Originally by: Goumindong

---

If anyone has any specific questions I will be happy to field them. Hopefully i will be able to keep this fist post updated with links to the questions and answers i have answered though i will make no guarantee that i will not run out of space.

---

Originally by: Cailais

---

Yup I have one.

What's your view on the 'Jihad Swarm' conducted by the Alliance of which your a member? Do you believe the 'ends' justified the means in this instance, and how do you counter the charge that your a member of an Alliance that some have described alternately as 'Griefing' (ie destruction of players assets without any cause / justification) or as attmepting to 'break' EVE and bring down the game?

NOTE: I am simply asking you (Goumindong) your view on these accusations / criticisms and I am not expressing a personal view on these accusations.

C.

---

Originally by: Arithron

---

Actually, I have...

Goonswarm have an interesting history and reputation. Given this, can you explain how YOU would serve the interests of the wider community on the CSM council; what would YOU do in a situation where Alliance loyalties dictated one thing, but overwhelming support for an idea indicated another?

Take care,
Bruce Hansen

---

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro

---

As briefly as possible, what are the core axioms and principles that lead you to your views on how EVE can be improved? No more than 10 please.

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

How do you feel about Kugutsumen's actions towards CCP, were they the wrong actions for the right reasons, or otherwise. Please explain in detail.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

How do you feel about Kugutsumen's actions towards CCP, were they the wrong actions for the right reasons, or otherwise. Please explain in detail.

---

Whistleblowers are important and need to be protected, but I am not knowledgeable enough on the subject to know just what it was he did and what he did may not be kosher. If all he did was publish information he gained from willing sources, no big deal. If he used malicious means then its much more iffy[as he likely would have had no reason to take such actions].

Kugutsumen's has taken other actions against player groups and many times these have been malicious and illegal and these types of activities should not be tolerated.

I hope to get a feel for what IA is doing to police the developers[No developer should probably ever be coordinating an alliances capital ops and planning for instance], but i am not sure about what types of information we will have access too nor what we will be able to release.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

[
Whistleblowers are important and need to be protected

Kugutsumen's has taken actions many times these have been malicious and illegal and these types of activities should not be tolerated.

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

Edited by: Viper ****zIe on 29/04/2008 00:43:13

Originally by: Goumindong

---

[
Whistleblowers are important and need to be protected

Kugutsumen's has taken actions many times these have been malicious and illegal and these types of activities should not be tolerated.

---

So which is it?

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

Also, do you have a campaign platform at all, as I haven't seen anything even hinting that you do.

---

Originally by: The OP

---

Reading material that I feel might be important that is not included in my CSM document linked in my sig may also be linked.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

Also, do you have a campaign platform at all, as I haven't seen anything even hinting that you do.

---

Originally by: The OP

---

Reading material that I feel might be important that is not included in my CSM document linked in my sig may also be linked.

---

---

Originally by: Dungar Loghoth

---

it would help if you actually had a signature idk

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Dungar Loghoth

---

it would help if you actually had a signature idk

---

Try turning signatures on in your forum options.

Otherwise, click here

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Besides the very obvious "balance" there are a few key axioms in eve that bind it together.

1. Eve is game and should be fun
2. Specialization should produce decreasing marginal returns
3. Everyone and everything has a role.
4. There should be no hegemony of the rich or old[also, see point 2]
5. Risk should correlate positively with reward.

If you can hold to these then you can really make the game a better place for everyone involved. Currently a few are failing.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

2. Specialization should produce decreasing marginal returns

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

3. Everyone and everything has a role.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

4. There should be no hegemony of the rich or old[also, see point 2].

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

5. Risk should correlate positively with reward.

---

Quote:

---

This point seems to be saying that those who work hard are smart, successful and have been working at it for a long time should not benefit from it.

---

Quote:

---

Id like you to also explain this in detail as well pls.

---

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro

---

I'm curious; in a game that's so intensely capitalistic, why do you think that there should be no hegemony of the rich? Where are you going with this idea?

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

I was not trolling i was asking for clarification on several of your points and i would post with my main but he is banned for posting pictures on caod.

Now i downloaded your documents and read through them and found them well presented if a little vague and now im asking for clarification.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

I was not trolling i was asking for clarification on several of your points and i would post with my main but he is banned for posting pictures on caod.

Now i downloaded your documents and read through them and found them well presented if a little vague and now im asking for clarification.

---

Can you explain what you want clarified? Because most of what i posted is fairly self explanatory. Do you want to know why i think these axioms are central to how Eve should be balanced? Do you want to know what a specific balance created by these I think should be implemented?

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

So what i am asking for is a list of things that you consider are most in need of changing, with these ideals as the principal reason for the change:

2. Specialization should produce decreasing marginal returns
3. Everyone and everything has a role.
4. There should be no hegemony of the rich or old[also, see point 2]
5. Risk should correlate positively with reward.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

The current state of starbase and sovereignty warfare. Specifically how it pushes smaller alliances out of the game, or to put it more simply, "attacking stuff is too hard".

The second most pressing issue would probably be speed, its current implementation and how it marginalizes lower skilled players and many ship types which ought to be valuable in all types of warfare.

And the third would probably be increasing U.I. functionality in all systems, especially the scanner, activation and reload of modules, and the fleet command tools.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Without wanting to be accused of being a strawman it seems to me that all you have done is rephrase your pet gripes about the DDD, Nano and Cloaking/scanning into a more positive sounding format. Id hoped it was not true and that you would have put together considerably more and varied content but it seems im going to be disapointed.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

As well, i am not sure i would qualify Jihadswarm as "griefing". It may just be that the motives just aren't clear.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Goons care first and foremost about making the game fun to play, because Goons play the game first and foremost to have fun. And this is where my loyalties lie. We aren't here to make partisan game changes that only benefit us, but benefit the game as a whole. Goons won't play the game if its not fun, they will go ride bikes instead. Such it is in the best interests of Goonswarm to make the game fun for as many people and play styles as possible and i cannot see that conflicting in any way with what is best for the community.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Viper ****zIe

---

Edited by: Viper ****zIe on 29/04/2008 00:43:13

Originally by: Goumindong

---

[
Whistleblowers are important and need to be protected

Kugutsumen's has taken actions many times these have been malicious and illegal and these types of activities should not be tolerated.

---

So which is it?

