It is now up to the citizens of the Gallente Federation …er, I mean, the capsuleers of loose association with the Gallente Federation, CALDARI State, AMARR EMPIRE, Minmatar Republic, TRIGLAVIAN Collective, Null Block WARLORDS and assorted Deathless PIRATE THUGS to decide who the next Federation president will be. Sorry, citizens of the Federation. Us superdelegates will take it from here. Ah, democracy at work.
YOUR CANDIDATES:
A.) We have the typical Corporate Shill Billionaire Elitist Nepo Baby.
B.) The “Zohran Mamdani” Bleeding Heart Liberal Soy Boi.
C.) The Savant “Non-Binary” They/Them On-the-Spectrum Kid Genius.
Who will you vote… er, mine, hack or blow stuff up for?
We’re immortal and even the poor miners are more wealthy than normie humans. Our ship crews get paid, and get paid so little that it doesnt even show up on our wallets.
In EVE Online lore, the payment of ship crews is generally considered a “background” expense handled by the high-level economy, often paid through ship insurance payouts or as part of the transaction taxes capsuleers pay when buying ships, ammunition, and modules. While not directly managed by players in the game interface, the lore suggests that the massive, high-risk salaries (or survivor benefits) are paid to crews out of the immense wealth capsuleers generate.
Key details regarding crew payment in lore:
Insurance Payouts: A commonly accepted piece of lore is that when a ship is destroyed, the massive insurance payout covers the crew’s family, ensuring they are settled for life. Many players believe this “life insurance” for the crew is included in the standard ship insurance.
Negligible Cost: Crew salaries are often described as negligible in lore, similar to station living expenses, because they are insignificant compared to the cost of the ship.
High Risk, High Pay: Crew members on capsuleer ships face a high mortality rate, making them likely to be among the best-paid non-capsuleer employees in the universe, often paid in significant amounts of local currency, funded by the 1–5 ISK capsuleers casually spend.
The “1 ISK” Standard: Lore suggests that “one handful of ISK” (or sometimes specifically 1 ISK) is enough to sustain a planet-bound family for a year. Therefore, paying a crew member a few dozen ISK for a successful mission represents massive wealth to them.
Faction Differences:
Amarr: Many crew members on Amarrian ships are enslaved or indentured servants.
Caldari/Gallente/Minmatar: Crews are largely voluntary, motivated by high wages and the promise of substantial survivor benefits for their families if they die.
The “Frigates of EVE” lore book mentions that navy personnel receive basic clones and backups, suggesting that “crew work is dangerous,” but that and safety measures, including life insurance and savings, are in place.
Moreau is the president the Federation deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Of the three, only Tenzin stands a chance of bailing this sinking ship.
That said, I’m not supporting any of them. Choosing champions among the Empyreans and letting them decide who leads… that’s how the slavers rule their twisted empire.
I am clearly not Amarr. I’m far too beautiful. I don’t own slaves. It’s strictly prohibited in the State.
I do hate the term “wage slavery” though. People make it out as if I don’t pay my crews. You take poor desperate people from the slums and people call it exploitation. I saved them. I give them three meals a day, 94% oxygen air, 4 walls, a ceiling and a floor. That they have to pay for room and board, air purification and holocalls is inconsequential. It doesn’t matter that it tends to equal most of their paycheck. Healthcare is free of course (not including dental).
I stand for diplomacy and rebuilding. Between the AID act, the appalling performance during the Drifter crisis that nearly saw the Angel Cartel claim a wormhole, and the mistreatment of the Intaki, Aguard’s presidency has been an unmitigated disaster, let alone the undermining of the political system of the galaxy’s sole democracy. I stand for welfare programs that will protect and help our most vulnerable, the repeal of the AID act, and the creation of jobs. I stand for mending fences with the Intaki, and a detente with the Caldari.
The interesting part about this election is how clearly the event designers show how elections in many countries actually work:
All candidates are almost identical and pre-defined by elites, based on what they are allowed to do. They will all move from point A to point Z — the only difference is who skips point B and who skips point C along the way.
The chosen path mostly depends on which reward is more profitable or useful for the majority of voters. For example, Tenzin’s Modified Guidance Disruptor (point B) isn’t as appealing as Roden’s Modified Nanofiber Internal Structure (point C) or Moreau’s Modified Expanded Scan Probe Launcher (point D). The same logic applies to the available drone sets.
Maybe Tenzin said something about someone, or doesn’t want to do what others expect — that’s why he has such poor reward (media) support.
This article says that 10k isk is the avaerage life saving of a family on a planet. I am pretty sure an avaerage family doesn’t get 10k years of food in savings or this game’s lore is way less dystopian than presented.
The 1isk fallacy, made up by some nerd, spread by others without refrences. false
That information is pulled from ai that pulls from available resources on the internets. It references a really old fashion thing that i think some people do not even know what it is; a book.
If this poll is accurate, the Federation is in for grim times. Roden is openly a tool of the military-industrial complex, Moreau is insane, and while Tenzin is good on social policies, his position on the intaki question is not great.
But if, for example, Roden’s items are viewed as superior to Tenzin’s, which ones are going to preferred to acquire in the first place? It’s not like this actually matters story wise. I believe for most people this is a matter of practicality and reward (what do I personally get out of this), not roleplay. The practical thing to do is to get the item perceived as being better. Ergo, there is likely to be built in (unfair) favoritism toward a candidate based on rewards and not message.
