open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Aelius 2011 CSM Candidacy Presentation & Guide-Lines (Candidacy Drop)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.05 13:13:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Aelius on 27/02/2011 09:57:55
Due to RL (work and family wise) time constraints i'm forced to drop this candidacy. I had big projects and ideas for EVE that would had required alot of my RL time, and I refuse to run just to be an "average" candidate.

I won't be supporting any other candidacy, but i feel that your vote matters. So i plea everyone to vote in someone. The more votes a candidate has behind him, the greatest moral empowerment he has behind him when he discusses things with CCP.

Best luck to all other candidates running for CSM6.



Aelius 2011 CSM Candidacy Guide-Lines



After some thought i came to the conclusion that addressing many issues in the CSM next year was going to be counter-producing, since CCP is going to have very little time for EVE. Vampires turning to Dust will have their hands full Razz

So i've chosen just a few issues/features to take upon discussion at 2011 CSM.


1st

Ladies and gentleman, is the complete removal of local chat in nullsec and lowsec. (as it now works in WH space).

I know that i will lose a lot of votes in pursuing such a goal, specially from carebears and macrominers/macroratters.
The last two i couldn't care less, since they aren't actual EVE players (cheaters instead), the first ones i can understand that my candidacy is a direct attack to their "EVE way of life". So i expect to be thrown every thing at me including the kitchen sink.

Reasons to remove local from lowsec and nullsec:

- Make "dangerous" space really dangerous. Without the "all seeing" local, players must rely on other ingame features like D-scan.

- Tactics will improve, since cloak ships will have an huge role, increasing the "unknown" factor in a battle.

- The value of lowsec and nullsec commodities will increase adding to risk vs reward.

- Small gangs can now more effectively roam in nullsec making large fleet battles a bit less a common place, thus reducing lag created from them. Important blows to enemies can now be done using less numbers.

Disadvantages:


- If you use lowsec and nullsec like an high reward highsec.



2nd


The introduction of tactical environments in most null and lowsec EVE solar systems as seen here:

Linkage

Oveur's post from 2005


These two features working together would enrich the value of null and lowsec, taking EVE back to its roots, as a rough, harsh and immerse PVP game.



3RD

Force CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not.


Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.05 13:23:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Aelius on 06/10/2010 22:16:22


Who is Aelius? RL and ingame Presentation


Aelius in RL:

Name: Ricardo
Age: 33
Nationality: Portuguese
Hobbies: Fishing & EVE

The computer games world has always fascinated me, from the the long gone ZX Spectrum, passing Sega Megadrive, until todays date PC's.
Amongst my favorites are:

- Chucky Egg (ZX Spectrum)
- The Great Escape (ZX Spectrum)
- UFO. Enemy Unknown
- Megalomania (a simple but hugely addictive Sega Megadrive strategy game)
- Starcontrol
- Diablo
- Warcraft
- Starcraft
- Master of Orion 1&2
- C&C (original Westwood)
- Total Annihilation
- Star Trek Bridge Commander (best Star Trek game ever)
- Half Life
- HomeWorld
- Nexus The Jupiter Incident
- Rogue Spear
- Supreme Commander
This just to name a few...

Also, since i know myself, i always was attracted to space, since my childhood my favorites were cartoons with space as a theme, also i watched Cosmos with Carl Sagan (takes a bow), original Star Trek, BattleStar Galactica and Space 1999.

If you add those two factors, you will end up with a guy that was destined to play EVE.

That takes me to the second part of my CSM candidate presentation.

Aelius in EVE:


From a friend, back in 2002, i was told that a new game was in beta testing, something called "EVE. The Second Genesis".
In the beginning i didn't make case of it, until my friend shown me some screenshots... Immediately my 1st reaction was to sell my mother in order to enter Beta Testing, which i finally did in December 2002. To be honest with you, when trying beta for the 1st time my eyes went to tears in the presence of this game. I can't really describe the feeling... It was overwhelmingly beautiful and revolutionary back in 2002 (still is).

Since then, i've been stuck with EVE. EVE is like great sex, the better it gets, the more you want it. This is perhaps imo CCP's greatest problem, they created such a great game that, no matter what they do, players just WANT MORE!!!!MORE!!!!


Why should you vote for me then?
- Do i know code, or do i understand how CCP develop their game?!... No
- Am i some over-qualified player, that is going to enlighten CCP at CSM?!... No
- Do i have second party interests to defend at CSM?!... No
- Do i see this candidacy as a way to be recruited by CCP?!... No

- Am i a player that loves the game?! YES!!!!!

Now to meet the real candidate behind Aelius character click
Aelius fishing on the coast of Portugal

captain foivos
Posted - 2010.10.05 23:24:00 - [3]
 

Guess who doesn't have my vote.

