casual player (except when I start running away with some project or another) It IS possible but I want to see more tools to facilitate that. The NPSI fleets are a great example of casual play as is RvB. Most PvE is broken up into small manageable chunks, sadly most of them are boring small manageable chunks. THAT I would like to see fixed.
Ah, POS's. I answered you in reverse order so I could save the best for last. Yes, we need a new mechanic for 'dead sticks in space' I am 100% behind a decay of the abandoned defenses over time so that missing fuel day by even a week doesn't mean you have lost it but if months pass someoene can come along and remove the POS without having to grind it to oblivion. Hacking would be one option, a descending price for Concord to remove as time goes by would be another. Literally have it towed into an impound lot. This would mean that the 'taker' doesn't get the loot pinata and a returning player may still reclaim his materiel. WH space is littered with old POS's as is highsec. Yes, we need a mechanic to replace the structure grind for old dead sticks.
Sorry about the wall of text but you asked a lot of questions
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2129
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 17:04:32 -
[53] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Mike's middle-ground mindset however is like Gandalf saying "Ok, you Orcs are allowed to pass, perhaps only one or two Goblins too, but I sure won't let the Balrog pass..gosh no, look at how balanced I am guys!"
F
Isn't that what Gandalf did? I mean seriously, he fought the big bad.
But that is aside from the point, I am fairly sure I will not be getting you vote, Feyd and I am still OK with that. If you think that I am trying to make highsec totally safe you are wrong but if you are supporting someone who wants to remove Concord from the game so that Highsec loses all safety then you are wrong again.
You talk about balance like even the word leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
It shouldn't. It is what makes this game viable. It is what keeps both the predators and the prey coming back to the same watering hole.
Oh toss about words like WoW and Disneyland all you like . . . making them the evil in the distance but please don't do it too loudly where CCP can hear because both of those ventures are multi BILLION dollar companies. I am happy, here, with Eve being a more balanced (theres that word again, here, have a mint to get the taste out) game with PvP and PvE and every blend of them in between. It is not black and white, it is not 50 shades of grey, it is all the colours visible and invisible.
Eve is hard because it lacks simplicity and guidance in the form of handholding. Eve is fun for those same reasons.
So you won't vote for someone who wants a balanced game. Fine.
I am still running.
How did the last 2 CODE candidates do? Oh yeah . . .
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1289
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 17:52:02 -
[54] - Quote
Yet again the man that is Mike throws his hat into the ring of CSM elections and it's followed very strongly by all my votes.
Mike was a strong candidate for me last year being that we share similar play styles and being a fellow "Carebear" .
Now to the man behind the avatar: I met Mike at Fanfest on Sindel's not-a-charity-dinner along with a few other current CSM members and what a lovely bloke! He's very down to earth, enthusiastic and keen to not only share his experiences but also to listen to what you have to say. Then things got a little blurry with drink and pub crawls (pic or it didn't happen Mike? Very well: https://twitter.com/CEOMCMXD/status/471344330503110656)!
A great bloke, awesome to talk to and again, he gets my votes and a strong push from me to my corp mates.
Go get 'em Mike!
[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee"
Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b]
Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1340
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 18:15:54 -
[55] - Quote
I've seen discussion about an all-new POS replacement that wouldn't require hanging at a moon, and furthermore wouldn't require that only one could hang at a moon. It's been a while, but it stuck in my head.
This seems like it would simultaneously make the dead-stick phenomenon much worse at the same time that it would take away the real problem, which is a dead stick occupying a valuable space that a live stick could have instead.
I'm asking because I once explored a C2 with a whole bunch of dead sticks, and it was like coming across an abandoned town. All these ruins of boldly named corps with ambitiously optimistic descriptions, hanging silently in space. It was cool. The last tower I found in the system still had a force field around it. I like that. Ruins and ghost towns and abandoned houses are cool parts of the landscape, especially when there's only enough left to make you wonder what once happened there.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2961
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 18:22:10 -
[56] - Quote
I don't think I will vote for you this time. Reason? If there was no CSM tag next to your picture I would have no idea you still are in CSM.
Invalid signature format
|
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Conference Elite CODE.
1211
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 18:57:49 -
[57] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Mike, what would you like to see done to increase interactions between players in high security space, both in terms of forcing players to work together, and having them work against each other? I want to see the tools for social groups strengthened, mailing lists enlargened. I would really like to see an entirely new set of mechanics for people who hang together for specidc things (like CODE, Bombers Bar, Redemtion road, mining fleets, mission teams and incursions to focus on the hisec sort of thing). Grouping is the glue that makes this an MMO and we need to keep working on the tools that help that. But I DO take issue with your wording of the question. We should never have to FORCE folks into groups or interactivity. There are people perfectly happy to play solo, to be the lone wolf hunter or the quiet single industrialist. There is nothing wrong with that and we shouldn't punish them for that style of play. Casual players face this the most since often they have limited game time to be online or odd hours and so they find it difficult to be reliable in a social group and they self isolate. tl:dr So I want CCP to develop the tools to facilitate interaction but I do not want to force it. m I appologize for my wording, but you also didn't fully answer the question. I can only assume that you oppose changes that put players in conflict in high security space? Is this correct?
To be clear, I want a strong advocate for highsec pve players on csm, but I do not want that to be at the expense of conflict drivers. High sec pve is in a sorry state right now, and the same content design is still running around from over ten years ago. The burners are a step in the right direction, but are poorly implemented by being included in current level 4 queues. The difficulty precludes using them to introduce newer players to frigate combat, and for players that enjoy the missions, a large startup investment into battleships is required.
The extreme repetition of missions is another issue, and the fact that missions are still essentially "go here, kill target" leads to very little diversity of gameplay between different missions. Add on the dry and immobile mission agents, and you have an experience not worthy of a game going on 12 years of success.
New player resources:
Uni Wiki - General Info
Eve Altruist - PvP
Belligerent Undesirables - High Sec Pvp
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2133
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 19:15:23 -
[58] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:I don't think I will vote for you this time. Reason? If there was no CSM tag next to your picture I would have no idea you still are in CSM.
Out of curiosity, whom do you know to be on the CSM and how did you find out?
It could be argued that I am one of the more outgoing CSM members this season. Between forums, podcasts, blogging, twitter, what medium were you looking for, direct mail?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2133
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 19:30:23 -
[59] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote: I appologize for my wording, but you also didn't fully answer the question. I can only assume that you oppose changes that put players in conflict in high security space? Is this correct?
To be clear, I want a strong advocate for highsec pve players on csm, but I do not want that to be at the expense of conflict drivers. High sec pve is in a sorry state right now, and the same content design is still running around from over ten years ago. The burners are a step in the right direction, but are poorly implemented by being included in current level 4 queues. The difficulty precludes using them to introduce newer players to frigate combat, and for players that enjoy the missions, a large startup investment into battleships is required.
The extreme repetition of missions is another issue, and the fact that missions are still essentially "go here, kill target" leads to very little diversity of gameplay between different missions. Add on the dry and immobile mission agents, and you have an experience not worthy of a game going on 12 years of success.
No worries, layered questions seem to be the theme on this campaign and I appreciate it when you try again if I seem to miss the question the first time.
*Highsec should not be made 'safe'
*It also should not be a free fire zone where the predators have all the advantages.
Those two statements together should tick off a few people because they seem to think I need to believe in one or the other. If you want, for example, to know how I feel about wardecs then go back to the Declarations of War roundtable from last year. I don't want them removed, I just would like them to make sense. Conflict is an accepted part of Eve. but that does not mean it always have to have all the advanatages given to the hunter nor is all conflict done with guns and missiles.
Yeah, I have a blog called a missioneer in Eve and still consider myself a carebear. PvE content is a part fo the game some may scoff at but a lot of folks play that aspect and it deserves attention as well.
m
but it shouldn't be safe or predictable for either side.
Do missions need a lot of love? Yes. Was I happy with Burners and want to see more? Yes. An I tired of rescuing that damn damsel? Yes. Would I like there to be more dynamio missions with a range of possibilities so Eve survivbal cannot give you a wlakthrough? Hell, yes. Have I asked for missions that see the kind of ship you have and give you missions made for the ship? Yup
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1668
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 19:32:06 -
[60] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote: ... But that is aside from the point, I am fairly sure I will not be getting you vote, Feyd and I am still OK with that. If you think that I am trying to make highsec totally safe you are wrong but if you are supporting someone who wants to remove Concord from the game so that Highsec loses all safety then you are wrong again. ... How did the last 2 CODE candidates do? Oh yeah . . .
Your mistakenly taking my position to extremes Mike. I would never support 'removing CONCORD'.
Here's the thing, and I hope you can get where I am coming from on this, and why I am so vehemently calling BS on the 'balance' claims...
For the last three years CCP has already been implementing a pogrom of nerfing hisec, in the minds of many content creators this has already swung the scales of balance well into the nerfdom side of the equation.. (lets call this a -10 condition from status-quo HTFU zero..).
No really, I am not making this up, look here.
Now, my problem with you Mike (like Ripard Teg before you) is that you refuse to acknowledge that already present shift in the scales to -10, and you just look at each new additional nerf proposed by CCP and nod sagely saying 'that sounds balanced', in a vacuum...
...the problem Mike, is that real true balance would be to seek to tip the scales back from that pre-existing -10 nerfdom to HTFU zero, and implement some buffs to non-consensual conflict in hisec (ostensibly by closing wardec dodging mechanics, etc)
Now this -10 condition has been mentioned numerous times, so at this juncture it must be willful ignorance on your part, thus invalidating your claims of 'balance'. Thus we see revealed another Ripard Tegian carebear, seeking to nerf the hell out of hisec, while seeking moral cover under the BS guise of 'nice guy being balanced'.
Protect the damned sandbox, undo the damage already done to conflict creation. THAT would be real balance Mike.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2133
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 20:10:16 -
[61] - Quote
Feyd, Oh how I would love to hear you and Dinsdale debate. Each of you tyaking the side that Highsec is being nerfed into the gorund but from opposite viewpoints.
Quote:you just look at each new additional nerf proposed by CCP and nod sagely saying 'that sounds balanced', in a vacuum...
and nobody hears things said in a vacuum. I love your blog about nerfing highsec though. Don't agree with parts of it but it was fun to read.
If Ripard and I have joined forces to nerf hisec non-consensual content in hisec into the groud then all ganking has stopped . . op success?
Um, nope. I looked and it is still going on. People are still shooting people, Niarja is still a place you move through quickly and carefully. Maybe loophole kills are lower, tricking people into being easy targets due to convoluted rules. I think that is a good thing, you are allowed to disagree.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1668
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 21:16:55 -
[62] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Feyd, Oh how I would love to hear you and Dinsdale debate. Each of you tyaking the side that Highsec is being nerfed into the gorund but from opposite viewpoints. Quote:you just look at each new additional nerf proposed by CCP and nod sagely saying 'that sounds balanced', in a vacuum... and nobody hears things said in a vacuum. I love your blog about nerfing highsec though. Don't agree with parts of it but it was fun to read. If Ripard and I have joined forces to nerf hisec non-consensual content in hisec into the groud then all ganking has stopped . . op success? Um, nope. I looked and it is still going on. People are still shooting people, Niarja is still a place you move through quickly and carefully. Maybe loophole kills are lower, tricking people into being easy targets due to convoluted rules. I think that is a good thing, you are allowed to disagree. m Its the dismal tide Mike, Its not the one thing.
We see in macro, micro and yes EvE's virtual world that freedom is lost in small paper cuts over time, as soon as people stop actively defending it and equivocating or rationalizing to find 'middle ground'. I would quote Edmund Burke here, but what's the point.
It's not the one thing.
I will close with this. If CCP wants to make hisec a second-shard 100% disneyland at the sacrifice of player freedoms, they should just be upfront and honest about it, as should you.
You can't do it over small increments like Ripard Teg and others before you, and hope people don't notice, feigning ignorance along the way on all the preceding nerfs, while proclaiming 'a balanced approach'. Again, at this point true balance would be restoring some buffs to hisec aggression, to take us back from that -10 nerf condition to HTFU zero.
You won't, because you are a bear, and there is no real 'balance', its just that I am calling BS on. You have every right to try and turn hisec into WoW and Disneyland with small continual paper-cut nerfs, but you do NOT get to do it while proclaiming ignorance you are doing it.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Jon Illat
I.C.E Initiative The Obsidian Front
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 01:53:18 -
[63] - Quote
+1 vote from me. Your blogs have certainly helped me to keep track of what's happening when I haven't had the time to follow the news as closely as I would like. |
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow The Revenant Order
4896
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 21:34:36 -
[64] - Quote
I endorse this product and/or candidate.
I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Demon your parents warned you about.
||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
58
|
Posted - 2014.12.14 18:46:48 -
[65] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Feyd, Oh how I would love to hear you and Dinsdale debate. Each of you tyaking the side that Highsec is being nerfed into the gorund but from opposite viewpoints. Quote:you just look at each new additional nerf proposed by CCP and nod sagely saying 'that sounds balanced', in a vacuum... and nobody hears things said in a vacuum. I love your blog about nerfing highsec though. Don't agree with parts of it but it was fun to read. If Ripard and I have joined forces to nerf hisec non-consensual content in hisec into the groud then all ganking has stopped . . op success? Um, nope. I looked and it is still going on. People are still shooting people, Niarja is still a place you move through quickly and carefully. Maybe loophole kills are lower, tricking people into being easy targets due to convoluted rules. I think that is a good thing, you are allowed to disagree. m Its the dismal tide Mike, Its not the one thing.We see in macro, micro and yes EvE's virtual world that freedom is lost in small paper cuts over time, as soon as people stop actively defending it and equivocating or rationalizing to find 'middle ground'. I would quote Edmund Burke here, but what's the point. It's not the one thing. I will close with this. If CCP wants to make hisec a second-shard 100% disneyland at the sacrifice of player freedoms, they should just be upfront and honest about it, as should you. You can't do it over small increments like Ripard Teg and others before you, and hope people don't notice, feigning ignorance along the way on all the preceding nerfs, while proclaiming 'a balanced approach'. Again, at this point true balance would be restoring some buffs to hisec aggression, to take us back from that -10 nerf condition to HTFU zero. You won't, because you are a bear, and there is no real 'balance', its just that I am calling BS on. You have every right to try and turn hisec into WoW and Disneyland with small continual paper-cut nerfs, but you do NOT get to do it while proclaiming ignorance you are doing it. F
It's funny to watch you chest-beat and whine about sandbox game-play when you seem to forget the fact the sandbox sword cuts both ways. Targets have just as much right to use any and all available mechanics to evade your intentions as you do to try to imbalance any encounters (neutral RR, Non-War Target Boosts, etc.) They don't pay a sub to amuse you. |
Anslo
Scope Works Psychotic Tendencies.
24738
|
Posted - 2014.12.15 16:57:53 -
[66] - Quote
Bump because **** yeah Mike Azariah.
[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
|
Kestrix
Industrial Renaissance MinTek Conglomerate
149
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:24:06 -
[67] - Quote
I will be voting for you Mike |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Suddenly Spaceships.
1687
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:37:07 -
[68] - Quote
Mike's done a fantastic job on the CSM, and not just for his constituency. I'll be putting him on my ballot for sure.
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM
Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1378
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:13:18 -
[69] - Quote
OK, so my last question went nowhere. Let's try this one:
What do you think of the direction that CCP Rise and his team are investigating for the all-new NPE? What can the CSM do to support their effort?
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2165
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:37:39 -
[70] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:OK, so my last question went nowhere. Let's try this one:
What do you think of the direction that CCP Rise and his team are investigating for the all-new NPE? What can the CSM do to support their effort?
I have encouraged CCP to look at other games and perhaps do some major shifting of how the NPE is approached. Sugar and myself and others are 100% behind improvements both in interest of having better player retention and just making the game learning curve a bit less of a cliff.
This is partially why I started Operation Magic School Bus. I am trying to get new players ready for fleets and low/null trips. We need more of this sort of thing, some encouragement for players to, once again, step up and be the content. This means the biggest thing we need to drum into new players is communication skills. How to read, research, use comms and mail and mailing lists.
Look, the current NPE trains the players to mine, to shift a bit of freight, to run missions. Is that how YOU describe Eve to people in real life? The disconnect needs to be addressed.
I'll toss it back to you, though. Which game has the 'best' NPE/tutorial, in you opinion? For me it is Portal.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
397
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 20:43:23 -
[71] - Quote
Do you happen to have a link to something about operation magic school bus?
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1378
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 21:39:48 -
[72] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Look, the current NPE trains the players to mine, to shift a bit of freight, to run missions. Is that how YOU describe Eve to people in real life? The disconnect needs to be addressed.
Yes, it is.
...
OK, no, not really. But you don't have to convince me that the current NPE is absolutely terrible.
Mike Azariah wrote:I'll toss it back to you, though. Which game has the 'best' NPE/tutorial, in you opinion? For me it is Portal.
I'm not much of a gamer, and EVE strikes me as different enough that I'm not sure how much EVE can learn. I mean, sure, TESO has a decent tutorial, including the fact that you can skip the little baby part if you're rolling an alt, but what you have to learn for a mostly themepark game vs. the urgent problem in EVE, which is giving new players the ability to reach other people and plug into whatever the meta is.
The 'basic controls in the game' part is easy, although the current tutorial manages to do even that wrong.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
gabrial trinady
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 23:32:15 -
[73] - Quote
i to will be voting for you again mike, you are by far one of the most publicly active members of the CSM next to Xander.
~~~~question time~~~~
I know some and maybe all of this may fall under the NDA so don't feel bad if you have to give "general" answers.
