Lex Arson
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
432
   |
Posted - 2015.12.23 21:40:47 -
[31] - Quote
Collie Herb wrote:I've heard nothing but good things about you and I am sure you would be great, but I have to question the need for another Null focused candidate when over half the candidates will be focused on these issues.
What separates your perspective on Null from the other 5-8 candidates that will certainly be elected running on the exact same platform you are?
I'm attempting to run on the "I actually log in and play the game, and thus have a slight idea of what I'm talking about" platform.
Have a look at least years' elected CSM - http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/csm-x-voting-results/
Half of them I've never heard of, and from the ones that I do recognize under the nullsec ticket I'm pretty sure the only ones that are people who deal with these game mechanics on a day-to-day basis are Sort Dragon and corebloodbrothers. The rest are ~meta~ or leadership people like Sion, Cagali, Gorga, or Thoric who just sit behind virtual desks and push pencils all day long and don't actually have to deal with the things actual EVE players do. Are you going to expect someone like Sion, a lead diplomat whose game mostly consists of jabber and skype to advocate for things like capital balance and entosis mechanics with the sort of passion you'd want from a CSM rep? When those are things they've never dealt with themselves personally?
If you look at the people in the running so far for the CSM XI, the list isn't exactly promising so far. It's full of "literally who's" and people who are promising to be all things to all people, etc etc... you get the idea.
Quote:Why should independent players still throw their votes at Null candidates that either cant do the job or CCP won't listen to anyway. The reason we are in the situation we are in is because our current and past CSMs have either been unable to do the job, or CCP didn't listen to them anyway (more the latter than the former, I think). I'm not a part of any bloc, and the interests I represent are perhaps of the older player, with a mind on spaceship violence and a hint of empire building. If you don't think that CCP listens to the CSM no matter how good the elected are, vote for Xenuria. If you think that the CSM can in fact make a difference, and your interests are aligned with mine, then vote for me.
Quote:I would probably vote for your name as most people have a lot of respect for you, but I can't if you are running on the platform of High-Sec is fine, Low-Sec is fine, Null-Sec is crap, and WHs should be ignored or left up to that one WH csm that's now a goon.
Edit: If I misread and you are running on the platform of increasing conflict drivers in Null then please explain some of your ideas and how they will be able to be intertwined with existing mechanics and the upcoming release of citadels.
I can't speak for highsec as I haven't lived there since my infancy, nor wormholes since I've never lived there. Point me towards a CSM member that has effectively advocated for all ranges of space and actually had a clue what he was talking about and I'll eat my shoe, but thankfully I don't think I'll have to. This is why we have a panel of CSM members from all different walks of EVE.
As far as ideas for conflict drivers and the like; being on the CSM doesn't mean you get to give your wishlist to Fozzie Claus every christmas and he gives you everything you asked for so long as you were a good boy. From what we've seen it seems to be mostly CCP coming up with ideas and asking the CSM how good/bad they are. Regardless, I do have my own ideas;
- Having a Citadel should give an ADM bonus to the current sovholder based on size, not have it's vulnerability affected by ADM. Citadels are defensive structures in real life, thus you should get a defensive bonus for having one.
- Jump bridges should grant a fatigue reduction bonus of some sort, how much is up to CCP's balance team. As they stand they're currently very nearly useless and have no 'use case' of when it's better to use one over just taking the gates.
- I will advocate for the removal of a lot of 'special-exception game mechanics' like Rorquals being able to boost inside poses (which tbf is being removed with offgrind link removal anyway), CCP's proposed idea to give a weapons timer for capitals cyno'ing onto citadels, and the like.
- I will advocate against mechanics or changes that are easily 'gameable' by a playerbase that has shown time and time again it will do so (think titan AOE cap neut DD side-effects) which don't actually solve the problems CCP set up to solve, while increasing a lot of tedium for all parties involved.
- Every kind of gameplay allowed by the sandbox is valid gameplay so long as it has a counterplay other than N+1. I will keep this in mind while on the CSM and encourage fellow members as well as CCP to remember it as well.
There's no use crying after every mistake,
you just keep on trying 'til you run out of cake.
|