---

What do you mean? The two positions are not mutually exclusive.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

I will not deny that some of your ideas have merit although a lot of them seem to reduce the overall effectiveness of single ship types/styles of fit and lean towards a one ship can combat all style of eve. And while this may seem like a good idea to less skilled and newer players it also takes away the ability for ppl to put together a gang or fleet of varied specialized ships and pilots in favor of conformity and universal fitting/ship types.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

The specific problem can be exemplified by looking at two specific ships. The first is the thorax, and the second is the brutix. When fit for speed, a brutix performs the same role that the thorax does, except better, it has more hit points, more dps, longer range[larger blasters], the same size drone bay, is faster and as agile[or more agile and as fast], it locks targets faster, and has a better active tank[when both are fit as such]. And this is not "it does any one of these things" but "it does all of these things better at the same time". Unless the thorax fits speed mods[something it should not have to do for various reasons] the brutix actually makes a better thorax than the thorax.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

The specific problem can be exemplified by looking at two specific ships. The first is the thorax, and the second is the brutix. When fit for speed, a brutix performs the same role that the thorax does, except better, it has more hit points, more dps, longer range[larger blasters], the same size drone bay, is faster and as agile[or more agile and as fast], it locks targets faster, and has a better active tank[when both are fit as such]. And this is not "it does any one of these things" but "it does all of these things better at the same time". Unless the thorax fits speed mods[something it should not have to do for various reasons] the brutix actually makes a better thorax than the thorax.

---

Actually the brutix fits the same sized guns just two more of them than the thorax and yes its a better ship than the thorax in all regards cos its a battlecruiser instead of just a cruiser.

It seems to me that you want to stop ppl from upgrading as nobody who can fly a ceptor or a AF would fly a normal T1 frigate, nobody who could fly a interdictor or HIC would fly a ceptor and so on and so on. Your trying to devolve ppl, ships and modules/fitting styles who have spent a lot of isk and time training for ships that are improvements over lower sp ones they have outgrown.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Actually the brutix fits the same sized guns just two more of them than the thorax and yes its a better ship than the thorax in all regards cos its a battlecruiser instead of just a cruiser.

---

Quote:

---

It seems to me that you want to stop ppl from upgrading as nobody who can fly a ceptor or a AF would fly a normal T1 frigate, nobody who could fly a interdictor or HIC would fly a ceptor and so on and so on. Your trying to devolve ppl, ships and modules/fitting styles who have spent a lot of isk and time training for ships that are improvements over lower sp ones they have outgrown.

---

Originally by: Kaben

---

From reading what G is saying is that 1 set of ships isn't supposed to obsolete the other, in other words the brutix obsoletes the thorax making it pointless to use a thorax. A battlecruiser should have a role, not obsolete its smaller variation. I have a ? though for g, I understand your reasoning behind the brutix and thorax, what are your ideas behind thorax and diemos. Obviously the diemos obsoletes it. Do you believe the t2 ship should be penalized or left as is?

---

Originally by: Kaben

---

Do you believe the t2 ship should be penalized or left as is?

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

In this case, they are. Either Kugutsmen's actions were right or they were wrong. Which is it?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

No, its that the upgrade from these types of ships is much too severe. The value you gain too much. It is not that people should not be flying these ships but the advantage that they bring does not correlate with the risk. Currently the game is very nearly "Don't come unless you can fly a t2 cruiser or better". Because they pretty much obsolete everything below them.

It seems to me you are simply attempting to strawman me instead of addressing the actual argument.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Motives for jihadswarm as stated by the GoonSwarm rep:

---

Quote:

---

How do you reconcile this with the public statements of members of GoonSwarm that they are not in fact "playing EVE," but instead playing their own game. This game is one which transcends EVE and in which "fun" is defined as causing trouble and distress for others, and for which the end goal is to make other players close their accounts and stop playing?

---

Quote:

---

Another question, which you will probably ignore as well, but I am asking it of several candidates who did the same thing, so in the interest of fairness I direct it to you as well:

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

In this case, they are. Either Kugutsmen's actions were right or they were wrong. Which is it?

---

How is it? Whether his actions are O.K. are dependent on information that I do not know about and such cannot answer. Nor is it exclusive that you ought to protect whistle blowers but not protect illegal actions to obtain that information.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Edited by: lecrotta on 29/04/2008 21:50:05

Originally by: Goumindong

---

No, its that the upgrade from these types of ships is much too severe. The value you gain too much. It is not that people should not be flying these ships but the advantage that they bring does not correlate with the risk. Currently the game is very nearly "Don't come unless you can fly a t2 cruiser or better". Because they pretty much obsolete everything below them.

It seems to me you are simply attempting to strawman me instead of addressing the actual argument.

---

A t2 cruiser or better fitted t2 costs at least 200 mil with rigs how can you say that its wrong for a ship like this to far outclass all ships below it, cos as far as im concerned it should far out class them.

This is my issue with your ideas as they are reducing what ppl have ratted trained and paid monthly fees for a long time to achieve, yes in eve right now there is a lot of t2 ships about but also there are a lot of ppl training for them because they are great fun to fly, remember your "make eve lots of fun" number one rule.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Then I guess the question would be which takes precedence? Protecting whistleblowers, or not protecting illegal actions?

Since you say you can't give an opinion for lack of information, then take it as a hypothetical. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Kugutsmen's actions which led to his whistleblowing were in line with his history of less then legal/appropriate means. If this was the case, should he be protected as a whistleblower or subject to the legal consequence of his actions? By the very definition, protecting and not protecting someone are mutually exclusive, they are opposites for crying out loud!

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

If you could not be bothered to do the work necessary to put out your information in your profile, why should we believe that you are up to the task of doing all the work that will be associated with a seat on the CSM?

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

But that is the issue bud, you think that the difference between t1 cruiser and below vs t2 cruiser is out of balance while a t1 cruiser costs 4-5 mil base unfitted and a t2 cruiser costs 100 mil base unfitted, this alone should make the t2 a massively (20x) better ship but if you fit both with t2 stuff and rigs the difference is slight compared to the cost in isk and training time.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Edited by: Goumindong on 29/04/2008 21:50:04

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Motives for jihadswarm as stated by the GoonSwarm rep:

---

Vile Rat is no longer the Goonswarm Diplomat. Nor would his word be taken at face value.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

How do you reconcile this with the public statements of members of GoonSwarm that they are not in fact "playing EVE," but instead playing their own game. This game is one which transcends EVE and in which "fun" is defined as causing trouble and distress for others, and for which the end goal is to make other players close their accounts and stop playing?

---

You are misinterpreting the statements. He is mentioning how you can "win" at eve. Because in Eve you will not destroy a person unless they stop playing. Since the advent of Jump Clones you simply cannot ever permanently destroy a character.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Goons play "goons in space" they do not play eve. This means they are out for fun first and foremost. That they don't care if you have fun at the same time does not mean that they do not want the mechanics that the game is played via to be fun and fair it simply means that they are going to use those mechanics to have fun and if someone gets in their way then its not their fault.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

Another question, which you will probably ignore as well, but I am asking it of several candidates who did the same thing, so in the interest of fairness I direct it to you as well:

---

I am getting to them all, it just takes time.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

But that is the issue bud, you think that the difference between t1 cruiser and below vs t2 cruiser is out of balance while a t1 cruiser costs 4-5 mil base unfitted and a t2 cruiser costs 100 mil base unfitted, this alone should make the t2 a massively (20x) better ship but if you fit both with t2 stuff and rigs the difference is slight compared to the cost in isk and training time.

---

A Tech 2 Heavy Pulse Laser costs roughly 100 times as much as a Tech 1 Heavy Pulse Laser. Clearly then the Tech 2 Heavy Pulse Laser ought to be roughly 100 times better than the tech 1 Heavy Pulse laser...

Now that the idiocy of that argument has been exposed:

If t2 ships become less valuable because they are no longer ships that you can get in and, if you are smart and careful, never lose while still engaging then their price will fall.

It has always been the case that ships do not gain value linearly with their cost.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

If you could not be bothered to do the work necessary to put out your information in your profile, why should we believe that you are up to the task of doing all the work that will be associated with a seat on the CSM?

---

If they aren't going to be bothered to follow a link they aren't going to be bothered to read a description. If you do not believe that what i wrote regarding that shows that I am up for the task then i don't know what to say.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

im not saying that a t2 cruiser is 20x better nor am i saying it should be

---

Originally by: You quoted in the same freaking post you quoted

---

this alone should make the t2 a massively (20x) better ship

---

Quote:

---

Also insuring t2 ships is pointless so when you lose one its a big loss instead of just a insurance cost when you lose a t1 ship.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

When there are over 60 candidates, you want people to go and read 60 webpages? I think that's a ridiculous expectation. Your initial profile should give enough for a player to decide if they have enough interest in you as a candidate for it to be worth it for them to follow the link and read more. The profile statements provide a snapshot of who you are and what you stand for, and should be a means of narrowing down one's choices. Not putting up any information in the statement either shows you are lazy, too busy to do something important, or have no platform on which to run.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Edited by: lecrotta on 29/04/2008 21:50:05

Originally by: Goumindong

---

No, its that the upgrade from these types of ships is much too severe. The value you gain too much. It is not that people should not be flying these ships but the advantage that they bring does not correlate with the risk. Currently the game is very nearly "Don't come unless you can fly a t2 cruiser or better". Because they pretty much obsolete everything below them.

It seems to me you are simply attempting to strawman me instead of addressing the actual argument.

---

A t2 cruiser or better fitted t2 costs at least 200 mil with rigs how can you say that its wrong for a ship like this to far outclass all ships below it, cos as far as im concerned it should far out class them.

This is my issue with your ideas as they are reducing what ppl have ratted trained and paid monthly fees for a long time to achieve, yes in eve right now there is a lot of t2 ships about but also there are a lot of ppl training for them because they are great fun to fly, remember your "make eve lots of fun" number one rule.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

When there are over 60 candidates, you want people to go and read 60 webpages? I think that's a ridiculous expectation. Your initial profile should give enough for a player to decide if they have enough interest in you as a candidate for it to be worth it for them to follow the link and read more. The profile statements provide a snapshot of who you are and what you stand for, and should be a means of narrowing down one's choices. Not putting up any information in the statement either shows you are lazy, too busy to do something important, or have no platform on which to run.

---

Or it means i mis-calculated the number of people that would be running and was optimistic that people would take the time to get to know candidates through various outlets. That it is not there is not an indication of lack of work. Maybe a little idealism that people will take a little time.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Was he the GoonSwarm diplomat at the time of this statement? If so, it is still a valid representation of Goon policy. If not, and it was an unauthorized statement contrary to the will of the leadership of GoonSwarm, then where is the public denounciation of such policy as the work of a rogue member and not representative of the alliance as a whole? If you don't keep control of your members' public statements, you are responsible for whatever perceptions those statements create.

---

Quote:

---

It worries me if the Goons think that the only way to win EVE is to make other players quit. Is it not enough if you simply drive other players from your space, force them to withdraw to where they are no longer a threat to you? Or is the only possible method of winning to harass such players to the point that they delete the game from their hard drive? This seems to be what he is saying, how is that "misinterpreted?" What part of it have I got wrong?

Also, how is it beneficial to the continuing health and growth of EVE if your goal is to drive players away? Chasing away players has the inevitable outcome of reducing subscriptions, less funding for CCP, and the eventual destruction of the game. In this light, shouldn't there be a different goal to your game?

---

Quote:

---

These statements speak volumes about what type of game the Goons are playing. EVE is a game about spaceship combat, about risk and reward, about gain and loss. When all done within the context of the game, it can be fun regardless of which side of a battle you are on. But there is a limit, this all stops at the keyboard. Except the Goons take it beyond that. Their game is to make players "miserable," to completely destroy their will and desire to play. That's really great for community building, and a great perspective for the CSM, isn't it?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Was he the GoonSwarm diplomat at the time of this statement? ...

---

In JV1V when goons were "Fofo'ing" in local after a successful battle a GM asked Remdeial[the Goon CEO at the time] to make them stop. He responded "I am just the head of an internet spaceship guild. I can't make them stop"

Goons aren't a massive collective as we may seem. If you don't trust what I am saying and instead think that Jihad Swarm was some Machiavellian scheme against players in empire then i won't be able to convince you.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

It worries me if the Goons think that the only way to win EVE is to make other players quit...

Also, how is it beneficial to the continuing health and growth of EVE if your goal is to drive players away? Chasing away players has the inevitable outcome of reducing subscriptions, less funding for CCP, and the eventual destruction of the game. In this light, shouldn't there be a different goal to your game?

---

There really is no way to really beat a player. See RA for a good example[or Goonswarm]. Anyone can simply run to low-sec and build up to attack you again. This is fun and good for the game since it continues the dynamism. That we understand that you cannot truly beat someone without making them quit only means that we understand the nature of the game.

If we drove everyone out of the game we would not be able to have fun. This would be bad for the swarm.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?

---

Originally by: Seth Ruin

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?

---

Sounds kind-of out of line. As far as representing GoonSwarm or not, as far as I know this CSM thing isn't about representing a corp or an alliance, but the playerbase as a whole, and I believe Goumindong is doing relatively well at that.

---

Originally by: Makhan

---

Goumindong, what subforum of SA do you find yourself browsing the most?

---

Originally by: Labienus

---

According to the Goonswarm killboard you have barely ever flown a t2 ship in a pvp situation. An Absolution 4 times, and never used a HAC. How can you say that the risk reward is broken on them if you have never flown/lost these t2 ships? Could your opinion in anyway be biased because you do not want to use these ships that outperform the usual t1 versions?

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Why do you feel that you can speak on the behalf of goonswarm when in fact no one in goonswarm can stand you and 50% of our forums have you on ignore because of your horrible posts?
How can you claim to be a valid candidate when you couldn't even get 20 people to support your CSM candidancy out of a forum of thousands of people?

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Goumindong would be a horrible representitive as he doesn't have the first idea about game balance or how to make an argument.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

That's nice, but it completely sidestepped the question. The statement was publicly made to CCP in the form of an ISD anouncement. It was made to sound as if it represented the alliance's objectives as a whole. If it did not, and was only the words of a single member, then your authorized reps should have been doing some damage control. Since they did not, I have to assume that the motives for jihadswarm were as publicly stated.

GoonSwarm is an alliance. An alliance can remove corps that don't adhere to policies. A corp can remove players that disobey orders. Failure to keep control of members is a matter of choice, not ability.

---

Quote:

---

Making other players quit is by no means a way to "win" EVE. I'd have to say that with some rare exceptions, everyone loses each time a player quits, because then there is one less person contributing to a game that is built on player interaction.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Labienus

---

According to the Goonswarm killboard you have barely ever flown a t2 ship in a pvp situation. An Absolution 4 times, and never used a HAC. How can you say that the risk reward is broken on them if you have never flown/lost these t2 ships? Could your opinion in anyway be biased because you do not want to use these ships that outperform the usual t1 versions?

---

Besides flying with and against these ships? Besides flying ships with similar characteristics [though not all similar] and then amalgamating from there? Besides testing their capabilities in non-live situations? Besides intimate knowledge of the game mechanics governing tracking, explosion velocity, speed, inertia, et all?


Nothing besides those things. I did not have to fly Typhoons and Domis to know that they were utterly broken right after the Rev 1 patch, and the same holds true for nano-ships. If there is a doubt, look a killboard like BoB and Tri and see where their losses crom from and the number of nano-ships that are killed by non-nano ships. Then figure out how many of those were from stupidity[like my last two nano-kills, which had the pilots had half a brain or were paying attention would never have happened]

Note, there is very little wrong with the Absolution in terms of risk/reward. It is not able to be made into a ship that is able to disengage like its smaller cousins. I would be flying that particular ship more, but getting my BS out of QY6 was of more strategic importance and the contract system screwed me over in terms of other means of retrieval[which is to say you can't contract damaged crystals in a gun]

---

Originally by: Sinrath

---

You sir, are one deluded man. I wanted to come up with something retortive, but your statement says all.

Clearly the Typhoon & Domi is overpowered

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

and tonnes of DPS?

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Edited by: LaVista Vista on 30/04/2008 05:34:01

Originally by: Goumindong

---

and tonnes of DPS?

---

How much DPS? I don't exactly recall the nano-phoon and -domi being DPS boats, when they were "overpowered".
In fact, if someone brought a rapier/huginn with them, they were completely useless.

They were flying bricks, if you managed to web them.

Leave alone the fact that you needed to fit them with rigs, likely snakes and faction MWD's if they should be worth anything. Or pure skill-requirements in order to do DPS. Phoon is one of the most skill intensive ships in the game at present, if you wanna fly it right. That has ALWAYS been true, the nano-time it had was no different. I mean, even now, if you want to do respectable DPS, you need a lot of skills. Imagine how little DPS it would do with + of the damage being reallocated to NOS.

---

Originally by: Vladameir Harkenin

---

Coming from a pilot who used to fly one, no you didn't need snakes. Also from what I remember there was a rig that was deleted that added to the mwd bonus ability. The problem is that nos and neuts are damage (considering they weren't nerfed at this time), domi did around 400-500 damage with drones while nosing his enemy to feed its own cap hungry mwd. a huggin or rapier will not stop this ship alone it is a flying brick yes, but that is a benefit as webs won't effect it as much as smaller ships. it will cause him to flee and find an easier target. You did not need alot of isk to build one either, a decent amount, but considering the payout in terms of survivability, definetly cheaper then the old dble repped nosdomi. (keep in mind not a comparison of price, but a comparison of survivablity) A good pilot who keeps his eye on local will never loose it.

Did it need to be nerfed, coming from a pilot who just happened to have all the skills needed to fit this style of domi and flew it regularly, yes. Also please don't include implants as a price for the ship, if the ship dies they still are imbedded into your skull so you didn't loose them....yet. Only thing you lost was a ship worth about 200-500 mil depending if you used a faction mwd. Not a huge loss, especially if you keep an eye on local the ship will more then paid for itself by tenfold.

Truthfully it doesn't really matter, the point is they WERE overpowered and as such they were put in there place.

---

Originally by: Vladameir Harkenin

---

Considering this the nanophoon did do alot more damage then a cruiser, quickly erroding your enemys cap is the same as if the enemy had to turn on reps to repair incoming damage. Nos/neuts are damage, just a different form. But back on topic.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?

---

Funny you should mention that.

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=597162
Your horrible concept of different sized webs whereby an interceptor would be slowed 4% by a battleship at up to 40km.

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=670196
Your plan to make assault ships into mini commandships and allow gang bonuses to only be distributed from squad command.

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=633776
This list of amarr changes where you mess with the ships in weird manners for no apparent reason including giving the geddon 4 turret slots (of 7 highs) and a 100% bonus to damage and then 5% damage per level AS WELL.

I could go on and post your entire "A GENERAL TREATISE ON EVE ONLINE" but really it's just a lot of words that don't say anything worthwhile at all and just show that you are capable of writing 35000 characters that say nothing of merit.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Do you have evidence of this or are you going to spew more ad hominem?