Ive heard the guys on the podside podcast mention this to you several times but I absolutely love the idea of station services in NPC null to be attackable. This happens to us in sov null from time to time and if I recall correctly you your self mentioned ( I cant recall your exact words) that you saw NPC null as a way to get used to the mechanics of sov null and the tactics used there. As it stands now NPC dwellers don't have to deal with the defensive side of sov warfare. Now im NOT saying we should be able to flip stations just incapacitate there station services the same way its done to us. With the difference being the NPC station services will eventually repair them selves just at a slow rate or they can form a rep op the fix there services faster. What is your though on something like this.
Agents....why cant we have some in sov null? There everywhere else but sov null and w space, why cant we have some sort of station upgrade for agents. It would be very helpful for the newer players that move straight to null to have access to mission agents. Another station question the different station upgrades that can be installed and as far as I know can not be removed unlike ihubs. Ihubs can have the different upgrades removed they are just destroyed like ship rigs. I think the station upgrades should be able to be FULLY customizable not a one time deal.
Im fairly sure this is in the pipe line but ill ask it anyway, the current balance or unbalance as it is of the low end ores in null sec is an issue. If CCP wants sov null to be eventually be self sufficient, as is my tin foil hatery from phoebe with the introduction of space aids, the minerals need to be rebalanced. im just curious as to how you stand on this as a high sec indy guy since right now we still, myself included, do the MAJORITY of our shopping in Jita 4-4.
Let me know your thoughts and ideas Also where do we sign to get you a permanent seat on the CSM
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2165
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 05:55:07 -
[74] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Do you happen to have a link to something about operation magic school bus?
Two
Post in my blog http://mikeazariah.wordpress.com/2014/11/30/ooc-giving-back/
and the thread in GD https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5309617#post5309617
I have spent the past couple of weeks in Rookie Help chat then in ther career systems trying to hand out ships to new players. Biggest problem? New players don't watch local, don't even know how to talk or listen to other players. They are playing the game as a single player experience.
THIS needs to be addressed in the NPE
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2165
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 06:24:36 -
[75] - Quote
gabrial trinady wrote:
Ive heard the guys on the podside podcast mention this to you several times but I absolutely love the idea of station services in NPC null to be attackable. This happens to us in sov null from time to time and if I recall correctly you your self mentioned ( I cant recall your exact words) that you saw NPC null as a way to get used to the mechanics of sov null and the tactics used there. As it stands now NPC dwellers don't have to deal with the defensive side of sov warfare. Now im NOT saying we should be able to flip stations just incapacitate there station services the same way its done to us. With the difference being the NPC station services will eventually repair them selves just at a slow rate or they can form a rep op the fix there services faster. What is your though on something like this.
Okay this one first, It IS a cool idea but the sov free areas are used by a lot of sov folks because of the safety. A place where you can put your stuff that will still be there tomorrow. You know that the null entities would enjoy making life hell for their less committed brethren in npc stations.
So is there a balance? Maybe not kill the services but hinder them or make them scale up in expense. A price of battle and failure to consider where you are, your home.
gabrial trinady wrote:
Agents....why cant we have some in sov null? There everywhere else but sov null and w space, why cant we have some sort of station upgrade for agents. It would be very helpful for the newer players that move straight to null to have access to mission agents. Another station question the different station upgrades that can be installed and as far as I know can not be removed unlike ihubs. Ihubs can have the different upgrades removed they are just destroyed like ship rigs. I think the station upgrades should be able to be FULLY customizable not a one time deal.
Moon mining, why can't we have that in highsec? Some things are the difference between one space and another. There are supposed to be differences between parts of space to give us a reason to make choices and not all of the choices should point to null being the end game where everything evrybody else has can be found there, as well.
gabrial trinady wrote: Im fairly sure this is in the pipe line but ill ask it anyway, the current balance or unbalance as it is of the low end ores in null sec is an issue. If CCP wants sov null to be eventually be self sufficient, as is my tin foil hatery from phoebe with the introduction of space aids, the minerals need to be rebalanced. im just curious as to how you stand on this as a high sec indy guy since right now we still, myself included, do the MAJORITY of our shopping in Jita 4-4.
I know some folks think each part of space should be self sufficient unto itself. I am sure if I looked hard enough I could find someone demanding that sleeper loot become atainable without all the hassle of wormhole life.
Out of curiosity, though. ARE all the belts in null mined out? Is it that you lack the minerals or people willing to mine them?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Harrigan VonStudly
Osmosis Inc The Bastion
108
|
Posted - 2014.12.20 20:56:49 -
[76] - Quote
Without hesitation Mike gets my #1 slot on my ballots. What does it for me as far as Mike is concerned is the fact that it doesn't matter the issue or the style of Eve-play a person has. Mike will represent, regardless, if he sees the need to take it up with CCP.
Go get 'em Mike |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1298
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 16:04:33 -
[77] - Quote
Mike is one of the smartest EvE players I have ever met. I hope you make it this time as well!
Burn the land and boil the sea
You can't take the sky from me
|
Jayne Fillon
475
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 17:13:24 -
[78] - Quote
Hi Mike -
In response to Angrod Losshelin running for the CSM with a platform that includes "Multiboxer Representation" what do you feel about the current voting mechanics?
Should the voting mechanics be restricted to one vote per person? If owning another account is enough justification to earn an individual another vote towards the CSM, would you support allowing another vote to those who use multi-character training on a single account?
Thanks in advance.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2190
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 19:48:42 -
[79] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Hi Mike -
In response to Angrod Losshelin running for the CSM with a platform that includes "Multiboxer Representation" what do you feel about the current voting mechanics?
Should the voting mechanics be restricted to one vote per person? If owning another account is enough justification to earn an individual another vote towards the CSM, would you support allowing another vote to those who use multi-character training on a single account?
Thanks in advance.
I understand where you are coming from on this one . . . it does feel like it is possible to 'buy the vote' but I would not push to change it.
Quote:Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time -Churchhill
This is representational democracy with the account (not the person) being the ones represented. Like stocks in a company, the more you put into it the more you have a small say in what happens. The sheer magnitude of the task to decide if two accts belong to one person would also not be something I would ask CCP to try. Brothers, wives, whatever, there are households that play (how they keep from stabbing each other at night is beyond me)
Do multiboxers have a slight advantage in the elections? Maybe, but then so do large voting blocks, groups of friends or even people who hotdrop podcasts. I think I can live with it and accept the competition as said multiboxers have the same right to representation as other players do.
A process has been banned, a style of play, not the players. They can adapt . . . or leave . . . or be asked to leave. But until the time that they are gone they have a right to the vote, one per account, just like the rest of us.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
62
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 22:41:20 -
[80] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:
I know some folks think each part of space should be self sufficient unto itself. I am sure if I looked hard enough I could find someone demanding that sleeper loot become atainable without all the hassle of wormhole life.
Out of curiosity, though. ARE all the belts in null mined out? Is it that you lack the minerals or people willing to mine them?
m
Nullsec could never truly be industry self-sufficient in its current state of being. A few examples.
Non-regional ices (not much helium up here in vale of the silent.) regional moon materials (mitigated somewhat with alchemy) datacores for invention. (local sites only produce certain types) faction ammo/mods/ships (no way to get the lp or access a store for all that ESS LP [that no one has])
By merging gabrial's desire for mission based (as opposed to anom based) ratting and creation of a more comprehensive (and expensive) lp store the last two needs could be met. The first two could be mitigated by expansion and improvement to the alchemy system. Add in some more mexallon in the local ore sites and we'd be much closer to a far more self-sufficient nullsec, We'd still have to go back for skill books and BPO's but those can be hauled without the need to invoke the bane of our existence, Space AIDS.
|
|
Doyle Aldurad
Stellar Winds Consortium
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.26 17:40:43 -
[81] - Quote
Definite endorsement from me and mine :) |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
4837
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 22:28:33 -
[82] - Quote
As I said in an earlier post, I like Mike, but I do have an issue with one specific highsec activity, Incursions. Mike, do you feel that the rewards for Incursions match the risk as well as the effort required? Do you feel Incursion income is properly balanced with even other highsec activities like missions or mining?
What about the balance between highsec and lowsec incursions, do you feel the balance is in the right place there?
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2202
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 02:25:09 -
[83] - Quote
Two step wrote:As I said in an earlier post, I like Mike, but I do have an issue with one specific highsec activity, Incursions. Mike, do you feel that the rewards for Incursions match the risk as well as the effort required? Do you feel Incursion income is properly balanced with even other highsec activities like missions or mining?
What about the balance between highsec and lowsec incursions, do you feel the balance is in the right place there?
Effort AND training . . . I, and a lot of the Incursion folks, I have talked with would love to see incursions get a make over, more variance, updated, etc. As for balance . . . how would you suggest we compare them to L4's or mining? One cannot afk an incursion, one cannot solo an incursion, a newish player with low SP will need the support of a lot of other people with more skills to survive an incursion. So should incursion income be on par with L4's? no.
I would LOVE for scout sites to be redone . . . heavily redone. To give newer small groups a taste of what is to come, just as L1's slowly build to L2's and so on.
As for lowsec? Hell, yes, that needs a buff to income to balance out the SAME level of training as needed in high along with increased risk and the shift to t1 fits and less blingy ships which slows down the income rate. I also would like to see some mechanism that keeps the movement of the lowsec incursions from being so large from one to the next as they have a MUCH harder time doing the migration after an incursion closes.
You never specified what your 'issue with incursions is'. I presume it is that they make too much isk for too little effort?
If so do you also think that we should take a serious look at other income streams that exceed that income and are shown to also be relatively low risk?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/56/5c/43/565c430139a433972d84468eae019aca.jpg
End thought. I doubt ANYTHING is perfectly balanced in this game as balance in a living system always requires adjustments and constant monitoring. I would encourage CCP to revisit things in a rotation to see how the balance is currently, maybe have a patrol lap, so to speak.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
71
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 05:05:59 -
[84] - Quote
Hi Mike,
what are your thoughts about risk-free looting of yellow wrecks in highsec by "laundering" the loot using a fleet hangar? Are you okay with this and if so, why? If not, would you try to push for a change?
In case you donGÇÖt know what IGÇÖm talking about, it works like this: gankers gank a hauler/freighter and the resulting wreck is of course yellow. To loot the wreck risk-free they use 2 characters: the first one sits in a ship with a fleet hangar (Deep Space Transport or Orca), the second one can be an alt without any skills in a noobship. Both warp to the yellow wreck and the char in the noobship loots the stuff from the yellow wreck by putting it directly into the fleet hangar. The result is that the noobship goes suspect, the DST/Orca however does NOT and can warp off safely carrying the loot. Given the size of the fleet hangar of a DST, even ships up to BS size can be looted without any additional risk (compared to a blue wreck).
Thanks,
Sarah
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2202
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 08:19:22 -
[85] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:
what are your thoughts about risk-free looting of yellow wrecks in highsec by "laundering" the loot using a fleet hangar? Are you okay with this and if so, why? If not, would you try to push for a change?
In case you donGÇÖt know what IGÇÖm talking about, it works like this: gankers gank a hauler/freighter and the resulting wreck is of course yellow. To loot the wreck risk-free they use 2 characters: the first one sits in a ship with a fleet hangar (Deep Space Transport or Orca), the second one can be an alt without any skills in a noobship. Both warp to the yellow wreck and the char in the noobship loots the stuff from the yellow wreck by putting it directly into the fleet hangar. The result is that the noobship goes suspect, the DST/Orca however does NOT and can warp off safely carrying the loot. Given the size of the fleet hangar of a DST, even ships up to BS size can be looted without any additional risk (compared to a blue wreck).
This is funny, so obvious once it is pointed out. The EASIEST would be to make someone under the criminal flag unable to transfer good in or out of a hold but then that would hit the guys who refit on the fly with mobile depots.
Out of curiosity, what would you have happen? Make the possession of the looted goods a yellow offense or make transfer of the same impossible? Gold does no crimes, has no guilt. Does anyone ever gank the orca that holds the stolen goods? Or is the immediate presence of Concord make that an impossibility?
On the larger side . . . I think that Crimewatch/Bounties/wardecs and all associated with it are about due for a re-examination. This is the Hisec equivalent of Sov, after all. It is the rules hisec lives and dies by.
This one does go in my book (I keep a book of things to ask CCP) but I have no idea if it will get much traction.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
4837
|
Posted - 2014.12.30 23:27:51 -
[86] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Two step wrote:As I said in an earlier post, I like Mike, but I do have an issue with one specific highsec activity, Incursions. Mike, do you feel that the rewards for Incursions match the risk as well as the effort required? Do you feel Incursion income is properly balanced with even other highsec activities like missions or mining?
What about the balance between highsec and lowsec incursions, do you feel the balance is in the right place there? Effort AND training . . . I, and a lot of the Incursion folks, I have talked with would love to see incursions get a make over, more variance, updated, etc. As for balance . . . how would you suggest we compare them to L4's or mining? One cannot afk an incursion, one cannot solo an incursion, a newish player with low SP will need the support of a lot of other people with more skills to survive an incursion. So should incursion income be on par with L4's? no. I would LOVE for scout sites to be redone . . . heavily redone. To give newer small groups a taste of what is to come, just as L1's slowly build to L2's and so on. As for lowsec? Hell, yes, that needs a buff to income to balance out the SAME level of training as needed in high along with increased risk and the shift to t1 fits and less blingy ships which slows down the income rate. I also would like to see some mechanism that keeps the movement of the lowsec incursions from being so large from one to the next as they have a MUCH harder time doing the migration after an incursion closes. You never specified what your 'issue with incursions is'. I presume it is that they make too much isk for too little effort? If so do you also think that we should take a serious look at other income streams that exceed that income and are shown to also be relatively low risk? https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/56/5c/43/565c430139a433972d84468eae019aca.jpg End thought. I doubt ANYTHING is perfectly balanced in this game as balance in a living system always requires adjustments and constant monitoring. I would encourage CCP to revisit things in a rotation to see how the balance is currently, maybe have a patrol lap, so to speak. m
My issue is not too much ISK for too little effort, but more for too little risk. Especially with the complete lack of randomness in Incursion spawns, the only real risk to a player in a good Incursion group is the slight risk of ganking and probably the more real risk of falling asleep.
I do think the reward is far too high, and especially because unlike just about any other high reward activity (wormholes, exploration, whatever), Incursions don't suffer from any scarcity. If one wants to, they could pretty much run Incursions 23.5/7 (unless the Incursion folks are having an argument again and prematurely finishing the Incursions). They are also very one-dimensional, unlike in w-space where one has to scan, pvp, fuel POSes, people can really specialize in Incursion running, and just do that. They don't even need to haul loot out, just stop over in a hub for ammo every now and then.
And yeah, any other source of income that is high reward and low risk should be looked at very closely. If that hits w-space, fine. I don't think you can really make the argument that it is low risk though.
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2212
|
Posted - 2014.12.31 05:10:07 -
[87] - Quote
Two step wrote: My issue is not too much ISK for too little effort, but more for too little risk. Especially with the complete lack of randomness in Incursion spawns, the only real risk to a player in a good Incursion group is the slight risk of ganking and probably the more real risk of falling asleep.
I do think the reward is far too high, and especially because unlike just about any other high reward activity (wormholes, exploration, whatever), Incursions don't suffer from any scarcity. If one wants to, they could pretty much run Incursions 23.5/7 (unless the Incursion folks are having an argument again and prematurely finishing the Incursions). They are also very one-dimensional, unlike in w-space where one has to scan, pvp, fuel POSes, people can really specialize in Incursion running, and just do that. They don't even need to haul loot out, just stop over in a hub for ammo every now and then.
A couple of things. I would love to know the metric you use to measure risk. So we could compare game styles in a objective way.
You have everyone fueling POS's in your holes? You don't have people who 'take a job' and specialize in it? When I lived in a class 5 I knew how to scan but I left it to others better at it. When I run incursions I know how to do DPS but I am better at Logi though I will bring what the FC calls for.
But why are we comparing apples and oranges? Each type of gameplay is an option to choose with pluses and minuses. Some choose the PvP route and complain that everyone makes more isk than them. Other choose the Trade which, if done properly, has little risk and HUGE returns. But you and I don't choose to do either of them, not because they are wrong or bad, they just are not for us. IF incursions are the be all and end all why is everyone not doing them?
yup, they are boring, you need skills, there are gankers and people who TRY to run them for 23.5/7 and fall asleep wiping a fleet, there is the migration when someone takes the mom and the dead days when nothing is available. There are days with too many in the system and competing for every site (and losing some of them) and there are days when no fleet is up. There is the politics of the various communities and all of that is effort. Working for a living. There are thieves who take all of the SRP funds and the burnout of command types. In short . . . it is Eve as usual.
As I said previously, would I like them to be more of a challenge? More variation? Yes. But that also goes for PvE missions and a lot of other PvE content.
There will always be some activity that makes the most isk. What it is does not matter, there is one and there will always be one. So do we haul it down to our level or ascend to meet it, surpass it, OR do we like what we do (and do what we like) and stop making isk the reason for play.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Crasniya
Strange Energy The Bastion
556
|
Posted - 2015.01.02 21:21:25 -
[88] - Quote
Mike Azariah will be on my ballot this year. I do not always agree with him, but I think he's a great asset to the CSM.
Soraya Xel - Council of Planetary Management 1 - [email protected]
|
ChYph3r
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2015.01.03 06:57:05 -
[89] - Quote
Mike is a good choice as I have come to know him as on podcasts and EVE Radio. He's honest and very easily approached.
Want to find all the podcasts around EVE Online visit
http://evepodcasts.com
@chyph3r on Twitter
|
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
224
|
Posted - 2015.01.04 21:43:23 -
[90] - Quote
Nice to see you running again for CSM, thanks for your time and effort for the past year representing.