T'Amber
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.10.06 10:23:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Why not post a reason so that he has a chance to adress your concerns?

-T'amber

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
Posted - 2010.10.06 14:52:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:54:48
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:54:36
Originally by: T'Amber
Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Why not post a reason so that he has a chance to adress your concerns?

-T'amber


Since you asked nicely Wink

Because he freely admits he knows jack **** about the game or its mechanics. I prefer people who have input, however small it may be, into things that may one day affect my game play to at least have some idea of what theyre talking about. Passion alone is not something I would consider useful in a candidate.

Its the main reason I've never put myself forward as a CSM candidate, because I feel I dont know enough about the game.

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.06 15:30:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Darek Castigatus
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:54:48
Edited by: Darek Castigatus on 06/10/2010 14:54:36
Originally by: T'Amber
Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Why not post a reason so that he has a chance to adress your concerns?

-T'amber



Since you asked nicely Wink

Because he freely admits he knows jack **** about the game or its mechanics. I prefer people who have input, however small it may be, into things that may one day affect my game play to at least have some idea of what theyre talking about. Passion alone is not something I would consider useful in a candidate.

Its the main reason I've never put myself forward as a CSM candidate, because I feel I dont know enough about the game.

What i said is that i don't know **** about coding or development, i know plenty about EVE mechanics.

Issler Dainze
Minmatar
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
Posted - 2010.10.06 18:56:00 - [7]
 

Someone is already campaigning for the next CSM???!!!

Simply wow,

Issler

Irae Ragwan
Posted - 2010.10.06 19:53:00 - [8]
 

I've never really cared to debate the "remove local" agenda, but this has me curious. Exactly how do you figure this change will give your desired outcomes?

Not the obvious ones like "more dangerous," and "more cloaky," but this would somehow encourage small gang combat? Even if you look to wormholes as an example, small gang combat is there simply due to mass restrictions, not because local is delayed.

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.06 21:55:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Irae Ragwan
I've never really cared to debate the "remove local" agenda, but this has me curious. Exactly how do you figure this change will give your desired outcomes?

Not the obvious ones like "more dangerous," and "more cloaky," but this would somehow encourage small gang combat? Even if you look to wormholes as an example, small gang combat is there simply due to mass restrictions, not because local is delayed.

Simply because if people don't know u there they can't call the "blob", giving you time to do some damage and escape. Guerrilla warfare my friend Wink

Leil Ren'Do
Posted - 2010.10.06 21:58:00 - [10]
 

nice introduction.
And ambitious agenda.

Since you've been playing since beta 2002 you must have some idea/ahnung about ccp, how they do things, company culture etc.
What is your strategy exactly to get ccp to do those things you propose?

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.06 21:58:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Issler Dainze
Someone is already campaigning for the next CSM???!!!

Simply wow,

Issler

You would do the same if you hadn't the guaranteed votes from some major alliance, starting soon gives me more time to divulge my ideas, perhaps giving me a fighting chance.

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.10.06 22:10:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Leil Ren'Do
nice introduction.
And ambitious agenda.

Since you've been playing since beta 2002 you must have some idea/ahnung about ccp, how they do things, company culture etc.
What is your strategy exactly to get ccp to do those things you propose?

My strategy is quite simple. Remind them of the essence behind EVE. Hell... i will even take my 2003 game box to Iceland and read it to them out loud. Remind CCP that, todays achievements , are own to what they once were...

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.12.13 12:42:00 - [13]
 

Adding to this the combat against all types of BOTs and Macroers, RMT or not.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.12.13 13:45:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: T'Amber
Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Why not post a reason so that he has a chance to adress your concerns?

-T'amber


Sure: he's not Trebor or Mynxee.

Vesok Toch
Posted - 2010.12.13 14:45:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Is CSM supposed to represent the player base or their own individual interests because from your post it sounds like the latter.

I'm with the captain.

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2010.12.14 13:17:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Aelius on 14/12/2010 13:23:34

Originally by: Vesok Toch
Originally by: captain foivos
Guess who doesn't have my vote.


Is CSM supposed to represent the player base or their own individual interests because from your post it sounds like the latter.

I'm with the captain.

Humm interesting statement yours... Let me guess what are your individual interests:


About the 1st proposal (removal of local on null and lowsec)

1st- Continue to treat null and lowsec like high-reward low-risk highsec, so removing the "all seeing" local is bad for you

2nd- Continue to Bot/Macro in null/lowsec... so removing the "all seeing" local is bad for you.


About the 2nd proposal (tactical environments):

I don't know why you don't want them...


About the 3rd proposal (fight against Bots/Macroers)
:

Unless the majority of EVE player base is using Macros, i don't see your problem... unless...


Personally i'm delighted that people like you come here and state that they won't vote for me... can i have better publicity than that?!
Tks alot Wink

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2011.01.28 11:18:00 - [17]
 

The time is approaching.... To the "CSMobile"Exclamation

Bunyip
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.01.30 00:06:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Aelius
3RD
Force CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not.



Do you even know what the CSM is about? As a veteran member, we're a liaison and advisory council. I'd like to know how you plan to achieve this grandiose concept, or what methodology you would use to detect said enemies.

I'm not saying that I agree with what CCP has been doing with Project Unholy Rage or any other initiative, but this idea is ludicrous. Unless you can demonstrate a reason for me to vote for you, I doubt you'll get few (if any) votes, except from your close friends.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.01.30 01:31:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Aelius
3RD
Force CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not.



CSM cannot force CCP to do ANYTHING. If you're running on the mistaken belief that you can, you are doomed to fail. CSM can apply pressure management successfully in some cases but at the end of the day CCP will do whatever the hell it wants. If what it wants doesn't mesh with the CSM's message as the voice of the community, there is not a whole lot you can do about it. Also, don't fail to factor in the "blowing sunshine up your ass" phenomenon, wherein CCP nods politely, says all the right words to CSM, and then proceeds to do...whatever the hell it wants.

Sure, there are quite a lot of good people working at CCP who engage with the CSM in a very collaborative fashion--out of which some long-awaited changes have been delivered. But thinking you're going to force CCP to do anything is pure folly. Suggest you reword that bullet point to describe something that YOU (and not CCP) have control of ... such as "Apply relentless pressure on CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not."

OmgNoFreeNames
Posted - 2011.01.31 15:10:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Aelius
i know plenty about EVE mechanics.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Aelius
Campaign with your main, or go and explore the game better Laughing

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2011.01.31 21:42:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Aelius on 31/01/2011 21:55:41

Originally by: Bunyip
Originally by: Aelius
3RD
Force CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not.



Do you even know what the CSM is about? As a veteran member, we're a liaison and advisory council. I'd like to know how you plan to achieve this grandiose concept, or what methodology you would use to detect said enemies.

I'm not saying that I agree with what CCP has been doing with Project Unholy Rage or any other initiative, but this idea is ludicrous. Unless you can demonstrate a reason for me to vote for you, I doubt you'll get few (if any) votes, except from your close friends.


To answer your question... theres actually alot that can be implemented to stop Macro/Bot usage. But doing nothing is not an option for me.

An easy way to do it was when someone filled a petition reporting a player, a GM would then "teleport" to that reported player and engage in a convo.
A warning would then be issued before convo saying "Failure to engage in a convo with a GM may result in a warning/ban".
If such player doesn't answer and continues to do things only a human should be able to, like accepting missions, change targets, warp, jet cans, etc, that GM will issue a warning/ban to that player. Plain and simple.

I really don't how this is so hard to do...

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2011.01.31 21:52:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Mynxee
Originally by: Aelius
3RD
Force CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not.



CSM cannot force CCP to do ANYTHING. If you're running on the mistaken belief that you can, you are doomed to fail. CSM can apply pressure management successfully in some cases but at the end of the day CCP will do whatever the hell it wants. If what it wants doesn't mesh with the CSM's message as the voice of the community, there is not a whole lot you can do about it. Also, don't fail to factor in the "blowing sunshine up your ass" phenomenon, wherein CCP nods politely, says all the right words to CSM, and then proceeds to do...whatever the hell it wants.

Sure, there are quite a lot of good people working at CCP who engage with the CSM in a very collaborative fashion--out of which some long-awaited changes have been delivered. But thinking you're going to force CCP to do anything is pure folly. Suggest you reword that bullet point to describe something that YOU (and not CCP) have control of ... such as "Apply relentless pressure on CCP to act upon BOTs and Macroers with swift justice (ban), RMTers or not."


Actually, if that is the only thing you have remarks about my candidacy, i think i'm in the right path. Putting some "" on "force" may help... because i'm not that naive to think i can force CCP to do anything. Afterall its their game.

I just chose such a strong word to express the frustration of our player base about how this matter is being handle by CCP, and to reinforce that i will do anything humanly possible to "force" CCP to take action.

Aelius
Caldari
Mnemonic Enterprises
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2011.02.27 09:59:00 - [23]
 

Due to RL (work and family wise) time constraints i'm forced to drop this candidacy. I had big projects and ideas for EVE that would had required alot of my RL time, and I refuse to run just to be an "average" candidate.

I won't be supporting any other candidacy, but i feel that your vote matters. So i plea everyone to vote in someone. The more votes a candidate has behind him, the greatest moral empowerment he has behind him when he discusses things with CCP.

Best luck to all other candidates running for CSM6.

Gehen Sealbreaker
Amarr
Posted - 2011.02.27 10:34:00 - [24]
 

Thanks. Best of luck to you too, in your RL projects.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only