EVE Search - [CSM Candidate] Jade Constantine

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

[CSM Candidate] Jade Constantine

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:21:00 - [1] Eve Online is a very special game. Love it or hate it, (and sometimes both at the same time) we all acknowledge it has something unique that keeps us coming back, keeps us training those skills, evolving with the technology, fighting our virtual foes and chasing the dreams so beautifully envisioned in every fabric of this engaging and utterly ruthless MMORPG. ItÆs about the universe: itÆs big, itÆs brutal, and itÆs totally uncompromising. ItÆs filled with predators and bullies, rivals and spies, assassins, psychopaths, patriots and the occasional hero. The environment can grind ambitions to dust and send you packing with relentless, terrible cruelty; you can see your hopes broken, corporations and alliances crushed and devastated, you can witness fantastically expensive and rare spaceships burning and annihilated before your astonished eyes and the work of years undone in moments in a frenzy of betrayal and intrigue that wouldnÆt be out of place in the darkest espionage novels of the cold war. But all this matters; itÆs remembered. Because Eve is a single universe with a single history, and whether we play villains or heroes or driven individuals just trying to survive, our stories remain. Talk about Eve and you talk about Eve. Talk about the death of the Phoenix Alliance in the GNW of 2004 and you are talking about something everyone of that age lived through. Talk about the Great War and itÆs a subject with a common frame of reference for all Eve players - our characters are not lost in an endless repeating mirrored maze of shards and instances and duplicate game-worlds, they stand their place in the one universe and as they succeed or fail they leave their mark in the virtual history. To play Eve is to live Eve and experience the aggregate accomplishment of a hundred thousand players who have come and gone in this same universe before you. Eve is unique amongst online games; a single virtual world where consequence and reputation are universal and accomplishment is absolute. ItÆs a rare treasure and compelling vision, and truly something worth fighting to preserve. The State of the Art My favourite review of Eve online in any medium remains the brief quote from PCGamer Magazine that is repeated each month in the top games column: ôA slow burning, complex and utterly beautiful MMORPG. Live that Iain M. Banks dream.ö Those words have always done an excellent job of summing up for me the player what I see in the game of Eve Online and how I describe my hobby to non-gamers and people fascinated by this strange universe where I play a green-haired pseudo-French revolutionary back-lit by a demonic red glow of shipboard machinery. I grew up with Iain M. Banks, you see; I read his great reinvention of the golden age space opera novel Consider Phlebas when I first started university and was smitten by the visions of vast star-faring civilizations at war with energies putting the suns to shame and wasting planets and space stations and vast fleets of warships in a bitter ideological war for domination. As a novel it works on so many levels: it has a sense of wonder and scale and terrible devastation, it has very human protagonists, spaceship fights and flights, rogues ducking and diving beneath the notice of near-omnipotent artificial intelligences and the sense that the wider universe is shifting in the chaos of total war while the characters chase their own ambitions with single-minded energy. Eve Online is precisely that.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:22:00 - [2] As I fly JadeÆs customised warship of choice through the chaos of border systems in Providence I know that elsewhere in the single universe capital vessels are dying in sieges and traps, battleship fleets are clashing for the ambition of their captains and leaders, blockade-running smugglers are taking the wealth of 0.0 back to the core markets for profit, religious zealots are clashing with their victims, traders are falling for scams and petty intrigues, and war profiteers are counting their profits while dreaming of plans to hurt their enemies a hundred systems away with complex schemes within schemes in this interconnected universe of bitter chance and endless possibility. The universe is vast and the cast of combatants, friends, enemies and neutrals just trying to make their own way is immense. It has a sense of scale that all other games lack, but IÆve never once felt irrelevant in this setting. IÆve never lost the sense of wonder just looking at my starship in the void and wondering what can happen. Never doubted that words can persuade and spark conflict, never forgotten that the right actions at the right time can be the fulcrum of accomplishment and change the whole virtual universe for better or worse. We are tiny specks against the tapestry of stars but our characters are everything an individual yearns to be or darkly dreams of becoming, every deed has consequence, every act of violence impacts the collective balance, every betrayal can be repaid and vengeance (though rarely swift) is always a shadow rising on the windward horizon. Any Eve character can rise to found an empire (or destroy one). Any can strive to be the most famed warrior, the deadliest pirate, the most loathed betrayer, the great statesman and peacemaker or the hair-trigger protagonist of the war that destroys the ambitions and hopes of thousands united under the fragile banners of territorial pride. All we need is wit and will (and a little luck) and some sweet words of persuasion and the universe of Eve opens up before us. Just like the characters in ôConsider Phlebasö weÆll be immortalised with our shining moments of choice in the heart of the political maelstrom without. A lot of words, I admit. But then what less does one say about a game thatÆs kept the interest for five years and still occupies an iron grip on gaming choice and preference? Truth is Eve is a seductive and addictive mistress with alluring smile and flashing eyes and a cruelty beneath the surface of her moods like rocks beneath the sometimes placid ocean. ItÆs not just about numbers and nerfing and units and balancing. ItÆs not about whether we side with pirates or mission runners, or traders, or tech2 cartels or whatnot. Its not about whether we give advantages to side X,Y,Z in whatever war is raging. And itÆs not a popularity contest between counterstrike players dueling rapid-fire frags in the neon glow of their monitor screens. No, itÆs deeper than that. Eve is a game but itÆs also a passion and a place of shared community, imagination and enjoyment. The other players in your corporation or alliance, those names in text or voices in Ventrilo, come to mean a lot more than the players of other games that came and went and got sequels and burned out their licenses while Eve was still maturing and evolving. Eve continues and the friendships and camaraderie we make in this game mean something. WeÆre sharing something special; weÆre building a community and the trust and friendships that come from teamwork, mutual interest and collective imagination.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:23:00 - [3] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 28/04/2008 21:23:40 The Council of Stellar Management With this document IÆm hoping to seduce you into voting for me to represent the Eve community on the founding Council of Stellar Management (CSM). ItÆs an important position and this inaugural council is going to be under the spotlight for its manner, its own accomplishments and its general approach to the task at hand. ItÆs going to be highly controversial in some ways (we all know this), there are going to be debates and arguments, and there are a lot of improvements that need making. WeÆre going to see big alliances dominate the proceedings on pure number base; weÆre going to see special interest groups arguing for radical re-balancing of core mechanics, weÆll see cults of the personality and superstars arise in the player domain and weÆre going to see CCP publicise the new oversight and capitalise on player involvement to improve tarnished aspects of their reputation. Some good some bad, some scandal and some genuine improvements are possible, but ultimately we have an opportunity here to find a voice and take responsibility for pushing the game of Eve in the directions we want to see it go, and thatÆs got to be a good thing. But what I want to make sure is that in all the politics and alliance interest and ego-polishing there is a representation for the player who, like me, truly loves that ôIain M. Banks dreamö and finds the imaginative potential of this gorgeous single server environment as strong today as it ever was five years ago and will fight with every breath for the continuation and enhancement of that splendid vision. I love the dark and dangerous universe with an adult twist of nihilism and intrigue; I adore the battlefields strewn with the wrecks of a thousand ships and the sweet taste of victory made sweeter yet for the memory of defeats in times before. Eve is a game where a player can make a name and reputation and rise from obscurity to command the attention and notice of the universe. I did it once and it was the greatest ride of my gaming life. Now I want to make sure that every new player starting out in this game has the same potential and opportunities I had and that Eve continues to be the truly open sandbox environment where everything is possible for the reckless and the wise alike. Apologies then for the long preamble but I thought it best we make sure a compatibility of imagination, vision and outlook exists before we get into the nitty-gritty of the policies and interests IÆll be presenting below. If youÆve come with me this far then I think we might be onto something, you and I; maybe we wonÆt agree on everything (who does?) but you will at least understand why IÆm going to say the things I do below and all IÆd ask is that you think a while with an open mind and cast your vote with conscience after considering all the options and possibilities before you. And I wonÆt be offended if the vision of chaos and destruction scares you a little bit, but really, donÆt we all enjoy being scared from time to time? CSM Policy Advocacy LetÆs get something clear from the beginning. IÆm not going to promise to be all things to all people, other candidates will do that and if you like the safety-blanket of a universal ôtrust me IÆve got all your best interests at heartö message you might not find my politics entirely to your taste. I have enthusiasms and interests of my own you see; I have things I care about and wish to see improved and promoted within the environment of Eve Online. I imagine that makes me an unwise politician in the context of the CSM elections but it does at least ensure that you are going to see well in advance exactly what you are going to be getting from my candidacy if you choose to trust me your vote. So here goes:
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:25:00 - [4] Enhancing Dynamism in 0.0 Space Warfare There is a problem with the current empire building and endgame conflict engine in Eve. POS structures for Sovereignty, the prevalence of Cyno Jammers strangling open space and nullifying entire ship classes, the danger of indestructible outpost spam in 0.0 cheapening the business (and risk) of establishing territorial roots. At present, the speed of territorial conquest in 0.0 has slowed to a crawl with dynamics akin to the trench warfare of WW1 with fixed positions and machine gun nests dominating the landscape. Its stopped being fun, its stopped being accessible, its become a typical MMORPG grind which is a cardinal sin for a game that was designed from the ground up to avoid typical boring grind gameplay in its fluid sandbox environment. The art and vision of Eve the epic space opera has been damaged by the introduction of empire-building elements prioritizing defence and safety and consequence-free building in what is supposed to be the most hazardous environment in the game universe. The dark and dangerous 0.0 void where all can be lost to war and fate has changed to ôSim-City-in-spaceö where all you need to defend your interests is to keep towers fuelled 24/7 and ensure your cyno jammer is anchored at the nastiest POS tower configuration possible. Small scale territorial conflict is not practical anymore since the defence advantage is so vast that massive assets are required to assault even the smallest 0.0 landholders. In essence, the balance between attack and defence has gone wrong and needs to be adjusted. 1. The cyno jammer module needs to be addressed urgently. They should never be the kind of starbase module that one anchors in each system in 0.0, flicks the on-switch, and never needs to worry about maintenance or priority ever again. At the moment the game encourages each alliance to anchor these things everywhere and in doing so encourages precisely the kind of massive numerical fleet warfare that the game infrastructure clearly cannot handle. Nobody enjoys laggy blob warfare. But that is exactly the kind of fighting required to make any kind of progress against the ubiquitous cyno jammer defended pocket empires across the map right now. For Eve to reach its beautiful potential as a space-conflict simulator with grand fleets clashing in vital engagements across multiple fronts in 0.0 as empires rise and fall the developers need to take a serious look at the implications of all POS technology in general and the jump-blocking cyno jammer module as an item of the highest priority. 2. Make outposts vulnerable to destruction. For some this is a taboo subject. The idea that a multi-billion ISK investment in fixed infrastructure in 0.0 should be destroyable in some fashion frankly horrifies some residents of nullsec and the alliances there, but really, isnÆt it contrary to EveÆs nature that its possible to build something in open space and have it stand as an indestructible monument forever more? Where is the accomplishment in building a station if it cannot be destroyed if your forces are defeated? Where is the drama and the grandeur of a desperate defence if the aggressors cannot burn and pillage your possessions and obliterate your dreams in a cataclysm of fire and fury?
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:26:00 - [5] And, less poetically û what happens to Eve when all of 0.0 is covered in indestructible outposts at some point in the future? When there are so many of these structures that nobody considers them worth defending and they remain as empty shells bereft of purpose or emotional meaning. My point is that for something to have value, it has to have vulnerability û to build and maintain an outpost should be an accomplishment and defending such things should be a major endeavour and never involve ôletÆs go to empire and bore the aggressors and return and put up more towers to get it back in 3 monthsÆ time when theyÆve gone away again.ö Players risk more total ISK loss in the hull and fittings of Motherships and Titans, the game of Eve doesnÆt need indestructible capture the flag gameplay in 0.0 space. 3. Introduce competitive Mobile Infrastructure. The balance of power in 0.0 has tipped wildly in favour of the fixed territorial paradigm. All technology and advantages encourage (and necessitate) the establishment of static base building and sovereignty maintenance. This forces players through one single set of hoops if they want to reach the highest tech levels and end content for the game. The problem is that it damages EveÆs original vision as a player-led creative sandbox for open experimentation and diversity of playstyles. Sure, we need territorial empires and tyrants and star bases and exclusion zones, but they are just one part of the ecosystem - they should never be the only option. Where are the cloaked pirate bases? The mobile refineries? The guerrilla resistance movements operating from converted freighters in enemy space? Smugglers and blockade runners, spies and assassins, rogue traders and loners scraping an existence from the underbelly of these empires? There should be advantages for the fixed power, but there should be options and alternatives for the mobile force. A balance needs to be rediscovered and the high level content options for Eve need to be widened and made more diverse to maintain its appeal for existing and new players. Owning sovereignty 4 and an invulnerable outpost should not be the universal endgame for every organisation in Eve. 4. Encourage diversity in PVP engagement opportunity. Deriving from all the above. The challenge for the CSM and game direction in general is how to raise the beautiful PVP combat aspect of Eve Online from its current doldrums to a new height of variety and enjoyable opportunity. Combat in 0.0 currently is about POS warfare and siege or securing gates during POS siege. There really isnÆt anything else of value to attack or defend. The stated intention of delivering midrange targets for small unit PVP needs to be revisited and made to work this time. Infrastructure items need removed from POS gun proximity û POS themselves need re-working from the ôSwiss Army Knifeö tool they are now to things with variety and specialisation. Moon mining Towers should not be as difficult to attack as Sovereignty claiming defence towers. Elements in the defence grid like system scanners, jump bridges and cyno jammers should be vulnerable structures in their own right û not simply modules spammed out within the universal aegis of the ubiquitous ôDeath Star POSö.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:27:00 - [6] New environments and precious items need to be found and secured, in-game hacking of defensive objects, counter-siege deployable objects (anti cyno jammers!), forward bases, warp range standoff batteries; even using asteroids as weapons! Basically, we need more places and environments in which to fight and reasons to do the fighting there. Diversity and variety are the spice of life AND Eve combat in 0.0. Give players a diversity of targets and multiple objectives in war and skirmish and youÆll make valuable progress in the fight to reduce dependence on blob-warfare. Promoting improvement and variety in Empire Warfare While the 0.0 dynamic in conflict has benefited from a vast amount of developer attention over the years, the core mechanics of empire war and the conflicts and smaller battles between predators and vigilantes on the verges of policed space has received virtually none. At core, these tiny struggles between pirate and victim, between small corporations fighting turf wars over lowsec assets and trading slights, these conflicts in empire between rivals and bounty hunters searching for profit in the slaying of illegalÆs are every bit as important as the vast games of empires raging in deep 0.0. These conflicts are the content that attract and maintain new players and enrich the environment for all of us. Not every Eve player has the desire or ambition to fight vast fleet battles; some prefer their PVP in small unit scale, some like the thrill of lone hunting, and there is a whole ecology of stainless steel rats living in the wainscoting of EveÆs society between the safe zones of core empire and the high-pressure sovereignty war of player-controlled 0.0. And this is not mere minority interest; this is a major area of the game for many, many people. Not everyone who plays Eve is a 24/7 alliance warrior in it for the alarm clock POS sieges and black-screen lag clashes for the honour of the supreme commander of their coalition. Empire conflict is important and it needs advocacy at the CSM to ensure it gets the attention and developer support it needs to reach real potential. 1. Piracy, bounties and transferable kill rights. There are some very simple but compelling ideas doing the circuits of the Eve Ideas and Suggestions forums. Allowing surrender for victims (powering down of weapons), allowing pirates to shoot to ôdisableö (ie disable a ship rather than destroying it when it runs out of structure); both great ideas, that would immeasurably enrich that career choice. And as for transferable kill rights - itÆs a brilliant concept. If you get killed by an illegal in empire, you get a kill right on the aggressor. Why shouldnÆt you be able to sell that kill right to a 3rd party ôbounty hunterö (who must be +sec status)?
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:27:00 - [7] LetÆs go a step further and allow the sold killright to function as a special kind of location agent that lets the bounty hunter track down the illegal and take a shot to deliver a form of justice to the victim. ItÆs neat, itÆs simple, and it brings another form of PVP to the game and will make Eve more exciting for pirates and bounty hunters both. (Oh yes, and make it so bounty can only be collected by the person who owns the kill right. No more self-termination by alts for profit.) Successful completion of a kill right contract by an accredited hunter gets LPs from Concord and can buy special, pretty things from the LP shop. ThatÆs right, missions that trigger PVP û why not? ItÆs this kind of idea we should be exploring to widen the appeal of the game and break the obsession/domination of massive slug fests only. 2. Enhanced corporate strife, open mercenary contracts. The war-dec system in Eve is pretty ancient now and a very blunt stick. ItÆs largely unchanged since the beginning of the game five years ago. One side picks a target, votes or selects the enemy, pays the fee and corporate / alliance warfare begins. There are no win conditions save ôblowing up shipsö / ôoutlasting the endurance of declarerö û no real structure, no penalty for doing hideously badly or award for doing well. At the minimum we could do with some kind of corporate / alliance statistic showing their ratio of wins / losses / ship tonnage / efficiency just to know who was really terrible at conflict and who did well (very important for merc corporationsÆ credibility). But what we really need are terms of the fighting û is it to kill ships? Is it to drive the target from XYZ system? Is it to reduce target membership? Is it to destroy a POS? Is it to protect / nullify somebody elseÆs wardec? There needs to be some variety and there needs to be a penalty for failing in the objective. I remember five years ago noticing the ôsurrenderö option in the war panel and wondering what the cost was going to be for ôlosingö a war. That question needs to be revisited and itÆs something we all need to ask and consider. Plus, when a victim corporation has an incoming wardec shouldnÆt they be able to automatically advertise for help by publishing the plea on a roster of requests for aid that mercenary corporations could answer and accept as a binding contract? The mercenaries get involved and automatically get paid a bounty for each vessel of particular type from a fund that the victim corporation establishes at point of bid. Establish a proper game structure for mercenary work, Eve is the ideal environment for this. I would like to see proper ranking tables and in-game adverts for mercenary agencies trading on their reputation and past accomplishment. Endless development time has gone into POS mechanics; letÆs have some devoted to encouraging the spread of player-led professions with actual player on player action rather than beating the dead horse of player on POS grinding.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:28:00 - [8] 3. Fix black ops technology! ItÆs a great idea on paper; weÆve had covert frigates, cloaking, light raiding cruisers and now jump capable stealth Battleships that can make miniature jump-portals for mobile forces to use to jump behind the lines of sitting territorial powers. Sounds really exciting, guerrilla ops, tense manoeuvre with cloaks and secret jumps and espionage but the potential has suffered with a sloppy deployment and the universal spam of cyno-jammers (those things again) on most approaches to 0.0 from Empire. Eve is a game of intrigue and spying and all kinds of information and psyops warfare, lets ensure that technology to support this career choice is correctly implemented and available to the player base as a valid and entirely playable option. I believe the field of black-ops should include methods of ôhackingö/disabling player structures, planting tracking devices, listening bugs, and making the business of espionage less ômetaö and more in-game technology with systems, modules and skills produced to empower and balance such endeavors. The current crop of Black Operations Battleships represent a very interesting game development that could deliver variety in play style and great opportunities for new conflict but theyÆve been introduced sloppily without properly understanding the reality in game at the moment and they need attention so they can support an appropriately sneaky play-choice for players wishing to specialise in battlefield recon and special operations in the Eve universe. I think most agree at the minimum covert cyno-fields need to be immune to conventional cyno-jammers, but in addition these ships need increased jump range (to allow them to traverse the long real-space ôpirate jumpsö between regions) and they certainly need radically increased cargo bays to store the fuel needed to jump themselves and other vessels into the combat zone. 4. Ensure faction warfare is done right. This is the big one. ItÆs been promised for years, the great hope of the roleplay community post-Aurora and something that could be absolutely brilliant for everybody who seeks roleplay conflict and PVP entertainment in empire. The concept at core: weÆre playing in a living universe where NPC empires (Amarr, Matari, Gallente, Caldari and other minor factions) are intriguing, plotting, scheming and ultimately fighting each other. Our characters, corporations, and alliances develop standings and loyalties for one side or another through the process of game activities (agents and such) and could get embroiled in actual conflict with player entities supporting the rival powers. Faction warfare promises actual game consequence for these conflicts and reasons for people to get involved in RP campaigns between the NPC powers. Maybe the Federation moves on the State and tries to take over a border region, thus evicting all those lovely level 4 agents the Caldari fans were farming for years? WouldnÆt that convince the Caldari agent runners to get involved with the fight and confront the Gallante loyalists and runners in a pitched battle to defend their interests? Is it something anyone could get involved in? Maybe external corps and alliances sign up for one side or another and fight all opponents in free sanctioned war decs and at the end of the month the side that inflicts the most casualties gets awarded the win! Real game changes happen! War heroes and combat aces are made; medals get handed out - rare faction kit to the victorious corps! Everyone cheers! Maybe itÆs a dream, but itÆs a good dream and itÆs something the CSM definitely needs to encourage because itÆs precisely this kind of thing that Eve needs to remain fresh and competitive and healthy in the wider game market.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:29:00 - [9] Fleet Battle Lag and Blob Warfare So I think by now youÆll be getting the point of my candidacy. These are the things I care about and IÆm convinced that arguing for increased developer priority in these areas will improve the game and enrich the game experience for everyone. IÆm not one of these people that believe there will ever be a silver bullet lag solution that miraculously solves the problem of blob warfare and makes 1000 ship battles run with silky smooth responsiveness. I believe the ôsolutionö to lag is breaking down conflict opportunities into smaller theatres û IÆve played and enjoyed Eve combat for almost five years now and to my eyes and judgement the game simply works better at certain scales than others. This is my conviction and itÆs what IÆll be arguing for û so I guess that means IÆm an anti-blobwar candidate as well as anarchist outpost destroyer! But thatÆs my position, and itÆs the platform IÆm going to be standing on for the CSM elections. I think we should be improving the game by adding new things and more variety and enriching the possible career options for new and existing players in smaller corporations and alliances. I think itÆs a mistake to keep banging our heads against the wall of lag cures while we do nothing to practically discourage massive uberblobbing in 0.0 combat. If you make mechanics that force people to blob they will blob. The solution is almost childishly simple û change those mechanics so players donÆt have to blob to compete, introduce realistic intermediate objectives and spread out the field of combat: What if taking down a station took a simultaneous assault by an attacking force on several different ôpower coresö at different places in the system (not at deathstar POS!) In one move youÆd have split up one big blob fight at X point into multiple smaller battles across a variety of objectives. The attacking and defending commanders would have to split up their forces into genuine ôwingsö and allocate resources intelligently. The point is that we should be looking at ways of breaking down the advantage of blob-warfare as a disincentive for alliances choosing it as their preferred option in waging wars. At the moment if you have greater numbers there is no reason not to blob out your enemy - the lag and damaged module response time of the big ôblob fightö generally removes all player skill from the environment and turns it to simple weight of numbers and attrition and this is really not anything CCP should be encouraging. Virtually all ôcleverö technologies die pointlessly in the lag environment and render their presence irrelevant, and this really is the biggest challenge to the state of the pvp game in Eve at the current time. Case in point the ôbomberö role for Stealth Bombers - conceived as an anti-blob weapon but its really not going to work when the incoming paper thin bombers are going to be zapped before they load the grid to no appreciable effect. The developers need to ask themselves a question à ôis the best defense to this technology going to be to put more ships on grid and produce lag reducing the ability for anyone to do anything clever?ö If the answer is ôyesö then its back to the drawing board. Eve needs more technology (vessels/weapons) that actually punish the fleet blob cruelly and without mercy. How about putting the bomb warheads on a cruise missile that can fly at warp speed for 1AU and explode against an object in space with an area effect? Put 200 ships round a gate and youÆre really going to be hurting when warp-speed cruise missile bombs start exploding on that gate. It punishes the defender for blobbing for a change and that is precisely what is needed.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:30:00 - [10] So lets think seriously about the implications of new technology and battlefield weapons and positively discriminate in favor of ideas that break up the blob, that drive commanders to make more intelligent decisions and split up their forces to achieve multiple simultaneous objectives and give a role back to smaller corporations and groups of skilled and daring players. The Titan was a great anti-blob concept for example. Doomsday weapon destroying hundreds of ships with one shot û superb! It actually encouraged mixed fleets, lighter ships that could escape the blast, better scouting, splitting groups û added a big risk to static gate camping and thoughtless blobbing. It was something that meant the commander had to be aware of the danger of a tactical nuke on the battlefield and avoid the unrealistic ôuberblobö that had previously haunted the game. But combine that with ridiculously simple to deploy and maintain cyno jammer module (that requires truly massive blob of ships to destroy at powerful deathstar POS) in an environment where only one side is going to have capital ships in the fight and everyone knows exactly when and where the fight is going to be and you have a terrible mess. You have gameplay priorities at conflict with themselves and utter contradiction of purpose in reducing blob-warfare. CanÆt blame the players for blobbing up when itÆs the only way to remove a module that prevents them bringing in siege ships and getting an even fight. And you canÆt blame the players for opting out of territorial warfare when they are forced to blob in an environment when the anti-blob doomsday weapon is king. Somewhere along the road there needs to be some common sense and a general rationalization of the problem with territorial warfare in Eve so that improvements can be made to the clear benefit of all. It doesnÆt need tinkering with these things in isolation; it needs clear and rational plan with the objective of reducing the necessity for lag-inducing blob-fighting while increasing the speed, enjoyment, and opportunity for player interaction in the territorial conflict model. ItÆs a tall order and a complex task. And end of the day you the electorate have the responsibility for selecting candidates whoÆll be able to make these arguments and correctly advise the developers in the choices to be made.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:31:00 - [11] Candidate Credentials So there you go, as I said IÆm not IÆm not all things to all people in this campaign. I freely admit I have a very personal interest in making Eve better through the specific policy items IÆve discussed above and IÆm not claiming to be able to represent everyone and everything else with an impartial and dispassionate reserve. What I can promise absolutely is that I love this game of Eve Online with genuine enthusiasm and if you share my desire to see it improved and enhanced in the areas IÆve discussed IÆll do my level best to make sure the developers are persuaded and debated in the right directions to make these things happen. Game Experience So to the funny bit, I imagine its possible youÆve read all that and still donÆt realise who the heck I am so IÆll give a little overview of my experience as a player of Eve Online and what IÆve spent my time doing over the years to demonstrate, if nothing else, that IÆve had the opportunity at least to understand the things IÆm talking about! I started playing Eve with the character Jade Constantine way back in 2003, a few weeks after the retail release of the game. I didnÆt play in Beta, I didnÆt even know about the game until a friend of mine convinced me to buy it and plan a corporation that could fight the system and set the universe ablaze on a diet of revolutionary zeal and free space ethics. I was intrigued, then addicted, then ended up doing exactly what was written on the back of the game and started a sequence of wars and conflicts in the interest of free trade and commerce in the player sphere of 0.0. Amusingly enough, Jade was rolled up with mining skills and more than anything I visualized her as a workers revolutionary organising against the big cartels and founding a breakaway movement of capsule pilots devoted to fighting the imperialism of the core empire and founding their own roving communities on graft and free space economics. Quite quickly the focus shifted ingame to trade in robotics and plutonium running and the corporation I founded, Jericho Fraction, became one of the earliest really serious blockade running outfits bringing rare goods with excellent profit margins from the wilds of Venal through empire to the receptive markets of Khanid and Domain for 20m ISK profit a cargo (back when that was a lot of money). Dodging pirates - most notably the famous Space Invaders - we made a lot of money just moving goods around, learned our PVP lessons through evasion tricks and misdirection, and invested wisely in funky modules to make our Bestowers the fastest industrials in space capable of evading gate camps back when instajumps hadnÆt been invented and you could still squeeze eight extruded heatsinks into an Armageddon without any hint of a stacking nerf. Eventually though the pirates got organized and the risks were increasing so I decided to join one of EveÆs first alliances and convince them from within to be freespacers in exchange for teaching them about the hallowed plutonium trade runs that were still massively profitable. This led to the first incident in a recurring theme of my Eve experience û the clash of freespace vs territorialist ethics. EveÆs first megacorporation, namely Taggart Transdimensional Industries under the notorious Randite ideologue Ragnar, had moved into the Venal alliance alongside our own Jericho Fraction and they wanted mineral rights, territorial exclusion to protect those rights, and moreover wanted to run Venal as a private fiefdom to enhance the power and prestige of Taggart itself.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:32:00 - [12] This was the archetypal big bad player-led imperialist hierarchy right in my face and I opted to destroy it. I committed myself to preparing for the fight to come, winning allies, hiring mercenaries, spies and agents; I funded allied corporations, manoeuvred, wrote press releases and readied my weapons and realized just how alive this environment felt û Eve was a fabulously compelling game, grand strategy, game of thrones, intrigue and bravery and brutal realpolitik rolled into one and I was hooked. What happened is a tale for another time, but suffice to say it propelled my character into fame and notoriety and kept her there for years to come. Other wars came and went and would conclude for me in the greatest conflict in the game to date that we called The Great Northern War that saw thousands of battleships clashing in the void of 0.0 while the politicians and heroes of the warring sides fought tooth and nail in the sphere of public relations and influence on the Eve forums for the very real advantage of foreign intervention, morale boosting and brutal political parody. What a game! Along the way IÆve changed from rebel miner to rogue trader to revolutionary ideologue and guerrilla firebrand. IÆve fought desperate battles, IÆve commanded fleets, IÆve had a loaded freighter killed by war targets in empire that I managed to forget all about! IÆve fought in empire; in 0.0; IÆve summoned fleets of frigates and deployed massed groups of dreadnaughts in desperate sieges. I fly all races of ships and consider the best defence against nerfing is to train whatever looks artificially weak at the moment (so one can only be pleasantly surprised when the balancing comes). IÆve experienced some of the best events ever run by CCP, duelled with murderous right-wingers at the Elarel Pleasure Gardens massacre, ran against trade-rivals for immense profits in the Transcranial Microcontroller craze, debated with Sisters of Eve and Mordu vessels and been condemned as a dangerous outlaw by Amarrian patriarchs and enjoyed it all. IÆve played in three Alliance Tournaments, given in-character interviews for EON, the ingame news service, third party fansites and seen my words translated into many languages and made friends around the world in the course of playing this lovely game. At the last though IÆd say my proudest accomplishment is sticking with the vision and ideal we had with the establishment of Jericho Fraction corporation at a friendÆs house in Watford almost five years ago now. We wanted to take revolutionary ethics and anarcho-capitalist free trade bias into this red in tooth and claw game universe and make ourselves famous for the deeds and accomplishment to come. We wanted to write our corporate name into the history books of the single server for all to see and live up to the claims on the back of the box. I think we probably succeeded wildly beyond those dreams and itÆs a testament to everyone thatÆs ever played a part in the story of Jericho Fraction and the Star Fraction alliance that weÆve come so far and achieved so much against dreadful odds and terrible foes to stand where we are today. So if I can promise nothing else then I promise great endurance!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:33:00 - [13] Player Notes My real name is Andrew Cruse; IÆm 39 years old, a self-employed communications and business writing professional from the south of England. IÆve had a varied education mingling sensible qualifications with the esoteric (IÆve got a MasterÆs Degree in Arthurian Literature) and in the course of earlier adventures in the realm of venture capital startups IÆve appeared on television in the guise of an expert on Internet censorship and consulted for the Gartner Group at international conferences. Though Eve was the first massively multiplayer online game I ever played, I do have a long history with social gaming and game communities, having been involved with societies in Oxford and Bangor and spending most of my adult life playing games in all shapes and sizes within my extended group of friends. ItÆs a little strange to step beyond the veil of character anonymity to the general community in this way, but hey, ultimately I imagine none of us have anything to hide and weÆre all decent normal people behind the avatars and online names. So there you go, thatÆs what you get for voting for me. Long term Eve player, loves Iain M. Banks style space opera and wants to see the drama maintained in Eve online with enhanced and brutal warfare in 0.0 and empire. IÆm not associated with any particular large player alliance ingame and consider myself independent of alliance politics and able to make my own decisions on principle and conviction. Vote Jade Constantine for exploding outposts in Eve Online! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:34:00 - [14] This is a post I'm going to reserve for links to interesting threads and general discussion items that arise during the campaign: (space reserved) CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:36:00 - [15] Anyway, all that said and done and if you chaps are still alive after reading my CSM campaign manifesto I'll be happy to answer questions about my candidacy, game interests, voting preferences and general approach to the CSM and all matters eve online in the remainder of this thread. Please keep it constructive and respectful and I'll certainly do the same. Fire away! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 21:52:00 - [16] Originally by: Serenity Steele Jade .. you edited your title out. It's an unfortunate feature of previewing an edited post before submitting. Got it thank you Serenity - I'm still busy touching up the format a bit CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 22:16:00 - [17] Originally by: Cailais Jade, Obviously as a known RP'er / immersionalist or whatever tag people want to stick on it these days I assume youre pretty interested and encouraged by the forth coming ambulation project. However... What do you think Ambulation should have thats trully interactive beyond clothes shopping and running bars? Is that all ambualtion can or will ever amount too and if not what should its final realisation be? Well it definitely needs gambling games, brutal death match fights, hi-stakes poker, cruel blood sports and semi-naked karate girls fighting for money in gallente lowsec hubs. Serious answer is content that promotes the seedier side of Eve and makes the game universe come alive. I have to admit ever since I heard about ambulation I had this secret fantasy about playing a ten billion isk sit down poker game on a soon to be exploding player outpost out in 0.0 with ISD covering the detonation and imminent bankrupcy of many of the players. (which as anyone who might have read it will recognize as close to a famous scene in Consider Phlebas.) Bars and shopping are all very well, but it needs the ability to gamble and win and lose and change the situation in the game to be meaningful as well. I don't think it would be appropriate for eve to have a combat engine that affects pod pilots though - just detracts from the nature of immortal captains with instant recloning for my taste. Maybe espionage, hacking, planting sensors on the avatars, disguise kits, listening bugs on the HQ, maybe that sort of thing would be interesting? But honestly, I think its going to going to be seedy bars in empire styles, adult-themed entertainment, hi-stakes gambling and people playing space-pool for the pink slips of their faction battleships and at the end of the day ... doesn't sound too bad CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.28 23:55:00 - [18] Originally by: Dungar Loghoth If I said I would vote for you under the condition that you reply to the question following mine in one sentence, do you think you would be able to? I'd give it a go. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 00:05:00 - [19] Destructible outposts promote genuine risk/reward dynamism in the 0.0 environment and provide a focal point to exciting war climax engagements, they would be destroyed by self destruct sequence triggered by the conqueror, defended by potential re-conquest during destruct timer to cancel the explosion, rebuilt for a discount from the ruins of the destroyed station and ôsalvageö would be in the form of hanger access in the wreck; additionally IÆd like to remove Sovereignty claims from POS and return these structures to a purely industrial function, and yes these are things IÆd advocate to the CSM if IÆm elected. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 00:23:00 - [20] Originally by: Viper **zIe Originally by: Jade Constantine Destructible outposts promote genuine risk/reward dynamism in the 0.0 environment and provide a focal point to exciting war climax engagements, they would be destroyed by self destruct sequence triggered by the conqueror, defended by potential re-conquest during destruct timer to cancel the explosion, rebuilt for a discount from the ruins of the destroyed station and ôsalvageö would be in the form of hanger access in the wreck; additionally IÆd like to remove Sovereignty claims from POS and return these structures to a purely industrial function, and yes these are things IÆd advocate to the CSM if IÆm elected. ****. Does that mean I get your vote Viper CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 00:46:00 - [21] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 29/04/2008 00:49:47 Originally by: Viper **zIe As much as I'd like to see quite a few of your points implemented ingame, I think it's a bit too early, or perhaps just the wrong time entirely, to see them worked into current game mechanics. Well ultimately for these changes to make it onto the dev schedule the community need to be in favour. If I get elected I can advocate these changes, IF the community wants them I can vote for these changes to make it on the agenda, but ultimately it will come to a discussion with CCP council. Question you need to ask yourself is are you FOR a candidate who has these interests in the game and has the kind of vision for Eve I've expressed in the manifesto. Every example and idea in the long text above is there simply to inform you how my mind and imagination and sense of game balance and development works. Its so you get a handle on how I'm likely to vote in the event I make it through the election. I'm being completely open about my interests and personal preferences here and if you like this stuff then I'd like your trust and vote. Quote: Also, do you feel there is a problem with "nanoships" currently, and what would you do to "fix" if so. I think its more a problem with Conquerable 0.0 infrastructure and defense advantage. Nano-fleets are popular/essential because any raiding force in 0.0 sovereign space is likely to get jump-bridge hot-dropped on by twice the number of defenders utilizing the rapid logistics of their POS network. This means attackers honestly can't fly anything other than Nano-raiders with any reasonable expectation of getting out of engagements that turn bad quickly. The problem is the prevalence of jump-bridges and horrible sovereignty mechanics that allow the defending sides to insta-blob large ships and hot-drop on any engaged raiders. Short answer, I don't think the nano-ships are to blame. Reduce or restrict jump bridge spam and slow down the rate that defenders can congregate on any incoming raid and you'll see more conventional gangs and fewer pure-nano fleets. I fly these things myself Viper, at the moment SF raids 0.0 almost exclusively with polycarb-fitted ships because to do otherwise is crazy - you just get bubbled and hotdropped any time you commit to a larger fight with slower ships. I'd love to be flying battleship gangs again but its not going to happen by nerfing nano - that stuff will just reduce ALL incidence of raiding playstyle not convince people to suicide vulnerable slowboats to the inevitable hotdrop. Nano-ships are expensive, vulnerable and easily countered by the appropriate counter-measures. At the moment they are niche performers in a landscape of hot-drops and jump-bridges and 0.0 blobbing. Outside of that landscape all traditional balance still applies and nano isn't a problem. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 15:16:00 - [22] Originally by: Bad Harlequin I suppose you're aware of how Horzalike you are in this context, Jade; there are several candidates I'd like to support (and will, should they be elected), but i know that if there's anyone who can be counted on to balance the MegaHugeAlliance's interests in space in favor of keeping freedom and openess in game, it'll be you; so given one vote, I give mine to you. Thank you Harlequin! Brilliant to see you back in the game and on the forums by the way. And yep, good old Horza, well if the Federation is the pro-culture and I'm profoundly anti fed nationalist it kinda makes sense. Its certainly a role I'm happy to play - and thanks a lot for your vote! Quote: Everyone hopes and wants a neutral CSM board; everyone also hopefully realizes that it's impossible to achieve fully. I think (and hope :D) you'll keep out your own issue-bias when you can, but i want some of that bias represented on the CSM. For the benefit of the big players as well as the small; few things can kill a game as quickly as massive vet-blocks getting everything they want too fast . Its an exciting and dangerous time in many ways. The wrong alliance blocs could do a lot of harm to the game and I foresee the first CSM being a defining moment for this community really. Like I've said in the manifesto - my voice is there to speak for players like me that still love this Eve dream and love the potential opportunities for cybernetic rats in the stainless steel wainscoting of overarching alliance power. Screw the end game, lets keep fighting! Quote: I hate to bring any hint of the "Local rules!" "Screw Local!" "Screw YOU!" brouhaha in here, but... when Ambulating, and no excuses about being Pod-tied into CONCORD and sensors and comms and godlike infosystems can be made: should we know who else is in station in any way? Or find out the hard way by running into them? In 0.0/lowsec with no local rules I'd say we shouldn't know who else in the station until we meet them. In empire there'd probably be a docking roster or something and concord oversight, but with these shady locations in marginal space I think the captains will want their privacy a bit. Quote: Dammit, i don't WANT some godmode knowlege of who else is in station. I want to walk down a corridor, turn a corner, and stop dead as Hardin and I come face to face, blinking for a second... Then my friend, you'll be reaching for a virtual blade or snub-nosed projectile hand cannon and be cursing the devs they said no for station combat in eve Quote: Hillarity shall ensue, oh yesssss. Damn straight. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 16:38:00 - [23] Originally by: LaVista Vista I wanna know what experience you have with industry in general. I don't do industry on my account or alts. Never have really. So speaking personally (as in have I ever done much building) nope. Most I've ever built would be a couple of cruisers, torpedoes, cap charges or something from tech1 blueprints. However, in my corporation I currently have directors who are amongst the most effective industrial producers in the game at the moment, in the tech2 market, and in the capital market. These guys really know their stuff and suffice to say I do get to hear a lot about the challenges and issues to particular elements of the production/supply/marketing process. Quote: Are you able to represent the people who care about the secondary market, for instance? Can you be a little more specific as to which secondary market elements you'd like to know about and what concerns there are please? Quote: I mean, i guess most people have high-sec characters, in order to make isk, which does something carebearish. But is the same true for you, and do you have any experience? I don't have any specific isk-making characters and as I said, have no real hands-on experience with this specialization - I generally pvp for money. When I need to know I ask people who are experts in the field. Rest assured if it comes down to voting and informed choice on such issues if very thoroughly briefed by people who do know everything there is to know about these areas. Quote: If yes, what is the most annoying thing for you, when you do these things? Well chatting to some industrialist contacts I'm hearing the following issues at the moment: Very high price tech2 dyposium moon derived components; reactor units, shield emitters etc etc. Questions about the distributing of these moons, perhaps there should new seeding of moons in lowsec perhaps? Generally feeling the distribution is currently wrong. Issues on establishing more factory/lab slots - pointed out that POS management isn't fun and some industrialists like the ship/module building game but don't want to get into POS management to enlarge slot availability. Emphasis on fun production empire's rather than baby sitting the POS tamagotchi monster. On production: some people lament the batch system of ship building output ships - questions about whether it would be possible to have things coming out of the factory in single units again. Extra skills needed: Advanced(advanced mass production) Maybe call it Industrial Empire or something + (+5 factory slots a level) same for lab operation. Basically industrialists don't like the necessity to have multiple production alts just to get enough factory build jobs running. Would much rather further specialize on existing production characters. Same for market sales, more skills beyond Tycoon wanted. Production efficiency Implants would be nice? On market "PVP". Standings based tariffs (ie if you are -10 from the buyer you pay a penalty fee, if you are neutral you get the market price, if you are +10 you get it cheaper.) that kind of thing. Just some issues I'm hearing about LaVista. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 16:45:00 - [24] Originally by: Renosha Argaron As far as im aware jade,and as good or bad as i may think your proposals are, none of them will be implemented as the whole point of the CSM candidacy is not to change any of the game mechanics, but to see that the game is being ran fairly, and so we dont get a repeat performance of GM's helping out there favourite allaince's or corps. Common misconception that Renosha and you are in quite famous company amongst those making that mistake. I've given a detailed answer to this subject already on SHC here That refers directly to the CSM PDF made available by the organizer. Brief Summary: 1. CSM reps can ask questions and make proposals to the CCP council on issues of importance to the general health and future of Eve. 2. CSM reps can vote on whether to escalate a public motion (5% electorate vote) to CCP council response. (important we get a fair and balanced CSM council to ensure that good public motions will get supported and encouraged - 5/9 rep votes needed). 3. CSM reps can and will advocate and debate in direct interaction with the CCP council in Iceland to influence official judgments and decisions on the issues raised. 4. CSM reps are responsible for communicating back the results of these motions, suggestions, questions etc, and ensuring that the eve public are engaged in process of developing the game. At no point in the founding PDF does it state these issues are solely involved with corruption investigations/internal affairs oversight, or policing GM's and CCP staff. Our prospective job as CSM reps is to watch for hot topics from the community, inspire and encourage good debate and raise popular and important topics to the CSM shortlist and refine that down for the agenda in Iceland. Face to face talks will decide the outcome of the issues and CCP undertake to give us detailed answers and feedback. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 16:46:00 - [25] Originally by: Xennith AFAIK the purpose of the CSM is to act as a layer between CCP and the players, to communicate the concerns of the playerbase to the developers, to identify good proposals and suggestions and advise CCP from the point of view of a player. That role i think fits Jade like a glove. Exactly so, (and thank you!) CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 19:42:00 - [26] Originally by: Spoon Thumb Would you still support cyno jammer mechanics and indestructable outposts if some alternative solution were to be found that allows for many more gameplay styles including your own alliance's revolutionary and/or guerilla style insurgency? Its a far wider impact than just small unit pvp consequence really. The current terrible situation with 0.0 territorial warfare affects everyone involved with it. This really isn't just small unit raiding corporations wanting to be able to destroy 0.0 holdings in an eyeblink. Under the proposals I made to illustrate the need for dynamism in space combat you'd still need to fight a significant military campaign to gain the ability to take (and thence self-destruct) an outpost. This stuff will be of the utmost significance to all sizes of alliance and territorial entity and will have a real impact on the current sprawling afk-defensive playstyle that populates 0.0. The problem at the moment is the wasteland of empty systems with more POS than players and cyno-jammers/arranged reinforcement battles, ensuring that if somebody does want to change something its going to be a laggy-dogpile battle rather than decent fleet fight. I believe eve needs destructible outposts to make 0.0 powers take their holdings seriously and apply the proper active defensive effort to make sure they can't be taken and occupied for little real meaning. Otherwise the landscape eventually gets filled with a desert of semi occupied "flags" that increase in number and blandness until nobody really cares who owns what and nobody has the defense focus or inclination to engage in serious fighting to defend them. Allow an aggressor the option of razing an outpost it takes and suddenly 0.0 becomes interesting again and powers have to make a significant commitment to defend the critical locations. Ironically some have claimed that this would lead to a situation where huge 0.0 powers would automatically destroy all the outposts of smaller powers but what it really achieves is to make anyone more circumspect in regard to overstretch and over-greedy landholdings. If you've only got a couple of outposts you'll fight with your whole fleet and focus to defend them and retake them in the self-destruct countdown if they do get taken. If you've got 100 outposts you don't really care about and the far-flung locations are attacked then sure, you'll lose them because you don't care enough. Eve is a game where commitment wins fights. Dedication brings results. A smaller corporation can achieve fantastic victories over a much larger corporation just because it has discipline, good activity, clear goals and focus. Same really on the alliance level. A bloated 2000 man alliance is comprised of any number of people at varying levels of commitment to the cause and if they are trying to defend dozens of outposts simultaneously they'll do much less well than a focused smaller alliance concentrating on just a few. At the moment the primary argument against destructible outpost concept comes from lazy large alliances that hate the idea that smaller focused groups will make them pay for their greedy land grabbing and lackluster defensive commitment with focused assaults with slash and burn objectives. Eve status quo as it is now allows these "lazy powers" to pretty much ignore the activities of smaller groups because they know "at some point in the future" they can just come back and reclaim what they have lost. Make it possible to destroy outposts and suddenly war becomes real and threat's significant - eve 0.0 changes from sim-city to civilization and gets truly dynamic again. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 21:55:00 - [27] Originally by: Skidd Chung I really like what I read on you manifesto. Although most of it sounds like a long shot, it is definitely what I would expect to change in EVE to ensure it remain fun for all. Thank you, glad you feel that way, its definitely what I'm aiming for and to demonstrate the right kind of thinking in the CSM role. Quote: 1) What is your view on Empire dwellers, specifically the mission running pilots who would not even risk isk and limb and stays in NPC corporations, do empire complexes and basically complains about 'PVPers' hassling them to 'get out more'? Or the typical 'carebear' that most PVPers tend to refer them to. People have a right to play the game in any way they choose really. If they don't want pvp its up to them. Hisec mission-running in npc corps is pretty damn safe and only suicide ganking is really going to be a threat to their way of gameplay - but is quite easily prepared for and countered. What I'd really like to see is these guys (and girls) lured into higher risk systems/low-sec and such by excitement and rewards. Not by nerfing or damaging the hi-sec experience, but just by providing more content and interesting bits and pieces in more dangerous space. I think people adjust to the pvp environment of eve at different rates and nobody says closed to possibility forever. One of Star Fraction's industrial director's hasn't pvp'ed for 4.5 years at this point but a couple of weeks ago was coming up with ship loadouts and concepts for "giving it a go" and seeing if that part of the game is fun. Thats the point, people choose their level of risk based on gameplay interest and potential profits. (Should point out that while our industrial director hasn't actively sought spaceship combat against players for most of the game, he's been dodgying pirates, blockade-running, ducking and diving while making filthy amounts of isk - its not an insulation from the rest of the server, just a way of handling your preference in interaction.) Quote: 2) Do you feel that Player run corps/alliance should have an ideal/minimum size before being able to form compared to current mechanincs that allows pilots to form corps/alliances on a whim wihout any other pilot support? Interesting question, but I'm going to say "no" there shouldn't be a restriction. If an individual pilot wants to form a corp then invest in alliance creation skills and payment just to have a flashy logo and more expensive incoming wardecs then its up to them. They need to pay a maintenance fee for the alliance and it gives them certain functionality - thats fair enough. I would however be in favor of introducing a clean up (maybe yearly check) to remove defunct corporations just to free up names and office spaces. Quote: 3) What is your view on current insurance payout mechanics and how do you think we can improve if you think something is lacking from it? I'd actually love a more dynamic insurance system that ups your premiums if you keep getting blown up and makes you pay a premium for insurance if you are low security rated. I think there is a lot that could be done with the insurance system to make it more interesting and let standings play an increased role. On the whole I don't like the minimum insurance payout either. I think it puts too much isk back into the economy from fights and Eve needs cash-sinks/fiscal impact to strip money from the economy and let pvp battles and slaughterfests in 0.0 actually reach critical dispute resolution levels (when one side literally is out of cash). Quote: 4) What is your current stance on the RMT issues in EVE including CCP's method of handling the problem? And how do you think we can improve the managements of it? I don't like RMT in the game. I think it spoils the environment and balance of play. Quote: 5) Would you support a dumbed down EVE if it can attract 50% more subscribers? Absolutely not. Eve is pretty damn successful as it is. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 22:33:00 - [28] Originally by: Kehmor It's good to see some things never change Jade I'm delighted you stuck to your ussual propaganda method of throwing a novel at any potential opposition in order to avoid any serious criticism. While I doubt I hold any true significance in your eyes you'll always be remembered by me as my first real enemy, although at the time I had no idea of Jericho Fraction's history. You were my probably my 2nd ever 1v1 pvp victory Kehmor. And I promise you back then we weren't much more seasoned than you were as a fighting corp. Pojo's Typhoon schooled us all while the war was on. I still remember our caracal duel distinctly, and I'm very glad you have stuck with the game yourself. Quote: You frequently mention eve's "sandbox" nature and seem to claim that maintaining this unique quality is of the upmost importance. However this idea of corp. "stats" surely goes against this. Let's take your example of the credibility of mercenary corporations. With their stats published to the world a huge chunk of the game is removed, namely propaganda. Fame and respect are things I feel should be worked for on all fronts. Indeed Jericho Fraction's own former and continuing fame were heavily influenced by propaganda campaigns. Well remember this stuff is going to happen in some way or another with faction warfare, there will be dynamic results based on in-game accomplishment, ships killed, LP collected, establishments nuked, widgets salvaged etc etc. Every merc corp of note at the moment runs a killboard and invites their clients to take a look at it to assess whether they are worth hiring - why shouldn't this functionality be tapped into to make a more useful war-declaration and fighting system? You are certainly right with regard to JF's early history, we were a tiny corp with a huge reputation and used PR to emphasize all victories and positively paint our defeats, the same could still be done - ultimately, you can't lie about killing ships or getting killed and not be called to task about it on the forums anyhow. You have to weigh up the current problems with the unfocused war-dec system against the benefit of hiding or occluding engagement stats I think. Quote: Let us now move on to consider the individual players taking myself as an example. My first ever war was against your own corporation, a mere few weeks into the game. I lost more ships in that month or so of war than I have in the last year or two. Do I regret it? Not at all, one of the most enjoyable times in my eve career, and certainly the most educational. It destroyed the noobish preconceptions I had about PVP and taught me to think for myself and, more importantly, outside the box. While my triumphs were few, they were each a true triumph for me atleast, and I hope you will atleast agree that I was almost always willing to fight. Absolutely you won a tonne of respect from us for engaging and fighting hard for your RP principles as Caldari Nationalists. And I'm really glad you took a positive experience from the conflict. -continued CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 22:45:00 - [29] Quote: Now let us consider the new player of today. How many would be willing to be so daring, to lose so many ships in the name of self-improvement and sheer fun if their stats were to be forever publicised to the world, their embaressing defeats highlighted to the eve community, their corporation or avatar ever a laughing stock among those who know better. Such daring rookies are few and far between as it is, should we discourage this minority with such a ruthless punishement? Well bare in mind I'm not talking about personal stats here. I'm talking about a war-system actually tracking the results of that war and leading to a result based on the actual engagements in space while its active. I'm not suggesting every pilot in eve has a public kill record that follows them around like a bad smell if they got blown up a lot as new players. This is a corporate reputation thing. Its useful for mercenaries to opt in to a public assessment of their capability to make it easier to sell their services - that would be their shop window really. Otherwise its a game mechanic thing to assess whether a war is still active and in the balance or whether one side or the other has won. We could certainly compromise on the suggestion and make the public side of conflict result listing an opt-in option that merc corps could agree to if they think its worth while for them. Other conflicts would be resolved by comparing the hidden/internal engagement stats but unless they are mercs and trading on results there'd be no reason for them to publicize these things. Quote: All I can really see this sort of change accomplishing is encouraging the already widespread paranoia of losing one's ship. Already blob's are wide spread, people take unneccesary precautions to protect their precious pixels. Bringing to light "who was really terrible" would merely further reward this type of general cowardice and reduce the enjoyment of pvp. I myself am reluctant even to use killboards because it encourages me to take the same precations in the name of "stats". Reconsider. I dunno, I can see your point on the personal/individual/character level yes. In general I agree, not every eve character should be tracked in this way and there is no purpose for the publicizing of performance on the corp/alliance level unless its a merc corp that wants these things made public as a sales technique. Of course in the bounty-hunting suggestion I link to in the op there you'd have an example of bounty hunting players listing their accomplishments on a leader board too but thats again an opt-in, profession choice, rather than a general tracker. As to people being embarrassed about losing and just playing even more carefully - well, like I said, it shouldn't be a universally reported thing for everyone. I'm primarily interested in this functionality for a) interior mechanic for deciding concord wars b) external op-in listing for professional entities and c) leader boards for Eves deadliest bounty-hunters. Flashy show-offs can certainly pursue flashy show-off PR results, but the average eve player shouldn't be "punished" with embarrassment over terrible kill figures. Anyway Kehmor, don't worry about me going all "elite-pvp" on you, I lose loads of ships and list them all on our public killboard aways. I've always considered being brave enough to keep fighting and take a bullet for the team is a much better assessment of whether I want to hire someone than absolute killboard efficiency anyways - the people with the best ratios in Eve tend to have a very boring/selfish fight style that doesn't work well in our alliance anyways. Hope this addresses your concern somewhat Kehmor. And again, very glad you're playing! And I hope you're a stone cold Cerberus Ace by now! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.29 23:11:00 - [30] Originally by: Spoon Thumb You didn't actually answer my question. I get what you're saying and I agree about the problems Hypothetically, if I did have a solution that had significant advantages over yours and fewer disadvantages or cons, solved all the problems you cite and more, would you drop your solution? I'm not really keen on playing games with arcane debating techniques Spoon Thumb. And I don't like leading questions - hence the way I chose to answer you earlier. I much prefer people to just come out and say what they think, make proposals, let us all take a look at them and give appropriate value to good ideas. Basically, just say what you think! I can't answer your question above (for example) because its a logical trap (I have to answer yes or it means I'm nuts) But I am interested in hearing your solutions to the problems of 0.0 sovereignty and overpowering defense advantage though, and if I like what I hear I'll be very happy to support your ideas and advocate them. I don't care which organization you are from, if you've got good ideas that are in the interest of dynamism in space combat I'll happily support them. Quote: What I'm really asking is are you willing to lay aside your own ideas and represent the ideas of others if they are better than yours? Edit: and argue other's points with the same vigor? Yes absolutely. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 14:32:00 - [31] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 30/04/2008 14:32:25 Well Kehmor, The thing about kill records and mercs not wanting to recruit new players û IÆm going to disagree about what makes a successful combat corporation/alliance there. Sure you can massage the stats and play with nothing but uber high skillpoint pvp ôprosö to protect your record. But, the reality of eve is that people burnout, they take breaks, they get on with their lives, they come and go and have variable playtimes available. Stats are one thing, but having an active and enthusiastic corporate environment is something else and far more useful in the long term. In Star Fraction for example we recruit relatively new players, 2-3 months in game, we put a premium on personality and select applicants we actually want to be spending time with. In the short term sure, this means our killboard stats are not as good as the Burn EdenÆs and TRI uber pvp corps out there. We sit on around 70% success rate overall and its good but not that good, but it means we are continually replacing numbers and keeping the movement strong and active. ThatÆs the long term view on playing Eve and its noticeable that JF is still around and going strong after nearly five years while any number of stats-loving ôelitesö are gone to dust and emo self-destruction. Point is kill numbers are not everything. To your question specifically maybe the merc corp sucks this up and makes it part of the PR appeal, promises activity and enthusiasm and devil-may-care hilarity rather than yawn-tastic cloaked-raven bombardment and near 100% efficiency. In terms of the merc-stats/contract efficiency IÆd say yes, by all means incorporate things like damage caused, kills per day, activity levels, things like this û its up to the merc corp to decide which aspects of its appeal it wants to promote. Re the ôbad smellö / re-rolling corps to lose early records û How about you can reset any time you like pretty much. The clients will be able to see when your records date from so if youÆve reset 3 months ago youÆll be a) relatively new, but b) will have a clean record to begin from. Again, remember this is at the corp/alliance (PR) level its not about your character specifically and being called on your entire eve record. If an industrial corp decided to change its focus and rebrand itself as a mercenary outfit after 3 years of being uber miners in Maut then its not unreasonable for those guys to publicise their results post the transition and begin their new PR history on combat engagements from the moment they choose the mercenary specialization. Re the ôpeer pressureö about public engagement stats well, first IÆm saying this is an option specifically for corps/alliance that would appear on an in-game hiring roster of Mercenaries û and would specifically track accomplishments over accepted contracts. (Random kills and nbsi wouldnÆt be relevant, just results in contracted mercenary wars). And secondly with regard to the general ôshameö at not having killboards etc. Not everyone in Eve at the moment has a public killboard. Some corps opt to keep their stuff private and that doesnÆt make them worse or less effective pvpÆers. Anybody judging x,y,z corp entity in eve on appearances alone is likely to be badly surprised sometimes. On the war-mechanics, hereÆs the basic concept: You declare war. The eve-system then tracks the results in this war (tonnage/av market value of ships/equipment blown up being the basic measure) If the overall exchange damage is > 75% or < 25% after 2 weeks (say the maximum default period) then the system is going to trigger a war end condition with either a win or lose for the attacker/defender. (If the numbers are somewhere in between war can continue). CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 14:36:00 - [32] Basically if we wardec random fat territorialist supply corp and shoot down 20 haulers for no losses in week1, and 15 haulers in week2 (with no losses) then the war is ending with a ôwinö for us at the beginning of week3. We get a victory ôboonö = x% of the target tax rate delivered to our corp wallet for example. If the fat territorialists actually brought some fighters to oppose us and the results were (we shot down 20 haulers and they downed a couple of battleships) and the overall numbers remained between 25/75% efficiency the war continues (and we have the option of continuing the pay the war bill - if we don't and the war finishes in the middle zone its a draw. No result). Whereas if they took it really seriously and hunted us like dogs and reduced our efficiency to -25% weÆd suffer a loss and involuntary penalty with the war cancelled, some kind of automatic war-reparations payout added to our alliance/corp bills. IÆd see mercenaries fit into this equation by letting them be "bought intoö somebody elseÆs wardec and join their statistics to the allied force (in order to pro-actively prevent the conflict ending with the whitewash win for the attacker) - (hence again the importance of the performance tracking for registered mercenary corps - so the defender can have an idea of exactly what they are buying) ItÆs a very rough idea, but it illustrates some thinking of where the war-dec system should be going in my opinion. CSM candidates have been asked questions about the war-dec system, are wardecÆs too expensive? What do we think about ôgriefingö wardecs û should bigger alliances cost more? Etc etc. We do need an answer on these issues and in my opinion the introduction of actual goals and penalty/reward calculations for sanctioned war-decs could add a useful balance and very interesting possibility for the future of the game. ItÆs not so much about chasing votes Kehmor, as in just thinking about problems that have been raised. If somebody asks me my opinion ôare wardec fees too extensive at the moment?ö IÆm obligated to think seriously about the answer and consider the big-picture pertaining to general conflict dynamism in Eve. I mean you can say ôyesö and advocate making them cheap but then every-wannabe empire ganker and his little dog too will wardec everybody with a freighter for ongoing free jita ganks. You can say ônoö (or even make them more expensive) and then you price younger pvpÆers and war-corps out of the equation and force them to do their fighting out of hi-sec. The true answer is that the system is too crude at the moment and could be something far more nuanced exciting. Challenge of CSM, eve electorate, CCP development team in concert is to express precisely what that ôsomethingö should be and agree its shape and roll-out. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 15:02:00 - [33] Okay then Spoon, First thing I have to say is that while my gut feeling remains that even Sovereignty 1 from POS is wrong, I do think the idea of general attackable infrastructure items away from the POS guns and thereby valid targets for raiding and conflict has some merit. That though said though, why not just make it about planets? Make sovereignty about putting orbital facilities (headquarters, administrative hubs, propaganda centres and such) in the orbits above planets and have the actual sovereignty of a system determined by the collective loyalty of the planetary population. Let both sides influence this by blowing up/establishing orbital facilities and dropping trade goods and equipment down to the planetary population (luxuries and flash grav vehicles to bribe them, guns and bombs and nerve gas to increase instability). Make the business of Sovereignty about blockade running, interdiction and generally influencing the simulated politics in the system. (ThatÆs all a bit blue sky and planetary environment-tastic but it would be a way of simulating sovereignty without POS.) And thatÆs a key point I keep coming back too Spoon-thumb. I think Sovereignty from POS is the greatest single problem that links all other 0.0 problems with dynamism. They are blob-makers. They are the things you HAVE to hit if you want to cause lasting damage and conquest or nullify conquest and the nature of the things makes warfare boring and blob-tastic. Hard to shoot down, impossible to destroy in one sitting, reinforcement timer means you have no initiative and will have to fight the collective war-blob of the defenders (and every other nap member) in order to destroy it. ItÆs a concept that hugely damages the war-simulation in 0.0, the whole ôreinforcement timerö paradigm has had a terrible effect and these are the real underlying issues. Now I like some of your bullets, the sliding scale is good, its nice for industrialists to have something to build, its good to have intermediate objectives for small/medium gangs to hit. But without actually dealing with the problem of POS being the sovereignty claimers at core (youÆd still have to destroy / outspam all POS in an outpost system to take the outpost) you havenÆt really dealt with the core issue. Re tactical environments û definitely, I love the concept and it would really help differentiate terrain and engagement variety. Callais made a really good post on the subject in my ôremoving local / discussion thread.ö here In conclusion while there are good ideas there Spoonthumb, I still think you havenÆt tackled the basic problem of POS/Sovereignty role in 0.0 wars. These things are a strong disincentive to a dynamic environment û they promote forced alarm-clock blobbing and a two-speed culture in 0.0 (caps/everything else). As a concept they just donÆt work. Ultimately having a nuanced system for increased sovereignty levels is a pretty good idea, but if the foundation level is still about POS spamming, you have the same old problem for the attacker in that theyÆve got to destroy or outspam the enemy POS network to attack the Outposts. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 16:27:00 - [34] Originally by: xOm3gAx Just wanted to let you know you have my support Jade. I've taken the time to read through many of your posts in the past and more recently with your CSM candidacy and i must say more often than not i agree with you. You have a good grasp of how things really are in eve and what the true causes of many of the problems this game has. All that being said you officially have my endorsement and will have my vote when the time comes. Thank you very much for your endorsement. Its very gratifying to see people taking a deep interest in these issues and looking at the big picture for the future of the game. I think its why it was very important to express the whole scope of opinions and general candidate understanding of current gameplay issues; the Eve electorate really needs to know who its voting for and to have faith and confidence in the vision, passion, and general fellow-gamer insight into these concerns on the CSM. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 17:46:00 - [35] Originally by: Big Bossu 1) capital fleets logging off when in combat (disappearing in 15 minutes) 2) Battleships logging off at jump in and disappearing in 60s Is that an issue? 1) becomes an issue with uber tanks that can shrug off damage for 15 minutes definitely. I know full well that expensively-fitted Amarrian Carriers and Motherships can pretty much achieve this with triage/uber bonuses and simply disappear if things look dodgy. Much more a potential problem in the small gang/pirating/lowsec hot-drop environment too because likely enemies just don't have a dps on hand to kill them in the time limit. Longer aggression timers on bigger ship hulls? (maybe 30mins for cap ships). Its annoying I understand that you might have to spend a bit longer cloaked on disengage before you can log off a capital ship, but might be a price worth paying to counter logoffski in fleet combats and skirmishes. 2) Is just rubbish really. It shouldn't happen. I guess one fix might be counting bubbles as "aggression" against an incoming ship (even while cloaked) so that its impossible to simply do the log off and disappear in 60 secs trick. I can imagine that being a tricky programming issue though so I'm very open to suggestions on this. But the principle is clear, I think its a nasty little cheat/marginal exploit to do the log-off at jump-in while cloaked and subvert the aggression timer. To which (on this general subject) I'll add another peeve based on timers and thats the deaggression/redock timer. Here's the thing, we've been through multiple iterations of ship hit-point boasts and buffs. Ships today are 2-3 times harder to kill than they were a few years ago. But redock/jump timers are the same as they ever were. This means that aggression/dock/undock "games" are more common and powerful than they should be and realistically this is a very easy fix and something I'd definitely like to see dealt with. When 0.0 fighting becomes about dock/undock games with fat tanked ships leaving the bay, shooting off some rounds and then de-agressing to dock again seconds after there is a problem. It encourages overwhelming force/hot-drops as only way of killing in time and is a blob attractor as a result. Cheesy tactics like these need clear fixes and its not unreasonable to increase the dock/jump timers in line with the hit point buffs that all ships have received in my opinion. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.04.30 23:39:00 - [36] Originally by: Proxay http://macrochan.org/source/5/V/5VBONAMN5DIMRPJSNHZ5QIHZA6WQ5FJL.jpeg You've got my vote. Thank you Proxay, and I love the image too! Much appreciated CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.01 14:05:00 - [37] Probably best to avoid the big quote match technique Ikar, since you are asking a lot of questions its much more space efficient to present as you have done. IÆll respond in the same vein: 1. Nano-ships, I disagree obviously on your view of the ôbasic premiseö of 0.0 warfare informing your conclusion that nano-ships are primarily valued for long-range movement and not escaping hot-dropped blobs from the jump-bridge. I fly nano-ships, I fight nano-ships, IÆve led nano-fleets, IÆve fought nano-fleets, I commanded nano-fleets against ôthe blobö and I know where there strengths and weaknesses are Ikar. I would certainly say that I have more than enough familiarity with 0.0 environment and living û IÆve been fighting the good fight in 0.0 for almost five years now and have seen pretty much everything there is to see out there. 2. You are incorrect on both counts, Destructible outposts are part of a general eight point view of how Eve combat can be enhanced, made more dynamic and exciting for all Eve players. Simplifying infrastructure? Not sure what you mean by this. With regards again to my experience in Eve, IÆve commanded attacks on sovereignty POS, IÆve been heavily involved in defensive actions for Sovereignty POS, IÆve looked into the minutiae of these things, IÆve played against them, IÆve seen the consequence of the current balance. Yes I do think smaller gangs should be able to inflict fiscal damage on the space infrastructure of player led space empires. Whether that damage is significant is in the eyes of the defender. Yes I believe risk/reward equation is very firmly established and no I donÆt agree with your premise that making items of infrastructure vulnerable to raiders would be unbalanced. 2b. No I donÆt agree with your premise. See the following discussion thread for detailed discussion on the destructible outpost issue Ikar (or if you wish, feel free to begin a thread in this forum and weÆll revisit the issues with every candidate having an opportunity to respond and comment). Yes I certainly feel IÆve given a great deal of time hearing and discussing the views of others on this issue. If you read through the linked thread youÆll see the evolution of the concept, compromise suggestions, and actually a decent resolution which had Hardin and I pretty close to agreement on the implementation of a destructible outpost proposal. I think this stands a good example of how such matters can be debated to good outcome in council. 3. I would say my broad Eve experience is capable of representing a vision for the common good of the game. The manifesto in the OP for this thread is about what Eve is and can be, and what it represents to the players. Speaking of minorities is a bit nonsensical really, most players in Eve play in Empire, run missions, play the market, trade and socialize. Does this mean 0.0 is a minority and shouldnÆt be represented? And by the same measure does one career specialty ôempire managementö automatically need more focus than another ôroving pvpö? The answer is that every interest is important but the most critical element to address is the general health and dynamism of the game. When things become too static and dry then the excitement fades away and imagination suffers. Its generally accepted by most candidates for CSM (and IÆd say a majority of the 0.0 population) that there are serious problems with 0.0 warfare, with POS, with Jump Bridges, with Cyno Jammers, and with the prevalence of Capital Ship blobbing without the engagement variety to actually tempt them into losses. Ultimately it would be more reasonable for you to categorize me as a progressive change candidate, who wants to improve the balance in 0.0 for the benefit of all playstyles there. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.01 14:08:00 - [38] 4. Off-grid AOE weaponry (combined with a degree of vulnerability in warp out from launch sites while bombardment continues) has the effect of adding another battlefield to the engagement where scanned targets can draw off elements of both forces. Gate camping blob needs to be aware of the threat from stand-off elements of the aggressor, once this starts happening mobility and reaction time becomes important and fleet battles will break down to smaller groups. Re the POS warfare angle, itÆs not really relevant û since the weaponry envisaged is too expensive to be employed against POS shields/structures/cap ships and if deployed by defenders against attacking sub cap ships would create additional battlegrounds and focus as per the gate battle. Yes I do believe that off-grid weaponry has a place in Eve, and its an important place because itÆll help split up the ubiquitous single dog-pile engagement into separate skirmishes. IÆm also a strong believer that its about time we got off-grid POS capable weapons (like deployable siege guns) that would be expensive (need defending) and would give attackers an alternative to frontal assault on POS shields - -these would be artillery pieces that would again create alternative battle grounds away from POS for engagement variety. 5. On local, no I donÆt think removing local channel would unbalance conflict/evasion mechanic in 0.0 as long as the reduction of local was coupled with an improvement in scanner functionality and dropping of map features that provide a godmode overview of system statistics. Local Discussion and Comment 6. On Titans, I think the problem with Titans is their combination with Cyno-Jammers and critical reinforcement battles that force both sides to blob assets at a single time and place to attack a single module initially, this means that mobility and initiative is surrendered and the TitanÆs attack strength is over emphasised. At the moment this combination IS detrimental to Eve. I think Titans are far less of a problem to other kinds of warfare and do represent an decent risk/reward scenario for their effectiveness. Case in point a couple of weeks ago I had an Avatar class titan hot drop onto one of my gangs in PF system while we were trying to kill Tyrrax Thork's Carrier. The Avatar arrived, triggered its weapon and most of my gang had plenty of time to activate warp drives and escape, some were adequately tanked, a couple of exploded. For the risk and vulnerability of the Titan in situ I felt that was a fair result. So again, I think the problem with Titans is directly in combination with current Broken POS/Sovereignty tools and mechanics, not as a ship in their own right. Hope these answers help Ikar. All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.01 23:22:00 - [39] Okay Ikar, response to the response, 1. IÆm going to have to disagree with you on your conclusions re: nanoships, as IÆve said IÆve played nano-ships, IÆve fought against against nano-ships, there are significant disadvantages to nano-gangs and it is possible to exploit these with a little planning and tactical awareness. I disagree with your premise that they are ôtoo versatileö they do one thing well; maintain mobility and ability to disengage when things go south. I also disagree with your assertion that POS/Sovereignty structural influence has nothing to do with nano-ship choice. If we didnÆt have to contend with instant reinforcement via jump-bridge in sovereign space there would be much greater variety in gang-composition choice. 2. IÆm going to disagree with your assessment of my experience of 0.0 combat of course, thatÆs obvious. IÆm going to point you at the discussion thread on the subject of Destructible outposts again since you still seem to be unsure about the issue. Re ôwinning the gameö û its irrelevant really, what is important is the general health of the game and most sensible people hold that POS/Sovereignty and the current status quo needs urgent attention. 3. Re the example given, the arriving gang have enhanced scanning tools that show the stand-off bomber gang, scouts transfer tactical awareness of the situation and incoming heavy gang break in different directions to align out of the bubble. This reduces vulnerability to AOE weaponry and fast attacking units begin to get solutions on the stand-off units while the battlefield breaks into multiple linked objectives. 4. Its not about my gameplay, its about gameplay that benefits the entire server, and I am convinced that enhanced combat dynamism and engagement variety achieves this objective nicely. 5. Ultimately Ikar, we all have our specialities and focus, IÆve done a lot more attacking 0.0 infrastructure than you have thatÆs true, but weÆre talking about general improvements to the territorial warfare system in Eve online that addresses current failings and lag-inducing dog-pile fleet battles that nobody really enjoys. Ultimately the voters are going to need to read the material on the subject and understand the big picture of whatÆs good for combat variety and enhanced conflict dynamism. Anyway, its been an enjoyable couple of posts and I trust I've answered all your questions on the issues you raise and you'll appreciate that the CSM must contain voices from all sides of the territorial perspective and its very important we have an open and honest discussion on the current situation in conquerable 0.0 infrastructure. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.02 12:49:00 - [40] Originally by: Voculus You're pulling my heartstrings, Jade! +1 vote Awww Voculus thanks a lot. Nice to know the appeal of manifesto is genuinely universal when its attracting pledges from Imperial Republic of the North. Quite a rich, various and vibrant history we've had in our own way! All the best.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.02 14:23:00 - [41] Originally by: Ramruqai First off, sorry for the pyramid. Ah no problems! It happens Quote: 1)It's gonna cause more grief an annoyance than actual usefulness to have 30 minutes as you crash, loggofski etc. etc. So I have to strongly disagree on that. I've had logofski carriers dissapear from me cause I did not have enough DPS in time to finish it off. It's annoying but we did not deserve the kill imo. If anything it will cause more ships that are not supposed to have cloaks on their ships to have cloaks, making the game imo more boring. I do see your point, but its a matter of balancing these things for smaller unit action too. The problem is when you get a mothership/carrier that becomes literally "unkillable" by anything other than X blob of ships because it can triage/run tank and log-offski (particularly in lowsec drops). In principle I think the 15min disappearance is fine for most ships but this is about some really uber tanks that make it impossible for smaller numbers to kill them before the timer is elapsed - its a direction that encourages (and necessitates) blobbing and I'm quite unhappy about it. Can you think of a solution that would allow a smaller gang to kill a tackled (well-fitted) AEON, Archon, before the log-off period that would not involve lengthening the disappear from space timer for that class of ships Ramruqai? I'd be very interested to hear one. Quote: 3) (or To which :)) Dock and re-dock games are indeed in need of a fix. All stations also need to be balanced to the point of having the exact same range from the station as you undock. I don't mind if it's 5km off of 5km within dock range, just that it is the same. Caldari stations and Gallente outpost with their 50km dock range are just silly. Agreed completely. Quote: I would propose that all stations have their focal point changed to where the undock actually is, instead of currently center for the model. From that point you'd have a 5-10km radius that you can dock at. It makes Rp sense that you dock and undock and the same place. you'd come our of warp same 5-10km from where folks undock to prevent jita undock cluster. Seems a good idea, that combined with increasing the redock timers in line with hit-point buffs in some way would certainly go a long way to reduce the attraction of "dock/redock" games in PVP.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:04:00 - [42] Originally by: Hamfast 1)Invention û A good idea that still needs workà a.Have you ever tried invention? I personally haven't, but then I'm really not much of an industrialist as already stated. However, Invention is VERY popular amongst the Free Captains of the Star Fraction and a decent proportion of the alliance make very good income from invention producing a wide range of modules and ships for profit and alliance provision. Overall I'm extremely impressed with how invention has allowed a far wider range of industrial characters to get a step on the ladder of profitable production. Quote: b. What ideas do you have to improve invention? We'll in an ideal world we'd have the ability to tinker with the attributes of vessels as part of the invention process and could have a Star Fraction brand Deimos with a bonus to ECM drones :) More seriously though, I think invention is a good template for the introduction of future tech levels and I would love to see more customization possible on the base design of ships and modules in the future. 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? Yes, Sec level should be more important, and yep, I'd agree with a variable concord reaction time (+loss penalty) depending on the sec level of the victim. Quote: b.Should the Security Level of a system affect changes to Pilot Security level changes? Yes. [quote[c.Should the Security Level of a Targeted Pilot have more of an effect on the security change of the attacker? Yes. Quote: 3)Industry û The Creators of Eve a.Do you regularly build anything? Not really, most I've ever built really would be tech1 frigs, cruisers, modules and ammo for personal use. I have about 55,000 skill points in Industry and thats mostly from the mining skills I started with. Quote: b.Do you regularly mine? Nope. Haven't minded for a long time. Last time was an alliance mining op in delve a long long time ago, but we more or less ditched mandatory corp economic activities in favor of individual initiatives (invention in the main). Quote: c.What do you think could be done to improve industry in Eve? Improvements to the interface. Option to set up sell order weighting based on relative standings of the buyer (ie -10's pay more, +10's get discounts). Re-distribution of rare moons, perhaps seeding more in lowsec to boost population/traffic. More factory/lab slots. Extra skills for industry characters to further specialize rather than needing multiple identical alts. (+version Mass Production/+lab spec/+tycoon). Production efficiency implants! Quote: d.You have been asked to help with new ships for industrial characters, describe a few ideasà Well I'd like more ninja-industrial vessels that are specifically-designed for operating in 0.0 away from the protection of fixed territorial infrastructure. What I mean are truly mobile refineries/factory/laboratory ships, maybe even mini base-ships that deploy to a functional fitting/repair/storage array that alliance mates can dock at. I'd love to see some commercial "clipper" style vessels, cruiser/battlecruiser class armed transports for role bonus for speed and maneuver perhaps the built in wcs bonus from blockade runners. Think East India company tea "clippers" - beautiful fast converted warships for hazardous trade and distant transit. I think there is definitely room for another class of freighter - bigger than the ones we have today. Custom Salvage ships with bonus to salvage rates and range would be good, probably cruiser class with big cargo holds. Just a few ideas. Hope it helps!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:22:00 - [43] Originally by: GFLSandman Jade....everything sounds great, but i am kinda still waiting on a answer to the question of supporting station destruction and still being able to support the "little guy" If you have station destruction in game you will turn this game into a game of maybe 3 or 4 major alliances running everything...if you aren't apart of one of those allinaces...you might as well never venture to 0.0.....i dont want to see that...the only way the "little guy" will be able to get to 0.0 is to become slave workers to a major alliance renting space... i thought we got rid of that kind of thing when ppl got fed up with B.O.B.. dont want to return to that. Anyway you platform sounds great and you almost have me. Fair enough. Basically on the Outpost issue, we've done a lot of talking round the concept on the chatsubo thread and people do have that concern. Thing is though, at the moment you do have a similar situation - if a big power decides it wants your outposts it simply moves in, spams/eliminates towers and takes the outpost locking you out pretty much as long as they want to lock you out for. What having a destructible option in the mix will achieve is that the big powers will need to consider their own defense more seriously since whilst they are away making trouble they could lose ground at home. The option for outpost destructible I most favor is the "need to capture conventionally, hold for x period 72hours is - then you trigger self destruct, and for the next 24/48 hours the station counts down to destruction and ANYONE could recapture it in that period and stop the countdown (until the last hour and then its locked in). Advantages for the loser even. At least if your outpost is captured and triggered for self destruct you have an option to counter-conquest without going through the sovereignty hoops again (destructing outposts opt out of sovereignty protection) and while the SD process continues no docking restrictions which means you can get your stuff out if your alliance/friends can secure space superiority for a time. Now if you consider whats happened in the "great war" at the moment its basically a lot of nothing. The great powers went one way, then went the other, then went back again. Outposts change hands, regions change their flag, but nothing of the infrastructure is actually lost. Goons didn't get to burn BoB outposts on the way out. Bob won't get to burn Goon outposts going the other way. This means neither side needs to do much rebuilding or re-investment in infrastructure and by consequence has more money left in the kitty to build immense capital fleets to threaten neutrals and dominate more pets. Looking at the big picture the status quo is far more beneficial for big powers than destructible outposts would be where one or both sides would be committed to rebuilding war damage at the outpost level rather than just plunging everything into the aggression budget. Now, like I said, we've already had a lot of good discussion on the issue and I'm open for compromise on elements of the destructible agenda - for example, its been suggested that the blown up outpost leaves a "derelict" that could be rebuilt for cheaper than a whole new outpost, and that the derelict still has the hangers intact in the wreck, allowing people to come close, open their hangers and move possessions directly to ship cargo holds (though not dock or fit or any other station service obviously.) I quite like this option as it keeps the drama of the self-destruct timer and critical battles around the issue, leaves a scarred wreck as a sign of destruction, and also provides a focal point of potential future pvp as people come and try to "salvage" their remaining possessions from the derelict station. Anyway, hope these additional thoughts and explanations put your mind at rest Sandman! Thanks for the kind words and fingers crossed I've convinced you.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.02 15:32:00 - [44] Originally by: Ramruqai I do have a better solution than just flat out increasing the loggofski timer yes, should have posted it obviously before. This is if you log of with the timer on you AND you have people shooting you your ship will stay in space until 15 minutes after the last person places a hit/scram/bubble on you. I'll paint a picture. Coward Aeon get's shot at and every time he get's shot at, even after he's offline, his timer will just re-set. Hence if you log of with aggro and get caught before the 15 min timer is out then you are there until the ship is dead, you get saved or you log back in. That would not cause extra grief to people that sorta need to run (we have RL believe it or not) so they wait 15 instead of 30 minutes, 30 minutes is a very long time! Yep, you've convinced me Ramruqai! Pretty hardcore. So just to recap: If you wait for your aggression to elapse (15mins from last aggression) and then logoff - nothing can stop you disappearing from space in 1 minute right? But if you log off within 15 minutes of last aggression then the timer is reset to 15mins each time you are aggressed thereafter? Is that a correct summary? (Only other issue I see with it is the jump through to a bubble / HIC camp. Where technically you haven't been aggressed even though you are cloaked in the bubble and can simply log-off and disappear in one minute - somehow this still needs dealing with.) Quote: On the same issue I'd like to speak of self-destruct timers. We've had it happen once. I jumped into low sec activated my HIC scram on a hostile Nyx, activated cyno, the guy self destructs pretty much as soon as he sees me. Our caps come in and by the time he's in half struct or so he goes boom via self destruct. No mail, only the loot that was in cargo and drone bay. Again, I'd like to suggest something like actual in combat self destruct = impossible. Defiantly the loot should drop when self destruct is initiated, and mails sorta should show as well. Self destruct sould not be a viable PVP tactic imo. I can actually see an argument for self-destruct and denying loot to an enemy. If you are fighting a fiscal war to destruction with another corp/alliance there might be times you really don't want to give them your loot because its going to hurt your comrades and corp-mates. I agree its pretty lame with a huge ship where there is no change whatsoever you can destroy it before the self-destruct charges go but I can't see a fair way to prevent that. On the subject of killmails though I think SD should generate killmails just like any other kill if a player has laid damage on the target. Denying loot to an enemy force is one thing - denying killmails because of the shame/e-peenery involved - now thats just sad!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.03 16:05:00 - [45] Originally by: Ramruqai On the self destruct, self destruct imo should be like a normal explosion of the ship. It should not be a powerful explosion that kills all your modules. It should be the same as a normal ship going poof. The same logic should apply to similar things. So if you can self destruct your ship to deny someone loot you should be able to do the same thing with pos and pos modules. Well I think its arguable actually, and I certainly believe the choice to Self Destruct to deny loot to the enemy is actually a valid one. Re the POS equipment, its a fair point, no reason why one shouldn't be able to self destruct a tower and modules either rather than allow them captured. (I could see the rationale for any kind of self-powered piece of equipment that had a reactor.) Quote: In the end though, from a role play perspective (you represent that at least half way yes?) self destruct should not make all your modules die, same as when you normally die only part of them dies. From a role-play perspective I actually think the complete destruction of the ship does make sense, its essentially setting scuttling charges and overloading the reactor with the express purpose of ensuring nothing valuable survives in the wreck. Look to real-word conflict examples - when the German Battleship Bismark was critically damaged and helpless following the naval battle with the Royal Navy the Captain ordered she be scuttled and sunk rather than risk the ship fall into the hands of the enemy. This is a perfectly understandable motive. In roleplay terms I could certainly agree it could be something with more significance and impact resonance though - if the decision to Self Destruct is effectively damning the crew to death (rather than as we imagine in normal ship loss, allowing survivors to abandon ship, put on vacuum suits, or otherwise take emergency precautions) there could perhaps be a security penalty? or some other item of reputation impact. Certainly no insurance payout! Maybe its a flight of fancy - but I can see Self Destruct being a fully roleplay-sensible decision in certain circumstances. So I'm going to have to say I come down in the favour of Self Destruct continuing as it is now for nullification of loot drops - but I think it should definitely produce kill mails for involved characters.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.04 00:11:00 - [46] Originally by: Zeknichov Edited by: Zeknichov on 03/05/2008 04:09:19 Roughly half of the candidates support changes that would undermine the ideals that this game was founded on. The others focus far too much on insignificant changes. You are the only candidate who understands what makes EVE great. I hope you get this position, you have my vote. Thank you very much for those comments, makes it all worthwhile. Very glad you enjoyed the manifesto and share the vision of what makes this game truly great! All the best.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 01:02:00 - [47] Originally by: Cventas I dodn't really read your forum but I like your attitude....HOWEVER....as a member of the casual players voting hand I have a few question I'd like direct answers to that I find pleasing. No problem at all Cventas, thanks for taking the time to ask questions: Quote: 1. Is it necessary to complete the seduction? Good question, to a degree yes, seduction leads to intellectual intercourse and gets things done. Sometimes you have to inflame the passions to make something beautiful. Quote: 2. Why are you the right choice for the individual who places a strong reliance on Eve as a platform? For the last five years I've been fighting for smaller organizations against the dominion of larger collectivist entities - its pretty much the foundation of my gameplay in Eve online. I'm a strong believer that individual aspiration and gameplay needs to be protected and enhanced, small unit combat needs to be promoted and mindless impersonal blobbing should not be awarded by game balance. I love the idea that a strong individual mind can rise to prominence and fame in this single server environment and I'm absolutely committed to ensuring that all new players have the same opportunities the veterans once had in this game environment. Quote: 3. How are you at asking questions(this a rhetorical query; yet, it deserves a response)? Pretty good, I've actually worked in fields where research, interviewing and formal process analysis play an important role in contract success. Of course in the eve context again we're here to ensure that we understand the ins and outs of developer preference on key issues and a facility in charming interrogation is going to be most useful.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 02:23:00 - [48] Originally by: Hermia Jade's Manifesto chimes to the right tune for a better game. It comes as no supprise that jade (considering his massive experiance) understands the soul of eve better than anyone else. This sorta knowledge only comes with reading dev blogs and player acheivements over the span of eve's existance. Jade has my vote! Thank you Hermia, very kind words and excellent to see another long time player still active in the game of eve! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 14:05:00 - [49] Originally by: Jorah Vulture Just a slight chance of having that Bounty Hunting system implemented is worth my vote, not to mention all the other interesting ideas you posted there. I simply can't disagree with any of your points. Good luck with the campaign, Jade! Thank you very much Jorah! I love the idea of a proper bounty hunting career option and I really think it would be an exciting and dynamic career choice for players that get off on the thrill of the hunt and small unit pvp. Something Eve definitely needs. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 16:06:00 - [50] Hi there Kali Burr! In answer to your questions: 1. I think there are options for PVE play that could be explored certainly û I know sections of the community have loved the idea of alien incursions, rogue drones going on the offensive, JovianÆs attacking, pirate groups making proper offences against 0.0 powers. ItÆs a lovely idea, obviously balance needs to be maintained to ensure its not just a harvesting opportunity for big blobs, but I can see ways that you could implement PVE challenge for 0.0 entities with a little clever design and attention to standings mechanics. Incidentally, Eve used to have big events like this where large enemy npc forces would attack x,y,z objectives and all sorts of player groups would work together (and against each other) û these things were a lot of fun until the spectre of corruption rose and player trust was damaged. IÆd like to think with the reformation of the volunteer/events/news organisations similar things could happen again in the future. 2. IÆd actually love the idea to be honest, itÆs a problem for roleplay justification in that the capsule pilots are only a small percentage of the electorate in the empires but on the other hand, each capsule pilot is a power in his or her own right and its not unreasonable to rank empire effectiveness by the number of capsule pilots swearing allegiance to the national cause. I think your mission functionality ideas have potential cross-over to factional warfare systems too. 3. IÆm definitely for customization of items through invention, IÆd love for it to be possible to juggle the statistics and bonuses with + and minus. IÆm guessing weÆd need to sell custom equipment through some form of escrow though to stop the market from getting utterly cluttered with 100100101001 variations of traditional modules/ships? 4. I donÆt think broad ômotionsö are the way forward. One way Empire could impact 0.0 is if some part of the economy flowed the other way. For example, the planetary development of 0.0 colonies depended on a flow of colonists and colonial support from empire to 0.0 and if certain 0.0 alliances had bad standings or rep with empires themselves (policies/behaviour/standings etc) they might restrict the flow of legal settlement. Something like that could work. 5. IÆd like more tournament events period, and yes it would be good to explore different formats and ship classes for sure. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 16:07:00 - [51] Originally by: Snarker Jade Constantine has the vision of how EVE should play and will take steps on improving the cold and dark universe, she has 2 of my votes. Thanks a lot! Your faith is greatly appreciated. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 16:32:00 - [52] Hi there Neth'Rae, With regard to the war-dec situation I do take your point certainly, and yes, I can also see the potential problem with reducing the sandbox freedom of wardecs in the context. But let me explain a bit about my thinking û as an alliance Star Fraction does A LOT of wardecs against various regressive nationalists and -10 NBSI aggressors etc etc and in our experience while a good wardec is a very good thing, these are actually extremely rare and hard to come by û most of the time empire wardec targets simply donÆt want to fight, canÆt find a reason too fight, and know that the best way to get us to remove our wardec is to generally a) hide, b) move a long way away. c) not undock, d) skip corp, and e) use alts to transport goods and maintain finance. Put together these things donÆt make for much fun and its as much a consequence of the fact that there is no way for the defender to force an attack to drop the deck really except make it ônon-funö and this tends to lead them into ônon-funö promoting tactics. Now the key advantages I see for a result tracked war-dec is it gives both sides reason to fight. Firstly because there will be a result ultimately not just a stalemate, sandoff and retraction from boredom. Having something to actually fight for (victory/defeat boons/penalties) and having way to ôwinö (kill more enemy shipping) does focus the mind and make the whole thing more serious and involving. +I do think that if you moved towards goal based wars it will play directly into the role of empire merc corps that can ôjoinö the war and average their figures with the client to ensure better results for their payment. Now you talk about real world wars not having these mechanics and actually IÆm going to disagree with you. In our current political climate casualties are the things that end wars and motivate public opinion û if our western democracies start losing too many troops in conflict zones opinion swings against intervention very quickly and governments can fall when our soldiers are committed to losing situations and paying too heavy a price for political involvement. And I think this reality is closer to the corporate sponsored war system in Eve than earlier ôworld warö style conflicts would be. When two corporations fight its rarely to extinction or to have one ideology dominate another, itÆs a matter of showing teeth, facing down a turf war, punishing poor diplomacy or whatnot. And this being the case the limited war until X casualty rate is forced on an enemy seems to make more sense. Thing is at the moment in Eve its extremely rare for an enemy to actually surrender an empire war and pay a defeat price. Usually the corporation will just leave the area, move away, even disband and reform. If you had a system in place that simply records a victory and victory boon when X war-advantage is achieved youÆd have a little more dynamism in the area at least, and there would be consequence for corp-skipping. Its an interesting area for discussion though and IÆm definitely open-minded on the implementation and possibilities here. How do you think wars in Eve could be made more interesting without the objectives and auto mechanic for ending on x% engagement advantage? CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 17:03:00 - [53] Hi there Seleene. Yes, IÆve already skimmed through the thread. It is a big issue and a very brutal one really. Firstly though yes, in a way we have been ôcheatedö by too simple a ship design. The older players of Eve will remember how the Titan concept was originally something closer to a mobile station, a staging point and fleet centrepiece to a Mothership from Homeworld rather than the big-bang ship it now is. This in and of itself doesnÆt have to be a critical problem though û just as long as CCP return to development and deliver us alternative mobile infrastructure vessels of that class and scale as an alternative to fixed territorial infrastructure. I feel that the Titan concept got a bit hijacked by anti-blob planning and it was felt that these ships would help break up the tendency to flood grids with multi hundreds of little ships and force greater variety on the engagement area. What went wrong though was that fixed territorial infrastructure and defences went insane and focused fleet fighting on particular points and times in space even as the Titan concept evolved into a way of crushing concentrated forces. This left us with the obscenity of Cyno Jammers and DeathStar POS reinforcement battles with defending side able to confront the offensive fleet with Doomsday weapons even while preventing enemy cap ships from involvement. IÆm going to say I donÆt have a problem with Titan class ships in and of themselves û I think they represent a huge investment in time and resources and skill training and tie high level characters to a vulnerable vessel with limited flexibility as a cost. I think if we get to the stage where mega-alliances have enough of these ships to nuke out each otherÆs support fleets and significantly damage even capital blobs itÆll lead to a beautiful, brutal fiscally-annihilating carnage ground in 0.0 that will involve a natural re-balancing when the appalling loss calculations come in. What I do have a problem with is 0.0 defence infrastructures that actually get in the way of these climactic battles and ensures we never get to see the large scale obliterating fleet clashes we need to reduce the cold-war style arms built up. As long as 0.0 is covered in cyno-jammers and jump bridges there arenÆt targets and focal points for incidental clashes and meeting engagements that can spiral into genuine mutual hot-dropping hi-stakes escalation battles where Titans will be genuinely threatened. As for the proliferation of TitanÆs being the end of fleet warfare û well, they might well be the end of blob warfare in that any lag blob dogpile fleet in an un-cyno-jammed system is begging to be multiple-doomsdayed at the moment, but that in and of itself might actually be the salvation for smaller unit, more responsive mobile warfare since gangs/fleets of those sizes are actually fast and flexible enough to evade the triggered doomsday device. + When there are more titans in the game the risk of hot-drop can itself be a disincentive for unwise deployment and weÆre definitely going to see more of these things blown up by opportunistic traps and cunning counter attacks. But ultimately the problem is with the 0.0 landscape of POS and cyno jammers and jump-bridges and Titans ARE an issue in combination with the status quo in sovereignty warfare. But the solution is not to nerf or diminish Titans in some way û the solution is reform territorial warfare, reduce absolute defence advantage and return dynamic consequence and risk to the 0.0 game. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 19:32:00 - [54] Originally by: Azure Skyclad Hello Jade As a very old Eve dweller, i have gotten a little jaded (sorry) with Eve over the last year or so. This is despite all the additions CCP have made since the game's release. I'm of the opinion now that many of the new additions to the game are just simple progressions rather than anything radically new. I'm fully aware this is my perception of the current game so it is subject to whatever shades i happen to be wearing. Question is: What radically new suggestions would you be willing to put to CCP to reignite the magic in the game? Can you, at least in spirit, attempt to usher in a gameplay experience which can equal undocking from Lave in my Cobra Mk III with 100 credits and 7.0 light years of fuel? Ah Azure thats an easy one really, improvements to mini-professions, lets have the bounty hunting mechanic and the ability to buy kill-rights and hunt down illegals for fun and profit - kinda like Commander Jameson and the pirates just this time its real players behind those nefarious personalities. Thats real multi-player elite right there! All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 22:11:00 - [55] Originally by: IlluminatedOne Edited by: IlluminatedOne on 05/05/2008 12:07:21 Edited by: IlluminatedOne on 05/05/2008 12:05:30 All I can say after reading the topic is WOW!!11111oneone. Rare candidate understands EVE's pros and cons in such a depth. You have my vote Jade. And - the only big thing that saddens me is Capital Ships Online, please press on it. Thank you Illuminated, rest assured I'll be doing my level best to make sure those capital ships start exploding in great number as "sim-city-in-space" turns to total conflict and brutal fiscal annihilation in dynamic space opera dramatics! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.05 23:05:00 - [56] Originally by: Sapphrine You'll have my vote today Jade. Best of luck :) Thank you Sapphrine, lovely to hear from the bold warriors of the Ushra'khan! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 02:01:00 - [57] Originally by: Hyron never heard of you before but your ideas, reasons and thoughts on eve are sound and similar to mine. did you read the first PCG review of eve online by any chance? you have my vote Yeah back when the initial review wasn't that great :) Anyways, thank you very much for your comments, its always great to realize eve has plenty of like-minded players chasing the dream of glorious space operatics and high drama in the single server environment. All the best! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 15:23:00 - [58] To Maranthas: Well, ultimately everyone is biased one way or another; donÆt believe the myth of objectivity in these matters. People who have a vision or passion for the game and want to see it improved are biased in favour of those aspirations and potentials, people who say they want the status quo are biased in favour of numbing paralysis, people who claim to have no agenda are being less than truthful. Re industrial effort, donÆt think for one moment that Star Fraction achieved the position it has in the game today on a diet of pure pvp mayhem. WeÆve got some the most successful industrialists in the game period as part of our roster and just because we make industry work on a territorial paradigm doesnÆt mean we donÆt care about the interests of builders, technologists, and market involvement. I think youÆre being a little short-sighted to make industrial argument ALL about POS and outposts. IÆm very happy for example, to see POS return to a primary role as industrial structures and remove the sovereignty element from their makeup as part of a process of reforming 0.0 warfare. IÆd love to see more varied and interesting options for POS from the development of space angle, but I hope youÆll come to see that tying these things to the sovereignty mechanic ruins all that since they become the single focus of space-warfare as well as economic tool. I think you are wrong to categorise my suggestions as being about ôeasy destructibleö infrastructure and IÆd ask you to read again. ItÆs not about being ôeasyö its about making space control about conflict and pvp not about siege drudgery and player vs structure. IÆm very happy that a Large POS can be a difficult and time consuming thing to attack û IÆm not happy that these things make outposts invulnerable as part of the sovereignty process. And IÆm not happy that outposts themselves will never be destroyed and will eventually be spammed through the whole of 0.0 diluting their value and accomplishment and turning the whole once dynamic landscape of the game in to a dull and monotonous backdrop of unattended ôflagsö that nobody cares about enough to capture. At the last though, thanks for your post, and IÆm sorry you couldnÆt come on board with the ideas expressed in my election manifesto, I hope you find your ideal candidate amongst the other options and enjoy the rest of the game!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 15:26:00 - [59] Originally by: Kelsin Good luck Jade, we need vision and leadership such as yours on the CSM to keep those unique qualities that drew us to the EVE universe evolving and dynamic! I think we all need a little more spice and danger too. I've got to say I still get a thrill of excitement fighting space battles in 0.0 and empire war and putting my ships and clone in harms way, I still see the space opera of Eve Online for what it is and can be and I just want to do my bit to promoting the beautiful ideals at the core of this game and advocating those changes that will keep it fresh and thrilling for each new generation of player. Thanks for your vote!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 16:35:00 - [60] Originally by: Lascaris Jade, I'm an industry-oriented player but I like being able to play a part in warfare by supporting my friends with equipment and logistical services. What I want to know is how you see the relationship between industrialists and fighters. Also, are there any issues you see with industry that need addressing or improvements that could be made - both purely industrially and with war in mind. Relationship between industrialists and fighters is a vital one, real competitive advantage is delivered to a combat wing by having good logistical support and excellent knowledge of current industrial systems. As I've said to earlier questions, I'm by no means an expert on Eve's building/production gameplay mechanics, but many of my directors and contacts in game ARE. I do see the huge benefit from these sides of the game delivered in the form of cost-price tech2 hulls and equipment, capital ships and freighters and the like, and without the diligent gameplay and breadth of knowledge encompassed by these friends of mine in game then Star Fraction wouldn't be a shadow of its current self in the Eve galaxy. On improvements, earlier in the thread I expressed some options to a reply to LaVista here Hope this answer helps you decide your vote. All the best! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 16:37:00 - [61] Originally by: Dani Leone You have my vote as promised, now go get us those destructible stations :) Awww thank you Dani, glad you didn't hold us attacking your Moros dreads with stealth bombers against me Fingers crossed we get a progressive CSM group that can truly grapple with the very real problem of paralyzing stasis in 0.0 warfare. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 17:36:00 - [62] Originally by: Cailais Im also endorsing Jade's campaign - a compeling vision of what EVE can really be. C. Thank you Cailais, excellent endorsement, you've asked some really good questions and involved yourself in decent and progressive discussions over the course of this campaign and your support means a lot. Much appreciated. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 18:06:00 - [63] Originally by: Latex Underwear Unfortunately, I didn't notice Jade's desire to remove local before I cast my vote. :( Do NOT vote for this person if you like local the way it is. Ah bad luck, seriously though what don't you like about the proposal for replacing local intel with better scanner functionality and reduced map options (+ delayed constellation chat for social interaction)? Can you express your opposition to the local changes with a little more detail please?
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 18:56:00 - [64] Originally by: Intigo Do not vote for Jade if you're a complete fool? Check! votes for Jade & Hardin <3 Thanks for your vote Intigo! Its an interesting endorsement message too CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 18:57:00 - [65] Wrathamon Starfury, don't worry I'll get round to the questions, I'm trying to be quite disciplined about answering them in order of posting to be fair. Keep checking the thread and I'll definitely get to it - you do bring up interesting issues that I'm very eager to address. Please hold that vote! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 19:41:00 - [66] Originally by: Maggot Votes cast. A candidate who recognises what is broken, brings some ideas to the table, and who is open minded regarding the solutions. Lets hope the CSM is not too late to help steer EVE away from what looks to be a terminal disease. Maggot. Your support is greatly appreciated old friend! Certainly at its five year mark its time for us to re-inject enthusiasm and innovative solutions into the Eve environment and deal with the static mechanics that have robbed some of the drama and space operatics from the 0.0 frontier. I've got a lot of faith in the player base and development team - I'm sure we can find a proper way forward to the benefit of everyone.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 20:38:00 - [67] Originally by: Phyrr Edited by: Phyrr on 05/05/2008 23:54:54 You have my vote. I live in your idea of eve. Much appreciated, and lovely to know people are out there living that Iain M Banks dream beside fractionites! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 21:37:00 - [68] Originally by: Neslo I endorse Jade Constantine (cast my ballot today) Thank you Neslo, lovely to get the votes of old timers too! Lets make Eve all it can be from the early promise of beautiful conflict potential!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 22:27:00 - [69] Originally by: Nebuchadnezzar I You have my votes as well. Good manifesto and good replies to people! Gl in the election :) Thanks a lot Nebuchadnezzar, much appreciated and nice to know you guys appreciate the issues I'm promoting and advocating. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.06 23:23:00 - [70] Originally by: Moon Kitten Given that time is limited in CSM meetings will you be able to be concise and to the point in order to not waste the time of the CSM and CCP? Yes CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 00:17:00 - [71] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 07/05/2008 00:17:56 Originally by: Grismar I personally think it's good to see some candidates with a clear agenda and their own set of opinions. Voting for a candidate that only promises to pass on the popular vote seems like a wasted vote, since the populace will never agree on anything. Strongly voiced opinions will be needed to affect change. Yep, absolutely agree, ultimately its going to take persuasion, enthusiasm and willpower to drive change through to the benefit of everyone. Quote: Having said that, I -am- curious how you plan on keeping in touch with your constituency after the elections? If you get a seat in the council, will you be a private politician, representing only your own ideas and those of the people immediately around you in the game? Or do you have a plan to keep tabs on what the community wants and tell them about your evolving plans? I'll be using the Eve-online forums as a primary point of contact and making sure anyone can draw my attention here. These are the forums that people get as part of their subscription and makes sense to use them as such. Quote: Good luck in the elections, Grismar. Thank you very much, I'll do my best! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 04:16:00 - [72] Originally by: Yatus i like the Eve you describe. More actions, more risks, more moves, i want a space-opera something epic. you have my vote. Thank you very much Yatus, Eve the epic space opera with exciting action and dynamic battles is much much better than Eve "sim-city-in-space" with static defenses and POS shield grinding, on this we can definitely agree!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 13:12:00 - [73] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 07/05/2008 13:12:59 Originally by: Natsuno Mirage Hello Jade, I'm glad you decided to go for CSM candidature. I really like your manifesto and share the same vision of the eve universe. We may not agree on everything, but we'll agree on most of it. You're a great candidate, and you have all my votes. With Regards, Natsu Thank you Natsuno, It honestly took quite a bit of heartsearching before deciding to enter and I guess sometimes everyone conceives doubts about the interests and general enthusiasms of the player base. I was seriously trying to assess whether the message I wanted to express in the Manifesto was going to have mass appeal or fall on deaf ears and whether trying and failing would be worse than not trying at all. Ultimately though its always best to give it a try and stand up and be counted, nothing good ever came of silently watching one's hobbies and enthusiasms fade away without attempting to do something about it! In this inaugural CSM Eve needs passionate advocates of the soul of the game and it would have been a crime to just sit by and watch the council get dominated by dull administrators and big alliance stuffed-shirts CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 13:33:00 - [74] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa I actually voted for Jade. Honestly, I like what he has to say. And the other candidates make me grind my teeth. Always a good thing to use a bit of charm and good-humour in the advocacy of progressive ideas Siigari, glad you liked what you saw and decided to trust me with your vote. Thanks a bunch! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 14:47:00 - [75] Right then Wrathamon, (told you IÆd get there in the end) You are correct, IÆm the leader of a non-territorial roving PVP alliance and we donÆt hold any space or stations. DoesnÆt mean we havenÆt played territorial warfare though, and this last Christmas we were down in the trenches, organising alarm clock POS siege ops/mustering dreads, watching POS shields creep down and trying crazy tactics to remove cyno-jammers and the rest. IÆve fcÆed those ops. Been involved in those fleets, offensively and defensively and seen the effect they have on players involved. Basically itÆs a whole lot of ônot funö and the biggest defensive advantage in Eve at this point in time is the fact that Territorial Warfare is the embodiment of tedium writ large on a tapestry of dullsville drudgery. Its not space warfare, its not dramatic space-opera, its some terrible bolted on sim-city-in-space mechanic that takes the onus from pvp and makes it player vs structure and afk defences. In essence itÆs not good. Now sure, yep I AM biased. IÆm biased in favour of the Eve I talk about in the manifesto; I AM biased in favour of that ôIain M Banks Dreamö, IÆm biased in favour of excitement, in favour of Dynamism, in favour of dramatic space battles and fluid political situations, of cunning feints and glorious advances. IÆm biased in favour of that the circa 2004 space battle between RKK/BNC vs FE where a couple of hundred battleships spent 3 hours contesting space north of P3EN and thousands of torpedoes glittered in the interstellar night in a climatic space conflict that made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck as I flew a tackle æceptor through a confrontation that put Return of the Jedi to shame and kept several hundred players in rapt concentration and spellbound addiction deciding the fate of the Tribute for the next 3 months. I honestly donÆt care that current 0.0 space-holders might feel disadvantaged if they were actually forced to fight to defend their space again. The defence advantage in territorial warfare has gotten ridiculous. ItÆs become a strong disincentive to meaningful conflict and territorial advance and itÆs bad for the dream of Eve Online and the vision for the game that so many respondents to this thread endorsing my candidacy would love to see. You say its ôpossibleö to knock out cyno-jammers and yes it is. SirMolle can do it. But then SirMolle commands the best equipped tech2 battleship and capital fleet in Eve online. HeÆs got thousands of players at his command and a stranglehold on rare moon mining producing an income of hundreds of billions each month. Suggesting that territorial balance is ôokayö because the biggest beast in the jungle can kick down the ôcyno-jammerö advantage is fine û but what about everyone else? What about smaller alliances, medium alliances, ANYONE else in fact? Is the rest of the server supposed to just accept that territorial warfare is out of their reach because they canÆt muster 150 tech2 battleships to hit jammers with? It just doesnÆt wash as an argument Wrathamon. The reality is that recent development has all been about defence advantage and focusing conflicts on fixed points and pre-determined times. This is bad for gameplay dynamism, bad for server performance and bad for opportunity in competitive territorial play. IÆm standing in this CSM for conflict dynamism, pvp opportunity, accessibility for newer players, excitement for everyone who loves the political drama and space opera feel of Eve Online. Ultimately vote for me if you want this, donÆt vote for me if you want to status quo and zero change to 0.0 defence advantages. In answer to your last question û IÆm a good candidate for 0.0 space holders who realise that the current situation is static and un-exciting and will kill the game if it continues, IÆm a bad candidate for 0.0 space holders who canÆt see beyond their own immediate advantage and donÆt care about the big-picture on general health and dynamism of Eve. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 15:17:00 - [76] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Originally by: Moon Kitten Given that time is limited in CSM meetings will you be able to be concise and to the point in order to not waste the time of the CSM and CCP? From personal experience working with him, he has the ability to be concise and to the point when there's a need. He just likes to be wordy when there's a chance . Heh Sakura, you know me pretty well But yeah, its a serious point. Sometimes we do need to be brief when its important and switch rhetorical gears. But I think the important distinction here in this Election campaign is that when I'm talking about "vision, dreams, aspirations" of what Eve "can be" it does need lengthy exposition - lets face it, this game is a big hobby for most us, we spend a lot of time playing it, talking about playing it, building communities and friendships amongst those other players that play this game. Its not that surprising to have a lot to say about it really. End of the day though anybody asks me for a short answer they usually get it :) CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 15:50:00 - [77] Quick reminder, Eve Cast did a sequence of candidate interviews last weekend, quite interesting to listen to the voices of the candidates back to back and get a comparative view of the platforms (my bit is the last third(ish) of the Eve cast). Go and have a listen if you are still undecided - it might just help CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 15:55:00 - [78] Originally by: LaVista Vista Originally by: Jade Constantine Quick reminder, Eve Cast did a sequence of candidate interviews last weekend, quite interesting to listen to the voices of the candidates back to back and get a comparative view of the platforms (my bit is the last third(ish) of the Eve cast). Go and have a listen if you are still undecided - it might just help You went on for bloody ages! Also, while your comment about me being relatively new, I'm only new to the general discussion forum really. People on market discussion and ebank customer knows me very well, and have known about me for ages! I did say nice things about you though! Seriously, you've run a very good positive campaign and shown a lot of enthusiasm and drive. Got to respect that. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 17:49:00 - [79] Originally by: Larno You get my 2 votes because you wrote so much. :P Nice to know effort is recognized and appreciated, thanks very much for your votes. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 18:21:00 - [80] Originally by: EihT51 Hi Jane Just wonna wish you good luck. Seems to me like you be a great part of CSM sadly im to green for EvE to vote for you, just got a active account We appreciate your interest in the Council of Stellar Management but sadly you do not meet our criteria for voting. You need to possess an active account and it has to be older than 30 days. Trial accounts are excluded from all participation. You may not be affiliated with CCP in any way. Awww, tell you what, try and persuade another player to vote the way you wanted to vote and all will be well! Seriously though, I hope you enjoy Eve and decide to stay long enough to vote in the next CSM. All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 19:00:00 - [81] Originally by: Almiel I approve of this candidate. Thank you! Good to know CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 19:29:00 - [82] Originally by: Masu'di i gave you a vote, was going to ask you about niche professions, combat boosters, narcotics and smuggling etc - but i never got round to it. Thanks a lot for the vote - and yes, I'd definitely like some discussion on matters smuggling and niche illegal professions - this stuff is excellent and I'd be happy to advocate enhanced development time and focus on these areas. All the best! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.07 23:02:00 - [83] Originally by: Wrathamon Starfury Jade, I understand your concern about outposts being built all over but right now there are only 350+ outposts in EVE and that count includes the conquerable outposts. Many wars are fought over these outposts. If you make it so outposts can be destroyed are you also willing to give them defenses? The current methodology I'm supporting doesn't really need them to have defenses - since you have the conquer them first, hold then for x period, then begin a self-destruct period during which ANYONE can re-conquer them and shut down the self destruct if they choose. If we were looking at another concept for destructible outposts - say one that could actually blow them up with direct action from space-fleets then I'd definitely be open to the concept of defenses and "space-forts" and such in the proximity. But we really need to nail down exactly which destructible outpost proposal we're talking about before considering such things. Quote: Also can you answer the question about if POS's are removed from the SOV system what would give people SOV in a system? I quite like the gate control sovereignty that CCP devs are talking about. I've also heard a good idea about outposts generating "sovereignty points" that can be spent on various upgrades and abilities. I think pretty much everyone agrees there is something wrong with the current system and we do need decent proposals on how to move away from the POS/tower/sov situation we have at the moment. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 00:32:00 - [84] Originally by: Hugoo Thraxxer Good work on the manifesto and nice, interesting ideas. I am now a fanboi. Jade Vote +1 I'm glad you like the manifesto and related ideas Hugoo, always great to find like-minded players. Fingers crossed we can get things going in a positive direction with this CSM election! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 13:51:00 - [85] Originally by: Tommy TenKreds You already know how I feel about you dude. Shame you're not a real girl tbh. I took your advice though and pitched a couple of votes for Vista and Omber too. Hope that strategic voting suggestion doesn't bite you in the ass. Good luck. Thanks a lot Tommy, even if I'm not a real girl I hope you'll at least find my voice sexy Seriously though I'm hoping that we do get a decent range of independent candidates on the CSM to confront the big-alliance block vote "stuffed-shirt" factor, I'd certainly much rather be working with a variety of interesting and passionate people representing diverse specialties and focus in the game than have to listen to clone "reduce lag so our blobbing works better" speeches from alliance appointees. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 14:58:00 - [86] Originally by: Botschafter Mollari you also got my vote. good luck! Thank you! Much appreciated CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 15:22:00 - [87] Originally by: Masu'di after reading the pit fight on SHC going to throw you vote with my other account too ;) Yeah heh, sometimes SHC does sound like a strange alternative universe world, still, it does have some useful posters and content and its still worth wading through the murk to find the gems. Anyways, thanks for you other vote! Great to have the support of you guys by the way, I have always loved the in-game drugs running concept for ninja-criminal-industry and its something I'd love to look at personally if I ever find the time on Jade. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 16:10:00 - [88] Originally by: Mr Stark Great speach and as a banks fan im in agreement to the whole love of space opera and tragic loss. I have one thing I would like looked into, and i know I will be much ridiculed: how about e-warfare being mostly restricted to e-war specialised ships? I think there is too much reliance on everyone using jammers all the time and it would make people think about what ships are in their fleets and gangs. Anyway, good calls all round, you have my votes. Thank you Mr Stark, glad to see more Iain M Bank's fans out there! Eve needs more of us thats for sure. Re E-war being restricted to EW only ships - to be honest I think this "problem" was pretty much solved with the EW re-balancing and re-write and the reality that now you do get a very significant role-bonus for EW from the appropriate class of ship. A Falcon with omni jammers is going to make absolute mince-meat out of the locking systems of Dominix trying to omni jam it back and this is pretty good balance already. I can remember when ALL battleships used to throw on a jammer or two just to mess with opponents in fleet battles but this was a long time ago before the chance based system and role bonuses for specific EW vessels. And on the broader point, I'm actually still a great fan of the flexibility and variety in ship fitting in eve, I love off the wall fitting concepts and wouldn't like to see too much reduction in that flexibility for whatever purpose since I think there would be a very real danger of reducing the uncertainty and of loadouts to fixed "cookie-cutter" classes and impact the diversity of eve combat in the general sense. Anyway, thanks again for your votes, they are greatly appreciated! Fingers crossed we can really push Eve in an exciting new direction and shake up the bogged down status quo of current conflict mechanics. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 17:02:00 - [89] Originally by: Danton Marcellus This candidate is being endorsed and promoted on the Nebula Rasa forums. Thank you Danton, means a lot to get the formal endorsement of a long term and respected member of the Eve Online community. All the best to you and yours. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 17:32:00 - [90] Originally by: Securion Wolfheart I just canceled my account a few days back, mainly because EVE have turned into "Capitals Online" and everyone is flying a carrier these days... But there are more reasons of course, like the gates we have to use for travel, "local chat", no sense of crew on your ships, very small universe (think about it; every system have how many places where you can actually travel to?) and the overwhelming griefing going on. Anyway, you got my vote. Why? If you can help make EVE feel a little bit more "spacey", and adress the whole "caps online" issue, I might come back in the future... Fly safe. Securion I'm quoting your whole post there because I think you are expressing some very important issues and I promise you that you're not alone in perceiving these things. I've had a good number of evemails in-game since the campaign started expressing identical views and concerns of where "the soul" of Eve has gone in this current horrible stagnant 0.0 territorial morass where risk has fled from the risk/reward equation and anyone and their dog can establish a secure space empire just by anchoring a few pos and waiting for sovereignty to build up. Too much safety means too much income means too many ships/capital ships means strong disincentive to attacks = too much safety again and the whole rotten cycle continues. I really want to advocate changes that bring Eve back towards its dynamic roots and make the players who desire space empire control actually fight for it once again. Thank you for your vote! Rest assured I will be trying my best to make these things happen. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 19:07:00 - [91] Originally by: Wu Jian I like your ideas on improving the game play in Eve and thus I have voted for you. I am new to Eve but the kind of fleet warfare envisioned in your posts is what I would like to be a part of. Good luck and hopefully some changes for the better can be made for the good of The State...and the rest of Eve. Thank you Wu Jian, glad to know the manifesto ideas are appealing to new players as well. Its very important for the future of Eve that new faces can join the glorious single-server space opera and carve out a reputation and story all of their own. I hope you enjoy your Eve experience and we're reading about your adventures and intrigues in a few years time! All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 19:46:00 - [92] Originally by: Illaria You got my vote. As someone who has got out from the trenches of POS warfare in the south, just to hop into new trenches up here in the north, I hope you will save my soul before it withers away someday while shooting my n-th hundred POS into reinforced Also I always liked your style and think you will make for a good CSM member. Good luck. Thank you very much for the Vote Illaria, I'll do my best to save your soul don't worry! Much appreciate your comment too, always great when somebody likes the personal style CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.08 20:50:00 - [93] Originally by: Aran Makor Its quite tempting to throw my vote your way, as i agree with 95% of your ideas. I, like half the other pilots in this thread, just got out of trench warfare. All calls going out daily, and most of the time, half the fleet on both sides would be ewarped, lagged out, dead, or anything other gruesome non combat ending. It gets rather boring shooting POS's into reinforced, and then be required to plan my life around EVE, to make sure im here to be another body to put the final stake through its heart. If you put enough missles ito something, why shouldn't it just go pop? Anyone here ever seen a Raven go into reinforced? Its a common theme Aran, a lot of people are tired of the boring static status quo in territorial warfare, we really are coming the point where it has to change for the good of the game. These reinforcement battles are just lag-attractor dog-pile blob fests and while I can certainly see what the game designers intended in opposing timezone flip-flopping of control I'm fast coming to the conclusion that the treatment has been worse than the ailment in this case. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.09 03:20:00 - [94] Originally by: One Percent Jade has my vote. Even if only half of Jade's proposed ideas could be realized, EVE and its players would be much better off. Currently, I'm forced to etch out a lonely existence in low-sec, normally praying upon the weak or unsuspecting. I desperately search out pvp, any pvp, that doesn't involve huge amounts of lag or 4-hour ops that end with nothing to show for it. I want a good reason to fight but more than that, I want a means of fighting for that reason that doesn't involve two huge Dread fleets with hundreds of support killing nothing but the server. For me, it isn't a question of whether or not Jade is the right choice.The question is... will CCP listen? Well lets hope for the best, all we can do at this point is try our hardest to advocate change for the benefit of everyone. PVP in Eve is in a tight spot at the moment but its dynamic space conflict that built this game into what it is today and a new generation of players deserve to experience the same enjoyment. Thanks for your vote! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.09 13:26:00 - [95] Originally by: Isotobe You have my votes, I like your ideas, and the simple fact that EVE has swung too far in favour of alliances and blob warfare. If you get through, I will hope that you will stand up and speak loud on behalf of all of us smaller entities and bring back some of the solo/small gang fun that we used to enjoy to a greater level in EVE.Regards and good luck, Isotobe Thank you for your votes Isotobe and rest assured its my full intention to stand up and speak passionately in favour of small unit pvp and Eve combat dynamism. You really aren't alone in feeling that this aspect has suffered in recent years and its truly time to redress the balance and advocate enhancements the Eve combat mechanics to give tactical gang warfare a role again. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.09 15:40:00 - [96] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 09/05/2008 15:41:47 Originally by: Zareph You seem pretty gung ho on teh ability to blow something up, but what about defense? ... Well now Zareph, nice to have some commentary from Merch Industrial! Been a long time since we had the pleasure of blowing you guys up back in Kheram, welcome to my CSM thread! Anyway to your points: At the moment defense advantage in EVE conquerable 0.0 is already too dominant. The progressive stance at the moment is to provide more balance and dynamic conflict opportunity. The status quo allows a defensive side to sit behind POS shields and do nothing while an attacker cannot substantively impact the enemy outside of a formal, telegraphed, and ultimately time and place spammed uber-blob showdown in a formal fleet dog-pile. You have to remember that Eve is a game as well as a virtual reality empire building simulator and if you make it virtually-impossible to assault player territorial claims in 0.0 you damage the spirit of the game and reduce the beauty of the glorious space opera drama of political shifts and changing fortunes. I think you are very wrong about the population level in 0.0 of course, most 0.0 is currently spammed with POS and the plague of cyno-jammers isnÆt far behind. Investment in 0.0 infrastructures is largely risk-free since the consummate grind required to actually remove these things sleights the risk/reward equation with a significant spice of ôcan we really be bothered?ö Space ship combat is always fun in Eve û attacking POS is always the same. Time we actually got biased in favour of excitement and variety. Lag/De-sync, etc etc. IÆve addressed these issues in the Manifesto document. The root problem is fleet blobbing and uber reinforcement battle dogpile. We need many smaller confrontations that have significance to territorial conquest. We need the mechanics to encourage conflict outside the huge lag-fests. We need disincentives to blobbing (with real game mechanics not some hokey allusions to political science or dimly relevant ôgame-theoryö). These are ôlong-standing-issuesö because the developers have been caught like rabbits in the headlights of the fleet blob issue and are trying to make their little guy outrun the oncoming wheels of dog-pile rather than sidestep the issue and introduce conflict resolution mechanics that distribute server load into multiple objectives across many systems and actively discourage focused fleet blob tactics. YouÆre complaining about black screens and laggy fleet battle deaths? You make my argument for me really. Territorial conflict resolution that involves bringing as many players as possible into a single node at a predetermined time (actively set to allow the defender to maximise their blob) is a recipe for disaster that you taste in your combat experience. If I cram 12 people into my car itÆs not going to work very well since its optimal seating capacity is 5. Time we started looking at Eve conflict mechanics in the same way. Yesterday I took part in a completely lag free fight with 60 odd people involved in blowing up a couple of motherships at a POS. That tells us that the combat engine can handle ad-hoc conflict with that kind of number of participants û does it really take a rocket scientist to realise that the solution to black screen of death horrible module lag frustration-fests is to actively discourage single node blobbing and distribute multiple concurrent objectives as the target points of territorial conquest? CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.09 18:26:00 - [97] Originally by: Miyamoto Isoruku What would you do to make mining not suck? Currently, mining consists of sitting and staring at asteroids for hours. Allow me to share my proposal: Hmmm, this is a hard question for me Miyamato :) In the past (back when we did mining ops) we usually made it "suck less" by fooling about, attacking each other with drones, stealing from each others cans and generally getting our ships exploded. Quote: Players would still buy mining ships, modules, etc. Their skills would still govern production output. However, instead of being forced to mine themselves, they would instead hire mining crews that would pilot their ships for them. This would allow players to have mining investments while they are doing things more interesting than staring at rocks. One could introduce skills for how many mining ships one can have active at once, behavior scripts, that sort of thing. Obviously, using a mining crew in low- or null-sec could be very dangerous. They would not be able to respond as quickly or as effectively and would probably need protection. Wouldn't that be ideal for macro-miner business? Sounds like the sort of thing that would end up with some unscrupulous interest. I can see the argument for making the whole mining process more interesting, but I think you have to involve a player in the oversight/admin of the process directly just to ensure it isn't being entirely automated and falling prone to money-traders automatic income schemes. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.09 23:33:00 - [98] Originally by: Fehn Gamin Jade, Thanks for your inspiring and eloquent manifesto. It's encouraging to me as a relatively new player of 2 months to see the thoughtful and clearly expressed vision you bring to the CSM campaign. While I do not yet have an appreciation for all the changes you propose, I find myself agreeing with your principles regarding game balance/mechanics. Thank you for the kind words, its excellent to see support from new players. Very glad you liked the manifesto and vision expressed. Quote: One question regarding the ædynamicÆ approach you advocate: Could this approach at all be at odds with the play-style of many if not most of the smaller corporations (0-50 strong) whose members are typically online in a specific timezone and would not have the 23-7 resources required to defend the small amount of infrastructure to which they could hope to have access? Or, if I am misinterpreting your vision, are you advocating mobile infrastructure that would suit this group of players? Well here's the thing, at the moment the current largely untouchable infrastructure in 0.0 grants existing powers a huge advantage when it comes to territorial sprawl. They can spam out sovereignty claiming POS in the knowledge that they will have plenty of warning and time to muster formal fleets in for potential reinforcement battles and can generally ensure that only people agreeing to play ball "IE NAP and submit" get to establish roots. Map options give a "gods eye view" of populated systems and quick scans through local can immediately spot the presence of interlopers. So your options as things stand are generally - make a deal with an existing power for access and residence, or try to make a pitch on your own and accept that sitting territorial powers will likely mass to remove you. Now, the kind of dynamic environment I'm advocating would cut down on the ability of existing powers to spam and maintain the extensive networks of untended POS and perma-cyno-jammed systems. With more fluid sovereignty mechanics involving actual pvp combat to maintain holdings, the big fish of 0.0 would be spending more time defending their sovereignty status on smaller claims and have less time and freedom to oppress EVERY system on the map. The kind of local changes I'd favor would make it easier for small corporations and alliances to exist under the radar of the big boys, I'm a great fan of "ninja-industry" and unlicensed presence in the underbelly of these big territorial beasts. I'd definitely be in favour of mobile infrastructure that can span the gulf between non-territorial (empire based) endeavour and formal 0.0 architecture: examples would be utility factory ships that could perhaps be customised with modules to act as mini-stations, with fitting, repair, corp hangers and such, but without the combat ability of current cap-ships, things that can act as base-ships for younger corps and alliances and provide a focal ambition for early collective endeavor. The basic message though: by making sovereignty harder to maintain and increasing the cost and reducing availability of items like jump bridges and cyno jammers, combined with reducing map report statistics and omnipotent local chat you produce a 0.0 environment that is suddenly ... much bigger, with far more room for newer corporations and alliances to dive in and establish themselves. I strongly believe that 0.0 as it is today is much too easy for the big powers to maintain and administrate and by making them work harder to defend their borders and space you produce greater opportunity for newcomers and new development. Quote: You have my vote, pending your response. Hopefully this helps explain, if you need any more clarification just ask! And I really hope you enjoy your time in Eve Online. All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.10 02:31:00 - [99] Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama Originally by: Miyamoto Isoruku What would you do to make mining not suck? Currently, mining consists of sitting and staring at asteroids for hours. Allow me to share my proposal: Players would still buy mining ships, modules, etc. Their skills would still govern production output. However, instead of being forced to mine themselves, they would instead hire mining crews that would pilot their ships for them. This would allow players to have mining investments while they are doing things more interesting than staring at rocks. One could introduce skills for how many mining ships one can have active at once, behavior scripts, that sort of thing. Obviously, using a mining crew in low- or null-sec could be very dangerous. They would not be able to respond as quickly or as effectively and would probably need protection. I already voted for you and represent some non-player support from Bangor too!!! But in seriousness the point above made me wonder... do you think there is more scope in eve for more accessible and dynamic temporary anchored structures... such as a deployed mining station (that perhaps would stay active only so long as your lease allowed, but would be available in high-sec with meaningful restrictions), siege weapon platforms that could be deployed on the offensive, listening posts that could provide a more legitimate alternative to bacon (with appropriate skills and isk investment to deploy)... I think personally a lot of the dull jobs in eve could be automated with proper consideration to the methods, and demend on in-game resources. I can certainly see a role for temporary anchored structures with a variety of purposes actually - things like the mining station (for storage/refine) that actually represents a fair investment and could be attacked by empire war decs, definitely on listening posts and siege weapon platforms (off grid bombardment of POS shields and micro battlefields in and of themselves) - these could be good. Quote: Lets pick the listening buoy example (and this is made up on the fly, not a serious suggestion but an illustration on a point). Lets say they're pretty expensive and moderately tough. You need high anchoring + some communications related skills existing or new to deploy them. You invest in 3 and while you siege a pos these are on 3 key systems on the approach to your fleet's location. These bouys are broadcasting something in order to detect incoming hostiles so they light up like cynos in system, you cant hide them. You know that if the enemy is coming they're going to pop it, but you do get to see them coming. But yeah, my question is: Is there not underutilised functionality here that could change the game for the better? In a situation where we get local altered and diminished gods-eye map intel and scan becomes more important then this kind of listening-post anchorable structure could well be a lovely way for the approaches of a key system to be secured. Good trade off for vulnerable investment vs functionality - decent target for small strike gangs and a balanced advantage for the owner. Yep, provisionally I like it. Anyways Ryoji thanks very much for the vote and support from good old Bangor :) All the best in Eve and fingers crossed we can get the influence needed to improve the game for everyone. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.10 12:39:00 - [100] Originally by: Syrin Jade = David cameron ?? Sounds like it anyhow. I dont get to play much EvE, hour or 2 a day. What are your proposals going to do for a small time empire gankbear like me ? Certainly not David Cameron that much I assure you ... Not entirely sure what a "gankbear" actually is? I'm going to guess it means you like short doses of pvp in hisec through wardecs and such? Well a whole section of my interest is devoted to enhanced combat opportunity in empire - things like transferable killrights as part of a bounty hunting mini-profession, improvements to the wardec system with goals and performance-tracking, mercenary career integration (binding contracts and "buy-in" to existing wars - and an enthusiastic commitment to really making sure that Faction Warfare is done right and delivered in an entertaining and inclusive way. I've done a lot of fighting in empire space myself Syrin and consider this form of warfare is vital to the nature of Eve and has to be fun, accessible, and allow players to actively involve themselves with other players for focused hostility and conflict when diplomacy fails and gunplay is on the menu. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.11 16:41:00 - [101] Originally by: Maltor'Vak While it is probably still a bit early in the process, I think you are well on your way to representing Eve in Iceland. Do a good job, we'll be watching. Fingers crossed; we're just about half way through the voting and there is a still a long way to go if we're going to make sure the CSM has a good range of representatives capable of presenting genuinely progressive thinking and clear understanding of ways to improve this great game. We really need an impressive voter turnout to overcome the alliance block votes and ensure we get genuinely independent voices on the council, since its in everyone's interest that this doesn't become a council of clones voting lockstock for status quo issues and terrified of all innovation and new ideas that might damage their host alliance's position in space while altering Eve for the better. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.11 22:46:00 - [102] Originally by: Shi Lang Just so you know, I voted for you man, gl :) Much appreciated! All the best. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 01:33:00 - [103] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've already voted for you - your vision for the game is exactly in line with what i'd like to see - but an idea just came to mind that I'd like to hear your take on. Thank you very much Herschel, very glad to hear that we share a vision for the future development of Eve - thats excellent! Quote: You've complained pretty strongly about how cyno jammers make for too strong a defensive bias, but the solution you seem to be implying is removal of the module. How about making it a soft jam instead? A player tries to trigger a cyno in a jammed system, it flashes onto the overview for everybody in local like a cyno does, and they have to hold it up for five or ten minutes before anybody can jump to it? It'd probably be a pain to rewrite the code for the module, but it'd allow for the jammer to still have a strong effect without making the attempt to bypass it a complete grind, and it'd require alliances that want to jam systems to keep people in them to watch for break-ins, which reduces the whole "spam and forget" factor you dislike. It'd still require a blob of battleships to come in and try to break the jam, but they wouldn't have to do it right into the teeth of a death star and a waiting blob of defenders. I think thats a very interesting concept actually - so something like making Cyno-Jammers -> Cyno-Inhibitors instead, that simply make the process of establishing working cyno fields more difficult rather than setting a binary "impossible flag". On balance I like the idea, and yep it would make the space holding alliances much more dependent on active patrols to investigate cyno fields in progress to eliminate threats to their sovereignty. I'm going to say that 10-15 minutes is probably too short and it will need a longer period of vulnerability before the cyno can be used but as a seed for an idea of how to reform cyno-jammers from their current broken form its a pretty good one. It definitely would provide combat dynamism and variety since you are establishing new focal points conflict each time you begin to break through with the new cyno field. Its a great idea! All the best Herschel and thanks a lot for that! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 02:30:00 - [104] Originally by: Zareph Ignoring POS/Sov stuff as it stands today my question was around your 'let stations be blowed up' part. If stations can be blowed up, stations need to have defenses that don't rely on a character/person being there, otherwise, it's SSDD with the blobs. you bring big blob to blow up station, persons who own station aren't really keen on that idea so they're going to defend... If you can burn the 15 jumps to the station from your space to their space, or, drop behind enemy lines via a simple cyno and start shooting the station either A) Taking advantage of the guy who owns it is dead asleep at the moment or B) taking advantage that the guy isn't there at the moment because he's busy elsewhere So you'd need some type of automated defense - just like NPC poses have. They have gate guns, and some of the missions have stasis web batteries, etc. So a player should be able to put those up as well to help in the automated defense. Sure they should have HP and Shield/Armor/Structure but without a mechanic to combat the time delta of the players of EVE again you could easily have a roaming gang destroy all the stations of corporation or alliance during say ANZAC time if they didn't have a huge population of ANZAC folks to keep it safe. I'm trying to understand what mechanic besides the broken one we have now you'd put in place to combat that. The simple answer to that is the current proposal for destructible stations I'm most in favor of: this has self-destruction as an option to conquerers after they have held (pacified) an outpost for X period of time. (Probably 72 hours or so) The outpost would be taken in a similar way to the current system (win sovereignty by whichever mechanic is in place) - then shoot at the shields till your "conquer" the outpost. After the 72 hour "pacification period" the new owner could opt to rig it to self-destruct and trigger a 48 hour countdown to destruction. During this countdown the outpost is under "emergency access" rules and anyone could dock and access their hangers regardless of ownership. Also, the self-destructing station would be outside the local sovereignty system and could be re-conquered and saved from self-destruct up to 2 hours prior to the ultimate destruction point. As you can see this doesn't make the outpost any more vulnerable to conquest than it is at the moment and it would actually be quite a challenge to keep these things to the self-destruct process against organized counterattack by forces wishing to prevent it. Hope this helps. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 12:33:00 - [105] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 12/05/2008 12:34:18 Originally by: Rico Minali Firstly, you have my vote. the more I think about getting rid of local channel the more I like it, it will allow smuggling and so on to be more viable, as well as 'living in the underbelly of giants' so I think that would be fantastic, as well as more realistic, you would have to scan to see who is there. Yeah exactly so really, Danton Marcellus has it right when the says that less is more from the perspective of giving less "gods eye" information to make a bigger game map from the current resources. It will make it more difficult for existing territorial powers to dominate the entirety of bloated space claims since they will need a greater balance of patrol and investigation than currently exists (where the map does much of the work). Quote: ... Cloaks should also be more limited to cov ops ships, with maybe a time limit that a cloak will work on a non cov ops ship. Or prototype ones are the only cloak allowed on a non cov ops and inrease the cpu and pg cost, this would allow at least some leeway for unusual fits without the cloak being a common mod. Well the thing with the cloak is that it allows you to operate in hostile territory and lets consider the balance here. In an outpost system you're likely locked out of the outpost where the defender can dock - thats fine, thats defense advantage. But in a non-outpost system you have the situation where the defender can avoid combat, afk and idle behind the POS shields of a friendly tower (making them effectively invulnerable in the short term) - there needs to be the option for the attacker to do the same in adverse circumstances or you've tilted the balance even further in favour of defense advantage and provided even more disincentive to actual combat. (this is the real issue at the core of all these discussions - what we have to avoid at all costs is discouraging warfare through making it too easy for the defenders). Quote: Also, how would you adress the great logofski problem? take a fleet to a system log them all of except a spy and log back in as a trap when you want to, it's unrealistic and not in the spirit of Eve to my mind. Its a sad tactic I agree. I guess it gets partially dealt with if you address the meta-knowledge tools of the game. Remove local intel and you get the ability to hide a fleet at a deep safe spot and gain the functionality of the "log-off" without actually performing the "log-off" (ie tactical surprise). Deal with map tools and similar effect. Allow people to change their status in the address book reporting (ie the MSN style functionality of "show me offline" if you are running with a fleet and don't want war enemies who have address-booked you to know you are online and active. See the point? The "logoffski" thing is designed to give a degree of tactical surprise that we should all be able to gain through good in-game play but can't at the moment because the client just delivers too much infomation to our enemies about our location in system, online status, map intel etc etc. Level the playing field by reducing "gods-eye" intel in the client and you remove the advantage of "logoffski" and login traps and people will stop doing it. This is an example of removing the advantage of poor play by giving good players the mechanics they need to gain tactical surprise through gameplay not metagameplay. Quote: ... reinforced shouldnt mean invulnerable. Perhaps just everything bar shield goes offline and shield resists go up so a pos in reinforced just takes a fair amount of pounding to blow up, giving the defending force time to get ships to it to defend. It wouldn't be nearly so much a problem if the POS themselves were not the foundation of Sovereignty claims AND the "space castles" that defend cyno-jammers and jump bridges. If the POS were purely industrial hubs for moon-mining and industry then I think the reinforcement mode would be far less grim. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 15:20:00 - [106] Originally by: Heero Yuy Having read through the manifestos of all candidates, I think its reasonably fair to say that only one has a broad and well thought-out vision for the improvement of EVE. Votes have been cast accordingly. Thank you Heero, very kind words and much appreciated! Quote: Best wishes and best of luck to Jade, and by extension to all players of EVE. Yep, thats the ultimate point of all this, delivering a progressive CSM that has the courage and passion to advocate improvements to this great game to keep Eve fresh and exciting for existing players and newcomers to the single-server space opera we know and love! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 17:00:00 - [107] Originally by: Forkrul I voted Jade Constantine for a number of reasons. The primary one is that she is a role-player and well known. She is therefore more likely than the other role-play candidates to do as she writes. Now why a role-player, some may ask? Well, while many things could be included to make role-players more complacent with an MMO, Jade will possibly urge the introduction of attributes to the game that may make it feel more immersive overall. She seems on the right pillar of what is truly needed in order to improve EVE Online. Thank you for your vote and kind words Forkul - most appreciated. Quote: I myself have technically quit playing EVE Online even though I keep my account active to train skills with the notion that I may come back. As a 0.0 solo-ist, the number one thing I am looking for is survivability, which would be perfectly okay if she somehow got the developers to remove all of this maximum speed upon undock crap. Well, there are other alternatives to the docking mechanic for achieving that, for example, when Ambulation comes around simply looking out of the docking port at stations will work wonders I think. Quote: But back to the Immersive aspect. Immersion is what keeps new players in, old players going and everyone intrigued. I recognize that Jade Constantine will keep attention to issues such as 0.0 warfare, low-sec quality gameplay and balance for both Pirates and Carebears as well as the wellfare of true high-sec carebears. Then there is me. All I want to do is just fkn play in 0.0 with the locals who I made friends with and not have to undock at full speed. Jade, please listen to this. I am voting for you because of your role-play background, but I hope you can push on issues that keep soloists balanced with corporations/groups. I'm certainly keenly interested in dynamic combat balance for small gang warfare in 0.0 and lowsec, and is vitally important that the game doesn't move to the state where such activity is nerfed out of sight by empire building tools and overt defense advantage. Quote: Aside from all of this, if you actually read what she typed, it's quite impressive. She knows she can't promise everything, but simply do her best to get the developers to realize what needs to be done to keep EVE going. She seems to knows that the current state of Cynojammers and Capital warefare is heavily unbalanced. I don't know much about this, but I reckon that it is unbalanced toward the defender, but that she recognizes that defenders still 'ought to have the upper hand in almost any situation. Defenders should only lose out of a combination of superior attributes, not just one spearheading the enemy into their space. I'm glad you found the general manifesto to be impressive Forkrul, I certainly hoped it gave an insight into my perception of the big picture in Eve at the moment and analysis of progressive ways forward for the good of the game and player base. Quote: Anyways, that is why I voted for Jade. As a role player, and a well known one, she seems to want to press issues which I think need pressing and will be held to it with her reputation. Certainly true - hence why running with a long term identity is very important. I'm asking you to trust me with your vote and you can assess on my past reputaton how well I've kept my word and did what I promised to do in the Eve history before. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.12 21:29:00 - [108] Originally by: Jamie Hara Is it true that you want to nerf carriers and 0.0 space? No idea where you got the idea I wanted to Nerf Carriers from. Absolutely incorrect. And as for nerfing 0.0 space - I would like to see it more exciting, with more conflict opportunity, more combat variety and featuring a greater range of engagements of all sizes and levels of significance. I guess if your desire for 0.0 space was "A quiet little place for making money" you might consider that a nerf - but for anybody looking for thrills and spills and glorious space opera dramatics on the wild frontier its a pretty easy sell CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 15:30:00 - [109] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 13/05/2008 15:31:00 Originally by: Forkrul Jade Constantine is a guy!!! :-O!!!! True story Quote: And I strongly support the destructible outposts idea, too. Jolly good! Seriously its an option badly needed in 0.0 conquerable space - Eve really shouldn't be all about spamming indestructible structures on easy mode. If you build a space empire it should be possible to see your holdings turned to ash by a dedicated foe who can triumph over your forces in war. Quote: You see, Jade is much like all those candidates that talk so much and are intelligent to face the issues head on... yet still admit that they are not going to be able to promise anything... but then people don't vote for Jade because "They took ear Jerbs," and "I WOULDN'T HAVE A DRINK WITH THAT CANDIDATE RIGHT THAR" Ummm, not sure I understood exactly what you said there Forkrul CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 16:15:00 - [110] Originally by: LiuSang Songbird I'm too new to the game to vote .But wanted to ask you if there are any other science fiction writers you take your ideas from in Eve? You write about Ian Banks and his Culture novels but are there any other authors you think embody the Eve culture and gameplay and could be a useful start point for newer players making their characters and corporations? Thx Interesting question, probably not that relevant to the CSM campaign specifically but I'm a sucker for science fiction As some who have taken an interest in Star Fraction in the past know we took our name from the the novel of the same name by Ken MacLeod which is a brilliant story in a speculative near-future setting with a world dominated by the US/UN and the British Isles divided into micro-states on the verge of a covert nano-tech powered revolution. I don't want to spoil the plotline but lets just say it has a whole slew of relevant happenstance particularly appropriate to building political movements in Eve Online. Star Fraction goes on to a further sequence of novels exploring revolutionary dynamics and something of a recurring theme in this writing - artificial intelligence, post-humanity and political ramifications of significant technological change. As another standalone book - Newton's Wake has some great ideas too, but is sadly less well written IMO. I'd also recommend the books of Dan Simmons (Hyperion sequence) -> for its wonderful Ousters vs Hegemony ideological clash in space settlement + (Illium sequence) -> for great insight into potential futures and technology post transhumanist singularity. Dan Simmons is a master storyteller and superb writer and is highly recommended. I really good go on all day with this stuff, but I'll close by mentioning Adam Roberts who tends to be a bit of hit and miss author with some mediocre books and some truly excellent books - I absolutely love his debut novel SALT (a tale of colonization of an alien world by culturally-distinct colony ships leading to the horrible inevitability of nation-state hostility again) and my favorite book of his Gradisil (which is a near speculative future of individual revolution amongst the private owners of habitats in near Earth Orbit.) Anyway I'll stop there, but feel free to drop by the SF forums and say hi if you want more ideas, we're got entire topics devoted to our favourite SF writers and stories. Hope you enjoy sparking your own revolutions in Eve! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 16:51:00 - [111] Originally by: Bomber1945 wow what a forum thread where two thirds of all the posts are made by the same person. Oh and btw cyno jammers mean that there is an opportunity for non-capital ship warfare to occur in 0.0 space. otherwise we would simply play capitals-online all the time and there is nothing more trench warfare orientated then 2 fleets of dreads sitting in siege mode. Long live system jammers! Shock horror news at 11! CSM Candidate replies to people in his own CSM Q/A thread! Cyno-Jammers actually mean that only one side gets to have capital ships in the Cyno-Jammer assault phase of the POS battle. They also mean that Capital Ships can be used with impunity by the defenders in Cyno-Jammed systems against any kind of raiding force - its not unusual these days to see capital ships deployed to fight 2 Drakes and a Crow on a gate. If more capital ships could be deployed in 0.0 space battles you'd see more capital ships dying. Dead capital ships cost money to replace and would have some impact on the otherwise entirely upward spiral of capital ship ownership and stockpiling in 0.0 at the moment. Cyno-jammers prevent incidental small unit capital ship engagements (handful a side) but do nothing to inhibit formal mega slug-fest capital warfare at reinforcement battles. Hence they are clearly a technology that penalize small scale warfare while ensuring big lag fests are neccessary. At to that: the modules are too cheap, too easy to deploy and spam over the whole of sovereign space, and you have a serious issue with 0.0 becoming a cyno-black hole where literally nobody can move ships about. This is the veritable definition of static trench warfare. Death to cyno Jammers! (or if not death then a damn good hard "rebalancing" with the nobbly end of the nerf bat. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 18:58:00 - [112] Originally by: Dai'Yu Shen Hey Jade, Your vision of what EVE can, and should be, gels perfectly with mine. Something needs to be done about the overwhelming advantages of defense in 0.0 and the idea of destructible outposts is sexy Yep, I think sometimes the player-led empires in 0.0 forget that part of the drama and beauty of this game lay in the ups and downs of political process and the sense of accomplishment needs to be coupled with a genuine sense of threat. Destructible architecture has such a prominent place in good scifi drama that its a bit amazing that a game with a background story and theme as rich as Eve should have this degradation of vision in 0.0 as a sop to softcore empire builders who fear aggressive action might burn their castles to dust one day. What makes Eve exciting and addictive is the adrenal-rush of fear that attends risking any significant asset in the dangerous regions of space - its a real death penalty and its a shame that 0.0 compromises this sensation in dull capture-the-flag mechanics on the outpost level. Quote: I've just a small question, and I apologize if this has been touched upon earlier in the thread (I don't think it has, but I could have missed a post or two). You briefly mentioned Titans in your manifesto, and it seems you don't see them or the DD as a major problem except in conjunction with Cyno Jammers. Is this a fair representation of your views? Yes it is a fair representation actually. I've never been a fan of knee-jerk nerfing ships and classes based on the political or gameplay aspirations of pressure-groups. I think the Titan class today has become a problem in combination with the nature of territorial warfare (everyone groups at pre-arranged time for the reinforcement battles as doomsday bait) and I'm also not terribly happy with the function of cyno-jammers making conventional fleets attack jammers at positions reinforced with Titans on the initial attacks. As ships in and of themselves though, I don't really have a problem with them - they represent a huge investment of training time/expense for the pilots, and they take an absolutely epic slice of effort to build them in the first place and they remain pretty vulnerable to dreadnaught class attack. Where I can see problems in the future is massed groups of Titans doomsday-shooting Heavy Interdictors out of space casually and having no countermeasure to their EW invulnerability/scramble immunity. I think a solution could well be to introduce a capital ship grade warp scrambler module that operates like the hictor focused scramble and allows capital ships to tackle Titans and Moms and will ensure that Titan/cap fights will be fought to bloody conclusions rather than allowing doomsday usage and scott-free escapes after doomsday blasting support fleets to bits. I also like the idea of scripting the doomsday weapon between AOE and focused mode (where the focused mode is a devastating anti capital blast of significant yield attack other caps and super caps.) The Titan pilots/FCs would need to choose from the benefit of the DD weapon and significant cooldown or maybe the ability to fire a powerful focused blast each minute or so. In essence this would give more tactical choices to the Titan deployment but via the capital scrambler more risk as well. Point is I think you can deal with Titan proliferation by making them get stuck in more. I really don't mind the idea of vast battles where titans are scambled on both sides and alliances throw hundreds of capital ships into the fray and see billions of isk going up in smoke. This is high end content and the biggest powers in 0.0 should be paying a cost for making war - I want to see literal Ragnarok for the capital powers in 0.0 in furious brutal showdowns. Ending the Titan-Age by just nerfing the ships to uselessness seems tawdry and un-eve-like to me. I want to see them used in the bloodiest fights the server has ever seen. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 19:30:00 - [113] Originally by: Arithron So you would like to see POS and other structures attackable and defeatable in one attack? How does this support small corps, who spend considerable time, effort and ISK putting the POS up in the first place? We all work in different timezones, and can't be on 24 hours a day to defend our structures in space- hence the reinforced mode. This gives a corp a chance to defend its property. Doesn't follow, I'm actually opposed to POS being used for Sovereignty warfare - I don't mind utility/industrial POS having reinforcement timers, but I do mind the universal "one-size-fits-all" Deathstar POS with critical elements of space control infrastructure being defended in such ways. Lets have Moon mining POS spawn attackable convoys outside the range of their guns for raiders to target. Lets have jammers and jump-bridges moved away from POS full stop. Lets have sovereignty determined NOT by large tower spam, but by a mechanic that actually promotes player on player conflict with distributed objectives encouraging smaller simultaneous battles. Originally by: Arithron I'm not interested in reading your manifesto, tbh. I personally don't think its our place nor job to come up with new directions and ideas for the game- the PLAYERS will do this. Our job is to decide which of these issues has the support of the players or is important to be brought to CCP's attention.Bruce Hansen (Arithron) I guess thats where we leave this part of the discussion then. Not much point you asking me to explain my stance on specific items when you are on record as believing that candidates shouldn't be talking about specific items in the first place. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 19:32:00 - [114] Originally by: Arithron Actually, it does follow. What you really mean is you want to split POS and other anchorable structures into two different groups, specifically those that give Sovereignty (0.0) and those that donÆt (low sec and empire structures). Nope, I really don't see a need to split between 0.0 and lowsec and empire for functionality of POS structures. I would like to see POS returned to a purely industrial role for economy/mining/research and such and in this form there really wouldn't need to be a 0.0 only POS. As to how Sovereignty gets determined and what it should actually do in the future - thats another discussion and quite complicated in its own right. For the sake of argument here we'll go with CCP's "gate-control" sov prototype so we don't get sidetracked. Quote: As far as I can make out (since I have read your threads, as I have with all other candidates and players in the CSM forums), you are wanting to see changes in the way Sovereignty works? Yes. Quote: Can I ask you how big of a percentage of players you think this will affect? A significant proportion of players involved with territorial warfare in 0.0 + and generally for the better, in that sovereignty disputes should be more entertaining, and involve far more actual player on player space combat rather than player vs structure grinding of POS shields. Quote: Additionally, what benefit to new players and younger players (ie, less than a year old) will these changes bring about? Ability to take part substantively in territorial warfare within fleets. With sovereignty fights coming down to actual spaceships vs spaceships rather than the current design in POS warfare the role for newer players will be much more prominent. Quote: How will it affect Empire (apart from possibly disrupting the rarer moon mineral supplies, which will go down a treat with manufacturers)? I would envisage no real effect on Empire since this is about sovereignty mechanics. As for the disruption of moon mineral supplies - well, at the moment giant cartels control rare moon minerals Arithron - they will either continue to to control rare moons and profit from it (while adapting to the demands of a more dynamic sovereignty conquest system) or they will fail and others will gain access to those resources in turn. This is eve, things change. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 19:59:00 - [115] Originally by: Arithron If you are pushing for POS to lose the determination of sovereignty role, then its actually a pretty relevant discussion to be having. Your æfixÆ present a bigger problemàhow to determine Sovereignty that reflects the expenditure of resources/time/effort/ISK to obtain it, and gives some stability to systems. Because, even if what you assert about cartels being in control of rare moon minerals is true, unstable POS existence to mine such minerals will have a major affect on their availability, and hence their price. Yes it certainly is and lets discuss it if you like. Thats what this thread is for. You appear to favor a pure economic expenditure model and I'm in favor of a pvp contest model. I think 0.0 empires should have to fight for their space - of course that fighting involves spending money so we're not that far apart on the principle just the execution. I think you are also missing the point on "unstable POS existence" -> since I'm actually quite happy with pure economic POS structures (non sovereignty) keeping their reinforced mode. Quote: Okay, you avoid giving numbersà.what percentage of PLAYERS do you think are involved in this significant proportion of 0.0? Depends on the region really, but if sovereignty assessment happened on a more overt pvp fleet battle system I'd say increased participation would occur, I'd expect double the number of current characters involved with territorial warfare at least. Quote: Do you think that the current setup of the server, and the tendency of alliances to employ large numbers of capitals, will actually make sovereignty disputes more entertaining? Yes I do. More battles, more losses, more excitement - more alliances going bankrupt and paying a price for warfare as it should be. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.13 20:21:00 - [116] Originally by: Arithron And you again avoided numbers...is it because the actual percentage of players involved are in the single percentages of players of Eve? Bruce Hansen (Arithron) Its quite possible. But as you say yourself what happens in 0.0 has impacts on the secondary markets and game-play of many more in Empire. I honestly don't see the rigid caste divisions between 0.0 and Empire as some do. If your going to ask me how many players are involved with sovereignty warfare - well, I don't have access to CCP server logs to cross check numbers of shots fired against POS but I'd be happy to estimate 10,000 or so? roughly, and these being quite active players often with multiple accounts. Compared against the 220,000 subscriber base thats probably 5% if that - but are you trying to say that issues involving 0.0 warfare should never reach the CSM because of the pure number of non-involved people? CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.14 01:00:00 - [117] Originally by: Ukutora Ozugas If you have the time, I would like for you to discuss what you can, about how you see ambulation effecting the player base. From recent videos on Ten Ton Hammer, and other interviews, we've seen a great deal about it. CCP is already taking great steps into the personalizing of the character that it is hard to think of anything that they might leave out. One obvious thing is that people are going to want to try to make the clothing themselves. According to CCP, this might break immersion with people running around dressed like santa. My own concerns are that the costumes will become stagnant and boring over time. I hope that they are constantly going to be adding new designs, not only new textures and fabrics. Well the science fiction genre has a rich vein of possibility for different ethnic looks and styles, I'm guessing some lucky graphic artist (or three) is going to get tasked with the job of ensuring that rare and exotic clothing forms that suit the Eve background are out there to be purchased for isk. I can certainly see the concern over self-design clothes though - a lot of amateur efforts in other games look quite tawdry and immersion-breaking and I can sympathize with CCP wanting to keep the graphic style "in-house" to maintain creative standards. Quote: Something that might also be cool, is wear and tear over time. I'm sure they've got the capability to do it. I also often forget... does PG-13 contain nudity? I believe PG-13 allows for topless women but no other naughty bits for either sex. Wear and tear for clothing could be good - but might just be something you need to customize yourself as a graphic style to differentiate costumes even more. I'd certainly like a battered leather flight jacket for Jade with the Star Fraction logo on it! Quote: Should you become elected for CSM, I can almost promise you that every player will have their own ideas and suggestions to improve that section of game play, and they will be asking you to relate those ideas. I've no doubt about that, ultimately its part of the role and responsibility and its down to the voters now to select the nine candidates they think can best achieve this within the aspirations of the CSM. All the best, and happy voting! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.14 11:13:00 - [118] Originally by: Elaron As always, Jade, it is a pleasure to read about your philosophies and aspirations as they apply to this complex and unique game. My question is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things, but I would very much like to know your opinion on the relative balance in the ships and capabilities of the four races. Do you even think this is much of an issue given the open nature of the skill system? Thanks Elaron, very kind words and much appreciated. Re the relative balance of the four empires ship technology - well, at the moment I do think there is a good degree of balance overall, all races have been through overhauls indirectly through addressing specific weapon systems (lasers, drones, missiles etc). If another race needs to be looked at its probably the Minmatar at this point but this would be a general stock-taking and assessment of how they work in the current environment rather than crisis "omg my race is broken" style issue. Certainly the open skill system does allow players to mitigate changes and perceptions of weakness in the four races and I think thats most long term players tend to cross-train at least a couple of races to allow for engagement variety and focus (and also if they are lucky those nifty pirate faction ships). My strongest pair of racial skills are Caldari/Amarr (ironically) and its certainly made the Nightmare an absolute beast at the moment. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.14 16:58:00 - [119] Originally by: Deathbear I loved your poster, so I already voted for you, but I'm still curious: Realistically, how do you intend to bring about the (mostly very welcome to me) ideas for changes you're promoting? I've read some concerns about how the scope of the CSM isn't quite clear to many people, and I fear I'm one of those people. Thanks for your vote Deathbear much appreciated. Ultimately what can be achieved by the CSM will depend on the nine candidates chosen by the electorate though - if we get 8 conservative stick in the muds with a status quo agenda there is going to be limited amount I can do with that if I'm elected as the 9th rep. The CSM needs to vote issues onto the formal agenda for discussion in Iceland and thats why is very important that people read the manifestos and get a "tell" on the kind of candidate they are supporting with their votes in advance. Whats more likely to happen though is we'll probably get 5-6 candidates with a genuinely open mind who can be persuaded to advocate progressive changes and then all sorts of things are possible. As for my campaign, the reason I've been very open about what I support and where I'd like the game to go is so that voters can have a high degree of confidence in where my voting power is going to go should I be elected. As an entity the CSM could be good, bad or indifferent and will dependent entirely who gets elected to it - everything is still up in the air and its going to be very interesting to see what happens in a weeks time. Quote: The ideas you represent notwithstanding, what do you think the CSM can achieve, and how? Thanks in advance for your answer. I think the CSM can achieve a positive reconnection of CCP development talent to the player-base itself. It can express serious concerns and desire for development effort and ensure that the general standard of communication between players and devs reaches a much higher standard then in recent years. If all goes well and we get a well-rounded CSM of passionate and progressive representatives willing to take the hard decisions for the benefit of future gameplay dynamism and excitement then the sky is literally the limit. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 01:12:00 - [120] Originally by: jdok Jade I apologize if this has been mentioned already, or if it isn't really within your power of CSM, but what can you do about more hotkeys? Especially drone hotkeys. Also would you be able to push for a better user interface? CCP isn't exactly the best at it... I think its pretty clear that CCP have themselves recognized the need for development talent in this area. There are definitely many many improvements possible for the UI at this point and I think its going to be an easy issue to find CSM consensus on. As for hotkeys in general - can't disagree, its good functionality and definitely needs advocacy. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 11:57:00 - [121] Originally by: Leneerra You already have my vote. Jolly good! Thanks very much Quote: But there is a few things I wonder about with regards to the destructeble outpost idear. An outpost represents a vast investment by a group to construct. Would you be in favor of having the destroying party make a similar investment as was originally made by the builders? No actually, on balance I think the attacker investment is made in the process of conquering the space the Outpost holds - this could involve placing or destroying dozens of POS in the current iteration of the sovereignty system for example. If you were asking the attack to make a similar investment (in addition) to the cost of sieging and taking sovereignty thats probably unreasonable. Quote: I think it should require at least something like a full load for a freighter in trade and produceble goods (and perhaps a bpc?). Part of these goods would be lost if the self destruct is aborted and part refunded to the statiuon manager, similar to a factory job. Given the actual difficulty of ensuring the self-destruct happens (you need to defend a station outside sovereignty protection for 48 hours while no docking restrictions are in power) I think it wouldn't be a good idea to further punish an attempted detonation with loss of committed material assets in that way. Quote: Also I have seen posts about having the station remain as a destroyed remnant where people can retrieve their assets as well as providing a rebate on constructing a new outops on the same spot. What would your opinion be in having that destroyed outpost removed at the end of the month during the recently (not yet operational?) clean up function (Although I think it should not be removed the first time it participates in the cleaning cycle, ensuring accassebility for salvage for at least a full month) I'm open-minded on the issue of whether it gets reduced to a "derelict" with hanger access for the stuff inside for the owners if they can manage to fly close. I think its a reasonable compromise solution. If that was adopted I don't think it should get cleaned up in the monthly process though - it should say and be a seed for future rebuilding at a discount of future outposts. All the best! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 12:49:00 - [122] Originally by: Arithron My question above was highlighting some issues that your proposed changes might have: Namely, server lag and system lag, making large battles difficult and frustrating. Additionally, it won't stop major capital + support ship engagements and thus we are back to the system lag again. The key is removing the big reinforcement battle at the POS aspect from territorial warfare really - and distributing multiple smaller engagements across a slew of systems as part of the process. Make warfare more about surprise action, intelligence gathering, and proper disposition and deployment of your forces. The old "bring everything to the POS and sit there" battle is the problem, it kills creativity, it murders the server and its no real fun for anyone. Quote: The economic losses are important, especially if you are a small alliance trying to get a foothold in 0.0. Such alliances can only take the losses for so long...so the larger alliances may still dominate the Sov (so we end up back where we started...). There is no such thing as a small alliance getting a foothold in 0.0 today in reality. They all become part of a broader NAP-pact to defend their holdings since numbers is the only defense in POS reinforcement sovereignty battles. Also, losses count for everyone, don't think for a moment its not possible to break a large power from sustained attrition in an environment where there are actual casualties being inflicted. Problem at the moment is such casualties are extremely rare - take a look at how many capital ships are actually getting blown up on various 0.0 megapower killboards for an example of how low impact 0.0 warfare tends to be. Compare to how easy these things are to build and stockpile and you get an insight into how Eve is turning into "capitals online". The answer is not to "nerf capitals" its to ensure that fights happen more often in a range of circumstances and not always at the favoured time and place reinforcement battles where the big blob decides all. Quote: Discussions such as ours will have to take place on the CSM forums with players, and in the CSM meetings etc. Lets hope they can be civil discussions, such as ours... Absolutely. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 15:37:00 - [123] Originally by: Erotic Irony "Black ops" Go. Thats all a bit minimalist, still its worth re-stating. Black Ops ships need to be fixed: covert cyno's definitely need to ignore cyno-jammers, basic jump range needs to be increased (to allow them to traverse pirate jumps distances) fuel usage needs to be diminished or they need larger cargo bays or some kind of jump fuel compression system should be brought into the model. Other than that, more black-ops ships and focus! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 16:34:00 - [124] Originally by: Miyamoto Isoruku PG-13 doesn't allow topless women, at least not in the states. Then again we're prudes here... Ah my mistake then shocking really and yep, you should hear the discussion we've had about our new forum banner and the tiniest sight of a woman's wayward nipple http://www.jericho-fraction.net/smf/Themes/SF/images/bigtitle.jpg Don't worry its pretty damned work safe now ... CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 18:49:00 - [125] Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde While some might be intimidated by your text and lengthy interviews, I received them as incredibly detailed and well thought out. You got my vote :) Thank you very much, greatly appreciated! Quote: Three things though. 1. Destructable outposts: Yes. Should still be capturable but they cant be the invulnerable fortresses they are now. One issue with this, and I'm surprised no one's brought it up (that I've noticed, sorry if i missed you) is that outpost destruction will become the new and most epic EVE griefing tool. Goonswarm will have a field day, if not many more groups. How do you address this risk? Well situation at the moment is if you take an Outpost from somebody you are likely putting up your own POS and locking them out regardless. With the capture and self-destruct sequence model the losing outpost owners at least get a chance to evacuate their stuff and if we adopt the derelict model for post destruction the kit in the hangers would still be there to be accessed / "salvaged." As for the likes of Goonswarm and such "griefing" outposts - well, its what they do anyway with their blobs and campaigns of sweeping across the map and owning vast underpopulated regions. With outpost destruction on the menu it gives a change for insurgents to strike back and do some real harm to these "lazy powers" that stretch across the map take too much territory for efficient defense. Compact and focused outpost holding alliances will be much more capable of holding their territory than overstretched greedy powers. Quote: 2. Advocate for 100% player content POS. You want alliances to not be able to claim gazzilions of systems, to rebalance in favor of attackers, and bring more sentiment behind removing POS as the basis for sov this is an important stepping stone. Look at what removing NPC involvement in the shuttle market is doing. Instead of an alliance being able to buy an endless amount of POS at a fixed price, let the players limit the supply and dictate the price if they dont have the industrial capacity to build in house. And if they DO, then that's more minerals shifted away from cap ship production or at least presenting alliances with a more challenging opportunity cost than is now the case. We'll see a massive decrease in POS spamming and a shrinkage of 0.0 claims. This should be paired up with all POS fuel being player createable/harvestable. No more NPC buy/sell orders for junk. Buildable with bpo or harvestable through something (exploration?). I like it. Quote: 3. Dont ever stop advocating for rebalancing 0.0 space. As long as most 0.0 is barely better than lowsec (if that) and some 0.0 space is a gravy train EVE conflict will still be funnled and predictable. Removing local in systems is key, but so is increasing the incentive for players to spread into more systems. This will also greatly benifit small/med alliances seeking the 0.0 land. Agreed completely. All the best now. CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.15 22:09:00 - [126] Originally by: Volir Do you think pandering to everyone's special interest pet project is a poor way of approaching what will be a group of communally elected reporters and go-betweens? In other words, do you think you are promising too much hoping you get to play amateur game designer when in actuality the job CCP wants you to preform is one of Public Relations? With your verbose tendencies and misguided aspirations, how will you preform the role of community representative if it does not involve championing obscure and poorly thought out yet drastic game changes? Please answer this question in 500 words or less and in only a single post. I don't think you understand what the CSM is about Volir, perhaps a little bit of further reading on your behalf? As for game design issues these illustrate the kind of voting stances I'll be taking and its right for the eve electorate to be informed in advance rather than being asked to "trust blind" that I'll "do the right thing" on no further detail. Obviously we'll agree to disagree about misguided aspirations and obscure and poorly thought out game changes. Anyway, hopefully you find your ideal candidate (I suspect you've already done that). Have a nice day! CSM Election Manifesto 2008
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:38:00 - [127] Originally by: Kelsin Best of luck Jade! Looking forward to seeing you represent us all on the CSM! One question: How many issues do you think there will be time to raise before CCP and get responses on, given the duration of a term on the CSM and the amount of time at the meeting with CCP? Thank you Kelsin, you definitely seem like you've enjoyed all the political discussions around the CSM! With regard to the number of issues I'd say quite a few actually, we've got several face to face meetings and a decent amount of time for discussion and debate - I think its entirely likely that we'll have quite a full agenda and get the whole thing addressed in the currently expressed format. Estimate 20-30 issues? Well its the roughest of rough estimations but fingers crossed. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:54:00 - [128] Originally by: Fitz VonHeise In any war the defenders should have the advantage. I see nothing wrong with the way things are (cyno jammers/jump bridges) Out of interest - do you think there is anything wrong with jump-bridges allowing Capital ships to arrive in Cyno-Jammed systems? Do you think thats how the developers intended it to work? Should defenders really be able to bring in capital ships to defend (and rep) functional cyno-jammer modules against enemy fleets limited to non-capital fleets? CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 23:56:00 - [129] Originally by: Lukeah Dong, dong, dong. You continue to post about mechanics which you have never used and do not understand. Capital ships can be brought into cynojammed systems en masse via jump bridges, which are also available at sov 3 and also exist with relative impunity due to deathstar POSing and... you got it... cyno jamming. This is exactly the ridiculous trench warfare card that Jade has been campaigning against all along. It is a little bit sad that some of the candidates still don't appear to understand the basic mechanics of territorial warfare Lukeah you're right. This whole capital deployment via jump-bridge even in cyno-jammed systems thing is a ridiculous loophole and nobody in their right mind should be defending it really. Quote: Many of the issues Jade is campaigning on are game design, sure. But it's not because he's playing "amateur game designer." It's because every player has a vested interest in game mechanics. Yep and ultimately the eve electorate deserve to know how my mind words and how I'm likely to cast my vote in the CSM on the issues important to them. By answering questions and giving opinion I give an insight into the thought processes and mindset that informs my prospective CSM voting policy, so at this point its all proper disclosure of interest to allow an informed choice at the election. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.17 13:01:00 - [130] Originally by: Revan Neferis As the final days of this election process approaches, I'd like to wish you sucess my dear. I'm sure that if elected, you will do your best to achieve the main ideals of your campaign. And whatever the outcome of it, know that I'm proud of what I've seen and confident about the positive impact that it had for this community. It's rare to see a player with knowledge, will and passionate about eve as you are. Best wishes my dear. Revan Thank you love, most appreciated. I know we're disagreed about a few specifics about campaign focus and even the CSM methodology itself at times but its excellent to see we both agree on the important matters, that this campaign will have a positive impact on the Eve community. End of the day, we both know I wouldn't have run in the election at all if I didn't have a great deal of love and enthusiasm for this game of Eve and the friendships and moments its delivered over the years. Time I pay back some of the pleasure I've taken from gameplay and socialising over the years and help steer Eve on a proper and progressive course through the inaugural CSM session. All the best, and keep enjoying those beaches! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.18 13:27:00 - [131] Originally by: Fivetide You have my vote, I'm comming to the end of my 5th year playing EvE and though I dont play all my spare time, you can find me playing most nights. The amount of time and effort you have put into this thread is all i need to see to make you my choice. Also as you can tell from my name Ian .M Banks is one of my most liked scifi writers. Good luck Thank you very much, definitely nice to see that people appreciate the time and effort involved in running one of these threads for a few weeks I did enjoy a lot Excession too, those Affront were a very amusing foil for the Culture. Thanks again for the vote, all the best! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 01:01:00 - [132] Originally by: Plan Neun Dear Jade Constantine This is an OOC posting but it is sincere and with tons of respect. If i Should do this in charachter you would never gotten my vote. BUT I know you as gamer from Forum and I know you are a decent player ingame. You are not in BoB or GHSC's pocket or others than your own. Therefore since i dont know the other candidates and rumours of this and that and you have the heart in the right place for the game + your an exellent roleplayer. You got my Vote. CEO Plan Neun Thank you very much Plan Neun, such comments and best wishes from the (IC) enemy is much appreciated. There is certainly a challenge standing as a completely independent candidate in an election where others will benefit from a giant alliance bloc vote, but ultimately it means I'll be free to best represent all players wishing for improved dynamism and combat variety on the live server without having to pander to narrow political alliance interests in gratitude for the forced voting of their membership. Got to be a good thing! all the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 01:15:00 - [133] Originally by: Guru got my vote... the thought process is there, and I like it... Much appreciated! Loved fighting you guys in the 4th alliance tournament, I'll do my best to get all the focus I can for small unit pvp in Eve rest assured. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 02:22:00 - [134] Originally by: Gasi Kobayashi Few questions for you before I give my vote. Sorry if you already answered on them. Hopefully its not too late Quote: 1) When you talk about Anti-blob warfare do you think only large fleets that produces lag or blobbing solo PVPers and small gangs aswell? Well distributed objectives and a more varied range of engagements will bring benefits to all sizes of pvp combat. I genuinely want to see fleet commanders challenged to split up their fleets and assign elements to distinct simultaneous objectives that will give opportunities for clever small unit and solo pvpers to flourish at certain points and periods of battle. Quote: 2) What do you think about nano ships/blobs/gangs, how they affect 0.0 PvP and un-nanoed solo PvPers. Its quite widely discussed elsewhere - but I think nano ships are a response to the overwhelming defense advantage of conquerable 0.0 at the moment - since they need to be that fast to avoid the inevitable hotdropped blobs themselves. Certainly does create a problem for un-nano'ed solo pvpers I'll grant you but the issue needs to be dealt with at the source, not by clumsily nerfing nano-ships, but by rebalancing the conflict environment to the extent that nano is no longer "the only" way to play. Quote: 3) What do you think about radical changes that would make EVE more enjoyable and more demanding? (Deleting Titans and Dreadnaughts, POSs, Local, Overview, all chance based things. Thus making EVE more epic and demanding players to use more real life skills rather than skill points and equipment.) Well, local chat needs to go in 0.0 in my opinion. Needs to be replaced with enhanced scanner capability certainly, but the overall effect should be to reduce reliance on "gods-eye" information sources like local chat and map intel. Sovereignty needs to be removed from POS, (these to return to a purely industrial role) - I'm not in favor of deleting dreadnaughts and Titans though, I think with the right changes to the overall play environment these ships can play a role in the "epic" space opera feel of 0.0 in the future. Quote: 4) Which is your favourite Iain Banks' book? :D Surprisingly perhaps its a non culture novel - "Against a Dark Background" - is my absolute favourite, I just find the whole environment extremely rich and the narrative powerful with its journey through the aftershock wreckage of war-heroes in a star-faring civilization turned forcibly inwards to accelerated decadence. And lets face it, who can't love the quixotic lunacy of the Lazy Gun. (If you insist on a Culture setting its got to be "Use of Weapons", I read that when I was a lot younger and it had a significant impact, brilliant story and very brutal.) All the best! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 11:41:00 - [135] Originally by: Sagara Takeda Got my vote. I listened to Jade's interview. he sounds the coolest. the rest seem like..typical geeks who cant talk straight. Ah thank you you Sagara! Nice to know you appreciate my speaking voice, quite an important thing for the council meetings though, not making the other participants screw up their eyes and hide under the table in horror at one's verbal presentation skills CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 13:38:00 - [136] Originally by: Dani Leone You have heard of Jump bridges haven't you? Last time I had cause to use them they allowed caps into Cyno Jammed systems without any problems. So what Jade said still goes, they allow one side, the defenders, the use of Caps. Doesn't require precognition, just a little forward planning. And I really am surprised that you, the pure mechanics candidate, didn't know this. You'd be surprised just how little knowledge that particular CSM candidate has on a whole range of issues Dani, behind the endless-pedantry and nauseating argumentative nit-picking is a void of ignorance on actual live server game mechanics that is quite startling if you pay overmuch attention. Fortunately few do CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 13:39:00 - [137] Originally by: Shintoko Akahoshi I've recently returned to the game after a break of about 6 months. RL issues forced my hand, but there were plenty of gameplay issues that ushered me out, as well. Primarily, for me, was the sort of "impotent makework" that you describe in your candidacy essays. You've known me for years, and you know that I relish exactly the sort of solo- and small-gang-warfare that current 0.0 dynamics don't support or reward. I've retired from 0.0 combat, shelved my Ubiquitous Fleet-Fitted SniperBS, and turned my energies to empire warfare. While Faction Warfare piques my interest, it would be nice to have some sort of potential role in 0.0 combat. I agree with you that the cyno jammer is one of the main problems. I understand the tactical use of the thing, but it's been implemented in a way that guarantees only the blob will fight. I've personally always loved the idea of 0.0 combat involving a few large battles supported by key small skirmishes. Imagine if, for example, cyno jamming a system involved maintaining a network of jammers around the system. If cyno jammers couldn't function except at very small and isolated POSes. If BS-sized ships couldn't even warp to them. You could have battles where black ops jumpships open a bridge for cruiser- and frigate-class ships to enter a system and fight pitched battles for control of the jammers. When enough jammers fell, the system would be open to capital ships. That's just an example of the sort of 0.0 combat I'd like to see. While BS- and capital-based blob combat will always have a place in the game (if only because lots of people seem to like that), they shouldn't be the only sort of combat that matters. It's frankly been hard for me to choose where to spend my vote. Only having a single vote sharpens the issue that much more for me. I feel, however, that you would be the candidate who would be most likely to defend my chosen style of play. As such, you have my vote. Nice to see you back Shintoko, your vote means a hellova lot to me. Thank you very much. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 15:23:00 - [138] Originally by: Sevan Rax Without doubt Jade so many of your views on Eve are so close to mine it's scary. As also an avid reader of Banks plus any other Sci-Fi or Cyberpunk I can lay my greasy paws on (of recent note; Richard Morgan) I'm all too acutely aware of the lack of finesse within Eve. On Tradeable kill rights, such a simple thing I find it very hard to believe that this cannot be implemented and yet the impact of such a system would be such a truly liberating thing for so many... A solo players wet dream or even a part of the Mercenary's day to day income. And for those pilots unequal or uninterested in finding the solution on their own terms are able to gain satisfaction and a sense of justice. And War declarations... From inception to completion there is no rhyme or reason to them, other than to serve as a platform for small gang warfare from bored/disillusioned PvP pilots. And from the massive growth in such practices I can only ascertain that something is definitely wrong with the system overall. As you have mentioned, there are no goals nor any winning/losing conditions in place, no rewards or penalties... no resources, concessions, advantages, rights, license or even a quantifiable point of contention that could serve as a focus for the war mechanic. Combat itself is cut dried and anemic, 'nano' ships are not a problem, they are a response to an ever increasing malaise within the Eve population which is the lack of dynamism and the static arena enforced by our environment. Which leads me to Black-Ops, since I heard of their imminent arrival I have been enraptured by the need to have one of my own. While, I still fully intend to get into one, I'm also cognizant of the rather half arsed approach they have taken. Which disappoints me and adds to a growing apathy concerning this very fine game. I close, to offer my whole hearted support to your passion and vision which closely echoes how I feel about Eve. Best of luck out there! Thank you Sevan Rax, its always great to read a post from a person with a similar passion and yearning for what the game of Eve "could be" and "can be" if we keep our enthusiasms and vision and push for the right changes and development focus. We're pretty much in complete agreement on these issues I think and I'm proud to accept your support and vote sir. As for Richard Morgan - hell yes. I love his books and the internal mythology of Takeshi Kovacs, Harlen's World and the revolutionary individualism of Quellcrist Falconer: that stuff gets me every time. I love the "make it personal quote" - very very appropriate for Eve-Online: Originally by: Quellcrist Falconer/Richard Morgan "Altered Carbon" The personal, as everyone's so ***** fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, take it personally. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you hereùit is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide out from under with wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it personal. Do as much damage as you can. Get your message across. That way you stand a far better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerious. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous, marks the differenceùthe only difference in their eyesùbetween players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it's just business, it's politics, it's the way of the world, it's a tough life, an that it's nothing personal. Well, ** them. Make it personal. That really could have been written directly for Eve-Online. Its a sentiment to play this game by really. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 15:36:00 - [139] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 19/05/2008 15:42:27 Originally by: TimGascoigne Edited by: TimGascoigne on 19/05/2008 13:56:41 jade plez stop spaming your thread to the top. Posting three to four times in a row on multiple occasions in the same page is getting a little ridiculous. Of course there's nothing rule breaking about this it's just not sporting Well Tim, a quick look at your forum posting history reveals you are a Pro Hardin CSM Election Front Character devoted to telling everyone that you are voting for Hardin at every conceivable opportunity. Fair enough tactics I guess, though not to my taste obviously. But the deeper point here, you'll note that each and everyone one of my posts in my CSM Q/A (means question and answer) thread is an Answer (or expression of gratitude for pledged support) to a particular poster. I'm curious whether you are considering that the people posting in my thread are "spammers" and shouldn't be answered? Or is there actually any problem at all in me responding to these people in a friendly and constructive manner as and when I choose to do so? Maybe you should mind your own business and stick to publicizing your chosen candidate? All the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 19:16:00 - [140] Originally by: TimGascoigne Regardless of people's polarisations I think the most important thing is to make sure that in five years time the game still exists as a place of death. Where people work desperately hard in order to gain great fortune only to have it destroyed forever in pointless warfare. After all if we did not want that to happen we wouldn't play in the first place. On that point we can certainly agree. Here's to another five years of Eve and to the enthusiastic lunatics and passionate visionary players who make this game everything it is! All the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.19 22:31:00 - [141] Originally by: Markus Vaughn Best of luck to you Jade Constantine you have my vote, I don't post often on the forums but I am an avid reader and player. Thank you Markus, your vote is greatly appreciated, hope you find all the best from Eve and keep on enjoying this game throughout the next five years of the live server! Quote: My question though is do you think your destructible station ideas will affect the worth of ISK in the future if you're elected? Building and maintaining these structures requires a rather large amount of money in general and if their destruction becomes possible then there could be a large fluctuation in the market of materials and money. Do you see any problems with this or any countermeasures to prevent a disastrous result? Well a fully upgraded station is an investment vaguely comparable to the Titan - with less investment in skills to assemble and deploy. Titans blow up, why shouldn't outposts - is the simple answer. But to the deeper question, yes, having destructible outposts will make it more costly to run 0.0 space empires and I think thats a good thing - 0.0 has become too easy to dominate with structures and afk-infrastructure and I'd like to see player empires really pay a price for replacing holdings damaged and eliminated in wars. Its about time 0.0 alliances felt the fiscal pressure again. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.20 00:00:00 - [142] Originally by: Toramii Jade, in many ways we are share a similar vision for the 'space opera' that is Eve, a game we both love. You already have my vote. Much appreciated Toramii, if I'm elected I'll do my level best to encourage the developers to embrace this vision and make it happen. All the best mate! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.20 00:02:00 - [143] Originally by: LaVista Vista Hey Jade. What is your take on FW, and how do you think it will work for those of us who likes small-scale warfare? Hen thats a can of worms! I guess we'll get an insight into that this coming weekend to see how it works on SiSi. As you can guess I think the implementation is suboptimal and a bit lazy to rule out alliance participation and incoming wardecs against the Militia entity, fingers crossed we'll find work-arounds. I think the loyalist RP community has been quite significantly shafted by FW obviously - at least if they were able to war-dec the opposing Faction militias they'd have some kind of meaningful "buy in". CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.20 04:12:00 - [144] Originally by: Gasi Kobayashi Thanks for the reply. You have my vote . I'm quite new to Banks, I'm currently enjoying The Algebraist, but will definitely check "Against a Dark Background" You'll love it CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.20 19:17:00 - [145] Just like to say some thanks at this point to the many people who helped me with this CSM Campaign, everyone's still on tender-hooks waiting for the results of course but at this stage whatever the outcome is I'm happy that a point has been made and this candidacy has stood honestly and proudly in support of Dynamic Space Warfare in Eve Online and presented a visionary agenda designed to enrich and empower a wide variety of engagement opportunities and gameplay styles on the single server. So great thanks to the Star Fraction Director team: Cosmopolite, Heartstone, Sinrath and others for some great advise and guidance in electoral strategy and focus through the campaign, you've helped me steer the best course between issues and debates and been stern enough at times to keep me on the straight and narrow troll-avoidance path! Much appreciated guys. Huge thanks also to Lazaroth for my graphics, Campaign Banner and Signature. To Valhalla for helping with the wordpress site, for Tareen Kashaar for the lovely destructible outpost video and to Elaron for the Eve-online blogging connection. Thanks besides to the general Star Fraction membership for putting up with my endless vent debates and discussions and letting off steam in the evenings and generally boring you guys rigid with CSM issues! Once this is all done and dusted perhaps we can get back to some proper murder and mayhem in space again And whatever the outcome at this point my huge gratitude goes out to everyone who voted for me in this election and decided to stand up and be counted and bring the plight of small unit warfare and dynamic conflict in Eve to the attention of the inaugural CSM. Everyone trusting me with their vote is a visionary hero in their own right and deserves to see Eve become all it can be in the months and years ahead - fingers crossed we've got enough support to advocate the changes neccessary to break the boring status-quo in territorial warfare and ignite the fires of space operatic drama once again. A couple of months ago I honestly hadn't made up my mind whether to run in these elections or not while mulling the issue over one voice in particular said "do it" without hesitation or restraint or a single second thought. And to that person I'm going to give a very special thanks and say I did my best in this campaign to represent this game we both love in the best possible light of what it is and what it could yet become. To Revan Neferis, hopefully I'll get that chance to change this game world for the better xxx. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 01:40:00 - [146] Originally by: Djuma Nihilist Congats mr new CSM chairman!!! VIVA LA REVOLUTION Mmmm, and I think I owe it all to the ghost of Che Guevara who was outraged at the misuse of his tee-shirts in rival campaign materials
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 12:36:00 - [147] Originally by: Tecam Hund Don't be so sour. There is a Goonswarm rep on the council. Jade's there because people voted. Congratulations Jade! Thank you Tecam! And yep, the goons are certainly free to send their issues to either of their reps on the council. I'm sure those guys will be happy to answer specific goonie complaints as well. Speaking personally I've got absolutely no interest answering goonie concerns or questions at this point in the process. They are free like any other player to post an [Issue] style thread and if I'm interested in it I might post an observation or reply. Otherwise, I'm going to consider myself entirely at liberty to ignore offtopic and irrelevant posts and focus on useful and progressive issues going forward. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 12:57:00 - [148] Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy Quite the balanced viewpoint you have there Jade. Lucky I wasn't standing for election on "balanced neutrality" then wasn't it CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 13:02:00 - [149] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 22/05/2008 13:03:20 Originally by: Brachis Agreed. The members of Goonswarm are people too. No better or worse than their fellow players. With the things they've been called at times, that's practically a complement! Haha. I'm actually very glad with how the election turned out, because the closing numbers really showed that every vote counted for quite a lot in the end, and as a voter, that's a good feeling. Congratulations, Jade! And yep, goonies are players certainly and they have their representation. But their issues are not my issues in the main, I neither like nor appreciate much of the specific gameplay focus they crave nor do I think that focus is actually very good for the future of Eve online the successful MMORPG. I stood for election on the issues in this Manifesto and these are the issues and items of interest I'm going to be active in advocating on the council. Goons have 2 of their own reps to pester for increased POS spam and de-weaponing titans and nerfing nano and all that guff - they don't need my help! All the best CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 13:24:00 - [150] Originally by: Papa Ina Sounds like you don't actually know what goons want at all then. That's a little disappointing. You're probably going to find a lot of overlap in certain areas whether you like it or not. Well Papa, end of the day I can only go on what you chaps are actually saying. If there are issues of overlap then speak up by all means and lets look at consensus. But you have to be aware that when the chief spokesperson for Goonswarm on these forums appears to be Goumindong its going to represent you guys in a particular light. But as for what Goons "want" - you got 2 reps on the council. Use those guys to speak for you. Its not really rocket science. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 14:42:00 - [151] Originally by: Gorobom As the chairman you're supposed to represent every single player. Negative. As chairman I'm going to ensure the CSM works smoothly. As CSM rep I'm going to do exactly what I promised to do in the Manifesto in the op post of this thread, and that involves promoting pvp enhancement, gameplay dynamism, increased variety and conflict opportunity and more risk and fiscally-annihilating mayhem in 0.0 space. Quote: You've been biased from the very beginning counting on the votes of people who mostly never fully experienced the game and the problems that 0.0 warfare presents. I'm going to have be stern now and say ... Goons, please get over yourselves. Eve Online is not about you. You're a single 0.0 power (currently in decline). You have no more knowledge about "what Eve is about" than any other collection of players and often considerably less. There is a vast universe of player experience out there and I've got precisely no interest in hearing only one point of view continually expressed by a collection of self-appointed goonie savants rabbiting on about why they know so much about this subject and that. I honestly don't believe the goons are experts in 0.0 warfare. Sorry but there it is. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 14:46:00 - [152] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON I apologize .. Apology accepted. Lets hope you can keep your fellow Goons in line in the future Darious. All the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 14:57:00 - [153] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Now address the rest. Nothing to address Darius. The election is done and dusted. Results are in. If you want my opinion on something you are very free to post an issue for discussion for the CSM. If I feel its worthy of comment I'll comment. As a CSM rep you have the additional privilege of posting an issue that must be voted on by the CSM. If you want to use that privilege then again I might comment on it and I'll almost certainly vote on it. Otherwise I'll expect to see you at tonights informal meeting where we discuss the role responsibilities on the CSM and you get to decide if you are going to stand for one of these specific jobs. Hope this clarifies things for you. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 15:11:00 - [154] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON You will see me exactly when and where my responsibilities take me. Our meeting is Saturday. There is no such thing as an "informal" CSM meeting, much like there is no such thing as selective representation. I'd recommend you re-read the charter documents regarding the council you chair. You don't seem to get it. And I quote: Quote: Selecting a Chairman will be straightforward matter; the Representative with the highest vote tally will automatically become the Chairman and is responsible for the internal council vote of a Vice-Chairman, Secretary and Vice-Secretary. Should the positions not be filled within three days an appointment authority is granted to the Chairman to fill the positions. Should the Chairman step down as such or as a Representative, a vote is to be held to appoint a new Chairman. If you don't choose to attend I'll call the first in line alternative CSM member to vote in your place Darius. Everything is cool and above board. All the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 15:34:00 - [155] Originally by: Hugh Ruka It does not say anything about you changing elected members of the council for the runner-ups. No elected members of the council are being changed. Its a a responsibility of the Chair to oversee an "internal vote" to assign the remaining council positions. This is what I'm doing. If it doesn't happen by Saturday I'd have an appointment authority to simply put people in the positions so I'm actually pushing to do this soon so it can be voted on. If Darius is unable to register a vote on these appointments I'll ask the first alternate to vote in his place. Its pretty simple. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 15:37:00 - [156] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON You cannot call anyone into place to vote in my stead, as I have not chosen to not attend an official meeting of the CSM. You've made a thread for the voting and that is where the voting will take place. Publicly, where a council vote should take place. Cool if you do now want to vote then thats excellent. Little less amateur dramatics would be nice next time though. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 15:49:00 - [157] Originally by: Idaeus I know, right? A member of the council is openly saying he'll ignore any concerns from some members of the playerbase. Those are some pretty divisive, or should I say discriminatory, statements. As an eve player I have no obligation to pay attention to people I consider don't behave with appropriate maturity and good manners. Nothing in the responsibilities of CSM rep (or chairman) change that level of obligation. I will happily talk to anyone who carries themselves in a respectful and decent manner. Can't really say fairer than that. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 16:05:00 - [158] Originally by: Vio Geraci Even people you consider your social lessers deserve representation in a democracy. Perhaps because you are not from a democracy, you do not understand this fundamental aspect of democratic political systems. You have all the representation you could need. If you have issues you are quite free to write a decent constructive post on the Assembly Hall Forum and there the Eve community will have the opportunity to discuss the matter properly and CSM reps may involve themselves or even decide to support the issue and raise it to formal CSM vote for the agenda. Thats your option now really. But don't expect me to substantively answer any more issues on my candidacy in the Inaugural CSM session since those matters are past. And just like any other Eve player I'll maintain my rights to ignore you and your concerns if I consider they are rudely expressed and nonconstructive in this forum. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.22 23:57:00 - [159] Originally by: Nyphur Edited by: Nyphur on 22/05/2008 23:47:49 Originally by: Gorobom You're being really, really delusional. Goons pointed out lot of mistakes in the game and CCP addressed them, just like other major alliances did. Even Goons who aren't in Goonswarm like Nyphur had a huge impact in the game. The same can't be said about Derelik Capital Constructions. WHO SUMMONS ME TO THIS THREAD? I DEMAND A SAC-RI-FICE Of the two Goonswarm CSMs, I've only seen one of them "in action" on the forums and that's Bane Glorius. The guy's smart, he has some good ideas and I'm sure he can adapt to fill the role of CSM pretty well. Whether they zerged the votes or not isn't the issue, judge each of them on their own merits and realise that goon or not, you could do a lot worse for CSM representatives than those chosen. A LOT worse. Initially I thought Jade would make a good chairman but it's starting to look like he's augmenting his role without talking to CCP about it and going on a bit of a power trip. The chairman is not a dictator, I'm pretty sure it's part of his job to ensure the smooth running of the council and I don't believe that's possible without treating all the council members equally. Something to keep in mind is that all of the CSMs including the chairman are accountable to CCP and I'd bet if someone is found to be abusing their role or not filling it well enough, they'd be out on their arse pretty sharpish. BTW, shouldn't someone at CCP be here to explain everything and guide the new CSMs? Have you all just been left alone with a 13-page PR document wondering what it is you have to do? I wouldn't worry too much Nyphur, we had a very good informal CSM meeting this evening and have a good plan going forward to the first formal meeting this saturday. Don't read too much into the public forum froth. The council itself has a group of sensible players who seemed to get on pretty well and I foresee us achieving great things in the inaugural session of the CSM. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 00:30:00 - [160] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 23/05/2008 00:32:55 Originally by: Nyphur Oh I'm not worried about the quality of your plans for going forth, I'm asking if you're ALLOWED to make plans for going forth. Surely CCP have a plan for how the CSM will take place and being chairman, you must have a contact at CCP to ask questions of. If they haven't given you any explicit instructions on how to move forward and the vote has essentially only just been concluded, are you really expected to just move forward on your own and make up the process as you go along with informal meetings and such? Well we've got the documents, we have some contact with the CCP organizer who will be playing a role in the formal meetings, but largely yes, we are going to be making a lot of this up as we go along and setting down ideas and improvements to rationalize and deliver the whole process. Tonights meeting added some important elements to certain of the roles and closed with a lot of productive discussion on how exactly to make the CSM actually work in its target process of bringing good ideas from the player base to the devs at ccp. I think its likely we'll be addressing a lot of potential loopholes and procedural glitches with the CSM in and of itself in our first term, and to be honest, thats a good thing. Quote: I just don't know if you're getting ahead of yourself or not when the first official meeting (where I assume a CCP rep will be present) hasn't even taken place yet. Can you see where I'm coming from at all? If a CCP rep had said "Hey Jade, have an informal meeting to vote on members positions in the council before Saturday" I'd be a lot less concerned about it. Oh sure, but rest assured we are in contact with CCP and are consulting with the organizers, but some of this stuff we do just have to take a lead on and make it happen. We haven't got months before the Iceland meetings, we've got a few weeks and its really time for us to get busy to make this thing really work. Quote: Of course the other issue I'm concerned about is that you might not be treating the council members impartially but I assume that if that becomes a problem, CCP wouldn't be too happy. I know you can potentially do a good job as chairman and if my advice is worth anything to you, I suggest trying to mellow out a little and not bashing horns with the guys you have to work with. Good luck with the position, anyway. I'll be here in a year's time to steal it off you :). I will be entirely impartial in the role of chairman on all procedural matters and issues of fairness. Time will demonstrate this I expect. Until then yep, probably is sensible to mellow a little on the temperature of some of the exchanges with particularly energetic members of goonswarm in particular. End of the day the election is done and now we need to make the process of the CSM work correctly. And if at the end of our term we've achieved that it'll stand as our legacy and memorial to a job well done. All the best. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:53:00 - [161] Originally by: Sariyah Originally by: Jade Constantine murder and mayhem in space That's Eve. Congrats for the big chair. Damn straight and thank you very much Sariyah! Its already pretty exciting, just like FC'ing in hostile territory in some respects CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:54:00 - [162] Originally by: Kelsin Congratulations Jade! /me high-fives Kelsin! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:56:00 - [163] Originally by: RU Sirius Are you, perchance, slightly bitter? I didn't vote for Jade but am still a welcome member of The Star Fraction (until they kick me tomorrow). we are as free as we believe ourselves to be. Yep, the only thing I asked of Star Fraction people was to become informed on the various platforms and to vote with their conscience. To be honest I probably would have booted out a pilot for "not caring enough to vote" but voting for somebody else is just fine CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:57:00 - [164] Originally by: Cassiuss Congrats Jade, Make us proud. Thats the plan! (love your sig btw) its a brilliant revolutionary outcome thats for sure! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 12:59:00 - [165] Originally by: Reverend Wreckedum Congrats, Jade. Fortunately, it looks like people did their homework as Goumindong didn't even get a significant number of votes. Looks like EVE is safe for the moment. Yep I think its a great defining moment for Eve's collective good-sense. Nice to know we've still got a substantial number of mature and sensible people out there who nonetheless dare to dream of a better game! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:00:00 - [166] Originally by: Xofii Gratz Jade, I dont agree with your rethorics but I do agree with parts of your vision, I hope you take pause to breath during the meetings and listen to your fellow council men/women. Cheers Xo Oh don't worry, as the Chair I've got a responsibility now to make sure Everyone gets a say in the meetings. To be honest its probably a good thing for the process I ended up winning rather than making speeches from the floor CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:01:00 - [167] Originally by: Revan Neferis winks Always listen to a woman dear. Now, time to celebrations. Will give you my congratulations in a more private venue I'm proud of you love. Success! grins* Got to say, success is always sexy CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:02:00 - [168] Originally by: Serenity Steele Congratulations on the Chairmanship Jade! Thank you Serenity! Much appreciated, now lets change the world CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:07:00 - [169] Originally by: Kayscha Well, it seems you made Chairwoman, congrats. I trust you are aware of this added responsibility and will not squander it lightly with ad hominem attacks and the pursuit of personal differences with other representatives. Well you know, I don't really believe in the categorization of "ad hominem" attacks, especially not on an internet forum where even accusing ad hominem becomes ad hominem and disappears up its own paradox more often than not. But I take your point, a certain degree of respect is going to be neccessary between CSM reps and thats something everyone is going to have to remember at all times. Quote: You of all CSM members will be least able to play favourites and push your own agenda lest this council is to fail before ever having assembled. (Forgive my skepticism. It has been an emotional fortnight. ;) ) Well there is a difference betwene the procedural duties of the Chair and the voting power of the CSM rep - these things aren't contradictory and its fairly easy to act with fairness and balance with a little maturity and good sense. Time will tell, but thanks for your congratulations! Much appreciated. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:13:00 - [170] Originally by: Damion Zyne Im delighted to see this result. Not only cause Jade will be part of the CSM but even more important, that the majority of the voters share the vision of what EVE is and should be. Congrats Jade, the CSM couldnt have a better chairman. /me takes a bow, thank you for your words Damion, its been a pleasure to run this campaign and its extremely heartening to receive the greatest share of the vote from the eve electorate and carry this forward to the inaugural CSM session. Vision is everything, as long as we dare to dream we can do anything. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:28:00 - [171] Originally by: Heartstone You suck. I demand a recount. See is where intellectual freedom and "voting with your conscience" gets me CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:52:00 - [172] Originally by: The Cosmopolite I'd like to congratulate my friend Jade on being elected to the CSM and I'd also like to congratulate all those elected to the CSM and to alternate places. There is a healthy mix of differing views which I believe will lead to some fruitful discussions. I also want to congratulate Jade on the top spot and becoming chair during these inaugural CSM sessions. Knowing the person, I know that, in conjunction with the other CSM reps and CCP, Jade will work hard for the CSM to represent all the players of EVE in a principled and transparent manner. I believe most players want to give the CSM a chance to work. It is right to be concerned that it is working properly. But seeking to suggest it is already corrupt and incapable of working with the current mix of CSM reps is not genuine concern: it is naked gamesmanship. It is rightly being ignored, seemingly and very gratifyingly by all CSM reps, in favour of actually getting on with the job. That augurs well for the CSM. Cosmo Agreed, and with thanks. And yes, the impression I get is certainly that most sensible players are very happy with the results and will give the CSM the time it needs to make a real and significant contribution to the interests of this game we all love. Its a good council on the whole and I've no doubt we'll work together and respectfully and get things done! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:53:00 - [173] Originally by: Mr Stark Congratulations Jade, so glad you made it, and by majority vote too, nice. Goumindog, stop whining and accept defeat. If you are calling everyone voting for Jade stupid then you are calling the majority who won stupid, not really making any friends here are you? Just quit it. It isn't productive in any way. Thank you Mr Stark, I'm very happy too, its definitely been an week for exciting politics and progressive agendas! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:55:00 - [174] Originally by: Uzuki Shootmenow Jade, congratulation on the results of the election. I'd like to let you know that me and majority of my fellow friends/EVE players have cast votes in your favour. Thank you Uzuki! Means a lot to have the faith and trust of so many eve players it really does, I'm glad that the single-server environment means that reputation counts and a name is something you can stand by. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:57:00 - [175] Originally by: Poreuomai Congratulations on your win, Jade! /me takes a bow, "thank you Poreuomai! and thanks to everyone who voted, it really is a victory for the thinking eve-player and those who truly wish to see progressive changes and an improved game experience for all subscribers" CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.23 16:20:00 - [176] Originally by: Nyphur Jade, I know you were banned from the forum for a long time but surely you know some basic universal forum ettiquette. Instead of replying to over ten posts individually one after another, it's customary to compose multiple posts into a single reply where possible. Doubleposting's pretty bad, tripleposting is annoying but tirteen in a row is just getting silly . Well its not everyday you get elected, and I think a vote generally deserves a post in reply CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.24 01:57:00 - [177] Originally by: Saul Dhampir well done Jade. Your efforts have paid off. It going to get very busy for you and the other members from here on in, bu tI am very glad that you will be chairman as I know first hand the great ideas you seek to bring to EvE. Congrats also to Hardin and the others who will of course bring balance to the whole counsil and should result in great well thought through ideas being presented to CCP. Thanks Saul! And yep, busy time ahead to make this inaugural CSM all it can be. I think on balance we got the best CSM we could have hoped for and we'll manage great things for Eve online and the player base. Exciting times ahead. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.24 03:11:00 - [178] Originally by: Heero Yuy Sometimes there is a little justice to be found in the universe... Bloody good show Jade! The chair could not have gone to an abler person and I have no doubt you will acquit yourself excellently in said position. As for the goons: a sadder bunch of winners (2reps!) have seldom been seen. Thank you Heero, it was a busy few weeks worth of campaigning I can tell you Still absolutely excellent to get there in the end. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.24 03:13:00 - [179] Originally by: BAteh Congratulations, Jade. Thank you and the votes were much appreciated! CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.30 12:21:00 - [180] Though I can appreciate the words of support of chairmanship of the first CSM meeting (and thank you) I would ask people not to use this thread to critique the behaviour and committee knowledge of fellow CSM reps. Lets give the process a little more time to work and see where it takes us. Its still very early days and hopefully the disruptions of the first meeting won't be repeated as we move into substantive discussion of the important issues for the Iceland agenda. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.02 22:10:00 - [181] Originally by: Hrian d'Fat Originally by: Jade Constantine Though I can appreciate the words of support of chairmanship of the first CSM meeting (and thank you) I would ask people not to use this thread to critique the behaviour and committee knowledge of fellow CSM reps. Lets give the process a little more time to work and see where it takes us. Its still very early days and hopefully the disruptions of the first meeting won't be repeated as we move into substantive discussion of the important issues for the Iceland agenda. I admire your optimism, I wish i would be able to share it. Good luck tho. Ah you've got the keep optimistic, end of the day I do have a lot of faith in fellow Eve fans I really do. I think everything will be fine in the end. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.07 12:54:00 - [182] Originally by: Baron Levian After what you have exchanged to be where you are, enjoy your faith while it lasts. Expect the best get the best. Expert the worst get the worst. Its a lesson you need to learn. Get on with your life and stop the hating is my advise to you. Its a big enough world, enjoy the spoils of your victory and don't feel the need to dedicate the reminder of your eve existence to a feud that has neither meaning nor any chance of you achieving anything of worth. Be free now. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.