It's good to know someone is out there fighting the good fight for the hi-sec part of the community
As a personal favor could you please keep both eyes on CCP's greed is good view concerning neural remapping
Regards, a Freelancer
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
|
|
Nashh Kadavr
The Bastards
73
|
Posted - 2015.01.05 11:51:12 -
[91] - Quote
+1
#EVE_NT website; www.eve-nt.uk
Blog; http://nashh-blog.pvp101.net
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
850
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 20:47:04 -
[92] - Quote
+1
Keep Mike on the job improving the game.
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
Grima The Mad
Direct Exploration Endeavors Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 06:46:25 -
[93] - Quote
Mike, you've done many fantastic things for the Eve Online community and you're out there actively in the trenches of the forums actively discussing things with people. I'm definitely giving you spot #1. |
Protovarious
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
16
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 02:49:13 -
[94] - Quote
Let there be no doubt that unless I am comatose or dead, Mike will be #1 on my ballot. Nobody in memory since I've been playing has been so in touch with the community, has the thickest skin, and is as open to reasonable player feedback to take to the table as he is.
Mike, you're clearly what this game needs and what the community deserves. As long as you're running, I'll keep voting.
(Just not like 20 years of something. I don't wanna fit the bill for your CCP retirement)
Mike Azariah for CSMX because YES!
#Endorsed
Co-host of The Neocom Podcast - http://www.TheNeocom.com
Eve Community Blogger -
The Eve Editorial - http://eveeditorial.wordpress.com
Twitter: @Proto_Eve
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2260
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 03:08:45 -
[95] - Quote
Protovarious wrote:
(Just not like 20 years of something. I don't wanna fit the bill for your CCP retirement)
d
OK but if I do 10 years will I get a sword? A letter opener even?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Protovarious
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
17
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 03:18:36 -
[96] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Protovarious wrote:
(Just not like 20 years of something. I don't wanna fit the bill for your CCP retirement)
OK but if I do 10 years will I get a sword? A letter opener even? m Is Mrs. Azariah trusting you with sharp objects again?
Co-host of The Neocom Podcast - http://www.TheNeocom.com
Eve Community Blogger -
The Eve Editorial - http://eveeditorial.wordpress.com
Twitter: @Proto_Eve
|
Tasspool Harp
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 11:23:33 -
[97] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Once you deem HTFU as the food keeping EvE alive
Thank you for your post. It got my blood up sufficiently to ensure I get off my lazy arse and cast a vote for the first time. And that vote will be going to Mike.
|
JoJo McKee
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 13:20:50 -
[98] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:
Look, the current NPE trains the players to mine, to shift a bit of freight, to run missions. Is that how YOU describe Eve to people in real life? The disconnect needs to be addressed.
I was drawn to Eve because it was described by a gamer colleague as a rich virtual universe where you had a lot of options as a player. If someone had described it as a PvP spaceship game I would not have bothered to even download the client and just kept trying to get better at Counter-Strike.
Regarding the social aspect of the game , I'm wondering if something more can be done to encourage players while they are still going through the tutorial phase (and maybe as part of the tutorial) to engage with other players in their faction by fleeting up and running a mission together or doing PvP in destroyers against a similar fleet from another faction (Amarr vs Minmitar , Caldari vs Gallente) . Don't torch me for bringing up WoW, but something like those Capture-the-Flag missions where you join a room with other random players to form a team could work quite well.
The other problem I gather new players in highsec face is how to deal with wardecs. Well meaning corp or alliance heads will often direct their members to avoid the enemy in order to not provide kills. While this is a rational approach , in effect the message going out to new players is "Don't fight. Don't mission. Don't Mine. Don't Haul. Get Killed and I'll kick you out." So basically you've spent some money to play a game and you're being told to not play. Even mid-sized corps and alliances are not averse to giving out these directives.
Now of course , some will say the player should just join a big alliance capable of defending itself, but is that where we want players ending up by default? These large entities also have their own rules and requirements and are not for everyone. Some players will figure out the best way to keep playing and avoid wardecs is to go back into the NPC corp, but that offers up a socially sterile experience at best unless you have other contacts in-game.
Maybe limiting the number of wardecs a small corp can be subjected to in a 30 day period combined with making it more costly to wardec might allow small corps to survive and grow. It is sometimes not the actual wardec itself but the fear it will be extended or that another wardec will come along immediately after that is the problem for the small corp and its members.
|
Random McNally
The Vendunari End of Life
92779
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 18:18:01 -
[99] - Quote
Mike has been a solid, intelligent and die hard performer for the CSM process and the capsuleers of New Eden.
It has been my pleasure to donate to his Operation Magic School Bus project. It is always a pleasure when he graces us on the High Drag Podcast.
Mike, you have my axe.
Good luck on the election!
Co-Host of the High Drag Podcast. http://highdrag.wordpress.com/
Check out the space music at http://minddivided.com
In Game Channel HighDragChat
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5868
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 20:39:29 -
[100] - Quote
Sending a vote your way, Mike. Solid choice.
The Paradox
|
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2256
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 00:48:31 -
[101] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:But why are we comparing apples and oranges? Each type of gameplay is an option to choose with pluses and minuses. Some choose the PvP route and complain that everyone makes more isk than them. Other choose the Trade which, if done properly, has little risk and HUGE returns. But you and I don't choose to do either of them, not because they are wrong or bad, they just are not for us. IF incursions are the be all and end all why is everyone not doing them? I'll tell you why I don't run incursions. Sure, they give me more than ten times the income of any other activity I can find to do in EVE (and that is absolutely NOT an exaggeration), but they also remind me too much of games like WoW. Whether you live or die is a careful balance of applied resistance, DPS, and reps. It looks difficult until you do it, then once you know you can and you know how, it's just too easy. It's not fun. In fact it's so un-fun that I'm about as likely to run incursions as I am to mine. Mining may pay a lot less, but it's a lot less taxing, too. Incursion running is like mining 23.5 hours per hour, and pays about the same, too.
Does it have risk? No. Do I need a risk metric to calculate that? No. Its risk level wouldn't register a peep on any metric I can think of. Even the increased risk of being ganked because your ship has expensive mods on it is still mitigated by how fast you earn back the value of the ship. (Was 3 hours for my Navy Mega running vanguards, about 5 hours for the Nightmare with a lower rate of activity running assaults.)
I have to agree with Two Step here, in that highsec incursions pay WAY too much. I think the best solution would be to dramatically reduce the income from those sites (in highsec) and then also significantly reduce the difficulty while also adding a lot more randomness. It doesn't make any sense to me that you should need something over the 500 million ISK mark to compete in highsec. Low and nullsec incursions might as well have the same base difficulty as highsec because they have so many other dangers to consider--but adding randomness will only hit highsec incursions hard. Lowsec and nullsec incursions might actually benefit from it, provided the logi margins were a bit larger to compensate.
I have to offer a disclaimer in that I have not tried running faction warfare sites in lowsec. People say they make more than incursion runners doing that, and they do it in warp-stabbed frigates. If that's true, then that's completely absurd income. WAY too high. You might be able to make that kind of ISK in nullsec or wormhole space with the help of a well-organized conglomerate of people who have to work to guard sovereignty for your access to such things, but you're not going to do it with a ragtag band of ten, and you're certainly not going to do it alone.
I'll end this tirade with the accusation that the reason nobody can sort out the risk*work/reward ratio of highsec incursions or faction warfare sites is that one is so small next to the other as to be invisible.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle
|
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux
413
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 16:24:53 -
[102] - Quote
What is your position on the Jump Fatigue Mechanic? Do you think they need to be changed? |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2345
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 16:58:10 -
[103] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:What is your position on the Jump Fatigue Mechanic? Do you think they need to be changed?
If by changed you mean removed and put back the way it was? No
If you are asking if I think that any arbitrarily selected number or system can stand examination for iteration? Yes and probably should be checked for usage and effects.
I was, and still am, in favour of the changes to power projection (teleportation) but am willing to discusss the nbuances and levels within that framework.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2257
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 18:25:35 -
[104] - Quote
I always felt that one of the major problems with the old jump mechanics was that alliances would set up specific jump points and have them carefully planned out at maximum jump distances, which forced players to learn Jump Drive Calibration 5 merely to even be allowed into capital fleets. That skill is useless in combat but can save a fleet perhaps one jump to get to the combat. With the force projection nerfs, I don't think this issue is any different. As I understand it, it is still important for ships to have the maximum jump range in order to get as much distance per jump as possible, because of the way fatigue multiplies with each jump. A larger number of smaller jumps takes longer to reach the same distance.
I've always felt that the jump mechanics should be built in such a way as to allow pilots with lower levels of jump drive calibration (or none at all) to be viable in capital fleets, and removing the skill or changing its bonus to something other than jump range is not a way I would go about making the change. I had the idea that perhaps if it were balanced such that the only disadvantage to a lower JDC level is a bit more logistics effort, with no time, fuel or fatigue penalties for making more jumps across the same distance, then we would see a greater prevalence of capital fleets accepting lower-skilled pilots--perhaps even advocating training into capital gunnery/drones/RR skills first, and eating the organizational aspect in order to wind up with a more potent fleet. Especially large capital fleets could fly 2-3 capital segments at different intervals to provide incentive for eventually training JDC, and to ease the organizational stress a bit. Small capital fleets could select intervals based on the lowest JDC skill in the group.
Any thoughts on the issue I mentioned or my solution/do you think it would work as intended? Do you feel this is even a problem? Do you have any alternate solutions?
I realize I might be barking up the wrong tree here. If you feel you aren't ready to tackle the question, please point me to a nullsec candidate who might have experience better suited to it. I don't know the current nullsec candidates very well. (I'm not even sure who they are except for Xander Phoena I think.)
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
41
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 18:40:30 -
[105] - Quote
Dear Mike,
If you are a casual gamer living in high sec, with a solo player style and dealing with a wife to be able to play, i am sure you can represent a lot of us.
It's campaign, so some questions to have an opinion, please.
1- What about shares market and opening it so that it can work like a real stock exchange ? 2- What about extending anti piracy means even in the core game ? 3- What about Walking in Station extension lobbying ? 4- What about Project Legion lobbying ? 5- What about Eve Valkyrie linked with Eve Online lobbying ?
When you will have time, i would be happy to read your answers.
Best regards.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light". John Milton, Lost Paradise.
Assassins will be punished by The Law. May their souls be cleansed by retaliatory fire and bounties prosecutions.
_The Law_channel
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
15964
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 19:42:24 -
[106] - Quote
XeX Znndstrup wrote:Dear Mike,
If you are a casual gamer living in high sec, with a solo player style and dealing with a wife to be able to play, i am sure you can represent a lot of us.
It's campaign, so some questions to have an opinion, please.
1- What about shares market and opening it so that it can work like a real stock exchange ?
This is essentially impossible to directly enforce via game mechanics with EVE structured as it is. You would first need to remove alts, or at least have some game mechanic that enforced accountability across alt accounts. Without that, any debt/assurance transaction that is not based on personal trust is laughable.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2349
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 01:51:58 -
[107] - Quote
XeX Znndstrup wrote:Dear Mike,
If you are a casual gamer living in high sec, with a solo player style and dealing with a wife to be able to play, i am sure you can represent a lot of us.
It's campaign, so some questions to have an opinion, please.
1- What about shares market and opening it so that it can work like a real stock exchange ? 2- What about extending anti piracy means even in the core game ? 3- What about Walking in Station extension lobbying ? 4- What about Project Legion lobbying ? 5- What about Eve Valkyrie linked with Eve Online lobbying ?
When you will have time, i would be happy to read your answers.
Best regards.
I would love to see (1) but as Malc says, there would have to be an entire structure of an enforcement arm (Financial Concord) or there would be no accountability. Without accountability a stock market is waaaaay too hazardous for all but the most wildcat investors.
As for antipiracy are you talking about taking/making concord contracts? Maybe a mission hub that notices the bad standing folks in the region and offers you a chance to hunt and shoot first without Concord slapping your hand or even higher level ones that send you into low to hunt them down on their own turf? And what do you mean, core game?
Comics have a phrase. 'too soon' I am not sure if we have crossed that line with Incarna, yet. I would settle for a licencing of Unreal Engine if Carbon makes Graphics cards cry and die. Would I like to see stations a living environment? Yes. Am I going to promise it? No. Does CCP have other things on its plate right now?? Yup
As for 4 and 5. Lordy I am looking forward to those games but they are games not under the purview of the CSM. We are the council for the space side (Eve) and not an overwatch of all of CCP's licences. If the games have a direct linkage then it will come into our wheelhouse but as of now there is nothing TO lobby about. Dust will become Legion and I assume that it will continue with the CPM. I have not heard anybody mention a council in connection with Valkyrie although they have let the council try it in the years gone by.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Tyrant Scorn
182
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 03:32:03 -
[108] - Quote
Mike has my vote and probably the number 1 spot.
Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast
www.legacyofacapsuleer.com
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 12:26:45 -
[109] - Quote
Mike,
Thanks for these answers.
For point 4 and 5, they have an important impact on Eve Online regarding new coming games like SC. For this reason, to protect from members escape, i think even CSM members should speak about this impact on our game.
CCP makes a good job. But sometimes, i am not so sure that market decisions are the best. Dust or World of Darkness could be some relevant examples. It's probably exciting to play with Oculus. But for a space shooter, we don't really wait for Eve Valkyrie. There are a lot of other games for this. Linking Eve Valkyrie to Eve is a strategic decision against SC and much more for Eve Online.
As CSM member, try to do your best to show it up to CCP. It could also be a good future program for a candidate.
Best regards.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light". John Milton, Lost Paradise.
Assassins will be punished by The Law. May their souls be cleansed by retaliatory fire and bounties prosecutions.
_The Law_channel
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
379
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 16:51:25 -
[110] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:XeX Znndstrup wrote:Dear Mike,
If you are a casual gamer living in high sec, with a solo player style and dealing with a wife to be able to play, i am sure you can represent a lot of us.
It's campaign, so some questions to have an opinion, please.
1- What about shares market and opening it so that it can work like a real stock exchange ? 2- What about extending anti piracy means even in the core game ? 3- What about Walking in Station extension lobbying ? 4- What about Project Legion lobbying ? 5- What about Eve Valkyrie linked with Eve Online lobbying ?
When you will have time, i would be happy to read your answers.
Best regards. I would love to see (1) but as Malc says, there would have to be an entire structure of an enforcement arm (Financial Concord) or there would be no accountability. Without accountability a stock market is waaaaay too hazardous for all but the most wildcat investors. As for antipiracy are you talking about taking/making concord contracts? Maybe a mission hub that notices the bad standing folks in the region and offers you a chance to hunt and shoot first without Concord slapping your hand or even higher level ones that send you into low to hunt them down on their own turf? And what do you mean, core game? Comics have a phrase. 'too soon' I am not sure if we have crossed that line with Incarna, yet. I would settle for a licencing of Unreal Engine if Carbon makes Graphics cards cry and die. Would I like to see stations a living environment? Yes. Am I going to promise it? No. Does CCP have other things on its plate right now?? Yup As for 4 and 5. Lordy I am looking forward to those games but they are games not under the purview of the CSM. We are the council for the space side (Eve) and not an overwatch of all of CCP's licences. If the games have a direct linkage then it will come into our wheelhouse but as of now there is nothing TO lobby about. Dust will become Legion and I assume that it will continue with the CPM. I have not heard anybody mention a council in connection with Valkyrie although they have let the council try it in the years gone by. m
I listened to your interview today on Cap Stable. You came across very well. You have my vote sir.
Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
|
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2349
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 18:32:06 -
[111] - Quote
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
I listened to your interview today on Cap Stable. You came across very well. You have my vote sir.
For those of you wishing to listen the interview is here
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
1811
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 18:58:43 -
[112] - Quote
I would like every CSM candidate to confirm (or reject) support of the idea of applying the following statement to all future proposed changes to EvE mechanics:
"If the proposed change to game mechanics is expected to reduce conflict, it should be rejected. If the proposed change will increase conflict, it should be embraced"
Simple yes or no, without equivocation or weasel words. With that one answer voters can have revealed to them who will truly protect the sandbox, and who will let one slip past the goalie one day and harm it.
Mike?
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2349
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:00:59 -
[113] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: I would like every CSM candidate to confirm (or reject) support of the idea of applying the following statement to all future proposed changes to EvE mechanics:
"If the proposed change to game mechanics is expected to reduce conflict, it should be rejected. If the proposed change will increase conflict, it should be embraced"
Simple yes or no, without equivocation or weasel words. With that one answer voters can have revealed to them who will truly protect the sandbox, and who will let one slip past the goalie one day and harm it.
Mike?
F
No. Based on the one work I emphasized above
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1028
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:03:10 -
[114] - Quote
some comments for you and whether you would support something like this.
1) the new player experience needs to be tweaked, and it can be by just doing a few things. Could you bring up to CCP to map wasd to directional as default for every new eve installation. It's silly to make people map out those keys just to figure out movement (it's being hidden from them requiring them to hit escape and map).
2) The default ccp overview is crap. While we can now transfer overviews, the default needs a total remake. Basically have ccp come out with a viable default for every new game installation. Pick the best, and that becomes the new default for players, until they make their own. There's no need to handcuff a new player and to tell them, get a ui from someone else who you can't trust. If you want to have fun with it, have three ccp debs come out with overviews and let the community vote on which should be the new default (with tabs).
3) a test should be run regarding voting for csm, so can an incentive be given to the player to get them to vote. Something like (you vote and receive 5 geico's, or a gnosis, or a free ingame frigate skin, exclusive to that vote year. It would kick the whole "it's worthless to vote for csm" if the players receive something to vote. I wouldn't do skill points, but something like a ship or a skin or some geico's might work. It should be tried this year, and if it doesn't work, no need to do it, if it does though..
