open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM Candidate] Goumindong
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8

Author Topic

Dethbloomy
Posted - 2008.05.06 00:48:00 - [151]
 

If you get elected, please bring up the idea of a slave module, so you can control 2 ships at the same time... whatever your first ship does, your second ship does... you know, this is a good idea, bring it up if you get elected

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 01:01:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: Dethbloomy
If you get elected, please bring up the idea of a slave module, so you can control 2 ships at the same time... whatever your first ship does, your second ship does... you know, this is a good idea, bring it up if you get elected


I don't really think this is a good idea. We already have drones which do what you order them to do. Being able to order entire ships around is very contrary to the design of eve and would likely further cement the hegemony of older players over younger. I couldn't support such a module.

Fury1980
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2008.05.06 01:06:00 - [153]
 

" Hegemony of the rich and old creates a perpetual subservience of the poor and young. This is explicitly bad for the game as fewer players will wish to continue past their trial. Why would they when they cannot have any effect until they are old and rich, where in those who are old and rich now will be even more powerful by the time they get there? "

On this, if i may.... So what about the arguement that one must crawl before they can walk...ie us older folks had to start off from nothing...why should new players expect to have any effect when they start off...when us older players had to start from scratch.

The truth is newer players now get it a whole lot better than we did..u can pretty much break 1 mill sp whithin your trial period (well near abouts).

The argument that there is in incentive for those that are newer is moot..otherwise we would not be where we are now if we (those that had to work our a$$'s off beyond our trial just to break 1 mill sp) did not put in the time and effort...this ie mearly one example.

Iam not saying there are not flaws, but eve is not for those who do not have patience..it never has been, thats why it appeals to those like myself who are a little older (IRL)...it takes time and effort.... if you try and cheat those that actually had to go through all of what the new guys are going through now....well...where is the fairness / balance in that..

fact is if you want to make your mark on this game, you should have to earn it like those that have come before us...

on another note i'm not a fan of the majaroity of goons...but some are screwed on right...i'm not sure where my vote will go, or even if i should bother, but you have some very sound ideas and if i do vote, you will be on my short list of candidates.



Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 01:23:00 - [154]
 

Originally by: Fury1980

On this, if i may.... So what about the arguement that one must crawl before they can walk...ie us older folks had to start off from nothing...why should new players expect to have any effect when they start off...when us older players had to start from scratch.


Don't get me wrong. There should still be advantage to being old and rich, and there pretty much always will be. The advantages that they afford are very strong and can easily be seen by simply looking at the difference between a tech 1 fit tech 1 ship and a tech 2 fit tech 1 ship. The differences are very large, and positively huge once you factor skills and player experience into the equation.

The problems come in when you have ships that are so powerful there is no way to defeat them without very highly skilled pilots. A good example of this in another game is WoW[oh how we all hate wow]. In WoW[and many other level based MMOs] when you attack someone way above your level you simply fail. You can't even hit them. You wouldn't be able to kill them if they were afk in the middle of a field with no one else around them. We almost have that type of situation in eve with some skill paths. Its "until you get into this skill path with enough skills, you don't really matter unless some or a lot of your gang are in this skill path with enough skills", its not so bad that you couldn't kill them if they were afk uncloaked 20km off a gate, but it is a problem. The main culprits are titans and motherships(And a lesser extent carriers)[you're flying a titan, mothership, dread, carrier, or hictor/dictor or you aren't worth squat], especially large amounts of them. The next largest culprit are tech 2 cruisers. And its either you have tech 2 cruisers or mindlinked command ship pilots[and some luck that your enemies don't pick up on it and are feeling risky] and a good deal of them or you are out of luck, it won't matter how much of a blob you bring you aren't going to kill them.

Even though players now get it a whole lot better than when I started and tonnes better than when you started. Other things have changed such that, in terms of where they start from where they need to be to be valuable its a much farther divide higher than it was previously.

Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
Posted - 2008.05.06 04:39:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: lecrotta

That is your problem bud, you are convinced your right about everything you say and that your ideas are perfect and are utterly unwilling to be criticized or told you are wrong.


That is not true. I have been, more often than not, in the oposing side of Goum regarding a lot of issues and ideas in this forum. Regardless of this, I can't say he ever posted or argued in anything other than coherent and logical arguments.

Dramaticus
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.06 05:14:00 - [156]
 

From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

Disunity
Gallente
Royal Regiment of Wales
Posted - 2008.05.06 06:16:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Dramaticus
From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

I donít think you (and other members of Goonswarm) could have made a more positive contribution to Goumindongís campaign.

Anybody so unpopular with Goonswarm canít be a complete ****.

