Bei ArtJay

Sure.

Your perspective is only coming from a null perspective where wardecs are mostly meaningless, regardless of the size of your corp.

You have an alliance to call on if anyone attacks them.

Regardless of what you think about HS, we don’t have that backup.

With the current blanket wardec culture you could easily lose everything as a small or one man corp because it’s difficult to defend against the merc corps.

Then there’s the cost, a Citadel is way more expensive to run than a pos and has to be fuelled 24/7 to keep things online, this is very cost prohibitive for a solo player or small corp. If it goes offline it costs the startup blocks again. A pos can be on and offlined at will at minimal cost, it can even be dismantled if threatened and it doesn’t take a week…( oh, and it can defend itself to a certain degree )

Then ofc there’s the rigs, you can only bonus for so many things in each citadel, I have close to 300 fully researched bpo’s, I give in about how many structures I’d need to bonus all of them.

Personally I’d much rather pay the increased tax that was imposed to force us into them, it’s better than risking billions on pretty much defenceless structures.

Some will and that’s cool, but going by the sheer number of unfueled structures in HS, most fail.

This is just my opinion of why I think your statement about citadels is wrong, it’s not meant to open a discussion about anything else.

The only issue with wardecs in Highsec is that they basically allow almost risk-free kills on gatecamps or station undocks. That’s what they are mainly used for: farming. On the other hand, non-highsec entities use the service of wardeccers as part of a move against a competition. A simple solution would be to limit the amount of concurrent wars any corp/alliance can declare to something like 10.
It would keep wardecs viable, but targets would need to be chosen more wisely.

Some of us have been arguing the same thing for years, but what stops them setting up shell corps and then after wadeccing 10 inviting their original corp/alliance to assist?

Either way, they’d still find a way around it somehow.

Because the assist option is only available to defenders: https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004152745-Wars

With a limit X of concurrent war decs, any such specialized corp would need concentrate on specific targets, which would be more in line with the general concept of a declared war vs. being a pirate. If you want to camp/shoot everyone, you can’t have legal ways to do so. Ergo, need to be a ganker or live outside of Highsec. If you want to wage war against specific entities in Highsec, they’d need to be… well decently specific and not just “every corp who flies more than 5 times a day through Niarja”.

2 Likes

Having known Bei for a number of years, I can say the vast majority of my most fun and memorable experiences in eve have been ones where Bei has had a hand in their creation.

From hotdropping in lowsec and a fateful night causing the “Rorsins Incident” and whelping a larger and superior fleet into a disorganised and inferior kitchen sink of pos bashers, all the way to leading my alliance, The Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork, to the Alliance Tournament top 10, SCL and NEO.

Bei has always been able to listen to concerns and address them by finding solutions or making his own. From providing content to corporations and alliances as an FC, to benefiting the greater eve community. Just look at the rapid growth and popularity of EVE_NT and EVE_NT Collides, as a testament of his dedication and energy to improving player experiences.
Through EVE_NT he has been able to bring a number of influential players together from all corners of the EVE Universe to provide a medium to provide new content and opportunities for players.

As he infamously often says before we die horribly “We can take 'em….”

He can take my vote.

That’s my biggest issue, I know all about EVE_NT I have been to every Nottingham meet.

But the fact that he puts so much time into that and very rarely appears on these forums makes me very wary of voting for someone who is focussed on only one thing, the game is more than tournaments and FC’ing.

I have very high standards when advocating for someone to be on the CSM. I don’t throw out my support to anyone if I don’t think they are up to the level I expect of the best of the playerbase who I want interacting with CCP to have a deep connection with the development of the game. I will probably only endorse up to 5 people at a maximum this year.

That said, I am absolutely certain that Bei would be an extraordinary asset to the CSM and CCP as a CSM rep for the player-base. I have seen first hand the level of dedication,. hard work and passion Bei puts into the game, and even when we disagree on issues he is a person who can push for his standpoint without dismissing your own opinion or issues. He’s communicative, articulate and exactly the kind of person and player I want representing the interests of the EVE community in the bowels of CCP.

Bei will be #1 on each of my accounts votes.

1 Like

Regardless of your endorsement, it’s still a fact that you’re here speaking for him.

Rather than him being bothered to defend his standing, and that is more concerning to me than any other single thing about a prospective CSM member. He simply isn’t interested in interacting with possible voters.

You don’t want a discussion but are complaining that there is no discussion from him?

Your forum activity seems to indicate you specifically targeting this campaign on no actual merit, especially when there are campaigns being put forward that are unrealistic, poorly laid out and down right of no value to the community at all. But you don’t comment and engage with those do you?

From my POV, you are just a forum warrior trolling with too much spare time on your hands, that people with an actual constructive and engaging vision for the eve community are not inclined to waste their time on.

LMAO, it took you over 2 weeks to come up with that reply?

Pathetic.

My reason for targeting this specific campaign is that I’ve noticed players standing in past years, then never, or very rarely appearing on these forums, this isn’t the only thread I have pointed this out in either. So no, it’s not just Bei, it’s all the others thats proved a waste of time who stood then never interacted with the player base.

I challenged Bei as to why he was ignoring players who were asking him questions, someone else asked also him a question, the fact that he can’t be bothered to answer says a lot about him, and the players backing him.

You need to learn to read, I welcomed a discussion about citadels, he never replied.

Sup Drago,

I already mentioned that I don’t spend much time discussing things on forums as it is not a format that plays to my strengths (English is hard work for me). I tend to observe and read threads that particularly interest me but don’t have bags of time to get stuck in lengthy written discussions. I get the sense like you said you just want to highlight that you don’t think people who don’t post regularly on eve-o forums are valid candidates. I’m not going to argue that point as I don’t see any logic in it, but feel free to keep giving my thread free bumps.

If you would like to discuss any topic in particular I’m more than happy to arrange a chat. You can try contact me in one of these ways in which I engage with other players on a daily and frequent basis;

https://twitter.com/bei_artjay
you can find me on tweetfleet slack
e-mail me on bei.artjay@gmail.com
or try in-game mail or conversation, I am active most evenings - ‘Bei ArtJay’

1 Like

I had the chance to interact with Bei at Fanfest just there and have a good conversation with him. Despite clearly being very busy he was happy to chat and very good at explaining his ideas.

Has my vote.

2 Likes

Was really kind to me with his time and wisdom when I captained Brave’s AT team in 2015 (and had no clue what I was doing). I later met him at one of the Nottingham events.

Bei will be #1 on my ballot this year in a field where I really like several candidates because he is an outstanding blend of friendship and leadership.

If you want Eve to be a game that’s richer and deeper than the daily grind put him#1 too.

3 Likes

Bei is the hardest working most dedicated player I know. Without doubt he will be one of the most valuable members of the next CSM term. His understanding of the game is second to none, his creativity still amazes me every time he comes up with something stupid.

Together we have build up EVE_NT and kept EVEsports alive over the last 4 years. I feel extremely privileged to have worked with him so closely on the projects we have completed and will do in the future.

If you voted for me for CSM 11 you simply must put your support behind this man; he has the same platform but more brains and willpower than I ever had.

Nashh Kadavr

#Bei4CSM

1 Like

Bei. Good morning. With your experience with tournaments, I’d like your view on balance in the game with ships, and its relationship with rules, limitations, and point values in AT.

I am always of the opinion that classes, factions, abilities, characters/ships are evaluated best in a tournament style atmosphere, but with the addition of more and more artificial restrictions, how can we ever scrutinize ships to determine if one weapon system or ship is too op or too similar to the next?

The best alternative is killboard statistics and worst, things which no one will engage, like Gila fleets. In this specific example, what do we blame? It’s 5 flights of high ehp drone dmg; its ability to fit multiple oversized shield extenders; that it has, on top of drones, a full high rack of missile hard points?

I understand some rules which recognize the limited space of the arena in a forced engagement, but is that the only arena we can come up with? What is the best action to see ships in their element? A null sec style fight between 15 pilots inside a four system pocket? I dunno. What do you think?

Thanks for your question Oreb, sorry it’s taken me a while top reply.

My view on ship balance is simply that I think there should be more of it. There should be a constant cycle of careful iteration to get right, there are so many ships in the game now (300 or so?) that there is enough work to constantly renew ships without it being too frequent. It’s a shame that the CCP balance team did not materialise - thought that was a really good idea! CCP have, in recent years put a decent amount of work into re-balancing, capitals and T3 cruisers to note, and this has been received on the whole very well. Would definitely be encouraging CCP to keep this up, and do more if I was elected. I think one of the important roles for the CCM, is reporting and making CCP aware of which metas in fleet combat become too dominant so they can push for re-balance in that area to shake things up and keep fleet warfare interesting (Machariels for example).

I’m not sure that CCP should ever balance the game we play every day on Tranquillity specifically for tournaments, in fact hope they don’t to be honest. As much as I love tournaments the sandbox nature of eve means you have to balance tournaments around eve mechanics, rather than the other way around. I certainty think they could work on new ways to encourage tournament play however, and the introduction of Thunderdome was a great step towards that. As you mention, there are definitely other types of pitched combat that could be explored and supported. I love the idea myself of some kind of small-gang objective focused tournament - haven’t come up with the right idea to try out yet tho!

I haven’t been campaigning as hard as i would have liked as this time of year at EVE_NT we have been frantically preparing for the Alliance Tournament which I am really excited about. To everyone who has voted for me however - thank you! Fingers crossed I make it in and can represent you well :slight_smile:

I’m sorry you got to this late too. I intended it as a layup and bump because I knew you would dunk it.

Good luck still though, this late in the voting game. Fly Well o/

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.