CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Commander Aze for CSM9

Author
#1 - 2014-02-21 04:53:20 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Dolan
Ill keep this short and to the point.

I wont claim to be the best or the worst player. I want to see this game grow and alter the state of null and high sec warfare.

I pride myself on training the new players in our corp and I focus heavily on the new player experience.

My main concerns
null sov warfare something better than shooting high hit-point items
high sec wars Fixing the permadeck shuffle.
In addition High sec wars need to be fought over something not just vague isk values.
finding a better POS mechanic
deployables that are actually useful.

I also want to hear the communities input so I might be able to serve their interests.


Commander Aze

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

Niklas Zisel
#2 - 2014-03-11 18:52:14 UTC
Clearly short and to the point is not getting you much response.

I was wondering if you had any ideas on how you would address the concerns that you have mentioned.

A few direct questions to your mentioned concerns:
What sort of deployables would be useful in your mind?
What is not useful about the currently released deployables ?
What is your opinion on how to fix high sec wars?
#3 - 2014-03-11 20:12:11 UTC
Niklas Zisel wrote:
Clearly short and to the point is not getting you much response.

I was wondering if you had any ideas on how you would address the concerns that you have mentioned.

A few direct questions to your mentioned concerns:
What sort of deployables would be useful in your mind?
What is not useful about the currently released deployables ?
What is your opinion on how to fix high sec wars?


Also so lets consider the deployables we have so far.

the ESS, Im sorry is a bit of a joke. Even with the changes to loyalty points its risks far exceed its benefits. Also the interdiction sphere around it only comes into effect for a cepter if they activate it to take all. doesn't hold them as a warp disrupt otherwise.

Mobile cyno inhibitor. Again we have seen approximately 2 times these have actually worked because of their low hp and long activation timers. In 10% tidi they are more than pointless as fc's have tons more time to see it and kill it. changes need to be made to make this what it was suppose to be.

Depots These actually are not bad...

mobile micro jump unit. Im not sure whats this things purpose was other than being redundant and making it pointless to put a micro jump on your ship.

Mobile scan inhibitors... These had promise. and a lot of it. then they made them visible to dscan. instant Im hiding something here scan me down beacons. not to mention they do not block any warpable object within then from broadcasting a system wide warp to. For instance a fix to this would be to make if deployed in a anom that anom now needs to be probed down it losses its instant warp. (miners would love this ratters as well.) before we jump to the doesnt that give an unfair advantage to the miners and ratters. no. why not? cause they spent the time to prepare. Also its range is silly short and should be able to hide pos as well.

Siphon units. lets assume i put 200 of these on every pos in the universe 10% of there efficiency is lost to the either of space. I dont even need to go back to empty or steal i just take a flat 10% away form them with almost no risk to me.

mobile tractor units. The mechanic as it stands is i can go chase a missioner in high sec and shot at these as they drop them and only gain suspect. yet still take off with all their stuff. (occasionally trigger stupid reaction of missioner to fight over it.) change the mechanic to criminal action similar to the thought of you cant take my ships loot unless you shoot at me.

Warp disruption fields. Formerly useful and only really useful against large groups trying to enter a cyno jammed system. Cepter roams have made these and even intel channels almost pointless. other than for camping hoping to catch anything but a cepter. Possible fix is a meta or different version of these that are designed to catch interdiction nullified ships. and only them.


High sec wars


ok so wars in eve are silly, in null their is not declaration of war cause it doesn't need it for the mechanic to work. low sec it doesn't matter either ohh sec status hit... can clearly see how that is working to prevent pvp in low sec... So lets focus on high sec. High sec wars currently are fought over one side dominating the other to the point they leave corp or alliance and reform under a new corporation to dodge the war. or they get permanently decked by marmite / whores / etc because they have new pilots that simply don't understand the mechanics. and walk into their station game traps. this is preying on the weak. Ive can flipped enough miners to know. these wars are arbitrary there is no goal or finish to them. they are not fighting over anything.

lets take war as an abstract concept. What is its propose? Wars are fought over territory, resources, and theology. So the Amarr get a pass on this... (that was a lore joke)

But what is a war in eve fought over? isk values? and total losses?

