CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
4 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing.

First post First post
Author
Interhole Revenue Service
#1 - 2014-12-09 00:03:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Angrod Losshelin
Name: Angrod Losshelin
Rank: CEO of Oath of the Forsaken
Extracurricular Activities: Host of Praise Bob Podcast, Multi-boxer, generally bad PVPer/FC.


Election Platform: W-Space PVE and PVP, Multiboxer Representation, and New Players in W-Space.

Platform Tenets:

Top Priority:
Quote:

  1. Corporation Roles

  2. POS roles need changed very very badly. (more roles, better organization)

    Recruit template for mails to recruiters. (AKA send mail to recruiters button)

    Remove “share” system that is useless and completely outdated. Replace with IWIN button.

    The ability for CEO or designated directors to remove all roles from all players or a “clear button” which will make role reorganizing alot easier.

  3. Mining in W-Space (gas and ore)

  4. Turning Ore Sites back into Scan Sigs

    Reducing the Gas gap in profitability

  5. New Players in W-Space

  6. Get Wormholes on the NPE (new player experience)

    More CCP publicity

    Better bonuses to T1 Scanning Frigs

    More of this.

  7. Multi-Boxing

  8. Increased PR for Multiboxers and their community

    Support from multiboxers for legitimate CCP concerns

    Better representation for multiboxers with CCP

    Benefits to CCP from multiboxers

    Better ways to restrict "problem boxing".




Lower Priority:

Quote:

  1. WH recruiting restrictions

  2. Diversify type of WH space in recruiting tab.

    C6 space is vastly different than C1 space.

  3. Multi-Boxing

  4. Reducing false positive reports from players come Jan 1.

    Increased CCP support for multiple accounts or alts.

  5. Little Things

  6. Saving settings and window locations with the ability to share that across all accounts on this machine or make them linkable to others.

    Ability to change the color scheme of each window individually.

    ISIS for modules. Enough said.


You are more than welcome to contact me via in-game mail or on this forum. I plan on running until my legs stop working or my lungs do.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

#2 - 2014-12-09 00:06:56 UTC
A new name is always welcome, and this is the first time I think anyone has run with multiboxing in their platform.

Should be fun to watch the fireworks at the very least.

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

Interhole Revenue Service
#3 - 2014-12-09 00:08:43 UTC
Jayne Fillon wrote:
and this is the first time I think anyone has run with multiboxing in their platform.


Thank you! I agree if nothing else this will shine a light on a part of eve that many either hate with little to no information or ignore completely.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#4 - 2014-12-09 00:48:18 UTC
You do know that, with Rhea, no station is required for recruiting people?

When you say multi-boxing, are you meaning:
Running multiple accounts at the same time (I have three accounts. I use them at the same time. I'm far from unusual on the CSM)
or
Running multiple accounts at the same time, using third party software.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Caldari State
#5 - 2014-12-09 03:27:18 UTC
Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I am one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: podcast@capstable.net
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal

Executive Editor, CSM Watch || Writer, Co-host of the Cap Stable Podcast || Twitter: @Lanctharus

Interhole Revenue Service
#6 - 2014-12-09 04:42:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Angrod Losshelin
Steve Ronuken wrote:
You do know that, with Rhea, no station is required for recruiting people?


A character can create a new application to join a corporation from anywhere. (Previously could applications could only be submitted whilst docked in a station)

You are correct, I wrote this up and have been working on it for quite a while now. Thank you for the correction.

Steve Ronuken wrote:


When you say multi-boxing, are you meaning:
Running multiple accounts at the same time (I have three accounts. I use them at the same time. I'm far from unusual on the CSM)
or
Running multiple accounts at the same time, using third party software.


I have multiboxed eve since almost the beginning with more than one account. Then three, now I have started utilizing third party software and am up to 7.

As a multi-boxer this simply means more than one account. Over half of eve's players are multi-boxers but don't necessarily consider themselves as such. Let me put this out there right now. I support the upcoming broadcasting changes, but most of the multi-boxing community feels misrepresented and their playstyle has come into question and attack with little to no response from CCP.

I feel all multi-boxers should be represented correctly and communication between some of this games most devout supporters and it's developers needs to happen. This change actually affects me very little, but it affects some dedicated players a great deal.

