CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Boliano For CSM

Author
DARKNESS.
#1 - 2017-02-27 23:57:47 UTC
Well here i am, Ive been playing eve since october 2008. Ive literally been to every corner of the game and have been in almost every major conflict since i started.
I'm running for CSM cause i believe i know what the players want, I think i know enough players from all facets of eve, and have made enough friends to have a good knowledge of what the players want.
So anyways Figured id throw my hat in the ring and see what hapened.
DARKNESS.
#2 - 2017-02-28 22:49:57 UTC
Reserved....
DARKNESS.
#3 - 2017-03-01 03:33:01 UTC  |  Edited by: boliano
My playform is based on a few simple things.
1. All players need to be represented. Not just the mega blocks and well known players in eve. Even the solo gamer that just logs in and spends there time solo just discovering the game should have a voice.
2. Even the smallest idea or complaint should be able to be heard by CCP. Not just the major issues in game.
3. I believe that the long standing bugs need to be worked on. We all want new features. But i also think that the older bugs and issues that persist in game should finally be addressed.
4. I think corp roles need to be reworked. Ive always thought the roles were not user friendly enough. And we need better options on assigning roles.
5. Corp logos need to be reworked. There should be a edit feature or upload like with alliance logos. A corp logo should be able to truly represent what the corps about.
6. Motherships? CCP took them and called them super carriers but one day motherships would be revisited.
7. I also feel fatique needs a rework too. While im all for limiting power projection. I think jump fatique still needs some tweeks. Yes
DARKNESS.
#4 - 2017-03-01 23:35:43 UTC
simple and staright. got my vote +1
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2017-03-02 08:16:46 UTC
Hello,

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC
DARKNESS.
#6 - 2017-03-02 23:37:21 UTC  |  Edited by: boliano
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello,

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC


Well as i remember when i started the game, I didn't know anything about standings at all. So i would say faction standings need to be explained more to new players. I had zero idea that running missions for one faction killed your standings for another. I think maybe a tutorial to explain it and to explain how to fix your standings that was built into the game would be a big help.
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2017-03-03 12:45:21 UTC
boliano wrote:
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Hello,

My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


DMC


Well as i remember when i started the game, I didn't know anything about standings at all. So i would say faction standings need to be explained more to new players. I had zero idea that running missions for one faction killed your standings for another. I think maybe a tutorial to explain it and to explain how to fix your standings that was built into the game would be a big help.

Thanks for the reply,

I agree 100%.

This game was based on having a balance in 'Risk vs Reward' and 'Actions vs Consequences'. Currently the only way to repair negative Faction standings is to grind missions. It takes time for players to ruin Faction standings and as such it should also take some time to repair those standings. In the past Characters use to be accountable for their actions in-game, now most everything has been dumbed down and turned into easy mode for the instant gratification crowd. That's something I don't want to see happen to Faction standings.

Currently the in-game aspects of Faction standings :
Positive Faction standings are the only way to access Cosmos Agents (one time access).
Positive Faction and Corporation standings are needed to access Research Agents.
All other Agents only require minimal amount of Faction standing for access (-2.00 or higher standing).
High Faction standings reduce Market Broker fees and Reprocessing fees in NPC stations.
At -5.00 or lower Faction standing, Empire NPC's will attack when in their space.

I created and shared the 'Faction Standing Repair Plan' with the playerbase back in 2010. In my opinion players need more options available to repair negative Faction standings then what I've listed in 'The Plan'. Most of those Event Agents can only be accessed once in the characters life. A lot of players in-game don't even read the forums so they don't know that guide is available. In fact repairing negative Faction standings is extremely tough on new players who haven't even learned the game yet. They can easily mess up their Faction standings right from the start without actually knowing it.