Just some thoughts.
Yaay!!!!
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2365
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 15:06:25 -
[115] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:some comments for you and whether you would support something like this.
1) the new player experience needs to be tweaked, and it can be by just doing a few things. Could you bring up to CCP to map wasd to directional as default for every new eve installation. It's silly to make people map out those keys just to figure out movement (it's being hidden from them requiring them to hit escape and map).
2) The default ccp overview is crap. While we can now transfer overviews, the default needs a total remake. Basically have ccp come out with a viable default for every new game installation. Pick the best, and that becomes the new default for players, until they make their own. There's no need to handcuff a new player and to tell them, get a ui from someone else who you can't trust.
3) a test should be run regarding voting for csm, so can an incentive be given to the player to get them to vote. Something like (you vote and receive 5 geico's, or a gnosis, or a free ingame frigate skin, exclusive to that vote year. It would kick the whole "it's worthless to vote for csm" if the players receive something to vote. I wouldn't do skill points, but something like a ship or a skin or some geico's might work. It should be tried this year, and if it doesn't work, no need to do it, if it does though..
Just some thoughts.
1) I agree with prelocking the wasd.
2) I am trying to see who to talk to about making a semi official library of overviews (with commentary) Funny thing, MOST players protect their overviews like it was the recipe for coke (cola) I personally use a modified SaraShawa.
3) this I cannot comment upon (which should tell you something)
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
594
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 07:43:00 -
[116] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Calls for nerfing highsec income are usually based on the idea that 'they are playing it wrong so we need to FORCE them to play our way.' I disagree with that style of thinking. Switch a few words, and oh the irony here..... |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2369
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 08:14:21 -
[117] - Quote
My habit of not reading who made the post made the last comment a bit of a puzzle. I agree that it does have the seeds of irony. But I have supported a few changes that abdicated gameply. Yes, if you asked me I would even make an argument against fleet warp. So I did support the move against multicasting for the same reason. Players are what makes this game great. Not subbed accounts, players.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
594
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 08:17:19 -
[118] - Quote
Nah, I was just remembering a conversation you had with a group of friends and I regarding censorship and nerfs based sole-ly on the idea that "wah they're doing something differently". At the time, you were 100% in favor of restricting gameplay and player choices because someone min/maxed harder than someone else. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2285
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 11:06:04 -
[119] - Quote
Tyrant Scorn wrote:Mike has my vote and probably the number 1 spot. Mike isn't in my #2 spot, he's actually in my #1 spot. Sabriz is in my #0 spot for being stunningly excellent.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx
|
Tyrant Scorn
184
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 07:25:12 -
[120] - Quote
Recorded a show together with Mike Azariah, I am editing it now so expect another great interview with Mike, regarding his CSM campaign and some other random Eve stuff.
I'll post it when it's downloadable.
Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast
www.legacyofacapsuleer.com
|
|
Tyrant Scorn
184
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 12:50:59 -
[121] - Quote
Our latest episode of the Legacy Of A Capsuleer podcast is out: http://mp3.legacyofacapsuleer.com/mp3/LOAC_ep_15.mp3
We had Mike as our guest... Enjoy !!
Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast
www.legacyofacapsuleer.com
|
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
212
|
Posted - 2015.01.28 19:50:04 -
[122] - Quote
I look forward to working with you ;-)
Ashterothi for CSM 10!
|
Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking Brave Collective
21
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 05:02:18 -
[123] - Quote
1. What are the 3 most important lessons about EVE newbros should be taught within their first 3 days of playing?
2. Do you want to change the location of the starting systems? If so, where would you put them instead? Closer to LowSec & NullSec? Cordoned off in an isolated space?
3. Should Mining Ships and Industrials have more offensive power?
Dave Korhal for CSM 10
Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."
Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"
Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2393
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 05:33:53 -
[124] - Quote
Dave Korhal wrote:1. What are the 3 most important lessons about EVE newbros should be taught within their first 3 days of playing?
2. Do you want to change the location of the starting systems? If so, where would you put them instead? Closer to LowSec & NullSec? Cordoned off in an isolated space?
3. Should Mining Ships and Industrials have more offensive power?
Ooh, I like these questions.
1) about eve? Basic mechanics, communications with other players, more of the choices than just mine or mission
2) I can see an argument for putting them on the perimeter of high sec, to give them the option temptation but I don't think I would actively push for a map shift at this point.
3) I loved battle badgers and the idea of an offensive miner appeals to me but only if the offence comes at the cost of mining efficiency. Remember the mining Rohk?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking Brave Collective
22
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 14:20:22 -
[125] - Quote
For the lessons, I meant something more philosophical, like "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose", "expect to die a lot", and "better to have many cheap ships than one expensive ship".
As for the mining, I don't remember the mining Rokh. I think mining barges are in a good place offense-wise, with the Procurer being a tough nut to crack. It's the Industrial haulers I'm concerned about, as the T1s can often be blown up by a single T1 frigate. This can be a problem in NullSec.
It feels like the intention was for Industrials to have escorts, but in practice 90% of them travel by themselves and have to avoid every fight. Perhaps a more expensive faction version of the haulers that could hold its own against 1-2 frigates? My main concern is whether that's dissuade newbros from attacking haulers more often, but it might also encourage them to group up and socialize to take them down.
Although that brings up another question: do you think increased difficulty encourages players to group together? Does it need a little nudge to get players grouping? Or do you think players group up for other reasons entirely?
Dave Korhal for CSM 10
Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."
Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"
Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2400
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:08:22 -
[126] - Quote
Dave Korhal wrote: that brings up another question: do you think increased difficulty encourages players to group together? Does it need a little nudge to get players grouping? Or do you think players group up for other reasons entirely?
Ever tried Dagan at the end of the sisters arc?
Yeah I think that we need more of that sort of mission that drives people to cooperate. It could be made optional so the people who really want to fly alone, could. There is a fine line between encouraging and forcing and I want to see us stay on the right side of that line.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
219
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:13:21 -
[127] - Quote
Right now one could argue a fair chunk of the PvE risk in groups is other players, for obvious reasons. Would you advocate group PvE content that protected the group from PvP disruption, but have very low rewards to allow groups to practice mechanics and learn the game?
Follow up, with the change in corp FF mode, would you advocate a "holo room" which is effectively Sisi on Tranq where players can fight each other in a simulation for training and tournaments?
Ashterothi for CSM 10 #AshYC117!
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2298
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 20:28:06 -
[128] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Yeah I think that we need more of that sort of mission that drives people to cooperate. It could be made optional so the people who really want to fly alone, could. There is a fine line between encouraging and forcing and I want to see us stay on the right side of that line.
m I've always felt that designing PVE to act such that a good group of two partnering together is much more than twice as strong as each individually, so that their combined efforts multiply rather than divide. Do you see such things as encouraging? Like, for instance, if a mission pitted you against a bunch of frigates and cruisers all at once, but if you go in with a frigate and a cruiser each NPC will go after the target of their size, allowing you to split up the incoming fire as well as having NPCs go toward the player that can better fight them. Is that like what you mean?
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera
|
Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking Brave Collective
25
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 21:02:30 -
[129] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Dave Korhal wrote: that brings up another question: do you think increased difficulty encourages players to group together? Does it need a little nudge to get players grouping? Or do you think players group up for other reasons entirely? Ever tried Dagan at the end of the sisters arc?
Actually, no I didn't. I bolted for NullSec after completing half the tutorials because they were taking too long and covering stuff I felt I could figure out on my own, and I avoided doing the Sisters arc after that because I heard there were plenty of griefers that camped the sites on that mission arc to kill newbros.
Dave Korhal for CSM 10
Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."
Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"
Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2404
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 01:41:23 -
[130] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:Right now one could argue a fair chunk of the PvE risk in groups is other players, for obvious reasons. Would you advocate group PvE content that protected the group from PvP disruption, but have very low rewards to allow groups to practice mechanics and learn the game?
I'd argue that damn near all of the danger in PvE comes from other players. But I would not argue for too much more protection because that ill prepares them for the big beyond. See that is where the concept of balance comes in. I object to guys greening their killboard by blapping people less than three weeks old but then I also object to giving protection to people making stupid mistakes like rushing into a ship they are not ready for only to lose it to the aforementioned 'l33t pvp3rs'. So darwinism is maybe the answer but with a little help.
I wan tfocus on keeping new players but not at the cost of losing the basic essence of the game which I presume was what brought them here in the first place.
Ashterothi wrote:Follow up, with the change in corp FF mode, would you advocate a "holo room" which is effectively Sisi on Tranq where players can fight each other in a simulation for training and tournaments?
No
That is what Sisi is. I have said before that I like them to have some 'skin in the game' and so losses on TQ should be real.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
|
Gynax Gallenor
Conquering Darkness
12
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 11:23:20 -
[131] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Protovarious wrote:
(Just not like 20 years of something. I don't wanna fit the bill for your CCP retirement)
d
OK but if I do 10 years will I get a sword? A letter opener even? m
Don't know about any of the above, but I'd be willing to give you a nice, shiny new ISK if you get that far. :)
Fly Reckless, cos flying safe is no damn fun!
http://flyreckless.com/newsite/
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
44
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:26:36 -
[132] - Quote
Why such a big bounty on your head ?
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light". John Milton, Lost Paradise.
Assassins will be punished by The Law. May their souls be cleansed by retaliatory fire and bounties prosecutions.
_The Law_channel
|
Ko-Reen Machu'dog
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 18:51:29 -
[133] - Quote
the current csm has achieved nothing other than further entrenching broken and unbalanced gameplay thanks to it being an echo chamber of uninformed opinions, so why should anyone vote you in again? |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2416
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:45:19 -
[134] - Quote
XeX Znndstrup wrote:Why such a big bounty on your head ?
From friends and listeners tot eh podcasts I do. I consider the addition to it to be a show of support and sent thank you notes to the people to add to it (I may miss one or two but most have been thanked). Feel free to add to it as well.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2416
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:56:45 -
[135] - Quote
Ko-Reen Machu'dog wrote:the current csm has achieved nothing other than further entrenching broken and unbalanced gameplay thanks to it being an echo chamber of uninformed opinions, so why should anyone vote you in again?
An echo chamber of uninformed opinions? I disagree heartily, but then, being uninformed I suppose I would. Which broken and unbalanced game play do you refer to? And how have you evaluated it to be a failure?
I KNOW what the metrics are, I know what actions have been taken and what is proposed for the future. I am the only person with two seasons of CSM under my belt and willing to run again. I am not uninformed, old son, not at all nor are many of my fellow council members but you are welcome to believe what you will of us. Obviously we did not hand you the style of gameplay you wanted or properly nerfed somebody elses so you are angry. I get that.
Achieved nothing? By what measure would you judge us? How could we show you that we HAVE achieved nothing and not totally break the NDA? What would you expect of a CSM, if you could set the standards?
This is not just for Mr. Grumblypants, here. Part of the election is choosing what and who you want. I have set myself out as a conduit and a communicator. As a casual gamer and a highsec fan. Other candidates have set themselves out in other ways, to distinguish themselves from the pack.
There are interviews and campaign threads and articles and vote match . . . all ways to choose the people who will best represent you and be YOUR CSM
If you don't like any of them? Run yourself. Now is the time to get that application in, up until Feb 15th
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
44
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 19:58:06 -
[136] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:XeX Znndstrup wrote:Why such a big bounty on your head ? From friends and listeners tot eh podcasts I do. I consider the addition to it to be a show of support and sent thank you notes to the people to add to it (I may miss one or two but most have been thanked). Feel free to add to it as well. m
Well... but you are also like this a nice prey for a lot of unscrupulous pirates. I prefer to express my friendship in another way than making you a target.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light". John Milton, Lost Paradise.
Assassins will be punished by The Law. May their souls be cleansed by retaliatory fire and bounties prosecutions.
_The Law_channel
|
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
226
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 20:28:41 -
[137] - Quote
It is easy for a incumbent to laud their successes, and hide failures.
Can you give an example where you supported a side on a decision that ended up not being what CCP went for, and that it turned out work out anyways?
In other words. Was there a topic this last year where you fell on the wrong side of history?
Ashterothi for CSM 10 #AshYC117!
|
Ko-Reen Machu'dog
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 20:42:08 -
[138] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Ko-Reen Machu'dog wrote:the current csm has achieved nothing other than further entrenching broken and unbalanced gameplay thanks to it being an echo chamber of uninformed opinions, so why should anyone vote you in again? An echo chamber of uninformed opinions? I disagree heartily, but then, being uninformed I suppose I would. Which broken and unbalanced game play do you refer to? And how have you evaluated it to be a failure? I KNOW what the metrics are, I know what actions have been taken and what is proposed for the future. I am the only person with two seasons of CSM under my belt and willing to run again. I am not uninformed, old son, not at all nor are many of my fellow council members but you are welcome to believe what you will of us. Obviously we did not hand you the style of gameplay you wanted or properly nerfed somebody elses so you are angry. I get that. Achieved nothing? By what measure would you judge us? How could we show you that we HAVE achieved nothing and not totally break the NDA? What would you expect of a CSM, if you could set the standards? This is not just for Mr. Grumblypants, here. Part of the election is choosing what and who you want. I have set myself out as a conduit and a communicator. As a casual gamer and a highsec fan. Other candidates have set themselves out in other ways, to distinguish themselves from the pack. There are interviews and campaign threads and articles and vote match . . . all ways to choose the people who will best represent you and be YOUR CSM If you don't like any of them? Run yourself. Now is the time to get that application in, up until Feb 15th m
why would any sane person waste their time campaigning to be part of a group of players that A) has very little impact on anything B) between them manage to have less game knowledge than ccp rise and C) have to go to iceland when ccp feels like they need a PR boost.
I could go through the last set of minutes that were posted to point out specific failings but honestly I'd rather play eve than waste time looking through that trainwreck
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2416
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:14:14 -
[139] - Quote
Ashterothi wrote:It is easy for a incumbent to laud their successes, and hide failures.
Can you give an example where you supported a side on a decision that ended up not being what CCP went for, and that it turned out work out anyways?
In other words. Was there a topic this last year where you fell on the wrong side of history?
Top two?
I would still like to see some counter mechanic for cloaking. I fought on multiple fronts for more dynamic PvE content, incursions variance (pirate raids), more missions, smarter AI and I don't feel I had as much success as I wanted.
Biggest frustration? Being remote makes communication and order of magnitude more difficult. There were things I wanted said during various sessions of the winter summit but could not get a word in edgewise or did so via text and was thus not in the minutes.
Damn, that was a good question Ash, you ought to have a podcast and interview folks.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Ashterothi
The Order of Thelemic Ascension
226
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 21:29:55 -
[140] - Quote
I should! Maybe I could call it... Hyper Mobile.
nah... how about Low Speed?
Eh I'll work on it and get back to you.
Ashterothi for CSM 10 #AshYC117!
|
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
7745
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 16:54:05 -
[141] - Quote
Glad to see you running again, Mike.
One of the few that I see getting involved on a daily basis with the player base. Not like most that you never hear from between election campaigns.
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Tyrant Scorn
184
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 18:14:25 -
[142] - Quote
Because you found it necessary to put a knife in my back on another podcast, I will no longer vote for you.
I have supported your campaign on CSM9 and for CSM10 I got you on the show again, and yet you found it necessary to disrespect me, something I never expected from you.
Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast
www.legacyofacapsuleer.com
|
ChYph3r
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
154
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 05:31:55 -
[143] - Quote
Tyrant Scorn wrote:Because you found it necessary to put a knife in my back on another podcast, I will no longer vote for you.
I have supported your campaign on CSM9 and for CSM10 I got you on the show again, and yet you found it necessary to disrespect me, something I never expected from you.
Dude (Tyrant Scorn), your such a douche, he was praising me for being a man about a situation that puts your podcast on the list that I run for the community. I did it because my site is for the community as a whole, so I disregarded your arrogance and egocentric attitude and put your podcast on my list. Even though personally, I don't like you. So if your not going to vote for him because he praised me, well your seriously (in the words of the Legend Ernie Harwell) LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONGGGGGGGGGGG GONE!
I can easily remove unnamed podcast from the list. If you so wish. I have no problem with that. Just send me an email on my site listed in my signature.
Want to find all the podcasts around EVE Online visit
http://evepodcasts.com
@chyph3r on Twitter
|
Protovarious
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
33
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 06:41:55 -
[144] - Quote
Tyrant Scorn wrote:Because you found it necessary to put a knife in my back on another podcast, I will no longer vote for you.
I have supported your campaign on CSM9 and for CSM10 I got you on the show again, and yet you found it necessary to disrespect me, something I never expected from you.
Firstly, he never named you. Pukin and Harry did.
Second, Mike was giving ChYph3r credit for doing right by the community and giving you media links on his site despite past personal feelings.
Personally, I doubt anyone cares about your "endorsement" any less than my own. But seeing as how your defensive victim complex has reared it's ugly head yet again, you're giving credence to why ChYph3r is, in fact, the bigger man here.
Easier to throw a tantrum than take a minute to comprehend, eh?
Co-host of The Neocom Podcast - http://www.TheNeocom.com
Eve Community Blogger -
The Eve Editorial - http://eveeditorial.wordpress.com
Twitter: @Proto_Eve
|
FrFrmPukin
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 09:18:36 -
[145] - Quote
PRO TIP (for newbros) To be good at EVE you have to vote for Mike Azariah for CSM, because if you do, his awesomeness will just magically enhance your gameplay. NO JOKING!!! His awesomeness is retroactive as well.