---

Funny you should mention that.

---

Quote:

---

This thread is not going to look at what exactly is wrong with Amarr. It will provide no changes that may or may not "fix" amarr. It will not look into any ships that also need changing that arent Amarr. The purpose of this thread is to provide a study on ship design around the Sansha/Marauder template that has recently made its way onto Sisi and will be entering the game soon as a way to diversify ship types and roles.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am sorry, are you going to make an argument as to why that is or are you just going to post some of the things that I have posted out of context?

Also no, i would not make gang bonuses only distribute via the squad command position and no, not make all AFs gang bonus producing ships. But you would have had to read those threads to understand what was going on.

---

Originally by: Terianna Eri

---

I'm mostly just curious about this:

a) What do you think about the 10% less cap use / level bonus on Amarr ships? Balanced? Waste of bonus and should be replaced with something different? Raise to 15% or 20% or decrease to 5? etc.

b) Do you think the Omen is balanced with other cruisers of its teir / other T1 combat cruisers?

c) you mentioned that you think there should be a role for everything. Do afterburners have a significant enough role, especially with regards to PVP?

thanks

(p.s. I actually liked your reworking of webs)

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Edited by: Waterfowl Democracy on 30/04/2008 15:41:37

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I am sorry, are you going to make an argument as to why that is or are you just going to post some of the things that I have posted out of context?

Also no, i would not make gang bonuses only distribute via the squad command position and no, not make all AFs gang bonus producing ships. But you would have had to read those threads to understand what was going on.

---

I didn't know it was possible to take an entire thread out of context. But basically here's my point, you don't know the first thing about this game or game balance. And despite this you seem to think that anything that comes into your head is a golden idea worthy of immediate implementation. You're the worst kind of idiot, the one who thinks he knows things.

And the reason I'm posting here is so that everyone else knows exactly how awful you are.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

That's nice, but it completely sidestepped the question. The statement was publicly made to CCP in the form of an ISD anouncement. It was made to sound as if it represented the alliance's objectives as a whole. If it did not, and was only the words of a single member, then your authorized reps should have been doing some damage control. Since they did not, I have to assume that the motives for jihadswarm were as publicly stated.

GoonSwarm is an alliance. An alliance can remove corps that don't adhere to policies. A corp can remove players that disobey orders. Failure to keep control of members is a matter of choice, not ability.

---

Then you fundamentally do not understand how Goonswarm operates. And this misunderstanding is what drives a lot of the funny that we see in the game. Vile Rat could have said anything and this would have been O.K. with the leadership and the people. Because as an alliance we don't care what you think, and if what you think is wrong and funny, more the better.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

Making other players quit is by no means a way to "win" EVE. I'd have to say that with some rare exceptions, everyone loses each time a player quits, because then there is one less person contributing to a game that is built on player interaction.

---

It is in the strictest of terms, otherwise there is no "game over" for the other player as there is in any other competitive game. This is very good for the game, but as an alliance it has much deeper meanings with regards to how you can win even temporarily.

The short answer is "You will win when you log on" and so the most important aspect of fighting another alliance and tacking their space is making sure that you will log on, and they will not.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

The second part

---

Quote:

---

The first part

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

So you aren't going to make any argument?

You didn't take an entire thread out of context, you took snippets, made it look like the entire thread, and lied about them.

I do not think that anything that comes into my head is a golden idea, but i do think the ones I post have merit.

Your posting here isn't really hurting me as far as I can tell. You've no argument and are just attacking me. I think most of the people who play this game are smart enough to not fall for such cheap tricks.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

If you feel that those posts don't show you as a complete idiot then clearly you wouldn't need to defend them.

---

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro

---

I have no trouble believeing Goumindong's motives. It surprised me more, after reading rather a lot of his posts on SHC, that he was a member of GoonSwarm.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

The second part

---

You are mistaking understanding of how the game is played and won with a wish to hurt others.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

The first part

---

Only if you believe that we act as a monolithic entity and have no wish to play a fun game. Both of these things are not true, we are not monolithic and do like to have fun. If anything Waterfowl should have convinced you that we are indeed not monolithic.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

You (as an individual or a group) intend to "win" the game. "Winning" for you means that other players quit playing. A reduced playerbase harms the game as a whole. Do you see the contradiction, and can you understand why some would be concerned with someone who holds that view having anything to do with the future improvement of the game?

---

Quote:

---

You are a group who associates under one banner. Anything said or done by a member displaying that banner has the potential to be taken as a statement representing the group. This has nothing to do with how you are organized internally, but rather it's just how things work.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

You (as an individual or a group) intend to "win" the game. "Winning" for you means that other players quit playing. A reduced playerbase harms the game as a whole. Do you see the contradiction, and can you understand why some would be concerned with someone who holds that view having anything to do with the future improvement of the game?

---

Just like economics, belief or disbelief in something doesn't matter. It only matters whats true. You might want someone who deludes themselves as to the nature of Eve and how you play and win, but I don't. And I won't be the person to do that.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

Then as already asserted, you and I are playing two very different games, as what we have here is a fundamental difference on what the truth actually is. What I see as true is that your idea of truth is not the heart of the game at all, but in actuality the pursuit of your "truth" is a method of the game's destruction.

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

lots and lots and lots of words

---

Originally by: Equin

---

If you had to guess what percentage of your corporation supported you for CSM what percentage would you guess?

Followup:
Do you think this number needs to be high or are there valid reasons for people to pick a CSM that doesn't have the support of their corporation?

---

Originally by: Hrin

---

As a space hero, I officially anti-endorse Goumindong.

---

Originally by: Wu Jiun

---

as a lowsec dweller i'd like to hear a bit more on the following aspects:

---

Quote:

---

i like this idea very much generally speaking. what i'd like to know is how big the range of authority should be. are we talking about systems, constellations or even regions?

---

Quote:

---

another point is how to decide who is policing. how would you keep the policing corp from going pirate theirselves? whats keeping corps from sabotaging the policing by taking the spot and not doing anything? especially a pvp tournament looks too much like gamble and exploitable to be the deciding factor.

---

Quote:

---

about outlaws: what your stance on remote repairing? currently remote repairing ships will draw sentry aggro even if they don't have a gcc. well if a harmless passerby is attacked i very well understand the need to punish all attackers including their logistic ships with sentries.

if on the other hand two outlaw gangs fight each other or the non-outlaw gang has flagged themselves to the pirates earlier e.g. by agressing during a station camp (it happens) and as such no criminal acts are commited why would the logistic ships need to suffer all alone? we frequently have to flag ourselves to the sentries although we can actually legally shoot the people just to save our logistics.

---

Quote:

---

about ship/module balance: what do you think about current t2 ammunition and more specifically the tracking penalty on the close range ones?

---

Quote:

---

what about torps/hams? whats your idea on fitting, range and damage?

---

Quote:

---

do you think the wardec system needs an overhaul and is it any important?

---

Quote:

---

How important is Ambulation?

---

Originally by: Frygok

---

Now, something I have been pondering since I read your part on page 1 regarding no hegemon and not having the vets being in power:

1) How do you feel about a few moons (dysp and pro) are the most important thing in 0.0 warfare (aside from personal ego's ;))? Specifically how a few alliances are more or less permanently using these moons with very little risk. Simplified, I know. I was more looking on your view on these moons being so important. Should there be more high-end moons? Should there be a yearly/6 month re-seeding? Should there be more different types of moons, making it more difficult for large alliances to have all the components needed? I would specifically link this to low sec, where you could have more moons that were non-present in 0.0 space.

---

Quote:

---

.

2) A direct continuation of 1). As you no doubt are aware of, large 0.0 alliances can without too much hassle control huge amounts of space due to logistics. One of the worst things that happened IMO to this game was the Jump Bridges and Titan bridging, as well as JF's (and carriers being able to transport BS and lower), as it minimized the risk of moving stuff to and from 0.0, as well as preventing smaller groups of mercs/pirates from interrupting the "supply train", thus removing what I feel is a great niche role. Do you feel the current balance between boring and time consuming logistics and too easy movement to and from 0.0 is fine?

---

Originally by: Equin

---

If you had to guess what percentage of your corporation supported you for CSM what percentage would you guess?

Followup:
Do you think this number needs to be high or are there valid reasons for people to pick a CSM that doesn't have the support of their corporation?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

There are roughly 4000 members of Goonswarm and roughly 900 voted in the election with roughly 1/3rd of the votes going between the three primary candidates. Were goon politics based on other attributes these numbers would have been very different.

I would guess based on block voting that very few in my corporation would support me since we have an imperative to vote for Bane and Darius. Whether they would in the absence of the block vote call, the other goon candidates[not including the PL candidate], or a lack of bandwagoning I cannot really make a determination of.

Is their lack of support a valid reason to vote for someone else? Certainly not, since it has nothing to do with my competency.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Quote:

---

Is their lack of support a valid reason to vote for someone else? Certainly not, since it has nothing to do with my competency.

---

This isn't an answer to the question. NO ONE in goonswarm can stand you and we all think you'd be a horrible CSM representative. That is why you had 8 people sign your nomination out of 4000 members (that's 0.2% btw).

---

Originally by: PartyPopper

---

I'm more worried about Bane going to Icelandic prison for attempted murder...

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Quote:

---

Is their lack of support a valid reason to vote for someone else? Certainly not, since it has nothing to do with my competency.

---

This isn't an answer to the question. NO ONE in goonswarm can stand you and we all think you'd be a horrible CSM representative. That is why you had 8 people sign your nomination out of 4000 members (that's 0.2% btw).

---

Please read next time, that is the question and answer.

Also, bane got about 30, with about the same trolling him. Which is about .08% of GF. Oh noes, .08% Bane doesn't have their support, run for the hills! Darius got 60, a whole 1.6%![The CEO, and he lost the general to Bane].

Please, start making an argument or asking relevant questions instead of just making statements and being useless.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Bane Glorious got enough nominations to get through to the next round (all that was needed and something you didn't manage) and in fact recieved the most votes out of all the candidates.

---

Quote:

---

Goumindong, how does it feel to be the most ignored post on goonfleet.com? Why do you continue to post when most people have you ignored and any thread you post in devolves into people telling you to shut up?

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

I feel that my questions are relevant.

Goumindong, do you feel that a potential CSM representative should be telling posters to get out of their threads in a combative manner?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

I feel that my questions are relevant.

Goumindong, do you feel that a potential CSM representative should be telling posters to get out of their threads in a combative manner?

---

I am sorry if you took that as combative, I am simply attempting to have less obfuscation in the thread so that people can have a clear view of how i think and what I know. It would be nice if you respected that.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

That is your problem bud, you are convinced your right about everything you say and that your ideas are perfect and are utterly unwilling to be criticized or told you are wrong.

But as this thread, your alliance members and other threads show the majority of ppl do not like your ideas (or you it seems) and not only that but your supposed to want to be a representative of those ppl and yet you argue and ignore all those that do not think like you do.

Why would anybody want to vote for somebody who ignores all but his own ideas and is convinced that he is always right, not only that but has already made his mind up about loads of issues without checking for where the majority of public opinion is (against you by the looks of this thread) and made posts about them.

---

Originally by: Dopefish

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

That is your problem bud, you are convinced your right about everything you say and that your ideas are perfect and are utterly unwilling to be criticized or told you are wrong.

But as this thread, your alliance members and other threads show the majority of ppl do not like your ideas (or you it seems) and not only that but your supposed to want to be a representative of those ppl and yet you argue and ignore all those that do not think like you do.

Why would anybody want to vote for somebody who ignores all but his own ideas and is convinced that he is always right, not only that but has already made his mind up about loads of issues without checking for where the majority of public opinion is (against you by the looks of this thread) and made posts about them.

---

People in general have no idea whatsoever what is best for them.
Telling people what is best for them is a shure way of being disliked.

Goum obviously sucks at politics, but his logic is undeniable.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

So his and your policy is stfu and do what we say cos you know nothing...erm ok gr8 thnx bb.

---

Originally by: Bane Glorious

---

Originally by: PartyPopper

---

I'm more worried about Bane going to Icelandic prison for attempted murder...

---

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

That is your problem bud, you are convinced your right about everything you say and that your ideas are perfect and are utterly unwilling to be criticized or told you are wrong.

---

Quote:

---

But as this thread, your alliance members and other threads show the majority of ppl do not like your ideas (or you it seems) and not only that but your supposed to want to be a representative of those ppl and yet you argue and ignore all those that do not think like you do.

---

Quote:

---

Why would anybody want to vote for somebody who ignores all but his own ideas and is convinced that he is always right, not only that but has already made his mind up about loads of issues without checking for where the majority of public opinion is (against you by the looks of this thread) and made posts about them.

---

Originally by: Hamfast

---

1)Invention û A good idea that still needs workà
a.Have you ever tried invention?
b.What ideas do you have to improve invention?

---

Quote:

---

2) Pilot Security Level û Should it be more important?
a. (In High Sec) û Should Concord react faster if the victim has a higher security level? If the attacker has a lower rating?
b. Should the Security Level of a system affect changes to Pilot Security level changes?
c. Should the Security Level of a Targeted Pilot have more of an effect on the security change of the attacker?

---

Quote:

---

3) Industry û The Creators of Eve
a. Do you regularly build anything?
b. Do you regularly mine?
c. What do you think could be done to improve industry in Eve?
d. You have been asked to help with new ships for industrial characters, describe a few ideasà

---

Quote:

---

d. You have been asked to help with new ships for industrial characters, describe a few ideasà

---

Originally by: PartyPopper

---

Originally by: Bane Glorious

---

Originally by: PartyPopper

---

I'm more worried about Bane going to Icelandic prison for attempted murder...

---

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

---

are you telling me that if you were sat across a table from Goumindong for days on end you wouldn't stab him in the face?

because then I might have to vote for darius

---

Originally by: Drolus

---

role player alert:

1. What are your thoughts about Tibus Heth?
2. How would you as a CSM adress the Dungar question?

---

Originally by: Drolus

---

check out the "Breaking News from the Caldari State" by CCP Ginger in the Events forum

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

My feelings are not at issue, only my competency. Of which there is ample evidence.

---

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Quote:

---

what is about allowing for several policing corps at the same time/location? why exclusive?

---

Because deciding how to split up the taxes would be even more of a problem than deciding who gets the job

---

Originally by: Drolus

---

role player alert:

1. What are your thoughts about Tibus Heth?
2. How would you as a CSM adress the Dungar question?

---

Originally by: Taizu Lilith

---

What do you think about resource gathering in EVE? ((mining/missioning)) How can this be made more interesting?

((what about RP?))

---

Originally by: Jackylucy

---

1 - What would you do to make EVE more enjoyable for people who don't have 20+ hours a week to play?

---

Quote:

---

2 - Do you feel that different professions in Eve are becoming so diverse that they are losing their connections with each other, and subsequently their significance in the wider picture?

---

Quote:

---

3 - What do you think could be done to make currently repetitive professions in Eve more interesting and enjoyable? (A good and fundamentally important example would be mining)

---

Quote:

---

4 - What do you think is the biggest problem in the EVE economy to date, and how do you see this getting fixed in the future?

---

Originally by: Wu Jiun

---

What about a more direct measure of policing success? as i understand it your idea is based on the prosperity of the regions. good policing leads to less criminal conduct which in turn gives incentive for players to rat/mine/explore/use station services and contribute to the income of the policing corporation.

Now, why not also looking for say how many of the given killrights are actually used? I.e. one could look at measures like (killed criminals)/(criminal acts) for a given time span or similar things. If such a thing was feasible one could also make the payments for several policing corps depending on their relative contribution, no? I've already mentioned this in the other post. I know your time is limited but if you can spare the time i'd like to know why this doesn't work in your opinion. thx a lot anyway for your input

---

Originally by: EnemyOfStairs

---

What is your stance on skill queuing?

---

Originally by: Lyta Reimalken

---

Cant poast on eveo atm for some reason :/

Just been having a read through your CSM thread, looks particularly interesting, if a little troll-ridden.

Just wondering how you think we could achieve this 'use-for-every-ship' idea you seem to be quite behind. I mean, boost t1 cruisers and down is all well and good, but how do you prevent from treading on the toes of HACs et al.

Personally I'd like to see the mining/logistics t1 cruisers boosted, a scythe that could shield rep or an auguror that could armor rep would be a start.
Im not sure I like the 'tier' system either. Cyclone's should not be obsoleted by Canes, and the cost of a cane shouldnt justify its superiority etc, but this sitution is so much more apparent in the frigates and cruiser section.
For a minmatar player, apart from the Vigil and the Rifter, nothings worth sitting in. Why would anyone buy/use an Atron?

Not that I am suggesting an answer, but thats what I'd have posted on the thread, had I been able to press reply. (**** you eve0)

I dunno, as an aside, given that he is the most readily apparent moron since the last time I read eveo, don't you feel a little ashamed to be in the same alliance as Waterfowl Democracy. I want the moments of my life back I spent reading what he typed

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Why would anybody want to vote for somebody who ignores all but his own ideas and is convinced that he is always right

---

Originally by: Lindsay Fox

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

Why would anybody want to vote for somebody who ignores all but his own ideas and is convinced that he is always right

---

Anyone who has some idea of how to get things done and be successful would know that these are two of the most important qualities to have.

An example of a corporation built by someone like this would be McDonalds (Ray Kroc).

An example of the opposite philosophy would be your average city council.

While I'm not sure if the CSM is actually going to achieve anything, one way to guarantee its failure would be to elect a bunch of representative pussies who want everyone's ideas to be implemented, and change their minds every time they are faced with an opposing point of view.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

I have a problem with whiners who constantly find fault with aspects of eve instead of with their own skills and competence, and have seen the word "balance" thrown around way to much by ppl who do not have any real experience in the ships or modules they claim need "balancing".

And of course anybody who by association sympathies or even supports a alliance who actually deliberately threatened the games very existence is not somebody who i feel should be given any official standing or authority what so ever.

---

Originally by: goodby4u

---

I have 3 questions and forgive me if you answered it before...

1)As i've seen you know alot about this issue, but my question is would you support more amarr boosts? And if so, what type of boosts would you support?

2)And how high up on your agenda is fixing lag issues?

3)Would you support a boost to people that travel solo/in small gangs or nerf to people that travel in blobs?

---

Originally by: Kali Burr

---

1) What do you think about more PVE scenarios, ones which would incorporate a large section of the EVE universe.

---

Quote:

---

2) Along the lines of the above statement, how would you feel if the EVE universe had a vote in how their races interacted.

---

Quote:

---

3) How would you feel about opening Invention to invent new items that they design, potentially completely new items to the EVE universe?

---

Quote:

---

4) How would you feel if the EVE universe could start impacting in some way on 0.0? Pirates and alliances in 0.0 often have influence in Empire space and low sec, what if the tables were reversed?

---

Quote:

---

5) Finally how would you feel about creating and opening events to all players and not just the wealthiest alliances in EVE? There could be many talented pilots out there that want to compete for fame and glory, but may not have the ISK to do it.

---

Originally by: "Crowdad"

---

Questions to Goumindong,

How do you see the possibility of improving Eve mechanics to remove some AFK enabling obscenities, among other things wrong with Eve. And what about giving CCP a boot to the head, on their need for speed motto which sounds like a lot of hot air by now...

- improving the user interface
- war declaration exploits
- dozens of POS bugs
- bridging the game mechanics gap between young and old characters.
- facilitating the building of trust for new gamers, while still allowing for scams to happen...

What about facilitating the destruction of property in empire to improve player base activity, further increasing the need for alliances and protection from war decs and utmost trust when starting joint ventures. Bring some of these things to empire... What would be your thoughts on faction warfare?

---

Originally by: Dethbloomy

---

If you get elected, please bring up the idea of a slave module, so you can control 2 ships at the same time... whatever your first ship does, your second ship does... you know, this is a good idea, bring it up if you get elected

---

Originally by: Fury1980

---

On this, if i may.... So what about the arguement that one must crawl before they can walk...ie us older folks had to start off from nothing...why should new players expect to have any effect when they start off...when us older players had to start from scratch.

---

Originally by: lecrotta

---

That is your problem bud, you are convinced your right about everything you say and that your ideas are perfect and are utterly unwilling to be criticized or told you are wrong.

---

Originally by: Dramaticus

---

From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

---

Originally by: Disunity

---

Originally by: Dramaticus

---

From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

---

I donÆt think you (and other members of Goonswarm) could have made a more positive contribution to GoumindongÆs campaign.

Anybody so unpopular with Goonswarm canÆt be a complete ****.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Goumindong, in the "quick reference chart" thread you said something... intriguing.
I'm referring to the following section:

[9] Allow moon mining in 0.4 -> there is already moon mining in 0.4
[9] Allow moon mining in highsec -> there is already moon mining in highsec

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK even if there ARE "moon materials" on 0.4 and highsec moons, there is no way to extract them, since harvester arrays can only be anchored in 0.3 system sec or below right now.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Goumindong, in the "quick reference chart" thread you said something... intriguing.
I'm referring to the following section:

[9] Allow moon mining in 0.4 -> there is already moon mining in 0.4
[9] Allow moon mining in highsec -> there is already moon mining in highsec

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK even if there ARE "moon materials" on 0.4 and highsec moons, there is no way to extract them, since harvester arrays can only be anchored in 0.3 system sec or below right now.

---

I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Good luck taking down a large faction POS, sitting on a dysprosium moon, with deathstar fit. There is no capitals in empire.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Good luck taking down a large faction POS, sitting on a dysprosium moon, with deathstar fit. There is no capitals in empire.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Originally by: Talkuth Rel

---

You (as an individual or a group) intend to "win" the game. "Winning" for you means that other players quit playing. A reduced playerbase harms the game as a whole. Do you see the contradiction, and can you understand why some would be concerned with someone who holds that view having anything to do with the future improvement of the game?

---

Just like economics, belief or disbelief in something doesn't matter. It only matters whats true. You might want someone who deludes themselves as to the nature of Eve and how you play and win, but I don't. And I won't be the person to do that.

---

Originally by: Minerva Richie

---

Sorry, I had no intention of commenting but I couldn't let that slide. Stock Markets? Fiscal uncertainty? The sub-prime crisis?

---

Originally by: Seth Ruin

---

Originally by: Disunity

---

Originally by: Dramaticus

---

From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

---

I donÆt think you (and other members of Goonswarm) could have made a more positive contribution to GoumindongÆs campaign.

Anybody so unpopular with Goonswarm canÆt be a complete ****.

---

Exactly what I'm thinking. The more goons ***** and moan about Goumindong and try to slander his campaign, the more likely I am to vote for him. Anyone who annoys the swarm has got to have some sort of capability of independent, rational thought.

---

Originally by: Icy Z

---

Goumindong, u still around?

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.

---

Originally by: Triest

---

Hey Guomindong, what's your position on the Zealot?

---

Originally by: Cadde

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.

---

As previously stated, you cant have dreads and carriers in highsec. But furthermore, POS'es are not considered WAR targets by Concord and even if you decc the corp and assault a undefended pos (Without any offensive capabilities) you still get Concord on your sorry A. Just fyi ;)

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Did you wait the required 24 hours?

ed: and did you have the right moon?

---

Quote:

---

24) Will Concord protect my POS from attacks?
ATM Yes. Anyone who shoots at your High-Sec POS will get Concordokken.
Even if the attacking force issue a war declaration to yours, the POS won't
become a war target. I tested with an alt on numerous occasions and Concord
blew him up faster than my POS guns could track him.
However, I haven't found any official announcement explaining if this change
was intended. It wasn't like that before Revelations. Some say it's a bug that will
get fixed, leaving POS vulnerable to attacks again. I don't know if that true, but
just in case, I deployed some guns in my POS. I advice you to do the same.

---

Quote:

---

How would you boos/nerf the current high sec POSes?

---

Quote:

---

How would you boos/nerf the current high sec POSes?

---

Originally by: swordpunisher

---

What are your thoughts towards Low population in low sec and suicide ganking.
And what are the reasons behind it, if you ant anything improved or changed about this what would it be?

---

Originally by: Kelsin

---

Originally by: Hardin

---

My concern, as stated above, is that while some of Jade's ideas are probably welcome, taken as a whole they have the potential to be gamebreaking and seem to be driven by an idealistic view of EVE which takes not account of human nature. Do things have to be improved? - Sure. Do we need to completely transform EVE in order to do so? - I don't think so.

---

Well Hardin, is it really fair to say that your opinions and biases will be tempered by a sense of fairness and understanding of game balance, but that other candidates somehow lack that ability? The criticisms you're presenting here are so vague as to be equally applicable to you or any other candidate, but you present yourself as somehow fair-minded and rational enough that you can avoid the pitfalls of bias when others cannot.

---

Originally by: jaffer cake

---

Dude, in each of those threads you lose the argument. What you trying to prove by linking them? You act like an arrogant guy and get out-argued and then you start crying about Ad homiwhatsit attacks and begging for pity? I don't think you know much about this game you don't even know what t]interceptors are for lol

---