Seth Ruin
Minmatar
Ominous Corp
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2008.05.06 07:49:00 - [158]
 

Originally by: Disunity
Originally by: Dramaticus
From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

I donít think you (and other members of Goonswarm) could have made a more positive contribution to Goumindongís campaign.

Anybody so unpopular with Goonswarm canít be a complete ****.



Exactly what I'm thinking. The more goons ***** and moan about Goumindong and try to slander his campaign, the more likely I am to vote for him. Anyone who annoys the swarm has got to have some sort of capability of independent, rational thought.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.05.06 08:51:00 - [159]
 

Goumindong, in the "quick reference chart" thread you said something... intriguing.
I'm referring to the following section:

[9] Allow moon mining in 0.4 -> there is already moon mining in 0.4
[9] Allow moon mining in highsec -> there is already moon mining in highsec

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK even if there ARE "moon materials" on 0.4 and highsec moons, there is no way to extract them, since harvester arrays can only be anchored in 0.3 system sec or below right now.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 09:28:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Goumindong, in the "quick reference chart" thread you said something... intriguing.
I'm referring to the following section:

[9] Allow moon mining in 0.4 -> there is already moon mining in 0.4
[9] Allow moon mining in highsec -> there is already moon mining in highsec

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK even if there ARE "moon materials" on 0.4 and highsec moons, there is no way to extract them, since harvester arrays can only be anchored in 0.3 system sec or below right now.

I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.05.06 09:30:00 - [161]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Akita T
Goumindong, in the "quick reference chart" thread you said something... intriguing.
I'm referring to the following section:

[9] Allow moon mining in 0.4 -> there is already moon mining in 0.4
[9] Allow moon mining in highsec -> there is already moon mining in highsec

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK even if there ARE "moon materials" on 0.4 and highsec moons, there is no way to extract them, since harvester arrays can only be anchored in 0.3 system sec or below right now.

I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.

Good luck taking down a large faction POS, sitting on a dysprosium moon, with deathstar fit. There is no capitals in empire.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 09:35:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista

Good luck taking down a large faction POS, sitting on a dysprosium moon, with deathstar fit. There is no capitals in empire.


Yes, the problems of POS warfare[specifically the strength of POS and the inability to inhibit economic and strategic modules without taking the entire pos down] are a central theme of my campaign. Thank you for bringing that up.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.05.06 09:38:00 - [163]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista
Good luck taking down a large faction POS, sitting on a dysprosium moon, with deathstar fit. There is no capitals in empire.

And hence, the sneaky other bracket choice of "allow cynos/capitals in highsec" Twisted Evil

Minerva Richie
Posted - 2008.05.06 11:41:00 - [164]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Talkuth Rel
You (as an individual or a group) intend to "win" the game. "Winning" for you means that other players quit playing. A reduced playerbase harms the game as a whole. Do you see the contradiction, and can you understand why some would be concerned with someone who holds that view having anything to do with the future improvement of the game?


Just like economics, belief or disbelief in something doesn't matter. It only matters whats true. You might want someone who deludes themselves as to the nature of Eve and how you play and win, but I don't. And I won't be the person to do that.


Sorry, I had no intention of commenting but I couldn't let that slide. Stock Markets? Fiscal uncertainty? The sub-prime crisis? Rolling Eyes

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 12:50:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Minerva Richie


Sorry, I had no intention of commenting but I couldn't let that slide. Stock Markets? Fiscal uncertainty? The sub-prime crisis? Rolling Eyes


There is a difference between confidence in markets having impact on prices and disbelief that the model is an accurate predictor. It doesn't matter if you believe that the model is accurate, it only matters if it is. It doesn't matter if you believe that fighting other alliances isn't about breaking their morale, it only matters if it is. And it is.

I understand how you took that though, next time i will make a comparison to real war. "It doesn't matter if you believe your army is stronger than your opponents, it matters if it really is."

Dramaticus
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.06 14:24:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: Seth Ruin
Originally by: Disunity
Originally by: Dramaticus
From goonfleet.com forums

Ignore List
Goumindong

Ask him about nano-Drakes and you'll understand why.

I donít think you (and other members of Goonswarm) could have made a more positive contribution to Goumindongís campaign.

Anybody so unpopular with Goonswarm canít be a complete ****.



Exactly what I'm thinking. The more goons ***** and moan about Goumindong and try to slander his campaign, the more likely I am to vote for him. Anyone who annoys the swarm has got to have some sort of capability of independent, rational thought.


thats so meta, you two would make good goons. i can sponsor you for a small fee if you'd like.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.06 14:29:00 - [167]
 

Dramaticus please do not scam people in my campaign thread, keep this on topic.

Icy Z
The Scope
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:17:00 - [168]
 

Goumindong, u still around?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:24:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: Icy Z
Goumindong, u still around?



Absolutely. I just haven't posted anything in this thread since no one has asked a question to me specifically . I have been posting in other threads where questions have been asked of all candidates.

Icy Z
The Scope
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:50:00 - [170]
 

Just want to wish u good luck.

If any goony makes it in, hope dis be u.

Triest
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.05.08 13:40:00 - [171]
 

Edited by: Triest on 08/05/2008 13:45:35
Edited by: Triest on 08/05/2008 13:43:42
Hey Guomindong, what's your position on the Zealot? I know it just got a 25% damage bonus (probably due at least in some part to you!), but I feel like it could really use another one, or at least a boost to something on the ship; as is I sometimes actually fly other ships, and I feel like I shouldn't ever need to fly a ship that's not a Zealot in any role.

What suggestions do you have to help this become a reality? I'm thinking something to kill tacklers if they ever can get 150 km to me before they die, as well as something to make battleships not able to hit me back when I'm at that range. But at the same time I don't want to lose the sensor boosters I fit in my spare mids for a web. I'm at a loss! Also, the Zealot does less damage than, say, an Abaddon at ranges greater than 160 km, which I feel is an oversight that needs to be addressed.

By the way, I really like your argument that while you don't actually fly the ships you try and 'balance', you understand game mechanics at such a superhuman level that you can still intuitively balance them, with the aid of such programs as EFT. That's the sort of attitude we need to have when interacting with CCP.

Cadde
Gallente
221st Century Warfare
Posted - 2008.05.08 14:03:00 - [172]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.


As previously stated, you cant have dreads and carriers in highsec. But furthermore, POS'es are not considered WAR targets by Concord and even if you decc the corp and assault a undefended pos (Without any offensive capabilities) you still get Concord on your sorry A. Just fyi ;)

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.08 15:52:00 - [173]
 

Originally by: Triest

Hey Guomindong, what's your position on the Zealot?

The Zealot fills its role as a fast DPS boat perfectly. It needs no changes in todays environment.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.08 15:55:00 - [174]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 08/05/2008 15:55:30
Originally by: Cadde
Originally by: Goumindong
I was not aware there were sec restrictions on moon mining, but looking at it it seems there are and i was wrong. I don't see why we shouldn't have moon mining in empire. Since its not like you can't just war-dec the corp and then take the moons anyway.


As previously stated, you cant have dreads and carriers in highsec. But furthermore, POS'es are not considered WAR targets by Concord and even if you decc the corp and assault a undefended pos (Without any offensive capabilities) you still get Concord on your sorry A. Just fyi ;)


Did you wait the required 24 hours?

ed: and did you have the right moon?


Cadde
Gallente
221st Century Warfare
Posted - 2008.05.08 16:01:00 - [175]
 

Edited by: Cadde on 08/05/2008 16:13:41
Originally by: Goumindong

Did you wait the required 24 hours?

ed: and did you have the right moon?




This is entirely something i trust that THIS guide is correct about.

A quote from that guide: (This might of course be OLD information and should be re-established as CURRENT fact)
Quote:

24) Will Concord protect my POS from attacks?
ATM Yes. Anyone who shoots at your High-Sec POS will get Concordokken.
Even if the attacking force issue a war declaration to yours, the POS won't
become a war target. I tested with an alt on numerous occasions and Concord
blew him up faster than my POS guns could track him.
However, I haven't found any official announcement explaining if this change
was intended. It wasn't like that before Revelations. Some say it's a bug that will
get fixed, leaving POS vulnerable to attacks again. I don't know if that true, but
just in case, I deployed some guns in my POS. I advice you to do the same.


EDIT: I found THIS thread to hold lots of information on the subject, but no official statement as far as i am concerned.

I could just as easily form this into a question:

How would you boos/nerf the current high sec POSes?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.08 16:16:00 - [176]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 08/05/2008 17:21:22
Edited by: Goumindong on 08/05/2008 16:16:24
What I know is that when POS were changed that destroying them would un-anchor all the modules on it a number of corps went on a high-sec POS shooting spree. War-decing a corp to attack undefended POS and steal the valuable modules for resale.

If the bug making high-sec POS un-attackable was not fixed i would be terribly surprised.

ED: it most certainly was. Heck on the first page of science and industry people are discussing how to defend their High-Sec POS from war-decs.

link

[ed Will answer question in a bit]

Quote:

How would you boos/nerf the current high sec POSes?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.09 12:30:00 - [177]
 

Quote:

How would you boos/nerf the current high sec POSes?


The same way i would nerf the current low and 0.0 POS's.

Currently there are two problems with POS. The first is that too many POS are used to hold sovereignty. Here is my long standing thread on an idea(that was not mine) about how that can be reduced. And the second is that its much to easy to make strategic and economic POS into deathstars worthy of holding space.

I.E. that you can have a Cyno Jammer POS also fit 80 ECM batteries or a full compliment of large/medium/small artillery is ridiculous. You need to have these POS be moved outside of the siege POS mentality and into their own category. This means that all strategic and economic POS modules need to be placed outside of the bubble. This means that all strategic and economic POS modules need to have high fitting requirements such that you can't make these types of towers into deathstars[Possibly as a % of the towers resources so that you can make something as taxing for a large tower as a small tower without requiring a large tower to put them up]. And all strategic and economic POS modules need to have their hit points reduced such that attacking them is reasonable with smaller forces.

In combination with this i would put a reinforced timer on these modules so that you couldn't just go and disable an opponents strategic or economic network when the defending alliance was off-line[which is the current way to siege a heavily defended system, you trudge in hundreds of players to assault it when defenders aren't in primetime then sit in the system without leaving until its taken]

You then won't have to assault SOV holding deathstars without your cap fleet and you also won't feel bad about otherwise sov holding towers not having heavy defenses[since the sov mechanic change makes holding fewer moons possible without being vulnerable to POS spam]. No one will have deathstars in empire or 0.0 since a deathstar is pointless there[it can't hold sov and won't have any strategic or economic POS modules due to their fitting requirements]. You then end up with structures that are both reasonable to defend and assault, even in high-sec.


swordpunisher
Posted - 2008.05.09 12:32:00 - [178]
 

What are your thoughts towards Low population in low sec and suicide ganking.
And what are the reasons behind it, if you ant anything improved or changed about this what would it be?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.09 12:51:00 - [179]
 

Originally by: swordpunisher
What are your thoughts towards Low population in low sec and suicide ganking.
And what are the reasons behind it, if you ant anything improved or changed about this what would it be?


I don't think there is anything much wrong with suicide ganking at the moment. Its a large risk, requires time and effort to keep yourself above the required security status for operation, and can easily be defended against.

Regarding low-sec. Low sec has low population because there is either too much risk or too little reward. I think that problem is a little bit of both, with very little reason to be in low-sec belts over high-sec belts[missioning is much safer and mining not even more profitable than empire mining]. If you take that, with the inability to efficiently protect your ratters and miners, due to gate guns and eventual security status loss you get an area where risks are higher than even NPC 0.0* and rewards are the same or only slightly higher than empire.

If you fix the rewards[make mining more lucrative in low-sec/0.0, increase the size of bounties on rats, tweak l5 missions a bit so that they start out on the high end of the scale instead of the low end encouraging people to take the time to run them instead of forcing a long buy in] and then make things safer[introduce a proper kill rights contract market, introduce a viceroy system to be legitimate player based police with incentives to keeping ratters, miners, and builders alive and producing in low-sec] there will be a lot more players playing in low-sec. This will mean more pirates too, but hey, if i push changes that make a bunch more people shoot at other people and make everyone happy then i feel i've done right for the game.


*I say NPC 0.0 because NPC 0.0 should be the most dangerous area of the game in terms of risking your personal ship. Right after that it should be low-sec, and then Sov 0.0 and then empire. The reason i put them in this order is because while there is less personal risk in Sov 0.0 to sov holders there is a much higher collective risk due to the necessity to hold POS and Stations all of which can be destroyed or taken from you. Where in NPC 0.0 these collective risks do not exist and so no benefit in personal risk reduction is gained. And in low-sec where these collective risks do not exist and you are more protected than you would be in NPC 0.0.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.12 00:02:00 - [180]
 

Stolen from Hardin's thread:

I am placing it here because i have received some of the same criticism and feel that its important to address that here.

Originally by: Kelsin
Originally by: Hardin
My concern, as stated above, is that while some of Jade's ideas are probably welcome, taken as a whole they have the potential to be gamebreaking and seem to be driven by an idealistic view of EVE which takes not account of human nature. Do things have to be improved? - Sure. Do we need to completely transform EVE in order to do so? - I don't think so.


Well Hardin, is it really fair to say that your opinions and biases will be tempered by a sense of fairness and understanding of game balance, but that other candidates somehow lack that ability? The criticisms you're presenting here are so vague as to be equally applicable to you or any other candidate, but you present yourself as somehow fair-minded and rational enough that you can avoid the pitfalls of bias when others cannot.


Yes, it is really fair to say that. It is Jades own word that she is not balanced and has an agenda to do real damage to large alliances via the CSM.

Yet when it comes time to discuss her proposals she simply slanders anyone who disagrees with hem as his argument to the opposite and then dismisses anyone else he can't ad hominem into the ground as a troll.

These three threads are good examples of the kind of "debate" and "discourse" we can expect from Jade Constantine. Presented more or less in full for full disclosure.

thread 1

thread 2

Thread 3


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8

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