PRO TIP (for veteran players) Voting for Mike Azariah will NOT make you win at EVE, because voting for him actually has the reverse effect. Winning at EVE = not playing the game... duh
PROT TIP (for bitter old vets) HTFU and just vote for Mike Azariah. Your going to do it anyways... you bitter old fork Harri and Chyph3r are going to do it and so should you.
PRO TIP (for all pilots) Mike Azariah IS NOT in the CFC, nor has been been assimilated or emasculated by the CFC as some may have accused him of. His "Magic School Bus" program is legit and is not a scam even though he has a huge bounty placed on him as a gimmick by many of us in the EVE Media. Just recently, Mike Azariah has been wrongly accused of betrayal by a non factor in the EVE Media who is the host of "Legacy Of An A**hole Podcast". That person owes Mike Azariah a formal apology for being incompetent on his fact checking and for letting his personal bias toward another podcast taint his comments towards Mike Azariah.
Lastly, if I wasn't married and I was batting for the home team... I would certainly do Mike Azariah!! However, I am just going to have to settle with voting for him with all my accounts... even the extra accounts that I just renewed in order to vote the CFC block list because my "Dear Leader" has ordered me so. |
FrFrmPukin
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 09:22:54 -
[146] - Quote
^ sorry for dp |
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers Soviet-Union
329
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 00:19:44 -
[147] - Quote
Mike, I tried talking to you in private about the issues between Tyrant and Cypher.
Honestly I tried burying this when I came on board, but it keeps coming up.
I even publicly thanked Cypher for adding LegacyofaCapsuleer.com to his podcast website, even after he called me names for having a different opinion then him.
- Cypher called anyone who is against the isboxer changes "c*ntsWith and bitches"
- Someone on Podside threatened harm to Tyrants family over some stupid eve argument
- On Podside, on a live feed, CCP Seagull was called names I'd rather not repeat.
- Cypher proceeded on 280 to say that Tyrant is a ****** supporter... Really?
- There was about 6 requests that came in before our interview with CCP Manifest asking us to push him to condemn or flat out ban Cypher and anyone else involved for the comment about CCP Seagull. There is a growing call to have CCP police podcasts and blogs because of these statements on Podside. None of us want that.
You said "With them I only stayed for a little while, I've never done that with anyone else."
You commend Cypher for adding LegacyofaCapsuleer.com to his podcast website but don't even attempt to call out all of these other issues, then take a swipe at us?
We brought you on because we liked you as a candidate and a person. However now we feel a bit slighted for reasons I can't really discern.
EVE Online and Multiboxing
Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2448
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 00:38:27 -
[148] - Quote
I am sorry you guys feel slighted.
I have been listening in and even taking part in the twitch portion of your casts for the last two (Funky and Manifest) as well as the time I was on.
RL precludes me from being able to stay full time for most casts but I do my best with the ones I do show up on.
I feel like a kid caught in the middle of a parents divorce. I don't want to take side and I am willing to work with you both. But each time 'mom and dad' get together things blow up (and not in a good way)
Each podcast is different. Your LoaC has been doing great one guest formats. Podside is a different beast, it is the equivalent of going out with a bunch of Eve folks, getting drunk, and talking about whatever crosses their minds. There are hours that have no Eve in it, others that are finer focus. Just like going to a sports bar for beers. Sometimes you watch the game, other times the waitresses.
I said it before and I'll say it again. I mean no harm, no disrespect. Trust me, if I do want to disrespect you I will make it very clear.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2328
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 17:10:54 -
[149] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:I don't want to take side and I am willing to work with you both. I'm more than willing to take a side here. I'd say in this heated exchange, Mike is clearly the better man.
You guys should take a moment to cool off before posting, and also try communicating with a person about disputes or tension and see if they're willing to work it out before you openly accuse them of anything. Two times out of three, you'll discover it was a misunderstanding and they meant no harm. One time out of three they go out of their way to make reparations. I'd wager Mike would be in that last one out of three, time permitting, and if you had a good case for damages.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky
Highsec reform thread
|
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers Soviet-Union
330
|
Posted - 2015.02.06 17:14:54 -
[150] - Quote
I tried replying from my mobile, but it apparently didnt send.
Mike - no problem, I understand trying to stay out of this fight back and forth (as I have tried doing as well, but I have a vested interest with Tyrant and also he doesnt seem to be the aggressor in this fight from trying to be objective....)
Staying neutral is a tough thing, we just felt a bit slighted by your comment after we supported your candidacy.
Podside has a few people who seem extremely hostile to other media and even to CCP employees (the statements on a live podcast about CCP Seagull are completely unforgivable).
Your a great CSM candidate and you still have our 100% support, sorry this dragged out longer then it should. Please do come onto our show whenever you want, either on Twitch or even on the live audio. Your always welcome.
EVE Online and Multiboxing
Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast
|
|
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 20:00:33 -
[151] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Any CSM or candidate that refuses to swear an oath to the EvE constitution, that they will never support any change that reduces player conflict, and will only embrace changes that increase player conflict, should be summarily removed from consideration. Mike does not subscribe to this pledge.
Man, you lost it hard! In short: - EvE is a game - CCP is the company with earning money in mind. - being a company you need to be professional and people you work with need to be professional too. - signing a NDA is a RL pleadge to a company, that comes far before every in game problem, personal oppinion or ingame pledge.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: There is no middle ground between food and poison, just poisoned food.
Bad luck for you: "Dosis facit venenum. by Paracelus. "it is the dose that makes the poison." As in medical drug(good) overdose(bad).
"Time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time."
Forum Main
|
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
14
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 00:49:43 -
[152] - Quote
Here it is.
If you don't like it I will pull it down and try again. |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2465
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 01:33:52 -
[153] - Quote
Bellak Hark wrote:Here it is.If you don't like it I will pull it down and try again.
I loved it, especially the ending
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
FrFrmPukin
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
6
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 01:58:55 -
[154] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Bellak Hark wrote:Here it is.If you don't like it I will pull it down and try again. I loved it, especially the ending m
I agree.. that was good!!
|
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
16
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 05:15:02 -
[155] - Quote
FrFrmPukin wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Bellak Hark wrote:Here it is.If you don't like it I will pull it down and try again. I loved it, especially the ending m I agree.. that was good!!
I am trying to think of a good one for Podside. It's difficult to decide on the video but I do have an idea of what I want to do and I am working on gathering video and finding good audio from the podcast. |
Bagehi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
281
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 20:07:20 -
[156] - Quote
Mike's a good guy and a great CSM member. |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1310
|
Posted - 2015.02.11 00:56:21 -
[157] - Quote
Mike really again? Supporting you again if you are not tired of it.
Burn the land and boil the sea
You can't take the sky from me
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5092
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 14:25:05 -
[158] - Quote
This year I'm starting to have a look at the running CSM candidates in a bit more depth, and I've written a short review of your campaign, which can be found here.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Origin. Black Legion.
1925
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:43:36 -
[159] - Quote
Yes yes yes...Mike is a 'nice guy' who 'works hard'...
But wasn't Dexter also, working hard at slitting throats on HBO each week, while wearing a warm brother/father facade? Hardly a Dexter, but in Mike's case it's nodding with trained-seal approval as CCP slits their own throats.
Also, this is pretty damning commentary from another CSM who also sat behind the curtains.
My point is this, CSM membership shouldn't be a popularity or work-ethic contest (for Dexter shure worked hard at putting a lot of bodies in the ocean...). It should be about people who will simply fight to the death to defend the damned sandbox. We don't need a fence-sitting trained seal or carebear supporting nerfs. We need someone who will defend the sandbox.
EvE is not WoW for a reason, but Mike would take us there, while pretending he isn't helping CCP do just that.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2352
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 20:52:32 -
[160] - Quote
+1 vote for Dexter Mike
Anyone who slaughters bad guys- -hunts evil promotes fun is good in my book.
Mike isn't trying to turn EVE into a theme park. He likes the sand box just as much as you and I do.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky, Tora Bushido
Highsec reform thread
|
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2481
|
Posted - 2015.02.12 22:12:07 -
[161] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Yes yes yes...Mike is a 'nice guy' who 'works hard'... But wasn't Dexter also, working hard at slitting throats on HBO each week, while wearing a warm brother/father facade? Hardly a Dexter, but in Mike's case it's nodding with trained-seal approval as CCP slits their own throats. Also, this is pretty damning commentary from another CSM who also sat behind the curtains. My point is this, CSM membership shouldn't be a popularity or work-ethic contest (for Dexter shure worked hard at putting a lot of bodies in the ocean...). It should be about people who will simply fight to the death to defend the damned sandbox. We don't need a fence-sitting trained seal or carebear supporting nerfs. We need someone who will defend the sandbox. EvE is not WoW for a reason, but Mike would take us there, while pretending he isn't helping CCP do just that. F
For those of you unwilling to click the link I brought it over, with a reason.
Quote:Mike Azariah
While I like Mike personally, I remain unconvinced of the value of serial podcast appearances or EVE-O posting marathons. He tends to fence-sit frequently, and it can be frustrating to determine what he genuinely thinks about a given issue. He has been consistently active and engaged. I'm convinced he's an anarchist. Sion's review of incumbents
The reason is I agree with almost all of it, I just see it in a different light.
He remains unconvinced of talking to the electorate, to going and and connecting with the players. To being on THESE forums. I am convinced that is what you are electing me to do. Communicate. If you think CSM/CCP knows best and they do not need you bumping his elbow then vote for people who only talk during the campaigns.
Fence sit? I always try to see both sides of an argument and usually both sides have some good points. I do not like things in Black or White, For us or Against us, Part of the Problem or part of the Solution. The world does not work that way. It is of compromise, agreement, consensus. So I engage, ask and look for the gems on each side of an argument. But that does not mean I waffle, notice he did NOT accuse me of that. I do make a stand but usually it is somewhere closer to the centre than some others do. Since he is more to extremes he finds me tough to read.
Active and engaged. . . . wow that is really damning, I have nothing to say to defend myself against that.
Anarchist- yup. I make my own rules and have an ingrained aversion to playing my game FOR someone else. That is why I do not do well in Null. Casual players cannot play alarm clock games, cannot make their monthly quotas of fleets and required activities. In Sions eyes a lot of players are probably slightly anarchistic. I represent THEM.
I read Sions article and laughed. What he saw as negatives are my best features. I like Sion as well, I get along with most folks. Comes from that centering tendencies of mine. I am what I am.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1455
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 01:28:31 -
[162] - Quote
^^ That.
I have nothing against Sion Kumitomo, but the fact that Mike is essentially incomprehensible to him is an excellent reason to have Mike on the CSM: It means he's representing people who Sion could not hope to speak for.
And that's OK. It just means that EVE is a big game.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers Soviet-Union
338
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 01:47:03 -
[163] - Quote
Well I'll say Mike came out against drone assist need, which I agree with him on and there were many other ways to balance carrier fleets.
however I'm not sure his opinion on multiboxing and isboxer users.
It
EVE Online and Multiboxing
Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast
|
FrFrmPukin
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:05:31 -
[164] - Quote
I believe people tend to forget that a candidate's opinions are a very small part of everything. The largest part of being a CSM member is how they are going to represent the players. Like Sion said himself in his TMC article, they are just a focus and feedback group and not DEVs or employees of CCP. They filter and sort through the cosmic white noise that is the pilots comments, the forums, and the EVE Media. Then they focus the strongest signals to CCP. This allows CCP to focus more assets on the game development and content. While being bound by NDA, they do the same thing in reverse. They convey what they can to the public via multiple different avenues.
Candidates need to have the ability to focus on what is good for the game and not what is good for an individual or a group. Communication skills and the ability to work within a team environment is also a must. Their personal opinions are just spice added to meal, but not the whole meat and potatoes. Creativity, knowledge of the game and the ability to provide educated thoughts to the CSM group or devs is more important than personal and biased interests.
Mike A. has earned the respect of the incumbents, much of the player base and those at CCP. Since we don't really have a good way of evaluating their performance while serving on the CSM, we have to rely on those they have served with to give us some limited feedback on the their peers. Since they can not speak poorly of each other due to the rules imposed on them, you can only go off the level of praise they give each other.
Mike is also supported by the majority of the those in the EVE Media. His willingness to do shows and interact with player base is also well known by so many. Mike always has a notebook nearby to write down suggestions, comments and complaints. He is willing to funnel those things, that he writes down, to the right people at CCP or the CSM group for discussion.
MY opinion is that if you don't vote for Mike and put him towards the top of you ballot while voting, then there is something clearly wrong with you and you should go skill yourself in game. Then give me all your things. Just put Mike in your top 10 for CSM10! |
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
65
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 08:15:30 -
[165] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Yes yes yes...Mike is a 'nice guy' who 'works hard'...
My point is this, CSM membership shouldn't be a popularity or work-ethic contest (for Dexter shure worked hard at putting a lot of bodies in the ocean...). It should be about people who will simply fight to the death to defend the damned sandbox. We don't need a fence-sitting trained seal or carebear supporting nerfs. We need someone who will defend the sandbox.
EvE is not WoW for a reason, but Mike would take us there, while pretending he isn't helping CCP do just that.
F
It's still good comedy to watch you chest beast about sandbox when you don't acknowledge both sides of the coin. Some play for pew and glorious internet spaceship murder. Others don't. That you fail to accept this concept is your problem, Not his. |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Origin. Black Legion.
1940
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 21:31:42 -
[166] - Quote
Urziel99 wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Yes yes yes...Mike is a 'nice guy' who 'works hard'...
My point is this, CSM membership shouldn't be a popularity or work-ethic contest (for Dexter shure worked hard at putting a lot of bodies in the ocean...). It should be about people who will simply fight to the death to defend the damned sandbox. We don't need a fence-sitting trained seal or carebear supporting nerfs. We need someone who will defend the sandbox.
EvE is not WoW for a reason, but Mike would take us there, while pretending he isn't helping CCP do just that.
F
It's still good comedy to watch you chest beast about sandbox when you don't acknowledge both sides of the coin. Some play for pew and glorious internet spaceship murder. Others don't. That you fail to accept this concept is your problem, Not his. Explain to me how this is honoring both sides Urziel, in the context of EvE being conflict and spaceship detonations at its founding core, and the first duty (in my mind) is for CSM's to protect that, not help CCP slit their own throats on the road to WoW theme-park. Then search your soul on if Mike has truly been defending that.
I get he's your podcasting bro, but CCP doesn't need player help in making hisec a theme park from our elected CSM's, when the CSM's should be the balancing counter-point TO CCP's theme-park intentions.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2360
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 00:19:54 -
[167] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Most of the items on that list were fixes to major bugs, exploits, or oversights that made piracy altogether too easy. Highsec was originally intended to be pretty safe and the only reason it took so long for those changes to happen was because it took a long time for the playerbase to really take advantage of the issues on a large scale. Also, I like (or rather, I HATE) how your list conveniently ignores all changes made in the other direction.
So here's what REALLY has happened:
* CONCORD response times adjusted for the increase in prevalence of highsec ganks * sec status penalties for ganks increased due to the discovery of easy ways to raise it again * Insurance removed for gankers, Tornado added. Expensive ganks retain similar cost, cheap ganks still cheap. * Barge and exhumer HP buffed because they were paper-thin and were getting demolished by 1 destroyer even when tanked. Now it actually costs either ISK or players to gank an expensive ship. * Ventures added, which have built-in warp stabs with full cost to slots, CPU, targeting range, and scan resolution--so it's a less flexible frigate. * Baiters can only re-ship in a combat-flagged Orca, to prevent Orca pilot from being combat-flagged for not doing anything. * War declaration mechanics made to allow corporations to attack others freely in highsec after paying a fee. * War declaration costs increased in balance pass after they are shown to be too cheap. * unlimited allies can join a defender or attacker - this is (obviously) used almost exclusively by attackers * can flipping gives suspect flag now, instead of combat only with one person - duels added for those who don't want suspect status * ganglinks can't be used inside POS shield > allegedly mining foreman links can, but I find this hard to believe. Can anyone confirm? * drone bug fix breaks exploit that allowed a player to flag another player for combat merely because the player had drones out * allegedly corps can disallow free shooting of corp members. I never heard of this.
So with all of these changes, we see a lot of rebalancing of highsec combat, but overall one very strong detail rings clear: highsec is much more dangerous now with wardecs than it ever was without them. The rest of that stuff (which isn't really strongly in favor of the defenders so much as balance retention) is insignificant in comparison.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky, Tora Bushido
Highsec reform thread
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
68
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 17:53:13 -
[168] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Most of the items on that list were fixes to major bugs, exploits, or oversights that made piracy altogether too easy. Highsec was originally intended to be pretty safe and the only reason it took so long for those changes to happen was because it took a long time for the playerbase to really take advantage of the issues on a large scale. Also, I like (or rather, I HATE) how your list conveniently ignores all changes made in the other direction. So here's what REALLY has happened: * CONCORD response times adjusted for the increase in prevalence of highsec ganks * sec status penalties for ganks increased due to the discovery of easy ways to raise it again * Insurance removed for gankers, Tornado added. Expensive ganks retain similar cost, cheap ganks still cheap. * Barge and exhumer HP buffed because they were paper-thin and were getting demolished by 1 destroyer even when tanked. Now it actually costs either ISK or players to gank an expensive ship. * Ventures added, which have built-in warp stabs with full cost to slots, CPU, targeting range, and scan resolution--so it's a less flexible frigate. * Baiters can only re-ship in a combat-flagged Orca, to prevent Orca pilot from being combat-flagged for not doing anything. * War declaration mechanics made to allow corporations to attack others freely in highsec after paying a fee. * War declaration costs increased in balance pass after they are shown to be too cheap. * unlimited allies can join a defender or attacker - this is (obviously) used almost exclusively by attackers * can flipping gives suspect flag now, instead of combat only with one person - duels added for those who don't want suspect status * ganglinks can't be used inside POS shield > allegedly mining foreman links can, but I find this hard to believe. Can anyone confirm?* drone bug fix breaks exploit that allowed a player to flag another player for combat merely because the player had drones out * allegedly corps can disallow free shooting of corp members. I never heard of this. So with all of these changes, we see a lot of rebalancing of highsec combat, but overall one very strong detail rings clear: highsec is much more dangerous now with wardecs than it ever was without them. The rest of that stuff (which isn't really strongly in favor of the defenders so much as balance retention) is insignificant in comparison.