Faction standing repair should be implemented in-game to be more intuitive instead of being so obscure. All changes to Faction standings should be brought to the players attention with an on screen pop up message. Any action that would cause negative Faction standing should trigger an on screen pop up warning (with option to deactivate). All Anti-Empire missions should have a warning to alert players that accepting and completing those missions will incur negative Faction standings. An idea presented by others is to have Tags for Standings. Personally I don't really like the idea but if it's similar to Tags for Security, I guess it would be acceptable. Lastly CCP could add another group of NPC Agents to the in-game Agent Finder strictly for Faction standing repair, sorta like the proposal I have listed in my forum signature.

Thanks again and good luck in the upcoming election.



DMC
#8 - 2017-03-08 06:03:07 UTC
07 Candidate!

First, thank you for your time and effort (both present and future) in representing the capsuleers of New Eden! They’re much appreciated.

I’m preparing to cast my vote in the CSM12 elections. After reading the information you submitted, though, I still have a question.

By way of background, I started in Eve as a hauler, moving freight in T1 industrials and gradually working my way up in both ships and cargo. However, I repeatedly found my progress impeded by gankers who would destroy my ship and steal my cargo. In low- and null-sec space, that’s to be expected. You place your bet and take your chances. In high-sec space, however, this is very frustrating. Why have high-sec space at all then? This frustration drove me into anti-ganking, and I’ve been a proud member of Thomas en Chasteaux's High-Sec Militia for several months now.

So, my question. Where do you stand on high-sec ganking? I’ll concede that ganking is a legitimate style of game play, as CCP has ruled. But I also feel that it should be difficult and dangerous (for the ganker) in the 30% of New Eden designated as high-sec space. In particular, I’d like to see CCP tweak the game mechanics so that the criminal flag generated by looting a ganked freighter in high-sec space follows all players who handle that loot, and otherwise make looting more realistic. (Thomas en Chasteaux's ideas, not mine.)

As a member of the CSM, would you present such an idea to CCP? Would you push for its adoption? What other game changes might you consider to make high-sec ganking more difficult and less profitable?

Regards,
Cochise Chiricahua.
DARKNESS.
#9 - 2017-03-11 00:28:40 UTC  |  Edited by: boliano
Cochise Chiricahua wrote:
07 Candidate!

First, thank you for your time and effort (both present and future) in representing the capsuleers of New Eden! They’re much appreciated.

I’m preparing to cast my vote in the CSM12 elections. After reading the information you submitted, though, I still have a question.

By way of background, I started in Eve as a hauler, moving freight in T1 industrials and gradually working my way up in both ships and cargo. However, I repeatedly found my progress impeded by gankers who would destroy my ship and steal my cargo. In low- and null-sec space, that’s to be expected. You place your bet and take your chances. In high-sec space, however, this is very frustrating. Why have high-sec space at all then? This frustration drove me into anti-ganking, and I’ve been a proud member of Thomas en Chasteaux's High-Sec Militia for several months now.

So, my question. Where do you stand on high-sec ganking? I’ll concede that ganking is a legitimate style of game play, as CCP has ruled. But I also feel that it should be difficult and dangerous (for the ganker) in the 30% of New Eden designated as high-sec space. In particular, I’d like to see CCP tweak the game mechanics so that the criminal flag generated by looting a ganked freighter in high-sec space follows all players who handle that loot, and otherwise make looting more realistic. (Thomas en Chasteaux's ideas, not mine.)

As a member of the CSM, would you present such an idea to CCP? Would you push for its adoption? What other game changes might you consider to make high-sec ganking more difficult and less profitable?


Excelent question. Well the issue is ccp has said its a legitimate style of game play., so they wont make it illegal or bannable then. I think It definately needs a tweak, i just don't think its an easy fix. If we make it better for those being ganked then the gankers are losing gameplay. And vice versa. So i think as you said with the loot, i think something needs to make it so that yes you have to lose ships to gank. But also the loot needs a punishment for taking too.

I have always said that ship scanners shouldnt be allowed in high sec. I think if high sec is " safe space" then scanners shouldn't even work there. Make gankers work for the loot, cause at that point they will have to gank everyone or no one.

Regards,
Cochise Chiricahua.
Forum Jump