Third party software can be considered any mouse with a program or hotkey built in. Those mice with multiple buttons that you can map to eve...that's third party software. Either way, third party software has a huge impact on this game and there is not a single player that does not use it to affect their game play.

The issue is how the third party software is being used and how it affects players. Some believe stuff like siggy and unsupported cache scrapping like Eve Central (agaisnt the EULA) is ok and some don't, just like some don't agree with third party multiboxing software. There simply needs to be representation. I hope to be that.

Not everyone will agree I just hope enough do to let me help the community communicate better.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#7 - 2014-12-09 04:43:55 UTC
Lanctharus Onzo wrote:
Well hello there!

My name is Lanctharus Onzo and I am one of the co-host and writers of the Cap Stable Podcast.

In early 2014 our podcast interviewed a great majority of the candidates for CSM9 and we will be doing the same for CSM10.

Here is our announcement: http://capstable.net/2014/12/01/council-of-stellar-management-x-call-for-candidate-interviews/

As we stated in the announcement, you can contact us to schedule your one on one interview via any of the following methods:

Email: podcast@capstable.net
Twitter: @CapStable
Or via our contact form

We look forward to speaking to you about your particular skill set and expertise in EVE Online and we hope you success in your candidacy.

Sincerely,

Lanctharus Onzo
Co-host & Writer of the Cap Stable Podcast
Military Director, Alea Iacta Est Universal


I plan on attending. As a podcaster myself I am grateful you exist!

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#8 - 2014-12-16 21:26:36 UTC
http://www.bobinmyhole.com/angrod-for-csm/ has been updated with some more information. Mainly my view and idea for WH is the new player Experience and POS related corporation roles.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Capital Escalation.
#9 - 2014-12-17 08:36:20 UTC
Angrod,

Currently brushing up on my "Praise Bob" episodes, and really enjoying the podcast. I'm looking forward to hearing your interviews and following your campaign. I'm glad we have a couple wormhole players running currently. Keep trucking along and I hope that your campaign goes well. Best of luck!

Minister of High Society | Twitter: @autoritare

E-mail: diogenes.proc@gmail.com

My Blog: http://diogenes-club.blogspot.com/

The Diogenes Club | Join W-Space | Down The Pipe

Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-12-17 12:14:29 UTC
I'm very interested in your platform, especially anything that will make W-Space accessible to new players. You've mentioned a few things about roles. I completely agree that the system is in need of improvements, but are you committed to keeping corp theft viable as a profession? I know its a bit off your platform, but what is your opinion on the discussion of removing intra-corp agression in high sec?

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!

Interhole Revenue Service
#11 - 2014-12-17 19:15:23 UTC
I feel that intra corp "combat" or aggression is more than viable and will remain so. I do not feel that adding ease of use or logical changes to the current role system should be postponed in regards to no changing current intra-corp aggression tactics.

Awoxing will always exist, corp theft will always exist. I would simply prefer the ability to actually control my role system logically rather than with the limited options they currently provide.

In wormhole space specifically intra-corp aggression is a very real and dangerous thing to CEO's and new corps. It destroys dreams and turns more people away from this game then should be. There are game mechanics flaws that pander to making corp theft amazingly easy. Where as safety becomes increasingly expensive and logistically insane. I think with the resolution of these game mechanics issues we will have a decrease in small time corp thefts and an increase in much larger schemes and thefts. Mainly due to lower totem pilots who think they can just enter and take **** their first week or so will die off rapidly, but as directors and corporate espionage professionals realize that the corp is increasing in wealth instead of having it taken over and over again they will be more and more tempted to disappear into the night with more valuable loots and isk.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#12 - 2014-12-17 19:16:20 UTC
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Angrod,

Currently brushing up on my "Praise Bob" episodes, and really enjoying the podcast. I'm looking forward to hearing your interviews and following your campaign. I'm glad we have a couple wormhole players running currently. Keep trucking along and I hope that your campaign goes well. Best of luck!


Thank you for your vote of confidence!

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#13 - 2014-12-22 18:01:04 UTC
http://www.bobinmyhole.com/angrod-for-csm/ has some Scanning Rig changes that I would love to support. Nothing earth shattering but still increasing new players usefulness to WH space.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Capital Escalation.
#14 - 2014-12-23 00:50:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Proclus Diadochu
In reply to your blog post:

@ Scanning Rigs - While this is something I'd currently consider a little thing in the scheme of things, as most players in the wormhole community at this time aren't likely to be the sort flying T1 frigates, I see that your vision for NPE toward wormholes would mean this adjustment for Scanning Rigs for those newer players.

First, thoughts on NPE:

I'm not against NPE to wormholes across the board, but I don't see wormholes in general as a new player experience, nor do I want it to become something that is easy enough for any new player to experience. Wormholes and the mechanical understanding required to live in them is somewhere after the learning curve (Corp/POS management, fittings, implants, drugs, various and relatively more difficult PVE/PVP, fleet and ship management, etc) and although wormholes have become easier over the years, with help from training, documenting, and third-party tools, I don't want to theme park the experience. So to that end, I'm of the opinion that NPE for wormholes should be reviewed and developed very carefully as to not end the frontier completely.

As far as the rig changes, this is fine.

@ Wormhole NPE - At one point last year I talked about how it would be nice for CCP to create tutorial missions in the exploration side that would allow players to probe down a generated wormhole that would lead to a specific mission area somewhere and allow them to complete a mission against Sleepers. It would likely conflict with lore, unless worked around, and would have to be limited to maybe the player who generated the mission, or those in fleet/gang with him/her to prevent nastiness. That or make the mission area "highsec" rules, which I don't care for unless the plan would be to have different level missions that allow players to work up to the dangerous level of wormholes, where the higher wormhole "missions" would be -1.0, no local, and anyone could scan down. Not sure on this, as I've said, I don't feel wormholes are NPE. But, I'm irrelevant :P

@ POS Mechanics - I've been setting up/tearing down/infiltrating POS's in wormholes for a long time, and at this point, I say to let CCP develop a permanent fix to address all current concerns and not waste any development time on band-aids. That's all.

@ Multiboxing - You quote:

Quote:
As a multi-boxer this simply means more than one account. Over half of eve’s players are multi-boxers but don’t necessarily consider themselves as such.

I don't agree with this statement, as many wouldn't. It isn't an accurate statement. A multiboxer is someone who actively plays multiple accounts at the same time. I have many accounts, and I am only multiboxing if I play more than one at a time. That is the definition of multiboxing.

multi-account =/= multi-box

That said, mutliboxing is a playing style, and since all playing styles should be considered, so as long as they adhere to the EULA/TOS, I appreciate your concern with representation to a familiar playstyle. To each their own :)

Edit: Spelling

Minister of High Society | Twitter: @autoritare

E-mail: diogenes.proc@gmail.com

My Blog: http://diogenes-club.blogspot.com/

The Diogenes Club | Join W-Space | Down The Pipe

Interhole Revenue Service
#15 - 2014-12-23 23:53:22 UTC
Proclus Diadochu wrote:


@ Scanning Rigs - While this is something I'd currently consider a little thing in the scheme of things, as most players in the wormhole community at this time aren't likely to be the sort flying T1 frigates, I see that your vision for NPE toward wormholes would mean this adjustment for Scanning Rigs for those newer players.


Yes, exactly.

Proclus Diadochu wrote:


First, thoughts on NPE:

I'm not against NPE to wormholes across the board, but I don't see wormholes in general as a new player experience, nor do I want it to become something that is easy enough for any new player to experience. Wormholes and the mechanical understanding required to live in them is somewhere after the learning curve (Corp/POS management, fittings, implants, drugs, various and relatively more difficult PVE/PVP, fleet and ship management, etc) and although wormholes have become easier over the years, with help from training, documenting, and third-party tools, I don't want to theme park the experience. So to that end, I'm of the opinion that NPE for wormholes should be reviewed and developed very carefully as to not end the frontier completely.


I do not want to see WH space become anything less than it is, I simply want an increase in people to shoot. What better way to do that then to expose our awesome slice of space to new bro's

Proclus Diadochu wrote:


@ Wormhole NPE - At one point last year I talked about how it would be nice for CCP to create tutorial missions in the exploration side that would allow players to probe down a generated wormhole that would lead to a specific mission area somewhere and allow them to complete a mission against Sleepers. It would likely conflict with lore, unless worked around, and would have to be limited to maybe the player who generated the mission, or those in fleet/gang with him/her to prevent nastiness. That or make the mission area "highsec" rules, which I don't care for unless the plan would be to have different level missions that allow players to work up to the dangerous level of wormholes, where the higher wormhole "missions" would be -1.0, no local, and anyone could scan down. Not sure on this, as I've said, I don't feel wormholes are NPE. But, I'm irrelevant :P



I think this would be best handled in an "instanced" or roomed WH for new players. Something non exploitable.

Proclus Diadochu wrote:


@ POS Mechanics - I've been setting up/tearing down/infiltrating POS's in wormholes for a long time, and at this point, I say to let CCP develop a permanent fix to address all current concerns and not waste any development time on band-aids. That's all.



I agree, and with the new Proteus patch announcements this looks to be happening, but we will have to wait and see if this actually resolves all of the issues.

Proclus Diadochu wrote:


@ Multiboxing - You quote:

I don't agree with this statement, as many wouldn't. It isn't an accurate statement. A multiboxer is someone who actively plays multiple accounts at the same time. I have many accounts, and I am only multiboxing if I play more than one at a time. That is the definition of multiboxing.

multi-account =/= multi-box

That said, mutliboxing is a playing style, and since all playing styles should be considered, so as long as they adhere to the EULA/TOS, I appreciate your concern with representation to a familiar playstyle. To each their own :)



I can agree with that statement, however, how many accounts do people have without actually using them at the same time?

Either way, I want to follow the EULA as well but I will argue against any EULA that restricts my gameplay outside of my bounds of reason. I'll follow it, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

With that being said, the current changes are acceptable if they are explained. The main concern for alot of multi-boxers is that this will not solve any issues, so whats next? That's what most are afraid of, as am I. CCP's reputation with taking the ax to an issue that needs surgery is well known and feared with good reason.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#16 - 2015-01-05 22:01:35 UTC
Well after the holidays and being sick as a space hooker on labor day I am back and ready to go! I will be updating the blog shortly with some more points and campaign arguments.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Interhole Revenue Service
#17 - 2015-01-05 22:18:28 UTC
Angrod Losshelin wrote:
Well after the holidays and being sick as a space hooker on labor day I am back and ready to go! I will be updating the blog shortly with some more points and campaign arguments.


http://warptozero.net/index.php?topic=85.msg817#msg817 check this forum out for alot of cool replies from your CSM candidates including the beautiful me!

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

#18 - 2015-01-05 23:02:50 UTC  |  Edited by: GeeShizzle MacCloud
i guess i am technically part of the multiboxer community as you so eloquently describe and i definitely do NOT feel misrepresented at all. in fact i feel happy with the Jan 1st changes and if anything am more content with CCPs current approach and general attitude to the changed TOS and EULA than previously.

Not wanting to rain on your parade or anything...

though have to say good on you for finding a USP to separate yourself from the crowd of CSM hopefuls.
Interhole Revenue Service
#19 - 2015-01-05 23:19:08 UTC
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
i guess i am technically part of the multiboxer community as you so eloquently describe and i definitely do NOT feel misrepresented at all. in fact i feel happy with the Jan 1st changes and if anything am more content with CCPs current approach and general attitude to the changed TOS and EULA than previously.

Not wanting to rain on your parade or anything...

though have to say good on you for finding a USP to separate yourself from the crowd of CSM hopefuls.


I am glad you are happy for the changes. I agree it pulls more out of the grey area than was previously, but it also caused alot of issues and generated more questions that simply need answered.

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

#20 - 2015-01-05 23:54:22 UTC
Angrod Losshelin wrote:

I am glad you are happy for the changes. I agree it pulls more out of the grey area than was previously, but it also caused alot of issues and generated more questions that simply need answered.


Well if your interests in bringing 3rd party multiboxing issues to CCP is to further reduce the area of grey that lies between what's for and against the TOS and EULA for the purposes of closing any loopholes that may potentially exist then i could support that. But if you're gunning for finding loopholes to exploit, then that's more than objectionable in my eyes.

However such a venture would not be outside the spirit of previous ventures by many eve players, some might say it can be said to somewhat define an eve online player from other MMO's or multiplayer games.
4 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump