Rots is a consistently toxic and demeaning person both in and out of the game, and continues to make awful management level decisions with his alliance. I have never had a positive interaction with Rots. For these reasons I find him unfortunately more than unfit for a CSM role. Cast your vote elsewhere
I am someone who had the displeasure of interacting with Rots on an alliance leadership level multiple times and I think the best way to charactertize this CSM ad is intellectually dishonest. He calls up areas of content generation, fleet commanding, and fleet concept building as his areas of expertise and arguable they are some of the most crucial aspects of being an eve online player.
You generally can not successfully manage a group without excelling in these roles, and quite frankly, Rots has practically no demonstrated competency in these roles. I think when looking at a candidate who is running on these kind of grounds we canât just look at their experience, we most look at whether they are actually good at the things they espouse and in Rotâs case his own gameplay is the antithesis of this so called fleet commanding and content generation.
In the south east he regularly took actions against the best interests of his alliance (if those best interests are to be viewed as a content generation and maxiumum pvp content, as all alliances in eve should strive for.) We have an alliance leader running that would much rather pay 600 bil to save a keepstar from almost certain destruction than invest that isk in creating meaningful pvp content. When faced with fighting a quasi-newbro alliance in Naval Defense Alliance, Rots chose to play the batphone game and called upon other more experienced and numerous alliances to fight his battles for him as opposed to engaging with the pilots he had. Why did he want to evict naval? We have no idea, seemingly it is to remove any sort of pressure from his group that could thwart their moon mining and ratting as without these engageable neighbors they are stuck with little PvP content.
Regardless of what his stated intentions are this is just a small look inside the mind of a so called âexpertâ in content generation. A content generator who did nothing except batphone more apt pvpers to fight his battles for him and only managed an aggressive campaign for a week before he realized EvE PvP isnât as easy as it is when B2 is funneling you content with frat making an aggressive campaign in the west. This is without even getting into the specifics of fleet commanding and fleet concept building where routinely from many BRâs you can find Rotâs âexpertiseâ lacking in his time here in the SE.
If your goal is to elect someone who thinks because they failed in a small scale pvp enviornment, they are competent and knowledgeful of small allianceâs needs, vote Rots.
If your goal is to elect someone who is competent and knowledgeful of small alliance needs, vote literally anyone else.
Hey @Krystal_Foxglove sorry this reply took me some time as i was away on work.
Yes, you can bring your drake 
Ill have to answer this in several parts so bear with me although thank you for the question.
PI to me would be made a lot less cumbersome by creating not only sleeker more interactive UI windows but also incorporating some element of âpresetâ or âsaved fittingâ options for your specific PI layouts and structures. The idea here being to ease monotony and enhance the player enjoyment of the mechanic. PI is generally speaking a good way to get newer players some stable isk base, it really benefits everyone if this improved.
The new null sec mining sites have receive a small balance pass already with some changes to power use etc. I would actually like to see the sites protected as they are and watch how economic reports start to look before i go hard into this.
High Sec inst my nuts and bolts and i have no problem saying that, however i think thereâs something to catering to the area of eve online with the largest player base. For what its worth, a campaign of Highsec enrichment is actually really not a bad idea when you think about how players first engage with the game. Missioning here could be made more engaging or maybe its just about dressing it up more?
Thanks you for asking.
1 Like
Hey @Elinore_en_Divalone, thank you for your questions!
-
I support Eve Vanguard being given its proper attention and i wish CCP the best with this title.
Look, i was here for DUST14 and i have bad memories and i felt let down. I think if eve online game play is effected by EVE Vangaurd game play i would inevitably have to interact with it, so YES. My caveat here is, i need to see it succeed, and i hope i could be helpful in that if presented the opportunity. -
I would absolutely pitch this if given the opportunity to see it happen.
I hate splitting stacksâŚ
1 Like
@Rhett_Schouten Thank you for taking the time to compile all this, the following are my responses.
- What ONE identifiable consequence requires CCPâs attention?
For me its about how CCP promotes thriving new groups with leaders who feel encouraged to engage in community building. A lot of my campaign is about community growth and the reduction of âspace workâ but also the streamlining of the Alliance and Corp tabs which i feel would be hugely beneficial. I envision a role building system with better information and info blurbs. Something intuitive, a place where CEO/Directors can build their frame work with many options and accesses that are not inherently bound by a large role theme. ie. Color Coding, Streamlined Medals and Titles, and Custom Corp Icons. I also feel the need to say that a lot of solutions are likely to be found in the diplomatic standings tabs and how mechanics here could influence conflict.
- What PROVABLE evidence can you supply to support your belief in this situation?
I believe the evidence is that the alliance and corp tabs have been largely unchanged in purpose and function since my early years. Diplomacy in this game has been largely unchanged since i have played. I needs to be revisited.
- What practical, and balanced change can be made to support a solution if any?
I think the practical approach here is to bring up the UI in these windows with todayâs eve. This i believe is about envisioning what alliance and corp management could look like if reworked. I think the practical is important here as what needs to be considered is what feels clunkiest (ie the rankings window) and how do we improve that. How to be better inform our future content creators with info blurbs etc?
Additionally outlined in my CSM announcement is the diplomatic approach which is that I strongly believe the diplomacy tab can be brought into the newer UI world and could be utilized as a tool for BLOC breaking. An example would be upkeep costs for having blue standings which scales with alliance member counts, War mechanics currently have a fee, l believe costs associated with friendly standings is a great opportunity for an isk sink on larger coalitions.
- What support do your observations have from other CSM candidates?
One of the first comments on my thread is from @Dujek_Oneye which i greatly appreciated. I think however the support of the eve player base is what i most strive for. Right now i think many CSM candidates wouldnât outright support my hopes for these adjustments as they would kinda go against the norm and status quo. Change scares people.
- How will you present your findings to CCP?
I think first this involved making connects at CCP which is what the CSM affords candidates the opportunity to do. I will likely present findings in concise write ups with the assistance of my peers (CSM) and look to make the pitch for some of these changes if CCPâs focus that CSM cycle permit me the opportunity.
1 Like
Rots is a consistently toxic and demeaning person both in and out of the game, and continues to make awful management level decisions with his alliance. I have never had a positive interaction with Rots. For these reasons I find him unfortunately more than unfit for a CSM role. Cast your vote elsewhere
@Meek_Mill thank you for your response.
I am grateful you took the time to outline how to feel about me.
Eve online is about making friends and enemies of some of the players you engage with. I greatly enjoy PVP and engaging people in it, not only am i competitive i am acutely aware of what making enemies means in game. I think your comment is evidence that i play the game unabashedly and with all the effort i can. Out of game however i donât think that really tracks, as i donât know you or your toon so i wont speak to that.
Thankfully, through review of your toons background iâm pretty comfortable saying we have passed one another in some way in the last 9 months in the area of curse. I think the management of my alliance may seem awful to you but for others its a great thing. I am not an imperfect player, but neither are you im sure, none of us are.
I think you would have to be a member of my alliance, my corp, my community to have a positive reaction with me and for that i dont fault you for your view point.
But i wont miss your vote either.
Cheers
Hey @AlexJones thank you for your post,
I appreciate you taking the time to write this out.
I would also like to thank you for joining the forums 7 hours ago to take the time to write on my campaign post! That was a whole lot of work in a short period of time and i would like to applaud you on being an active participant on the Eve Online forums.
Iâm sorry you feel my post is intellectually dishonest. Sadly i disagree.
- Regarding Content Generation
Being consistent is key to how content generation works, and please be mindful that i didnât say winning content generator or losing content generator although i view a night out doing SOMETHING in eve a win for me and my group. My competency is more than proven here as i enjoy the benefits of a large community of like minded players who engage in the same content with me.
We may lose, we may die.
- See even here, i generated content, but iâm just on another level. I paid 600bill to buy off several larger groups who now likely use that money to fund their PVP presumably (i generated content. for untold number of players in their groups) but i also know my group well enough to know that fighting in a large fight with TIDI wasnât what they wanted, so i spent isk to give them the content theyâd rather enjoy. Also note i didnât say âPVP contentâ i said âcontentâ
- My alliance members many of whom have never felt safe to own a super bought and DOCKED their super for the first time playing eve. We also did this as an independent entity. I provided content for them.
- Also, if you donât know the story its ok. I invested 600 bill to see a memorial keepstar go up for a player in our community who was likely on his way out (R.I.P Falcon Eddy) i achieved my goal in doing that for him. Sorry i thought having eve alliances shoot it sounded morbid. You can read about that here Reddit - Dive into anything and you can watch the drop here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpJx0YMrwK8
- This sadly, is not the case. Everyone batphoned, and also everyone saw two alliances having content. I never wanted to evict NAVY and actually i didnât, William chose to move NAVY and i offered to help etc. I respect him a lot and am very sad for how our experience with NAVY had ended. I didnât like Vorengard much, but one member does not make an alliance. My Corp is a bunch of hot heads too. However, such is eve and we had many good fights.
I hope people vote for someone who completes their thought processes, including others for CSM this year than just myself. So ill address the other two points you didnât speak to fleet commanding, and fleet concept building.
- Regarding Fleet Commanding
Fleet commanding isnt always about winning or losing in my eyes. Often times i take fights I know i wont win. I have a comment on my campaign post even Rots Mijnwerker for CSM 19 - #12 by Levon_Bedros which speaks to me me not being afraid to lose in order to engage in fun. Also i donât link BRâs cause i donât need to, i have years of wins and losses - Good decisions and bad Decisions. Fleet commanding is about being consistent, active and going out with your team and engaging in EVE online. For me, i think my qualities are different, older, and more intellectually and emotionally honest than most.
- Regarding Fleet Concept Building
I often take handout fleets of various ship types just for the shits and giggles of seeing some of the underused models in the game. I build concepts around what my members would like to do, what we can realistically field, and then also just cause i want to try it out - i then hand those concept fleets out. In a game where at this juncture most people fly Barghests, Nightmares, TFIâs, Cyclone Fleet Issues, and Rokhs in large blocs, the meta kinda dictates what you fly when you are playing the N+1 game. To that end i have a team of fitting and concept builders who help me as i donât believe in testing things alone. I think i am not only good at it, i am good at doing it often.
But whos perfect?
@AlexJones again, thank you for taking this time to engage in the CSM campaign cycle, and though i may not receive your vote, i hope you well.
2 Likes
I have had the pleasure of closely working with Rots for the majority of my 15+ year eve career. IMO Rots is one of the most dedicated and trustworthy pilots I have ever encountered in New Eden. Youâve outlined some great points in this post and I wholeheartedly believe in your ability to contribute to the CSM and help improve the average player experience. Youâve got my vote!
+1 for Rots. Weâve worked together on some combined fleets in nullsec back in 2021 and to this day, he continues to promote the non-bloc sov null priorities that will make New Eden a better place for groups from all backgrounds.
I highly recommend Rots be a part of your ballot this year!
1 Like
Rote is a good fellow with whom Iâve enjoyed working in the past. I think he would be a good representative for the interests of small-medium sized groups.
1 Like
Thanks Blinky!
Thanks Mick!
1 Like
We love you rots!
Something as simple as saved PI fits⌠never even considered it and given I and presumably almost everyone else who does it have our own set layout for each purpose (extraction, factory etc.) YES PLEASE!!!
1 Like
I have never met a more calm and welcoming individual. Rots has an absolute mastery of the game, both in skill and experience. He always knows whats going on, be it local, regional or bloc politics. Wherever we roam, characters will recognize and reach out in local just to connect with him. You get the sense that he has been all over.
He knows exactly when to take a fight, but has the soul of a diplomat. Rots is probably the most patient and level headed under pressure FC i have ever had the pleasure of working for. He never yells at, or talks down to others. Just a generally friendly guy who is a great addition to any team.
Vote rots!
1 Like
Thanks Cioran
I really liked this answer.
As an aside I actually really support this issue. Although I myself havenât articulated it quite as comprehensively as you have here, it is my shared belief that enhancing the corporation membership experience is a HUGE untapped source of potential player immersion, player engagement, and fun.
Actually I touched on a couple of these issues in a post a few years ago and I asked about it in last years CSM interview thread.
Good Luck.
Rots sent my fax to the moon ! He has my vote o7
Do you feel the recent sov/passive income/infrastructure changes are creating positive change in nullsec? What do you like? Would you change? Ultimately, what is your vision for a nullsec that promotes the growth and activity of smaller groups?
Hey Ztrack, thank you for your question.
I think the recent changes have the potential to revitalize some key parts of nullsec game play however with regard to smaller groups its likely a nerf if they are wanting to be so holders, as what we are already seeing is there larger groups gobbling up space to have farms and fields, passive moon income etc.
I like the sky hook raiding, iâm sad about the most recent changes surrounding them, i think the vulnerability times for these is really small.
I like to possibility of changes JB routes cause of these changes and i like the power and reagent mechanics, but i would have stayed on the heavier hand side with what the new upgrades consume.
Ultimately my vision for null sec is largely constituting a change in the corporation in alliance tabs and how diplomacy in the game works. I would love to see a diplomacy tab that involved costs as the barrier of entry to creating a large bloc. I would love to see a maximum toon count for alliances that is much lower etc.
1 Like