There is a fix. a War in eve needs to have a goal. I declare war on X corp or alliance so that I can take x moons and x customs offices from them within x time frame.

Now War is a concord approved action so dipping into lore it can be seen that concord have a need to micro manage everything. adding rules and regulations to things that may or may not need them. this change could play well in the story line as Concords way of trying to reign in the capsuleer threats.

Failure to complete objectives in the war within the timeframe yields a penalty of not being allowed via concord to continue.

Here is more where my vision for the future of eve/dust comes in. I want to see planets become upgradeable to the point they are worth fighting over or setting an alarm to defend.

Additionally as concord sanctions war interference in the war from 3rd party logistics should be a concord able offence and pull the corporation or alliance into the war because of their actions. Making 3rd party logi a thing of the past.

Back to abstract lets consider normal wars if a third party is found helping one side or the other they become a target as well. flipping back to eve currently they pull suspect of which doesn't really do anything to them as a penalty.


As for useful deployables
deployable surveillance units the operator gains a camera like option that shows any activity in the deployables area. useful for viewing the next system over without being there. or watching a gate for incoming hostiles while your on the other side of the system

I'm putting together a more firm vision of the eve dust connection that involves war barges with a special weapon that launches a siege clone bay into a customs office or pos and reinforces that pos or customs office until the resulting battle in dust contracts is completed. adding a different aspect to the current pos warfare deal.

And lastly Asking the Devs why they build a game on computer and not release their FPS on computers as well...

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

#4 - 2014-03-29 02:29:12 UTC
Some others might know me from incursions.

Any other questions?

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

Pandemic Horde
#5 - 2014-04-03 07:35:53 UTC
I think neutral logistics is a broken mechanic best of luck
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#6 - 2014-04-03 13:49:52 UTC
High sec wars currently are fought over one side dominating the other to the point they leave corp or alliance and reform under a new corporation to dodge the war.

If one side is being dominated so heavily, is that not the corporations leadership at fault for failing to have a effective defense fleet or strategy in place, or educating their members on how to operate safely during a war?


But what is a war in eve fought over? isk values? and total losses?
There is a fix.


Who is to say that this needs to be fixed? If two corporations fall into dispute, why is the destruction of each others ships not a valid reason to declare war? If a member of a corporation clashes with other members and leaves or is kicked, perhaps they wish to hire mercenaries to inflict as much damage as possible via isk value as revenge.


War in eve needs to have a goal. I declare war on X corp or alliance so that I can take x moons and x customs offices from them within x time frame.

What if the corporation or alliance has no moons or custom offices?


Failure to complete objectives in the war within the timeframe yields a penalty of not being allowed via concord to continue.

Could you list and explain, say, three objectives which you think a corporation could choose to pursue? These may not include things which a corporation may not necessarily own, such as custom offices / moons / POS.


flipping back to eve currently they pull suspect of which doesn't really do anything to them as a penalty

I would have thought the fact that every single other pilot can freely shoot them for the next 15 minutes would be a sufficient penalty.

Additionally as concord sanctions war interference in the war from 3rd party logistics should be a concord able offence and pull the corporation or alliance into the war because of their actions.

So basically a corporation could declare war against someone, stick a whole bunch of alts into other corps/alliances and then start concording t1 logi frigates onto the defender, thus dragging all of them into the war and giving the original attacker a load of free decs.

I fully support this change.


deployable surveillance units the operator gains a camera like option that shows any activity in the deployables area. useful for viewing the next system over without being there. or watching a gate for incoming hostiles while your on the other side of the system

What is your primary motivation for this suggestion?


Some others might know me from incursions

Do you feel the amount of ISK that can be made from incursions currently is balanced based on risk/reward?
#7 - 2014-04-05 15:19:49 UTC
#8 - 2014-04-05 22:59:34 UTC  |  Edited by: commander aze
If one side is being dominated so heavily, is that not the corporations leadership at fault for failing to have a effective defense fleet or strategy in place, or educating their members on how to operate safely during a war?


This assumes every corp wants to pvp There are many people that do not wish to engage in combat ever they just like building and such.



Who is to say that this needs to be fixed? If two corporations fall into dispute, why is the destruction of each others ships not a valid reason to declare war? If a member of a corporation clashes with other members and leaves or is kicked, perhaps they wish to hire mercenaries to inflict as much damage as possible via isk value as revenge


50 million isk is what is required to war dec a small corp. for that 50 million I can Stop you from doing 90% of your normal activity they haven't had the time to build a pvp wing. or an older corp may have lost members to different activities or attrition. simply put most wars happen because opportunity strikes for a large alliance to wardeck a weak opponent. Just because they saw them in an industrial on the trade route. That is not a reason for a war. IF you think it is then why doesn't switzerland enter a war ever.


War in eve needs to have a goal. I declare war on X corp or alliance so that I can take x moons and x customs offices from them within x time frame.

What if the corporation or alliance has no moons or custom offices?


Quote:
Failure to complete objectives in the war within the timeframe yields a penalty of not being allowed via concord to continue.

Could you list and explain, say, three objectives which you think a corporation could choose to pursue? These may not include things which a corporation may not necessarily own, such as custom offices / moons / POS.


Well set a loss mail as a reason
Neutral logistics as a reason (if it ever gets added to kill mail)
something that in a reasonable persons mind constitutes the low cost of 50 million to war deck people.


Quote:
flipping back to eve currently they pull suspect of which doesn't really do anything to them as a penalty

I would have thought the fact that every single other pilot can freely shoot them for the next 15 minutes would be a sufficient penalty.


Additionally as concord sanctions war interference in the war from 3rd party logistics should be a concord able offence and pull the corporation or alliance into the war because of their actions.

In addition to that Why should i need to track everyone in the game that has logistics skills? they are not part of the war?

Quote:
So basically a corporation could declare war against someone, stick a whole bunch of alts into other corps/alliances and then start concording t1 logi frigates onto the defender, thus dragging all of them into the war and giving the original attacker a load of free decs.

I fully support this change.

such is eve to find a way around a new mechanic... I would be happy settling for the concordokken of a neutral guardian... just saying Id laugh


Quote:
deployable surveillance units the operator gains a camera like option that shows any activity in the deployables area. useful for viewing the next system over without being there. or watching a gate for incoming hostiles while your on the other side of the system

What is your primary motivation for this suggestion?


Providing intel

Some others might know me from incursions

Do you feel the amount of ISK that can be made from incursions currently is balanced based on risk/reward?
[/quote]

considering the amount of ganks happening against incursion ships yes. the real question is do i think contesting a site is silly or not. Simply put since level 5s are in low sec the best option for high sp characters is incursions. I feel that if the logi fail at their job or the fleet fails to take out jams in time that yes the risk is there. it still take many hours expecially at the plex prices of today to gain enough isk to pay for your account. considering plex is over 700 mill... what i would have killed to have it there when I bought plex

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

#9 - 2014-04-06 14:24:41 UTC
quick and to the point all things that need to be adressed, I like this way of thinking

how you like fraction warfare?
people say it need to be fixed I dont see whats wrong with it, its one of my fav thing in eve
#10 - 2014-04-06 17:59:59 UTC
Hasan al-Askari Mujahideen wrote:
quick and to the point all things that need to be adressed, I like this way of thinking

how you like fraction warfare?
people say it need to be fixed I don't see whats wrong with it, its one of my fav thing in eve

I tried faction warfare ... Warp core stabs was my strategy and i always entered systems with way too many people to kill me.

with the new avenues for lp makes it interesting. Id be open to hearing any suggestions for change. the thing i remember most is that it runs like an npc alliance with few large fights because individuals seem to be only interested in the prize not the glory. there are a few corps that do well and actually form up but it seems lacking for the solo player... at least that is why I stopped doing it.

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

#11 - 2014-04-08 18:20:44 UTC
Vote is online go vote please!!!

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2014-04-22 05:12:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Sykaotic
Out of all the candidates, and me as a returning *new* player (played for a bit in 2008) you are the only candidate I would vote for and did vote for.

GL and I encourage you to promote the ideas you have expressed no matter the outcome as the game is somewhat in shambles compared to 2008 due to the current office holders mindset.

Time for change.
#13 - 2014-04-23 03:26:45 UTC
I appreciate the support thank you

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps

Forum Jump