CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Jayne for CSMX - ELECTED! - Thank you for your support!

First post First post
Author
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2015-01-20 01:17:57 UTC
Seems to be a faint whiff of drama just waiting to surface.

Yet to be convinced the NPSI community needs a dedicated CSM, Ganked, spectre fleet, bombers bar all seem to do pretty well and there seems to be no mechanics that impinge them.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#82 - 2015-01-20 03:50:46 UTC
I have to admit I had no difficulty with the idea of flying NPSI with Agony Unleashed a couple of times. Maybe it's because I'm in TEST, or maybe because my corp is cool like that, but I just didn't fear any repercussions from a mistake on my part. On the contrary, I rather relished the thought of possibly running into a blue or green and having to make a split second decision to assist my fleet or leave them alone. I even spent a fair bit of time running through scenarios in my head and deciding how I would act in each. I was a bit disappointed to not meet any friendlies during the roam-or perhaps I wasn't paying attention and shot somebody blue who is mad and is gonna hunt me down later.

These sorts of unknowns add a sense of adventure to EVE. I know a lot of people dislike them but I am careful to advocate the ability to see through it because such functions quickly become fleet/alliance doctrine and it destroys that adventure.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

#83 - 2015-01-20 11:09:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I want to see a fleet mechanic that allows fleet operators to make it public what your intentions are. Example: a NPSI fleet decides to broadcast open hostility publicly, so that nobody is butthurt when they get shot by a blue cause they can see that the blue is in a NPSI fleet.

Thoughts?
There are a few things that I would like to see happen with the current fleet mechanics, and the one closest to what you're talking is the "fleet standings" concept. The gist of it is simple: members of a fleet inherit standings from FC. Your blues are now the FC's blues, your reds are now the FC's red, and people view YOU in the same way they would view the FC. These standings would preferably only apply for the duration of the fleet, and only if the FC "enabled" that option etc etc.

Whether that is technically possible given the coding for standings and fleet, I don't know.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

#84 - 2015-01-20 11:14:11 UTC
Lajs wrote:
Seems to be a faint whiff of drama just waiting to surface.

Yet to be convinced the NPSI community needs a dedicated CSM, Ganked, spectre fleet, bombers bar all seem to do pretty well and there seems to be no mechanics that impinge them.
In the same way that there are no mechanics that impinge them (which I would argue is untrue) there are no mechanics that support the playstyle at all. People have simply developed creative ways of using chat channels and mailing lists to organize these thriving communities.

Alternatively, you could make the same argument against sov warfare. The system is currently functional, wars are being fought, sov is changing hands, the alliance that live is sov space seem to be doing pretty well.... why do they need a CSM? why does sov need to be worked on?

The CSM does more than just fix broken things, they let CCP know how and what they need to do to make the game better.

... and there are A LOT of different things that could be done to make the channel based communities better.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#85 - 2015-01-20 12:18:15 UTC
I like this man because he is intelligent and well-spoken, and whether or not I support his specific ideas I feel he has a good head on his shoulders.

Though I kind of like the ideas, too.

+1, I may vote for you.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2015-01-20 14:28:22 UTC
Sleightz wrote:

I also had some other more relevant questions for Jayne I scribbled down and then lost (sorreh). I’ll get back to you.


I found my notes!

These were mostly questions for variety (hopefully) and are all hypothetical.

* Imagine it's 2-3 years from now and you're still on the CSM. The vast majority of your proposed tools for improving npsi outlets of the game have been implemented to a satisfactory degree, and are mostly fitting in successfully. This area of npsi public gameplay is now in an overall "good place".

What is the next big thing you take on as your new agenda for change, and cause for improvement in the game?

* A relatively new player crosses paths with you during your space travels. You end up chatting briefly and he or she makes you an offer of 300 million ISK for 3 days training in the arts of EVE.

Assuming you accept, what do you teach them?

* Our beloved game developers somehow introduce a definitive change to the game that causes reactions from the playerbase similar to those witnessed in the Incarna expansion (a la Monoclegate). You agree with the players on this being a major issue.

What is you first course of action in tackling this?

* Lastly, you find yourself in an ice cream parlour on a hot summers day. Sadly there are only two flavours of ice-cream left over. Chocolate & Tutti Frutti.

Which flavour do you choose?

Thanks.
#87 - 2015-01-22 00:42:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Right, first of, the OP has the right to expect a civil and healthy discussion in his campaign thread. You don't have to agree, but post your arguments in a civil manner please (and don't spam them again and again). This goes both ways by the way.

I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


13. Spamming is prohibited.

Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words “first”, “go back to (insert other game name)” and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post.


27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.


30. Posts that distort the forum layout are prohibited.

Posts that are deliberately designed to distort the layout of the EVE Online forums, or character names that are of an inappropriate length and stretch the forums will be removed. This kind of behavior is deemed as being in opposition to the community spirit that CCP would like to promote, and posts of this nature will be deleted. Users who engage in this type of behavior may face temporary suspension or permanent revocation of their forum posting privileges.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

The-Culture
#88 - 2015-01-22 00:44:01 UTC
Thank you Ezwal. +1
Of Sound Mind
#89 - 2015-01-22 04:26:37 UTC
It might have been nice if the part where I actually asked a question about small-gang had stuck around...

To paraphrase, it sounds like Jayne sees "small gang" as a state of mind, containing less in the way of dedicated support ships, and probably more in the way of ships that could fight reasonably on their own but fight better in a group. Does that sound right?
#90 - 2015-01-22 04:27:13 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
It might have been nice if the part where I actually asked a question about small-gang had stuck around...

To paraphrase, it sounds like Jayne sees "small gang" as a state of mind, containing less in the way of dedicated support ships, and probably more in the way of ships that could fight reasonably on their own but fight better in a group. Does that sound right?
Nailed it.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

The-Culture
#91 - 2015-01-22 04:31:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Seraph IX Basarab
I think that's the sort of vagueness that I'm finding issue with. Small gang being a "state of mind" is wishy washy up in the air nonsense. Does that mean I can roll around with 500 Zealots but as long as my "state of mind" is small gang, than it is so?

If the concept is so relative as personal perspective, how can you even begin to address any of the issues presented? I mean you can't even pin down the fundamental definition about the concept let alone improve on it. You're just agreeing with whatever Ranamar said.
#92 - 2015-01-22 04:51:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.

Reposting for the sake of everyone else:

Quote:
In my opinion, the difference between a gang and a fleet isn't determined by size, but by the presence of links and logistics. Small gangs in FW are often groups of frigates or destroyers working as a wolfpack, whereas a fleet of maybe 20 battleships with triage support would certainly be classified as a fleet. That is to say, it's more about what people are flying, rather than how many people are flying them.
Source can be found here.

Seraph: by now you've made it abundantly clear that you not only disapprove of me, but of my candidacy for CSM9 as well - not that either of those things were ever in question in the first place. Now, please stop posting in this thread if you're not going to contribute anything of value.

*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

#93 - 2015-01-22 08:37:57 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


12. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a support ticket under the Community & Forums Category.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

#94 - 2015-01-22 12:44:39 UTC
Sleightz wrote:
I found my notes!

These were mostly questions for variety (hopefully) and are all hypothetical.

  • Imagine it's 2-3 years from now and you're still on the CSM. The vast majority of your proposed tools for improving NSPI outlets of the game have been implemented to a satisfactory degree, and are mostly fitting in successfully. This area of NPSI public gameplay is now in an overall "good place".
What is the next big thing you take on as your new agenda for change, and cause for improvement in the game?
2-3 years from now? At that point I feel it's reasonable to assume that corporation and alliance mechanics have been completely overhauled, and the sovereignty warfare redesign has been completed as well - which would have been my focus if the items in my platform were brought to a point where they could no longer be improved upon. What I would focus on after all of these things are completely done and perfected, would be wardecs. Although you could consider this to be a part of the corporation and alliance mechanics, I doubt it'll receive the proper attention during the current development roadmap.

I don't feel that there are enough highsec corporations and alliances that operate and compete with one another exclusively in highsec... and I blame this entirely on the current wardec system. Highsec will be in a "good place" imho when the same depth of conflict, competition, and narrative can be seen in highsec as can be seen in sov null. Allowing player run groups in highsec to form empires, and encouraging them to compete with one another is extremely important to me, and will do wonders to improve the health of the game.

Sleightz wrote:

  • A relatively new player crosses paths with you during your space travels. You end up chatting briefly and he or she makes you an offer of 300 million ISK for 3 days training in the arts of EVE.
Assuming you accept, what do you teach them?
Take the money and say "Welcome to Eve" ? Lol

Real talk tho, money should never be the root incentive for people to help players - just putting that out there.

Anyway, the one thing about new players that frustrates me, is that they don't know enough about the sandbox to know what they're going to enjoy in the sandbox. This is partly why it irritates me that people are so quick to encourage new players to join groups like Brave Newbies - not that BNI isn't a wonderful group and has a lot of systems in place to help new players - but that people are pigeonholing these new players into sov nullsec, which many consider to be the least fun part of the sandbox.

If I were to have three days with a newbro, I'd show them as many different parts of the game world as I could. Take them wormhole diving, try and fight FW plexers, gank a few miners, run a few mission.... show them the depth of the game, and let them decide where they want to set up camp and thrive within the sandbox. To this end, E-UNI does a great job, and after the 3 days I'd recommend the new player go there until they've found themselves.

Sleightz wrote:

  • Our beloved game developers somehow introduce a definitive change to the game that causes reactions from the playerbase similar to those witnessed in the Incarna expansion (a la Monoclegate). You agree with the players on this being a major issue.

What is your first course of action in tackling this?
You would think this comes with a rather complicated answer, but it's really quite simple.

In CCP Seagull's keynote speech, she discussed designing for unintended consequences within New Eden, saying that: "If we can predict what is going to happen, [The Players] can predict what's going to happen - and [The Players] are smarter than us."

The playerbase is extremely intelligent, the bloggers are outspoken and knowledgeable, and the subreddit and news sites allow for both discussion and dissemination of information. In a situation where there is a controversy regarding a change to the game - or anything really - it's important to make sure that constructive discussion is taking place and that the community knows what's happening and why. Regardless of whether or not I agree with a controversial change, it's the CSM's job to represent the players. That means facilitating the discussion within the playerbase, correcting any misunderstandings, and taking that feedback to CCP.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

The Marmite Collective
#95 - 2015-01-23 14:38:15 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Seraph: by now you've made it abundantly clear that you not only disapprove of me, but of my candidacy for CSM9 as well - not that either of those things were ever in question in the first place. Now, please stop posting in this thread if you're not going to contribute anything of value.
Why do you keep avoiding him. Shouldn't a CSM listen to everyone and not just the players who agree with you? Don't you think its arrogant to tell people not to post any more on the public Eve-O forum ? Straight

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

#96 - 2015-01-23 15:26:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Tora Bushido wrote:
Jayne Fillon wrote:
Seraph: by now you've made it abundantly clear that you not only disapprove of me, but of my candidacy for CSM9 as well - not that either of those things were ever in question in the first place. Now, please stop posting in this thread if you're not going to contribute anything of value.
Why do you keep avoiding him. Shouldn't a CSM listen to everyone and not just the players who agree with you? Don't you think its arrogant to tell people not to post any more on the public Eve-O forum ? Straight
Forum rules prevent me from answering this question fully.

In short, Seraph is neither interested in a productive discussion about the CSM nor in my platform as a whole. We have a history together that dates back over two years to when we were in the same corp together, him as the CEO and myself as the director. We did not part amicably - that much I'm sure is obvious. I engaged with him during my CSM9 campaign, but the aftermath of that nonsense proved to me that simply ignoring him is the best course of action.

I'm all for discussions about the game, debating conflicting ideas, and defending both my position and opinions.

... but I'm not going to humor someone who harbors nothing but malicious intent towards me.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

Pandemic Legion
#97 - 2015-01-23 15:30:19 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:


... but I'm not going to humor someone who harbors nothing but malicious intent towards me.

Would you say that's something common with you? I can't say that Sugar Kyle or Fuzzy Steve have people that have such feelings towards them.

It wouldn't be a good quality in a CSM to cause such feelings from the player body. At the end of the day we all know this is a game but if you're the type of person that elicits that response from people it would be detrimental(to all of us) to have you presenting our problems to CCP.
#98 - 2015-01-23 15:51:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayne Fillon
Doomchinchilla wrote:
Jayne Fillon wrote:

... but I'm not going to humor someone who harbors nothing but malicious intent towards me.

Would you say that's something common with you? I can't say that Sugar Kyle or Fuzzy Steve have people that have such feelings towards them.

It wouldn't be a good quality in a CSM to cause such feelings from the player body. At the end of the day we all know this is a game but if you're the type of person that elicits that response from people it would be detrimental (to all of us) to have you presenting our problems to CCP.
I apologize in advance for using argument ad absurdum, but by this logic any CFC candidate - even The Mittani himself - would have been a detriment to the CSM since they have enemies. In a game of conflict, it's impossible to constantly fight and compete with others without making enemies, let alone having everyone still like you.

As for people like Fuzzy, Mike, et al, they do not engage in adversarial play styles so the comparison is moot.

There are many candidates who can present your problems to CCP, and in your specific case Sugar is probably the best one for the job. That being said, the people who I compete against, or who am hostile with, would never find themselves without a voice on the CSM due to my inclusion on the council. I would never purposefully oppose change or try to silence those who I dislike, simply because I dislike them or because in game they are my enemy. This is no different than CFC candidates advocating for the health of the game as a whole rather than the health of their specific coalition.

Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.

#99 - 2015-01-23 21:15:40 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post.

Also, as I have stated earlier please refrain from stating the same (counter) arguments or personal opinions over and over again.
This is a CSM campaign thread, please keep it civil!

The Rules:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.


4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


13. Spamming is prohibited.

Spam is defined as the repetitive posting of the same topic or nonsensical post that has no substance and is often designed to annoy other forum users. This can include the words “first”, “go back to (insert other game name)” and other such posts that contribute no value to forum discussion. Spamming also includes the posting of ASCII art within a forum post.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Heroes and Villains.
#100 - 2015-01-24 02:23:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Boom Boom Longtime
Edited my bad post made when extremely drunk Blink

Concord Approved Trader

Forum Jump