Mining links are the only ones that work in a shield. All others won't work. The intercorp aggression flag is coming with Tiamat. It plugs a major security hole and it's made to encourage more social play instead of countless alt corps or just sitting in an npc corp.
But feyd here isn't interested in balance, he just wants easy kills by any means available. There are still plenty of complete bullshit mechanics that CCP either lacks the will or technical skill to fix. *cough* Bumping, hyperdunking, -10's still active in highsec *cough* So don't bother playing poor downtrodden victim around here. It won't hold water. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5103
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 19:06:19 -
[169] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: Most of the items on that list were fixes to major bugs, exploits, or oversights that made piracy altogether too easy. Highsec was originally intended to be pretty safe and the only reason it took so long for those changes to happen was because it took a long time for the playerbase to really take advantage of the issues on a large scale. Also, I like (or rather, I HATE) how your list conveniently ignores all changes made in the other direction. So here's what REALLY has happened: * CONCORD response times adjusted for the increase in prevalence of highsec ganks * sec status penalties for ganks increased due to the discovery of easy ways to raise it again * Insurance removed for gankers, Tornado added. Expensive ganks retain similar cost, cheap ganks still cheap. * Barge and exhumer HP buffed because they were paper-thin and were getting demolished by 1 destroyer even when tanked. Now it actually costs either ISK or players to gank an expensive ship. * Ventures added, which have built-in warp stabs with full cost to slots, CPU, targeting range, and scan resolution--so it's a less flexible frigate. * Baiters can only re-ship in a combat-flagged Orca, to prevent Orca pilot from being combat-flagged for not doing anything. * War declaration mechanics made to allow corporations to attack others freely in highsec after paying a fee. * War declaration costs increased in balance pass after they are shown to be too cheap. * unlimited allies can join a defender or attacker - this is (obviously) used almost exclusively by attackers * can flipping gives suspect flag now, instead of combat only with one person - duels added for those who don't want suspect status * ganglinks can't be used inside POS shield > allegedly mining foreman links can, but I find this hard to believe. Can anyone confirm?* drone bug fix breaks exploit that allowed a player to flag another player for combat merely because the player had drones out * allegedly corps can disallow free shooting of corp members. I never heard of this. So with all of these changes, we see a lot of rebalancing of highsec combat, but overall one very strong detail rings clear: highsec is much more dangerous now with wardecs than it ever was without them. The rest of that stuff (which isn't really strongly in favor of the defenders so much as balance retention) is insignificant in comparison. In addition to this there have been other changes which have pushed it the other way, for example the corp hangar changes, allowing Orcas to drop loot from ther fleet hangars. No changes which were beneficial to his playstyle make it onto his graph. Also for wardecs, you used to be able to dec shield yourself, making it ridiculously expensive to declare war. You also use to be able to shed wars, and now can't do that.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
420
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 19:38:12 -
[170] - Quote
Mike,
Assuming someone wanted you, steve, corbexx, and sugar to get re-elected, what do you think the order would need to be on the ballot to ensure maximum success? |
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2490
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 20:03:11 -
[171] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:Mike,
Assuming someone wanted you, steve, corbexx, and sugar to get re-elected, what do you think the order would need to be on the ballot to ensure maximum success?
Yeesh, that is a really tough question. Trying to answer it without being self-serving is even harder
So let me tell you how I am thinking it.
Visible support currently in effect is the key along with how the election algorithm is worked. We ALL need some #1 vote slots to make it past the first winnowing and pass throughs. So if you had multiple accounts I would suggest you shuffle them a bit to spread the love.
That being said I would say that, right now my money is on Sugar and Corbexx for being almost sure things. Corbexx has a solid and supportive constituency and I challenge you to find anybody saying anything negative about Sugar. I expect to see her on a lot of null ballots as well as the low support. Steve and I are the odd ducks. Neither of us have a huge support block behind us and as a result are more at risk. If you listened to my interview with Cap Stable you will know Steve was who I chose as the one person I would like to see get in (besides myself)
So to keep it from looking self serving
Steve, Me, Sugar, Corbexx
But there are lots of other good candidates that deserve to be on that list as well. I am going to hack my way through the final list in the next few days and see who I like over all
oh, and thank you for putting me on the same list as those other three, I consider that a high compliment.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2365
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 21:52:35 -
[172] - Quote
Urziel99 wrote:Mining links are the only ones that work in a shield. All others won't work. The intercorp aggression flag is coming with Tiamat. It plugs a major security hole and it's made to encourage more social play instead of countless alt corps or just sitting in an npc corp. I agree with the intercorp aggression flag though I am a bit disappointed about it. But the mining links working inside the shield is inexcusable and I disagree strongly with that! It should be fixed.
Mike, I thought you were a shoe-in. You might get a few less votes because of the high number of folks getting interested in other candidates, but I highly doubt you won't win a slot. Steve will probably get in, too, he's got popularity. But you're right, Corbexx and Sugar Kyle are total shoe-ins.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky, Tora Bushido
Highsec reform thread
|
Aditu Ibuki
Metaphysics Industries Holed Up
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 00:09:11 -
[173] - Quote
Why if the majority of the players are set up in low-sec/null-sec alliances and wars is CCP not focusing on content development for them. The entirety of the EVE media seems dedicated to advancing the interest of players to play EVE just to blow each other (and the rest of us up) Why are our interests not being represented well, why is CCP not advancing content in the games in areas where you are not targeted by players 4 seconds after you de-cloak? This is not about separating more groups of players with different interests but a ambition to add something in the game for those of us not interested in new ways to blow people up... |
Tyrant Scorn
187
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 00:39:23 -
[174] - Quote
Quote:Mike Azariah
While I like Mike personally, I remain unconvinced of the value of serial podcast appearances or EVE-O posting marathons. He tends to fence-sit frequently, and it can be frustrating to determine what he genuinely thinks about a given issue. He has been consistently active and engaged. I'm convinced he's an anarchist. Sion's review of incumbents
Sion is not the only CSM member who shares this opinion, I've heard people say the exact same thing before Sion even released this.
Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast
Eve Online Hold 'Em | EveTimeCode.com | GameTimeZone.com
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2490
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 03:08:41 -
[175] - Quote
Aditu Ibuki wrote:Why if the majority of the players are set up in low-sec/null-sec alliances and wars is CCP not focusing on content development for them. The entirety of the EVE media seems dedicated to advancing the interest of players to play EVE just to blow each other (and the rest of us up) Why are our interests not being represented well, why is CCP not advancing content in the games in areas where you are not targeted by players 4 seconds after you de-cloak? This is not about separating more groups of players with different interests but a ambition to add something in the game for those of us not interested in new ways to blow people up...
Simple exercise for you. Open the map and go to the statistics tab and click on players in space in last half hour. Then rethink your first sentences.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Aditu Ibuki
Metaphysics Industries Holed Up
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 03:27:25 -
[176] - Quote
I have corrected the missing negative in mu post.
The map doesn't help me tot up all the next to empties compared to the smaller much redder empire space.
I am assuming there was still a significant proportion of people playing almost entirely in high-sec, maybe they've all gone and I am overdue too... |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2490
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 03:40:53 -
[177] - Quote
Ah, ok. See I was answering the first question and scratching my head wondering where you got the impressions everybody was in null.
I disagree that CCP always plays to one portion of the population but at times the communities can act very envious of the other ones if action is taken to fix something over there. Yes, the next year is going to have a lot of Null focus because SOV really does need some attention. NO, that does not mean that all the other parts of space will be ignored.
That is why I am running. To represent Hisec play and the Casual gamer. To watch over the fact that no part of space is isolated from the rest, not even wormholes. Any change causes ripples across all of New Eden and so you need WH reps, Low sec reps, Hisec carebears like myself, as well as the Null representatives who admit that they don't need YOUR votes because their own people will sweep them in to victory easily.
I do not have that luxury. I need you and people like you to vote.
a lot
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Aditu Ibuki
Metaphysics Industries Holed Up
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 03:49:26 -
[178] - Quote
Then we need some kind of affirmitative statement from CCP they actually support this playstyle because reading any EVE media and reading future plans I see a big zero. The only issue discussed seems Concord tweaks and war decs, this is not new content.
I game like EVE has enormous potential for no PVP content and there seems no movement in this area. Trade expansion, market interaction expansion, science explansion, social expansion, planetary resource expansion, NPC corp interaction explansion, co-op mission explansion, the list is huge. No-one seems even to both to mention it as it is not big for PVP or alliance meta-game twaddle. Where is the prompting on CCP on this.
All this could be done, all players could enjoy it if them want, all could offer risk of various sort (economic, PVE or player pirating, where is the debate? Its seems be a total non-starter..... |
Cutter John
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 09:36:21 -
[179] - Quote
-1
I mailed you about it, you read it, then didn't reply. |
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 13:55:33 -
[180] - Quote
Applications are ending. Time to vote soon.
A candidate may not agree with everything but he should be a fair representative and witness of what people told him. Before requesting our agents to endorse someone, we would like to be sure you would speak about these following subjects if member of CSM X :
1- Piracy : we don't want new game mechanics which reduce ability for some to live in a securized space. This subject is important in game but becomes also more important politically out of game when we see some unscrupulous organizations applying for CSM.
2- Walking in Station, Legion Project and Valkyrie : these 3 subjects are important because they would add others perspectives for Eve Online. That's the reason why they should be supported as a whole and not like other games. They MUST be linked with Eve Online. Perspectives in a game is the main reason players, new or old, would stay in this game. Working on this doesn't significate CCP shouldn't work also on actual mechanics.
3- Societies, social hubs or organizations : we are so we want them.
4- Market mechanics : even if it would necessitate big modifications, CCP should start to think about this in their planning. See what we spoke about in this thread about shares exchange as a way to influence in another way the sandbox.
Your answer could be as simple as an "OK" for each point. And we will be yours.
Best regards from The Law Organization and its messenger.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light".
John Milton, Lost Paradise.
|
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
70
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 17:38:15 -
[181] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Urziel99 wrote:Mining links are the only ones that work in a shield. All others won't work. The intercorp aggression flag is coming with Tiamat. It plugs a major security hole and it's made to encourage more social play instead of countless alt corps or just sitting in an npc corp. I agree with the intercorp aggression flag though I am a bit disappointed about it. But the mining links working inside the shield is inexcusable and I disagree strongly with that! It should be fixed. .
As soon as true command ships give a mining foreman bonus so the booster can defend itself. Till then, nope. |
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers Soviet-Union
340
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 18:42:31 -
[182] - Quote
XeX Znndstrup wrote:Applications are ending. Time to vote soon.
A candidate may not agree with everything but he should be a fair representative and witness of what people told him. Before requesting our agents to endorse someone, we would like to be sure you would speak about these following subjects if member of CSM X :
1- Piracy : we don't want new game mechanics which reduce ability for some to live in a securized space. This subject is important in game but becomes also more important politically out of game when we see some unscrupulous organizations applying for CSM.
Can you please be more specific on who your advocating for? The high sec players or the High sec gankers / pirates?
EVE Online and Multiboxing
Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 19:24:25 -
[183] - Quote
ShadowandLight wrote:
Can you please be more specific on who your advocating for? The high sec players or the High sec gankers / pirates?
Neither gankers nor pirates. Not only in high sec.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light".
John Milton, Lost Paradise.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2492
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 21:01:20 -
[184] - Quote
XeX Znndstrup wrote:
1- Piracy : we don't want new game mechanics which reduce ability for some to live in a securized space. This subject is important in game but becomes also more important politically out of game when we see some unscrupulous organizations applying for CSM.
2- Walking in Station, Legion Project and Valkyrie : these 3 subjects are important because they would add other perspectives for Eve Online. That's the reason why they should be supported as a whole and not like other games. They MUST be linked with Eve Online. Perspectives in a game are the main reasons players, new or old, would stay in this game. Working on this doesn't significate CCP shouldn't work also on current mechanics.
3- Societies, social hubs or organizations : we are so we want them.
4- Market mechanics : even if it would necessitate big modifications, CCP should start to think about this in their planning. See what we spoke about in this thread about shares exchange as a way to influence in another way the sandbox.
Your answer could be as simple as an "OK" for each point. And we will be yours.
Best regards from The Law Organization and its messenger.
1) I am not sure what you mean. Hisec is not 'safe' it is a place where consequences happen as enforced by npc's. In Null and wormholes the consequences come more from your fellow players. ANY freaking change will affect someones ability to live in the space, question is which change and who gets affected. Take the AWOX change coming this Tuesday. It has an effect but I was totally for it because it was a very dumb rule to begin with.
2) CCP has a game universe and an intellectual product and they are going a lot of different ways with it. I do NOT expect to see direct crossovers anytime soon for a few reasons. The first is time differential. WE fight in long 'age of sail' type battles while Valyrie is more twitch boom dead. (I have played it a few times) Legion/Dust is small group and also hard to tie in without a LOT of economic rulings for it all to make sense and not for a mediocre pilot to be able to buy and see squads at the drop if a few million isk. It is easy to demand integrration but a lot more difficult to actually envisage what the hell that means. As for walking in stations? I wrote this and stand by it.
3) Societies. Hell yes. I will continue to fight for them (and the name)
4) Market mechanics are cool IF we could have some sort of Concord securities commission. Otherwise it would be a madhouse with uncontrolled monopolies snatching up all the little fish. Go back through the histories like Eve Bank, the number of corps and alliances shut down or broken due to bad share management and tell me I am wrong.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2015.02.15 23:10:43 -
[185] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:But the mining links working inside the shield is inexcusable and I disagree strongly with that! It should be fixed.
This was done to protect Null sec mining boosters. Neither the orca or rorqual have received a balance pass, so it may yet change. In relation to high-sec, since the orca is also the logistics of a fleet, it is almost always on grid. Hence the "nerf to hi-sec" is a non-sequitur for this particular item.
*==========
Conflict is just not measured in dps and ehp. Harvest -> Build -> Destroy are three legs that Eve stands on. Mike gets this and has my vote.
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 13:06:14 -
[186] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:1) I am not sure what you mean. Hisec is not 'safe' it is a place where consequences happen as enforced by npc's. In Null and wormholes the consequences come more from your fellow players. ANY freaking change will affect someones ability to live in the space, question is which change and who gets affected. Take the AWOX change coming this Tuesday. It has an effect but I was totally for it because it was a very dumb rule to begin with. 2) CCP has a game universe and an intellectual product and they are going a lot of different ways with it. I do NOT expect to see direct crossovers anytime soon for a few reasons. The first is time differential. WE fight in long 'age of sail' type battles while Valyrie is more twitch boom dead. (I have played it a few times) Legion/Dust is small group and also hard to tie in without a LOT of economic rulings for it all to make sense and not for a mediocre pilot to be able to buy and see squads at the drop if a few million isk. It is easy to demand integrration but a lot more difficult to actually envisage what the hell that means. As for walking in stations? I wrote this and stand by it. 3) Societies. Hell yes. I will continue to fight for them (and the name) 4) Market mechanics are cool IF we could have some sort of Concord securities commission. Otherwise it would be a madhouse with uncontrolled monopolies snatching up all the little fish. Go back through the histories like Eve Bank, the number of corps and alliances shut down or broken due to bad share management and tell me I am wrong. m Thanks for the answer.
1- Hi sec is safer if you don't attack. If you attack, yes, you start to have problems. We don't want to change this logic some suspicious candidates for CSM X proposed to be changed.
2- Peraphs you think about something too much. First demonstration of Project in Fanfest 2014 is enough far for us. You can make two games with a minimal link like they show. For Valkyrie, it could be exactly the same. And yes, they are time differential. That's the biggest reason they should be linked. Battle on the ground or in the sky can't be like in space. You could easily imagine it : there are wars in space, on ground and in sky. They would propose the adequate rythm in the adequate situation. For WIS, if i understood your blog, here also, you plan very far. A role playing like "Mass Effect" could be enough in the first time to make us discover inner stations. And if it's like in Legion demonstration, a game that boots from another, it's enough at first. After, it would be possible to increase interactions.
3- We agree even if the name societies is a bit luxurious when we have already organization (the word) in the game.
4- Your idea "some sort of Concord securities commission" is quite good. Fight for it.
With these additional informations, would you be able to be at least a spokesperson in CSM X of what IS a wish for some ? Even if we understand you can have a nuanced vision on some subjects (almost impossible to be a clone for each opinion).
In any case, we like your ability to speak and exchange with players. This is what we are waiting for a CSM candidate.
Best regards.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light".
John Milton, Lost Paradise.
|
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Origin. Black Legion.
1948
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 21:22:52 -
[187] - Quote
Urziel99 wrote: .. But feyd here isn't interested in balance, he just wants easy kills by any means available.
Truly Urziel, I am unique in my support of sandbox play and desire to shoot others in the face in a space combat game. You however have never dunked another EvE player nor used mechanics against them to achieve victory, individually or in fleets... Truly, you have only ever taken part in honorable 1 v 1's at the sun, in equally fitted ships, against equal SP toons only...you would never win a fight by any available means.
