Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rathnon Domitras
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
12
|
Posted - 2017.02.05 16:19:47 -
[31] - Quote
Bob has my vote for CSM 12.
He's always open and receptive to ideas that are put forward then provides clear feedback to what he presented to CCP and how it was received. |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
452
|
Posted - 2017.02.05 16:38:08 -
[32] - Quote
Vote ze Bobmon! He'll waste tons of his time on this garbage. |
White Aero
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
11
|
Posted - 2017.02.22 05:09:19 -
[33] - Quote
Could not think of a better dude to be on the CSM!! |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2017.02.28 19:01:08 -
[34] - Quote
The reason this trash should never be anywhere near CFCSM of CCPL.
Do not vote for this piece of ****, people. Boycott CFCSM election entirely until even CCPL realizes something is wrong. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
59671
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 12:40:16 -
[35] - Quote
Hello,
My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes would you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?
Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Dod o'Dixie
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 13:47:57 -
[36] - Quote
How do you plan to help include deaf/blind players into the game further? What tools do you think can be used to do this outside lobbying corps/alliances/blocs to review their comms strategies (no comms/mumble, no entry) which is the biggest obstacle to deaf/blind players, for instance? |
Bobmon
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
212
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 19:09:49 -
[37] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Hello,
My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes would you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?
Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.
DMC
I think they could get some love and maybe be more meaning full other then getting missions etc. Other then that I would be really interested in what the community thinks that needs to be done and bring that to the CSM discussions.
@BobmonEVE - BOBMON FOR CSM 12
|
Bobmon
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
212
|
Posted - 2017.03.02 19:12:16 -
[38] - Quote
Dod o'Dixie wrote:How do you plan to help include deaf/blind players into the game further? What tools do you think can be used to do this outside lobbying corps/alliances/blocs to review their comms strategies (no comms/mumble, no entry) which is the biggest obstacle to deaf/blind players, for instance?
Well with blind people I think its going to be hard. Spoke with a few people who have bad sight and they really wanted to have more options to increase certain fonts / colours to make it easier for them to read.
@BobmonEVE - BOBMON FOR CSM 12
|
mkint
1520
|
Posted - 2017.03.03 00:34:40 -
[39] - Quote
Bobmon wrote:Dod o'Dixie wrote:How do you plan to help include deaf/blind players into the game further? What tools do you think can be used to do this outside lobbying corps/alliances/blocs to review their comms strategies (no comms/mumble, no entry) which is the biggest obstacle to deaf/blind players, for instance? Well with blind people I think its going to be hard. Spoke with a few people who have bad sight and they really wanted to have more options to increase certain fonts / colours to make it easier for them to read. ... that's not a plan.
If it's not a priority, just come out and say it. It's such a small market segment to try to appeal to, so I wouldn't expect much effort in that area, except that the entire client in general should be more usable than it is, regardless a person's condition. Is that a priority at all? To have a better client in general?
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
105
|
Posted - 2017.03.03 03:22:40 -
[40] - Quote
And one more reason some fucktarded assdrillers should be removed from CSM by force, after removing the CFCSM of CCPL itself.
Seriously, is there anything you won't do to ruin eve in order to push your agenda? |
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
59700
|
Posted - 2017.03.03 11:19:51 -
[41] - Quote
Bobmon wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:Hello,
My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes would you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?
Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.
DMC I think they could get some love and maybe be more meaning full other then getting missions etc. Other then that I would be really interested in what the community thinks that needs to be done and bring that to the CSM discussions. Thanks for the reply.
Yeah I agree. Faction standings should be more meaningful than just to get missions. They use to be needed to anchor a POS in high sec space until CCP removed that aspect. I think that was a big mistake.
Currently in-game, Faction standings are the only way to access Cosmos Agents (one time access). Faction standings and Corporation standings are needed to access Research Agents. All other Agents only require a minimal amount of Faction standing for access (-2.00 or higher standing). Also high Faction standings reduce Market Broker fees and Reprocessing fees in NPC stations. At -5.00 or lower Faction standing, Empire NPC's will attack when in their space. Those are the in-game aspects of Faction standings.
This game was founded on the premise of having a balance on 'Risk vs Reward' and 'Actions vs Consequences'. It takes time for players to ruin Faction standings and as such it should also take some time to repair those standings. In the past Characters use to be accountable for their actions in-game, now most everything has been dumbed down and turned into easy mode for the instant gratification crowd. That's something I don't want to see happen to Faction standings.
Now I know it's tough on new players who haven't learned the game yet, they can easily mess up their Faction standings right from the start without actually knowing it. I was one of those players victimized by negative Faction standings until I decided to do something about it. After 3 months of research in 2010, I created and shared the 'Faction Standing Repair Plan' with the Eve Online community. In my opinion players need more options available to repair negative Faction standings then what I've listed in 'The Plan', especially since most of those Event Agents can only be accessed once in the characters life.
I think the process of Faction standing repair should be implemented in-game to be more intuitive instead of being so obscure. All changes to Faction standings should be brought to the players attention with an on screen pop up message. Any action that would cause negative Faction standing should trigger an on screen pop up warning (with option to deactivate). All Anti-Empire missions should have a warning to alert players that accepting and completing those missions will incur negative Faction standings. An idea presented by others is to have Tags for Standings. Personally I don't really like the idea but if it's similar to Tags for Security, I guess it would be acceptable. Lastly CCP could add another group of NPC Agents to the in-game Agent Finder strictly for Faction standing repair, sorta like the proposal I have listed in my forum signature.
Anyway, thanks again for the reply and good luck in the upcoming election.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Bobmon
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
213
|
Posted - 2017.03.07 17:43:46 -
[42] - Quote
My Crossing Zebras interview: https://crossingzebras.com/csm-chat-bobmon/
@BobmonEVE - BOBMON FOR CSM 12
|
Cochise Chiricahua
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 05:56:11 -
[43] - Quote
07 Candidate!
First, thank you for your time and effort (both present and future) in representing the capsuleers of New Eden! TheyGÇÖre much appreciated.
IGÇÖm preparing to cast my vote in the CSM12 elections. After reading the information you submitted, though, I still have a question.
By way of background, I started in Eve as a hauler, moving freight in T1 industrials and gradually working my way up in both ships and cargo. However, I repeatedly found my progress impeded by gankers who would destroy my ship and steal my cargo. In low- and null-sec space, thatGÇÖs to be expected. You place your bet and take your chances. In high-sec space, however, this is very frustrating. Why have high-sec space at all then? This frustration drove me into anti-ganking, and IGÇÖve been a proud member of Thomas en Chasteaux's High-Sec Militia for several months now.
So, my question. Where do you stand on high-sec ganking? IGÇÖll concede that ganking is a legitimate style of game play, as CCP has ruled. But I also feel that it should be difficult and dangerous (for the ganker) in the 30% of New Eden designated as high-sec space. In particular, IGÇÖd like to see CCP tweak the game mechanics so that the criminal flag generated by looting a ganked freighter in high-sec space follows all players who handle that loot, and otherwise make looting more realistic. (Thomas en Chasteaux's ideas, not mine.)
As a member of the CSM, would you present such an idea to CCP? Would you push for its adoption? What other game changes might you consider to make high-sec ganking more difficult and less profitable?
Regards, Cochise Chiricahua.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |