Innominate for CSM 15

My Story.

While I started Eve in beta, I only played a few months into release. Returning for a few short stints, the game finally stuck when I joined Goonfleet in 2006. Since then, my history has been Goonswarm’s history. I’ve been playing steadily since then, taking part in conquering our first space, the great war, and all of the rest of Goonswarm’s significant conflicts. I’ve been around for a long time, and this shapes how I look at the game. I am not concerned with what ship doctrine is in vogue, or what the game will look like next month. I am concerned with what the game looks like next year, or five years from now.

Why am I applying for the CSM?

Continuity. When I first ran in CSM 11, all but one person was on the CSM for the first time. While we did do some good, we spent much time and effort working out who was who and how the CSM would work. My following terms were greatly improved both by not losing time and by helping first term CSMs get their feet under them more quickly. I feel that turnover in the CSM is essential, but also that it is valuable to maintain continuity. In every case I have seen, a 2nd term CSM has always been more successful than their first term. I give this as advice to anyone considering running for csm; don’t run unless you expect to run for multiple terms.

What can players expect from you?

I am unapologetically a Goonswarm bloc level candidate. But don’t misunderstand what that means. The health of Goonswarm is inexorably linked to the health of the game. We cannot survive without a healthy highsec growing new players, or without strong enemies capable of threatening our existence. No matter what we do in the game, or what banner we fly under, we’re all in this together. I advocate for what I believe to be for the overall betterment of the game and take the long view on the impact of changes. I want to be able to hunt buffalo, but that means making sure there is a healthy population of buffalo to hunt. If we let the buffalo die out, we die next.

When CCP told the CSM they were planning to boost rorquals and add excavator drones my reaction was disbelief. I thought it was a bad idea. The specific words I used were, “If you make this change, Delve will be wall to wall rorquals.” The change was going to be massively beneficial to us, but I argued against it.

Before my time on the CSM I was a supporter of highsec wardecs. I believed they were about as Eve a mechanic as you can get. As a Goon, we expect to be under highsec wardec always and don’t think much of it. After talking to the highsec wardec people themselves, it became clear that the bulk of what they were doing was preventing highsec players from being able to form meaningful groups and social bonds. Starting on CSM 11, I pushed on highsec wardecs, and even though the csm was profoundly nullsec biased, there was broad support each year that it was a significant problem. It took two and a half years, but we did finally get it addressed. Without the continuity of having those three terms in a row, I do not believe the change would have happened. This also serves as an excellent example and reminder that just because someone is from nullsec doesn’t mean they don’t care about the health of highsec.

My areas of expertise.

I am very much a generalist. I have, at some point, done most of what the game has to offer, but have avoided getting too attached to any particular system or mechanic.

Aside from playing the game, I also manage the Goonswarm servers and have written a large portion of our software. We use the ESI heavily, making it’s operation, development, and feature set dearly important to me.

My long experience in the game is particularly important. In many cases, I have played all of the variants of a given system over the years. For example, when talking about sov changes, I have engaged in station ping-pong, pos warfare, dominion sov, entosis sov, and the current citadel system. Understanding how past systems worked is critical to avoid repeating their mistakes. Often this means knowing not just the what, but the why’s that may never have been written down. Who remembers why carrier fighters don’t have auto-aggression?

4 Likes

You Goonswarm guys are a real piece of work. We had the Band of Brothers running everything and you guys came in like chaotic rabble and destroyed them. Now you are fatter and more entrenched than BoB ever dreamed of. The LAST thing the CSM needs is another unapologetic Goonswarm voice.

Congratulations on your re-election to the CSM.

2 Likes

Innominate is one of the best people I know in EVE, and I look forward to playing with him and serving with him for many years in the future.

2 Likes

just some harmless quote editing… just having fun with it :crazy_face: :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Hello

I would like to know your opinion about “conflict driver” and what are your ideas

i have a specific question aswell about something who existed before and was removed : Passive moon, what are your position about that, bad/good does active moon are more beneficial than passive and if you would like to see them’ come back what you think CCP should change about 'em ?

i strongly believe Active Moon was a total mistake just like Rorqual, when Rorqual encouraged Supercap meta Active Moon encouraged stagnation and “krabbing meta” i’m a bit pissed to see a small minority of people realizing that, some CSM candidate like Phantomite and Blazzingbunny seem to care about conflict driver that’s why i would like to ask every other candidate in order to turn Eve “krab meta” into a “perpetual war” just like it should be

Thanks

I think passive moon mining was better than the system we got, but it had most of the same problem, that of concentrating enormous wealth. You talk about the “krab meta,” but in the days of passive moon mining that wealth was generated without anyone having to log in, without even having ships in space. I’ll take the “krab meta” over empty space. Active is better.

The problem isn’t active vs. passive, but the other design mechanics around the system.

In the passive days, taking a moon for even a few days or weeks would be profitable. In the current system, you need to hold the moon for months to wait for a worthwhile frack, and with enough security for rorquals to be able to operate. Profiting from a moon is generally only practical when you also control the space around it.

You also have citadel mechanics, which make the moons themselves much easier to defend. The multiple reinforcement timers combined with the utter reliability of their duration and fast, automatic repair allow for zero-effort defenses to work well.

The moons should be quicker to take and easier to exploit without having to wait two months or completely control the space around them.

But to conflict drivers in general, we have no shortage of conflict drivers. The eve universe is full of groups that want to murder each other, but the game places barriers between us that nobody wants to be the ones to cross. We have an overabundance of mechanics designed to block conflict. On a large scale, we have double-timer citadels, 100% reliable timers, jump fatigue, entosis sov, the cyno removal, etc. Large scale conflict has been progressively made more and more painful, not even difficult, just painful and cancerous to the point nobody wants to engage in it. On the smaller scale, we have nullification, massed bomber fleets, filaments(I love them, but they’re only a partial solution to a bigger problem.), and all other manners of making sure that your smaller fleet is ganking, not fighting.

To me, the answer to a lack of conflict is not a need to add more reason to fight. It’s to start removing the things that make it unnecessarily difficult.

4 Likes

Thanks for this complete and full of good-sense response

and the lack of manpower / time to mine 'em even if you manage to take them from another group (if you already have XX moons) :frowning:

i feel that CCP should have fix those issue year ago instead of reworking everything and make a mess, anyway, thanks again i wish you good luck :slight_smile:

Thought there was now a term limit? Unless CCP decides to renege, this guy wont be around for CSM16. Which raises an interesting point. The mantra being pedaled that it takes several terms of adjust or be successful. They can comfortably elect three candidates?! So that means whom replaces this guy (and his two buddies), needs to also sit for 17. (or the mantra is BS after all). And then 16 will contain some Night Watchmen.

Eventually there has to be the realization that the Imperium is a monopoly in New Eden. Being successful or organised did not prevent attempts to breakup Standard Oil or control the Railways for the beginning 20 Century. It is a shame Dr Eyjo is not around anymore - I am sure he would have enjoyed that puzzle.

Existing CSM members were grandfathered into the term limit system, so all of the current members have one year marked off their eligibility. Innominate can run for CSM 15 and 16, but has to take a year off for CSM 17.

Imperium ballot can comfortably elect two. Getting three or more on requires more coordination and a different pool of voters.

It’s not a monopoly. It’s not trying to dominate anything more than its area of space. There’s no BoB style desire for a galaxy wide hegemony. The voting system is designed to make it hard for one group to dominate completely if turnout is high. If it’s low, then no voting system will stop the most organized and motivated people from showing up.

youre right and you are wrong

even if a different players becoems elected he still has for as far as theyr nda’s allow it
have the support of theyr former csm members so the knowledge or focus is not completly gone if soemone else takes the seat

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