Try and shoot the messenger all you want, but I am not running for CSM, Mike is, and he is about championing continued nerfs to the sandbox, just like Ripard Teg before him. Thats fine, it's his right, but what's despicable is he (and you) try to hide that fact from people. I don't care about rationalizations of a nerf, a nerf is a nerf; 0 minus 1 equals -1 and it doesn't get to equal 0 just because you rationalize the subtraction with 'mechanics fix' spin-doctoring.
Quote:There are still plenty of complete bullshit mechanics that CCP either lacks the will or technical skill to fix. *cough* Bumping, hyperdunking, -10's still active in highsec *cough* So don't bother playing poor downtrodden victim around here. It won't hold water. Or, perhaps what you call 'bullshit mechanics' many (including CCP who validated bumping in a ruling) call 'working as intended', and people 'playing downtrodden victim' are actually the ones trying to defend the damned sanbox? You know, like Mike is supposed to be doing?
Look, i'm not the first or only person to call Mike out here, others have long ago done so more eloquently than I. The voters just have a right to know....nerf advocates like Mike (and yourself) who operate like tax & spend governments pitching new taxes as 'revenue streams' are lying to them. Selfsame, dressing up nerfs up as 'mechanics fixes' to avoid voter scrutiny and people clueing into what you are really about is equally not cool.
F
Would you like to know more?
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5130
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:16:23 -
[188] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:I don't care about rationalizations of a nerf, a nerf is a nerf; 0 minus 1 equals -1 and it doesn't get to equal 0 just because you rationalize the subtraction with 'mechanics fix' spin-doctoring. It's only negative one in your opinion. A lot of changes you dislike I think are good for the game, so I'd say 0 + 1 = 1. You crying over the changes doesn't make them bad, it's simply a matter of opinion and they differ.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: ROFL, a TMC posting by James 315. And that's supposed to be taken seriously and can be assume to be completely objective? I think not.
You realise if you guys didn't stand behind CODE you'd actually be worthy of considerably more respect, right? I say this in complete honesty and this is not designed to be insulting in any way - nothing anyone from code has ever said has ever come across even remotely as if it were supposed to be taken seriously. It's an enormous RP trollolol fest. You'd do far better to drop the act and be frank about issues. Drawing up fake graphs and presenting grandiose "the end is nigh" speeches really doesn't lend itself to being treated like anything more than comedic entertainment.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1432
|
Posted - 2015.02.17 23:40:08 -
[189] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:I don't care about rationalizations of a nerf, a nerf is a nerf; 0 minus 1 equals -1 and it doesn't get to equal 0 just because you rationalize the subtraction with 'mechanics fix' spin-doctoring. It's only negative one in your opinion. A lot of changes you dislike I think are good for the game, so I'd say 0 + 1 = 1. You crying over the changes doesn't make them bad, it's simply a matter of opinion and they differ. Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote: ROFL, a TMC posting by James 315. And that's supposed to be taken seriously and can be assume to be completely objective? I think not. You realise if you guys didn't stand behind CODE you'd actually be worthy of considerably more respect, right? I say this in complete honesty and this is not designed to be insulting in any way - nothing anyone from code has ever said has ever come across even remotely as if it were supposed to be taken seriously. It's an enormous RP trollolol fest. You'd do far better to drop the act and be frank about issues. Drawing up fake graphs and presenting grandiose "the end is nigh" speeches really doesn't lend itself to being treated like anything more than comedic entertainment.
James article is well written and it's very hard to argue with the points he made.
The some thing happened long ago with Ultima Online:
Ultima Online was the first sandbox. Housing, PKs, full loot, all that good ****. The economy was extremely well balanced, pvp was frenetic, twitchy and had an extremely high skill cap. You could steal from people, poison them, etc.
Then Trammel came. It split the world in to two halves. One half was the way it was before, the other half was pvp-free. If you stayed in the old world, you got double the resources you did in the new one, but at the same usual risk. In the new world, there was quite literally zero risk, so the economy got completely ****** and inflated. Everyone went mob-killing (ratting) in the best gear (deadspace) instead of basic blacksmithed (t2) gear, no one cared about ore/minerals anymore, etc, etc.
It was the deathknell for UO. Subscriptions dropped off massively and it never recovered. The game is god awful now, but a carebears absolutely sweetest heaven, full of opportunities for massive gold-accumulation and nothing to spend it on.
The Tears Must Flow
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5130
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 00:01:17 -
[190] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:James article is well written and it's very hard to argue with the points he made. Excuse me if I don;t take your word for it. I've read James' articles before and the only thing it did was waste part of my life.
Vaju Enki wrote:The some thing happened long ago with Ultima Online:
Ultima Online was the first sandbox. Housing, PKs, full loot, all that good ****. The economy was extremely well balanced, pvp was frenetic, twitchy and had an extremely high skill cap. You could steal from people, poison them, etc.
Then Trammel came. It split the world in to two halves. One half was the way it was before, the other half was pvp-free. If you stayed in the old world, you got double the resources you did in the new one, but at the same usual risk. In the new world, there was quite literally zero risk, so the economy got completely ****** and inflated. Everyone went mob-killing (ratting) in the best gear (deadspace) instead of basic blacksmithed (t2) gear, no one cared about ore/minerals anymore, etc, etc.
It was the deathknell for UO. Subscriptions dropped off massively and it never recovered. The game is god awful now, but a carebears absolutely sweetest heaven, full of opportunities for massive gold-accumulation and nothing to spend it on.
Yes, I'm well aware of Trammel, something that happened years before UO's peak player count yet for some reason takes blame from some old players for the downfall of the game. I don't really buy it to be honest. Beside the fact that the game went on to grow significantly for years following Trammel, it was also a separate world, so would have no actual impact on the "hardcore" world. The only thing it would influence is how much people cried because someone else was playing the same game but easier.
Tell me, do you get upset when you play a game in "Very Hard" while someone else plays it in "Very Easy"? Do you write letters to the developer demanding your money back because everyone should have the experience you have or not have it at all? No, you don't. Nobody sane does, that would be ridiculous. So why would it matter if an MMO had 2 different style of world?
That said, nobody is advocating Trammel in EVE. Mike just wants people who play the way they play and enjoy it to keep that style of play. Too many people want to force them to have to defend themselves with guns, which they don't want to do. Forcing someone to play the game your way is just as bad as forcing you to play it their way. There's room for a multitude of playstyles in EVE, and keeping that room is all we want.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
|
Flamespar
WarRavens
1294
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 10:14:22 -
[191] - Quote
Mike. Part of CCPs Seaguls vision was about players having a "home" in EVE, what does this mean to you?
EVE Chronicle: An audio drama set in the EVE universe
http://evechronicle.blogspot.com.au/
https://twitter.com/Flamespar
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
628
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 10:39:47 -
[192] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote: James article is well written and it's very hard to argue with the points he made.
It is hard to argue with such a well presented piece or at least I haven't seen any real attempts other than those rejecting it based on the author, or just putting their head in the sand and claiming no problem exists. However, CCP is the only ones with the numbers to show what we all suspect - players are increasingly moving back to highsec, or using highsec alts, to make their living in safety and that this is contributing to the stagnation and low population of the other spaces.
So Mike, CCP Seagull has presented us with a grand vision of player-built stargates and increased player conflict which many speculate will involve new (maybe Jove) space. Perhaps this question isn't fair as you have signed a NDA, but what do you think is the best way to get a significant amount of the player base to move to or use this space? I can only imagine if things are left as the status quo, no one aside from a few large null entities will move in and this expansion will be deemed a failure.
I know you have made some efforts to get new players out of highsec and PvPing, but you must admit that the near risk-free and significant income potential of highsec is tempting for established players to come back to and grind an income. Without hurting casual or new players, do you think there is anything that can be done to discourage this grinding behaviour on the part of established players and encourage them to move their home somewhere riskier than highsec, like perhaps this new space when it becomes accessible?
Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10 is a good idea.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5133
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 11:15:40 -
[193] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:It is hard to argue with such a well presented piece or at least I haven't seen any real attempts other than those rejecting it based on the author, or just putting their head in the sand and claiming no problem exists. However, CCP is the only ones with the numbers to show what we all suspect - players are increasingly moving back to highsec, or using highsec alts, to make their living in safety and that this is contributing to the stagnation and low population of the other spaces. It's like the boy who cried wolf, because he's written practically pure sperg since the beginning of time, people won't generally sit there and read through 10 pages to find out if it's crap. For me I took one look at the subject and the author, and can be reasonably certain it will be more crying about how terrible and themepark EVE is becoming.
Black Pedro wrote:So Mike, CCP Seagull has presented us with a grand vision of player-built stargates and increased player conflict which many speculate will involve new (maybe Jove) space. Perhaps this question isn't fair as you have signed a NDA, but what do you think is the best way to get a significant amount of the player base to move to or use this space? I can only imagine if things are left as the status quo, no one aside from a few large null entities will move in and this expansion will be deemed a failure. Surely this is something you should know though? I live in nullsec, I moved all but a tiny fragment of my alts out of highsec long ago, so I don't know why PvPers live in highsec, but your group lives in highsec, so surely you know why it is that you choose to sit in highsec ganking industrial ships rather than go into other parts of the game and fight people who shoot back? I'd wager it's much the same reason carebears like highsec - low commitment, low risk, high reward, easy access to trade hubs. So what would it take for you to be coaxed out of highsec?
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2492
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 16:53:13 -
[194] - Quote
Flamespar wrote:Mike. Part of CCPs Seaguls vision was about players having a "home" in EVE, what does this mean to you? Home is a place you care about. That you will defend and work at improving. At least that is what I see it to be.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1434
|
Posted - 2015.02.18 19:28:11 -
[195] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Flamespar wrote:Mike. Part of CCPs Seaguls vision was about players having a "home" in EVE, what does this mean to you? Home is a place you care about. That you will defend and work at improving. At least that is what I see it to be. m
He wanted you to talk about WiS.
The Tears Must Flow
|
Urziel99
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
71
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 04:58:23 -
[196] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Urziel99 wrote: .. But feyd here isn't interested in balance, he just wants easy kills by any means available.
Truly Urziel, I am unique in my support of sandbox play and desire to shoot others in the face in a space combat game. You however have never dunked another EvE player nor used mechanics against them to achieve victory, individually or in fleets... Truly, you have only ever taken part in honorable 1 v 1's at the sun, in equally fitted ships, against equal SP toons only...you would never win a fight by any available means. Try and shoot the messenger all you want, but I am not running for CSM, Mike is, and he is about championing continued nerfs to the sandbox, just like Ripard Teg before him. Thats fine, it's his right, but what's despicable is he (and you) try to hide that fact from people. I don't care about rationalizations of a nerf, a nerf is a nerf; 0 minus 1 equals -1 and it doesn't get to equal 0 just because you rationalize the subtraction with 'mechanics fix' spin-doctoring. Quote:There are still plenty of complete bullshit mechanics that CCP either lacks the will or technical skill to fix. *cough* Bumping, hyperdunking, -10's still active in highsec *cough* So don't bother playing poor downtrodden victim around here. It won't hold water. Or, perhaps what you call 'bullshit mechanics' many (including CCP who validated bumping in a ruling) call 'working as intended', and people 'playing downtrodden victim' are actually the ones trying to defend the damned sanbox? You know, like Mike is supposed to be doing? Look, i'm not the first or only person to call Mike out here, others have long ago done so more eloquently than I. The voters just have a right to know....nerf advocates like Mike (and yourself) who operate like tax & spend governments pitching new taxes as 'revenue streams' are lying to them. Selfsame, dressing up nerfs up as 'mechanics fixes' to avoid voter scrutiny and people clueing into what you are really about is equally not cool. F
Just because CCP allows a mechanic doesn't mean it's not complete bullshit. Tacking without invoking aggression or generating a kill right is bullshit. -10's operating with impunity in secure space is like giving Charles Manson free admission to any social function he desires instead of keeping him locked up where he belongs. The most hilarious part is the fact you quote James 315 and think he is to be taken seriously, who next in the sociopath's hit parade? Erotica1?
And before you get too uppity I have lived in high, low and null security space and accept the benefits and limitations involved in each. When it comes time to fight I have no problems doing so on my combat alt. Tell me again about how being narrow-minded is "defending the sandbox." It amuses me. |
Flamespar
WarRavens
1294
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 08:21:00 -
[197] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Flamespar wrote:Mike. Part of CCPs Seaguls vision was about players having a "home" in EVE, what does this mean to you? Home is a place you care about. That you will defend and work at improving. At least that is what I see it to be. m He wanted you to talk about WiS.
So some players want to explore the interiors of EVE. Learn to deal with it.
I'm genuinely interested in hearing what CSM members think about EVE's vision because at the moment it seems building stargates is something only the huge corps and alliances can consider. Mike said he is about high sec and smaller groups of players. I want to know what he would like those groups of players to be able to do as part of this "vision".
EVE Chronicle: An audio drama set in the EVE universe
http://evechronicle.blogspot.com.au/
https://twitter.com/Flamespar
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5143
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 08:52:52 -
[198] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:It is hard to argue with such a well presented piece or at least I haven't seen any real attempts other than those rejecting it based on the author, or just putting their head in the sand and claiming no problem exists. However, CCP is the only ones with the numbers to show what we all suspect - players are increasingly moving back to highsec, or using highsec alts, to make their living in safety and that this is contributing to the stagnation and low population of the other spaces. There, I read it and I want that few minutes of my life back. It's exactly what you would expect it to be. It's a guy still crying about carebears and themeparks, and going though basically every fallacy there is in a post that could have been summed up n page 1. Essentially he believe that any change to help with highsec player retention is part of path which will inevitably remove all risk from highsec. The problem with that is that even the players campaigning for changes which reduce risk in areas are adamant that there should always be risk, but apparently they can;t be believed. Essentially his problem is that he wants people to live in what is effectively lowsec, but doesn't want to go though the pain of moving to lowsec.
He also makes terrible analogies, like comparing total safety in highsec to removing the ability to die from an FPS. Except there are still 3 areas of space you wouldn't be able to die in. More accurately, if highsec were made completely safe (which it shouldn't be) it would be more akin to having a safe spawn point, which is a feature used by several FPS games to great effect.
I'm convinced he wasn't even there for Incarna, since he seems to have the impression that the main issue there was WiS. The main issue was the potential threat of the game turning into a microtrans model which would effectively be flipping to a completely different type of playerbase. WiS it'self isn't a particularly terrible idea - or at least it wasn't, on CCP reduced staff numbers now it probably would be.
He also talks about how making the game less risky in highsec will drive away veteran players. What he fails to realise is that he's a shining example of that not actually being true. He's been complaining about how CCP caters to carebears for years, and yet still hasn't quit. Like it or not, CCP could do basically anything they want to help with new player retention, and the vets would still remain, even if they grumbled more. I'm pretty sure that when I'm old, grey and dying, my last breath will be "Make sure Chribba gets my assets for PLEX 4 good."
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Reeses Peices
State War Academy Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 03:12:43 -
[199] - Quote
Mike,
Why should you serve another term as CSM? What do you have to bring to the table that a newer younger member of the community couldn't. Wouldn't you think that newer players would have a better feel for improving the NPE that the game needs?
Don't you feel that maybe this should be the year you step down and pass the torch? |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2501
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 06:08:54 -
[200] - Quote
Reeses Peices wrote:Mike,
Why should you serve another term as CSM? What do you have to bring to the table that a newer younger member of the community couldn't. Wouldn't you think that newer players would have a better feel for improving the NPE that the game needs?
Don't you feel that maybe this should be the year you step down and pass the torch?
I did spend some time asking myself that same set of questions.
I bring experience, contacts, and continuity. I bring a long history of involvement with the CSM and a sense of the changes and direction that it is traveling. I have seen iterations of the NPE and look forward to helping with the new one as it grows.
Do we need some new blood on the CSM? Hell, yes. But it needs to be tempered by experience. It needs people to bring the new council members up to speed. THAT is why I am still running. Or one of the reasons, there are others.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
|
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
62
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 14:10:21 -
[201] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Reeses Peices wrote:Mike,
Why should you serve another term as CSM? What do you have to bring to the table that a newer younger member of the community couldn't. Wouldn't you think that newer players would have a better feel for improving the NPE that the game needs?
Don't you feel that maybe this should be the year you step down and pass the torch? I did spend some time asking myself that same set of questions. I bring experience, contacts, and continuity. I bring a long history of involvement with the CSM and a sense of the changes and direction that it is traveling. I have seen iterations of the NPE and look forward to helping with the new one as it grows. Do we need some new blood on the CSM? Hell, yes. But it needs to be tempered by experience. It needs people to bring the new council members up to speed. THAT is why I am still running. Or one of the reasons, there are others. m
We think you have some qualities to be again in CSM. You just have to be more confident in some new features as we talked about before. And, then, with this, i am sure you will be able to bring also what a new player could bring in CSM. Even if you didn't answer on these points in our last thread, we believe you are enough open-minded to speak about these points in CSM X.
Don't disappoint us on these points !
Best regards.
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light".
John Milton, Lost Paradise.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16130
|
Posted - 2015.02.20 20:47:32 -
[202] - Quote
My experience of working with Mike was that the CSM was better for him being there. He's outside any consideration of bloc politics. He brings a valuable, all-too-rare perspective to the table: the well informed, considerate, thoughtful hi-sec player. He's mindful of the "little guy" who experiences being the solo minnow in a sea full of sharks, but he's by no means a simplistic "NERF THE PEE VEE PEES" raging carebear.
God dambit vote Mike, you fools. We need him.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
386
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 07:31:48 -
[203] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Ashterothi wrote:Was there a topic this last year where you fell on the wrong side of history? I would still like to see some counter mechanic for cloaking. Sigh
Mike, just when I was about to drop you into the "Endorsed" section of my spreadsheet I find this. My friend, you were even in the room for my favorite dev quote ever:
CCP Fozzie wrote:AFK Cloaking is the equivalent of posting on forums until someone stops ratting So lay it on me - what's your ideal fix for something that, IMO, is a gargantuan non-problem that is really a symptom of whiny laziness?
Author of Interstellar Privateer
Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2505
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 07:47:56 -
[204] - Quote
Afk ratting is one of those things that keeps coming up.
Let me tell you why I have an issue with it then you can decide whether it alters how you will vote.
I want people to play eve. I want then to be present in the moment. I have issue with afktars, with afk mining, with people assigning drones and coming back hours later to see how they did. I dislike bots that allow someone to set it and return to bacon.
Unless you are docked or in a POS, you are at risk. Space is dangerous.
But then there is cloaking.
See, I have no issue with the psychological impact of it but the presumed safety. I would howl with maniacal laughter if the Circadian Sleepers started finding, scanning, and decloaking inattentive cloaked ships.
I don'the mind cloaks . . . I mind their excessive safety and security.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
544
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 09:31:56 -
[205] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:I don'the mind cloaks . . . I mind their excessive safety and security.
m Local channel list provides even more safety and security and doesnt even require you to make any fitting sacrifices.
W-Space Realtor
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2505
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 16:30:02 -
[206] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:I don'the mind cloaks . . . I mind their excessive safety and security.
m Local channel list provides even more safety and security and doesnt even require you to make any fitting sacrifices.
Yes, but it is not an asymmetric safety and it does demand player engagement to be useful.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
386
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 21:18:04 -
[207] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:I have issue with afktars, with afk mining, with people assigning drones and coming back hours later to see how they did. I dislike bots that allow someone to set it and return to bacon.
I can get behind this.
Mike Azariah wrote: I would howl with maniacal laughter if the Circadian Sleepers started finding, scanning, and decloaking inattentive cloaked ships.
I don'the mind cloaks . . . I mind their excessive safety and security.
Agreed, providing certain timing. I don't think looking hard at a ship that has been AFK cloaked for 10h without moving is a big deal - go for it. But 30 minutes is very typical when you are actively watching a target. I've sat watching, actively, for up to 2-3h at a time as a scout. Sitting cloaked is an especially valid thing to do in wormhole space.
The issue is NOT the cloak. So if the above is your stance, please don't present it as a cloaking issue - present it as an AFK issue.
Author of Interstellar Privateer
Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
|
Brutalis Furia
Hammer and Anvil Industries
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 23:40:57 -
[208] - Quote
Mike, the more I read the higher on my list you go.
From what I read, The best thing I can see about you is that you have a solid, grounded platform. Your intents are clear and well communicated and despite being called wishy washy and a compromiser, I see you as a clear, decisive moderate.
A disclaimer before I go further: I'm a carebear and proud of it. I enjoy missioning and mining with the rare day of Incursions in peace and quiet (with the exception of NPC explosions). I have tried null, but wasn't really happy there so I moved back to HighSec.
Some thoughts on points raised:
In regard to the conversation with Feyd Rautha Harkonnen, I wonder if a possible solution would be to make Empire space's Sec status dynamic. More traffic (hostile or otherwise) would result in a higher CONCORD presence. If you offset this with the opposite being true, or there being a finite CONCORD presence across a region with traffic determining the distribution. In a dynamic SecStaus model, I could even see it extending to TruSec and the value of Null systems for ratting and mining. Granted, this the Features and Ideas section is probably a better place for specific ideas, but in a general context what are your thoughts on reworking some of the static systems, like SecStatus, to dynamic ones that are based not on static values set by CCP but on formulas based on player interaction with bounds set by CCP? Precedent for systems like this have already been set with the Cost Index.
From where I sit, one of the biggest negative differences between EVE and almost any other MMO out there is the immersion factor. There is by far more meta-gaming that goes on in EVE than in any game I've ever encountered. I believe this is a large factor in new player retention. What are your thoughts on ways to improve the immersion factor of EVE?
Despite being a carebear, I like the Sandbox. I like that there's no RIGHT way to play EVE. I love its complexity. But I also think there's a real risk of scaring off new players (and the money that comes with them) by having that very complexity create an environment that is so hostile so early. How have advocated in the past to minimize new player loss, and will you continue to do so? |
Dave Korhal
Kite Co. Space Trucking Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.02.23 02:07:30 -
[209] - Quote
Mike:
Should ratting be changed to encourage PvP fits? Current ratting's focus on a single damage type and a single resist encourages PvE-specialized fits, which in my opinion gives attackers an advantage they do not need.
Should CCP adapt the same AI they're testing out with Drifters to regular rats?
Would visible timers for the duration of Post-Jump Cloaking and Undock Invincibility (similar to the current timers for Jump Fatigue and Aggression) benefit the game?
Matt: "Mining is the devil's work. If any of you mine, I will AWOX you."
Vikkiman: "What about Dave?"
Matt: "Dave gets a pass; he's batshit insane."
|
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
387
|
Posted - 2015.02.23 03:22:23 -
[210] - Quote
After researching all of the 77 candidates, Mike is one of only nine to earn a full endorsement from me. He's on my list and he should be on yours.
https://interstellarprivateer.wordpress.com/2015/02/22/csm-x-full-endorsements/
Author of Interstellar Privateer
Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
|
|
Shocker Stalin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 00:29:37 -
[211] - Quote
I am a new player but I have spent the past two weeks trying to become as educated as I can with the election process, issues and candidates.
From all I have read you are the first candidate I can definitely say you will have my vote.
Keep up the good work! |
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2509
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 01:34:30 -
[212] - Quote
Dave Korhal wrote:Mike:
Should ratting be changed to encourage PvP fits? Current ratting's focus on a single damage type and a single resist encourages PvE-specialized fits, which in my opinion gives attackers an advantage they do not need.
Should CCP adapt the same AI they're testing out with Drifters to regular rats?
Would visible timers for the duration of Post-Jump Cloaking and Undock Invincibility (similar to the current timers for Jump Fatigue and Aggression) benefit the game?
Should Damage Control be turned into an always-on module instead of a manually-activated one?
Current ratting? No. But if new npc's were to show up I would be fine with them being more AI wise and doing things like warping out or calling for reinforcements which would, in turn, mean that the player would have to fit points to keep the target handy. I like the concept of the newer things being smarter but nobody was screaming for belt rats to suddenly be sleeper level or Sansha tanked. Each type will be its own class.
As for the invulnerability period timers? Yeah, that would be nice. I find myself counting out loud when it is a situation where the time means something.
No, Damage control is fine as it is. Thus it can be capped out, turned off and is a Darwin check for people coming into a system. (and yes, I have failed that check more than once)
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Erica Dusette
Isogen 5
39317
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 08:48:49 -
[213] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:2) CCP has a game universe and an intellectual product and they are going a lot of different ways with it. I do NOT expect to see direct crossovers anytime soon for a few reasons. The first is time differential. WE fight in long 'age of sail' type battles while Valyrie is more twitch boom dead. (I have played it a few times) Legion/Dust is small group and also hard to tie in without a LOT of economic rulings for it all to make sense and not for a mediocre pilot to be able to buy and see squads at the drop if a few million isk. It is easy to demand integrration but a lot more difficult to actually envisage what the hell that means. As for walking in stations? I wrote this and stand by it. You're on my ballots, Mike.
Good luck.
Jack Miton > you be nice or you're sleeping on the couch again!
Part-Time Wormhole Pirate pâä Full-Time Supermodel
The Endgame | Wormhole Diaries
|
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 11:43:26 -
[214] - Quote
Hello Mike.
Can you name one issue / point that was discussed during the past year's CSM meetings (and not under NDA) that you felt strongly about AND were in disagreement with the majority of other CSM members. Doesn't matter if you got your way or not.
Describe briefly the argument you presented to defend the issue. and the challenges you faced, if any, being the "mission running/casual" candidate among the others.
Thanks,
Fang
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2515
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 18:18:52 -
[215] - Quote
Belinda HwaFang wrote:Hello Mike.
Can you name one issue / point that was discussed during the past year's CSM meetings (and not under NDA) that you felt strongly about AND were in disagreement with the majority of other CSM members. Doesn't matter if you got your way or not.
Describe briefly the argument you presented to defend the issue. and the challenges you faced, if any, being the "mission running/casual" candidate among the others.
Thanks,
Fang
This will seem to be an odd choice
The Sensitivity Training.
Drama started early in the CSM and lines were drawn. CCP tried to calm the waters by having a meeting to discuss professional conduct with the CSM. It WAS needed because not only did we have negative people towards the process but also people who brought their 'in game' politics into the CSM and continued game agendas. This made the council less functional than it could have been.
'Eve is politics and I can play nasty if I want' was said to which I responded 'THIS is NOT Eve. We are a council discussing Eve.'
Some folks never got it and at least one of them is running again. Others mocked the process of trying to bring a level of professionalism to the council and made jokes about singing kumbaya. They never ever got the message and we suffered for it.
I will say it again, here. CSM is not about the game politics. It is politics so we can talk about the game. Anyone unable to lay their baggage at the door and discuss things calmly from their positions of knowledge rather than from in game prejudice is doing the game, the voters, and the council a great disservice.
There were other times that I was the adversary but most of them are still too NDAd to discuss.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation The Kadeshi
43
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 23:13:03 -
[216] - Quote
I asked a tricky question and I got an excellent response. Thank you and good luck in the elections, Mike. -- Fang |
Deck Cadelanne
Exigent Circumstances CAStabouts
130
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 09:09:45 -
[217] - Quote
You get one of my votes, again.
I am not a hisec resident but I like what you are doing. Hope you continue doing it!
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
1205
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 12:24:50 -
[218] - Quote
Vote match says 40%, still voting. We need level headed, informed, active and helpful folks who aren't part of the 0.0 lol blocks.
I'm old Gregor.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2544
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:28:08 -
[219] - Quote
What? Nobody is going to ask me about the SOV change upcoming?
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Flamespar
WarRavens
1300
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:30:13 -
[220] - Quote
Oh hai Mike. What u think about Sov revamp?
EVE Chronicle: An audio drama set in the EVE universe
http://evechronicle.blogspot.com.au/
https://twitter.com/Flamespar
|
|
Flamespar
WarRavens
1300
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 08:32:34 -
[221] - Quote
To be honest I was wondering what you thought about some sort of Sov-lite concept for High Sec, where players can have a degree of ownership of those systems and some sort of benefit.
EVE Chronicle: An audio drama set in the EVE universe
http://evechronicle.blogspot.com.au/
https://twitter.com/Flamespar
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1811
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 11:50:17 -
[222] - Quote
Well the CSM has been so quiet in the thread I assumed you weren't interested :)
Sov light for highsec sounds great. Maybe even finer grained, asteroid belts etc.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
ST0NER SMURF
Vrix Nation
228
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 18:35:06 -
[223] - Quote
usely don't care about csm but hoping ya poin them to a easy solution so voted on ya
now get the multi ships fitting working
yust hold a beer infront ofthem, open it, then say ya get this when ya get thos done and voila its done within 5 min
all structure alrdy inplace uyust a littlebit of coding and done
__________________________________________________________________-á
GÖ½ When your pod gets blown to bits GÖ¬GÖ½ And you lose your implant fits GÖ¬\Gÿ+/ Don't worry GÖ¬ GÖ½ GÖ¬ GÖ½GÖ½ GÖ¬ GÖ½ GÖ¬ Be Happy \Gÿ+/
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2546
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 19:26:00 -
[224] - Quote
Flamespar wrote:Oh hai Mike. What u think about Sov revamp?
I think it is a good thing. But as Fozzie said, it will need continual tweeking. Sov systems will always find a balance and start to stagnate if you don't poke and change it on a regulare basis. Like a plant becoming pot bound
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2546
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 19:27:10 -
[225] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Well the CSM has been so quiet in the thread I assumed you weren't interested :)
Sov light for highsec sounds great. Maybe even finer grained, asteroid belts etc.
Hell no, to the staying out of the thread, I am just trying to catch up, yes I am reading all of it and in the first few days it has gotten away from me, gimme time
Staking a claim on a belt has been suggested before. Not a bad idea
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
1083
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 02:57:04 -
[226] - Quote
While campaigning, I directed people to you or Lorelai as true high sec candidates.
Voting is almost over and I won't be running again next year. Just wanted you to hear a vote of confidence and best wishes that you get a seat.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2618
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:13:31 -
[227] - Quote
The Voting has now closed. I want to thank those who supported me, win or lose, I appreciate it
Good luck to all the candidates who ran.
I have said it a few times publicly. This is my last race for a few years, no matter what the results are. I have no idea how I will spend the next election season. Probably sitting back, laughing, and throwing in the odd comment from the side.
I think I have earned it
Again, Thank You all
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2377
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:16:30 -
[228] - Quote
Dang, I didn't realize it had opened yet.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Xander Phoena, Sugar Kyle, Corbexx, Jenshae Chiroptera, Marlona Sky, Tora Bushido
Highsec reform thread
|
Grima The Mad
Ideal Empire Ideal Society
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.15 08:43:36 -
[229] - Quote
Thanks so much for running Mike, regardless of what people say you have done good for this game and I really hope that you've been elected again! If not, enjoy the ability to do just that, sit back and laugh hysterically. |
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1506
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 19:02:06 -
[230] - Quote
You have earned it! Congratulations, Mike! Do us proud.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
I voted in CSM X!
|
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2651
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 19:45:24 -
[231] - Quote
Wow, three in a row.
Thank you all and I will keep trying to earn the responsibility you have given me.
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
8004
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 21:24:10 -
[232] - Quote
Gratz! Don't ever give up the good fight!
Mr Epeen
There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
|
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
136
|
Posted - 2015.03.19 23:21:34 -
[233] - Quote
We have the worst CSM to date, and of course one of the people responsible for it, Mike, got elected again.
When is the next Mike-sanctioned hisec nerf? I believe it was April, the time null ores are redone, which will probably devalue hisec ores below the ground... again.
Anything to say in your defense?
A crap ton equals 1000 crap loads in metric, and roughly 91 shit loads 12 bull shits and 1 puppy's unforeseen disaster in imperial.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2654
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 05:00:47 -
[234] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:We have the worst CSM to date, and of course one of the people responsible for it, Mike, got elected again.
When is the next Mike-sanctioned hisec nerf? I believe it was April, the time null ores are redone, which will probably devalue hisec ores below the ground... again.
Anything to say in your defense?
Did you vote?
I am in waaaay too good a mood to take offence at your tone, your entitlement, your errors so tightly pakced in such a small package.
They could make minerals twice as common and easy to get in Null. Unless they have folks there WILLING to mine them, it will make no difference.
But don't let my opinion sway you. Tell me more about how I manage to be the one driving the bus taking hisec down the ever so well paved road to hell.
m
did I mention I was in a good mood?
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16166
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 08:30:44 -
[235] - Quote
Congratulations on winning a third year of unpaid work trying to make a video game better for whiny ungrateful man-children!
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Warp to Cyno.
4325
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 08:35:16 -
[236] - Quote
oh? i thought we were meant to be hating on mike for being too carebear-y
am i behind the times
now that you've been caught nerfing highsec you're supposed to give an extended evil monologue and proclaim that nothing can stop you now |
XeX Znndstrup
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
64
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 11:51:43 -
[237] - Quote
The Law Organization agents made their best so you could be elected again. May you bring the light again in your chair of CSM diplomat.
Claritatem et ferociam.
The Law Organization
"Long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light". John Milton, Lost Paradise.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2658
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 16:34:39 -
[238] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:oh? i thought we were meant to be hating on mike for being too carebear-y
am i behind the times
now that you've been caught nerfing highsec you're supposed to give an extended evil monologue and proclaim that nothing can stop you now
Velma grabs my neck and peels back the mask "It was old man Mittens all along"
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
1125
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 19:18:10 -
[239] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Velma grabs my neck and peels back the mask "It was old man Mittens all along" m I can only visualise him as a kid.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
.
SOV is stagnant because Low Sec is not the next step from High Sec and a viable place to grow alliances to the point they can challenge Null alliances.
Fozzie is treating a symptom.
|
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
150
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 21:24:52 -
[240] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:We have the worst CSM to date, and of course one of the people responsible for it, Mike, got elected again.
When is the next Mike-sanctioned hisec nerf? I believe it was April, the time null ores are redone, which will probably devalue hisec ores below the ground... again.
Anything to say in your defense? Did you vote? I am in waaaay too good a mood to take offence at your tone, your entitlement, your errors so tightly pakced in such a small package. They could make minerals twice as common and easy to get in Null. Unless they have folks there WILLING to mine them, it will make no difference. But don't let my opinion sway you. Tell me more about how I manage to be the one driving the bus taking hisec down the ever so well paved road to hell. m did I mention I was in a good mood?
There was a mining report in dev blogs recently, which drew a clear picture. Some null regions scored a lot more than certain not depopulated hisec ones. I still remembered how Odyssey plummeted mining into the ground, and it doesn't take a genius to tell what ANY ore rebalance favoring null will do to hisec, which has already lost any industrial competition with null and is nothing more than a raw resource provider for it at the moment. You were in the CSM then, you are in the CSM now, you ok'd it, you devalued it, and now, 5 buffs later, when 80% of resource providing capacity has been recovered, time to kick the dying dog. Thanks, Mike.
A crap ton equals 1000 crap loads in metric, and roughly 91 shit loads 12 bull shits and 1 puppy's unforeseen disaster in imperial.
|
|
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
723
|
Posted - 2015.03.22 02:33:20 -
[241] - Quote
This is a trash post trying to be LAST post.
Yay another year of bugging the wholly hell out of mike with my useless ideas and random bull
I'm cloaked in your thread, stealing your info.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |