Journey of an EVE-online pilot

2008.05.16 12:22:00

Victim: GM Icini
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Game Masters
Destroyed: Sleipnir
System: FD-MLJ
Security: 0.0
Damage Taken: 21823

Involved parties:

Name: Xoudan
Security: 5.1
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Hotel Moscow
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Hobgoblin II
Damage Done: 10246

Name: Inanna Zuni (laid the final blow)
Security: 4.7
Alliance: Electus Matari
Corp: The Causality
Ship: Drake
Weapon: Terror Assault Missile
Damage Done: 6592

Name: mis Kity
Security: 1.5
Alliance: NONE
Corp: Mark Septim Corp
Ship: Drake
Weapon: Scourge Heavy Missile
Damage Done: 4985

Name: Joghert
Security: 0.6
Alliance: Phoenix Rising Alliance
Corp: Sylver Gryphons of Unity
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Small Nosferatu II
Damage Done: 0

Destroyed items:

Targeting Range Dampening (Cargo)
Capacitor Power Relay II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Scan Resolution Dampening, Qty: 2
Gyrostabilizer II
Remote Sensor Dampener II, Qty: 2
Domination EMP M, Qty: 200
ECM Burst II
Dread Guristas Scourge Heavy Missile, Qty: 33
Medium Armor Repairer II
425mm AutoCannon II, Qty: 3
Particle Dispersion Projector II, Qty: 2

Dropped items:

Targeting Range Dampening (Cargo)
Capacitor Power Relay II
Warp Disruptor II
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Domination EMP M, Qty: 80
Heavy Missile Launcher II
425mm AutoCannon II, Qty: 4

Via an EVEmail I just received this from a pilot by the name of Azzma:

"Hi I am a Japanese player and I have noticed there is no candidate that represents anything for Japanese players, which is a sizeable population of Eve.

Therefore, I am willing to be your Japanese spokesperson (A group unreachable and without a candidate) for 100 mil ISK (negotiable). I will campaign in Japanese forums, channels, corp channels, etc which are unnavigable to all other candidates. I am familiar with almost all Japanese players, who are very close knit because of the language barrier. Spreading your message to this group of voters who currently do not have a candidate will definitely be one of the sure moves to aid your campaign.

Please be a voice for a group of eve citizens often neglected in this large bureaucratic mess.

Please feel free to respond with any questions or concerns
Thank you,

Azzma"

Personally, I am standing as a candidate for *all* pilots, from whatever planetside geography they hail from. I am based in London, England, but ingame our 'Earth-bound' location is irrelevant except for some technical issues such as internet response delays and occasional mis-translations of the EVE interface (which are taken care of through existing systems.)

I hope that Japan-based pilots - and japanese-speaking ones too - will support me for my platform and support for *all* pilots no matter their nationality, language, gender or age, and not because I might pay someone to speak on my behalf. Needless to say I will not be taking up Azzma's offer.

IZ

Today is the start of voting in the ballot for members of the Stellar Council of Management. You get two weeks in which to cast that vote, so it isn't urgent that you do it *right now*, instead you can take the opportunity to reflect on the range of candidates and, hopefully(!) like many others who have sent me their support, decide that you want to vote for me.


Although I haven't added anything here recently, you will find a number of comments and responses to other pilots on the EVE forums:

Suicide ganking

Local channel

Hi-sec isk farmers

Contact with the pilot community

Balance within the CSM

and a topic at Jita Park Speakers Corner which so far includes Q&A about being a woman in EVE, invention, industry and security levels, and missioning.

Tags: csm

At heart this breaks the spirit / intent of EVE online as a multi-*player* game; you aren't playing if you aren't watching. BACON does't offer anything to the player who is actively ingame; all the information this available via local and a decent overview setup. One could almost argue that CCP should include something similar as part of the game under disability anti-discrimination requirements for those players who do not have perfect eyesight and need auditory assistance (eg. we can see when our warp drive is active, but we get the voice anyway).

Does it create unbalance between pilots using BACON and those not using it? Yes, if they aren't actively involved in the game, but otherwise not so much. Does BACON benefit the macro farmers and those who set out to abuse EVE? Yes, and if they hadn't written such a program before they sure know about it now and could invent new uses for the idea. At corp and alliance level though, integrating the data from multiple pilots and alts, it clearly advantages the BACON-using side who can create a real-time map of traffic in as many systems as they have alts.

Is it, or should it be, illegal? So far the TOS appears to not be broken but, more to the point, because it accesses local client files, it would be very difficult for CCP or anyone else to prove that there hasbeen unauthorised use of the logfiles. Unless you remove some elements of the logging process, or recode the whole logfile subsystem to encrypt its output, then any external program using that data cannot be stopped. But even that would probably not be sufficient as there are many tech geeks around. Something that made it impossible to run the local logserver without each-time permission from CCP is impracticable and, now the cat is out the bag, one could probably write some Wireshark code to 'watch' the EVE data anyway.

As regards nerfing local, that would just play into the hands of users of BACON and similar programs, giving them a massive advantage over the pilot who actually plays the game in the way that CCP intended. BACON doesn't read 'local', it uses the whole stream of data required by the client, and while there are some arguments to change how local works BACON isn't one of them.

Personally, the level of automation I currently find acceptable ingame is the autopilot. And I don't use that. Tools like BACON, Beetracker, and the rest, using the logfiles for other than their intended purpose are exploits. They can't be stopped by not accepting they exist nor could you say they contravene the TOS without a way to prove that they are actually in use. To stop them requires a change of the logfile format. These tools break the heart of the reason for EVE and produce inequality between pilots and I would support the removal of their ability to continue to work.

IZ

(see http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=753528 for the full thread on this topic)

[16:42:18] Yrathi Tai > well I’m not exactly here on press business more my own curiosity

[16:42:33] Inanna Zuni > nothing wrong with that ;-P

[16:42:43] Lapis Zuni > Hi sis!

[16:42:56] IZ > xoxo L

[16:45:57] YT > So I was wondering what you thought of the other candidates? any that stand out as a particularly good or bad choice?

[16:47:39] IZ > I'm probably in the same position most other pilots are; we only hear of the exploits of other pilots if we come across them somewhere - in space, forums, etc. Unlike 'earthbound' politics we don't find them knocking at the door to our pods asking for our support (which wouldn't be helpful in the middle of pvp anyway!) so some names I know of and mates tell me are "good people" and others not so much.

I'm tending to the view that everyone who has put themselves forward has a good reason for doing so and that, in the main, they are interested in what is good for the game rather than themselves / their corp / alliance. This is the first time around the loop, but as there will be elections every six months it will get easier with time anyway (and someone can only be elected twice so there will have to be new people coming in anyway). Same as I would in a real-world election though I wouldn't say who I would vote for if not myself (I didn't say "real election" as, so far as I am concerned, this is ...). I'd like to hope it might encourage the 'press' or EVE to grow too, in order to widen knowledge about the pilots around

YT > Do you think if this flies regular "parties" will emerge?

IZ > Don't know. For a 'political party' to exist it needs widespread ground support. I'm not sure that could happen in EVE except for alliance-based parties. You could argue there is a "Goonswarm Party" as they have six candidates. however whether their Alliance asked them to run or they are independent of their alliance is another thing. "Suck it and see" is probably the motto this first time around. CCP also have a steep learning curve to see if the concept works sensibly from their end too. Hopefully, it will ;-P

YT > Indeed how much of a "turnout" do you think we will get?

IZ > well the published notes suggest that 25% of *players* have multiple accounts, and presumably if a player votes on one account then they'll vote their other(s) too. Then take off those who don't login regularly - although given the two-week window for voting that shouldn't be too much of an issue - and then the usual apathy of people along the "if voting changed anything they'd make it illegal". I would love for over 90%, I'd expect maybe 60% but will be satisfied as long as it is over 45%. Again, first time around ... if the first Council does well then I'd hope the turnout will increase in future elections.

The second interesting thing on that is the "one account = one vote" even though there are nine places to be filled. Unless there is a lot of pre-arrangement then I would expect to see a steep drop-off in the numbers of votes cast for each successful candidate …

YT > Kinda counts the goons out a bit doesn’t it?

IZ > Not really. If any (alliance / corp / grouping) wanted to get multiple seats they could organise themselves to vote in sufficient numbers across each of their candidates. Same as happens IRL sometimes!

To an extent, in any sort of election, people will vote for the name they recognise; that has a benefit for some of the candidates, and not for others. But this isn't the same as any other election. Candidates can't buy airtime or adverts in papers or on hoardings at gates! So all we have is the hope that people will read the CCP pages and follow the various links to sites, blogs, etc. which, I reckon, makes it quite wide-open and unpredictable as to the overall composition of the first Council and, from what I read on the boards, some candidates are doing a good job of shooting themselves in the foot so again depends on what boards / threads people read.

YT > Like who?

IZ > There was some discussion over the weekend about whether some accusation against a candidate was true or not. The sensible thing to do would have been not rise to the bait, but the candidate did, repeatedly. People develop their own conclusions as to who to choose, but that will change right up to the time they click the button against a name.

The whole "real name" thing is going to complicate matters too. Voters will have to check which real name on ballot applies to which pilot name they support. I hope they list both together, I'm very worried they won't as like most online games, boards, etc. people are known by their handles and very rarely by their "real" name.

YT > That would be just like CCP wouldn’t it? What do think of the Per. Capita idea?

IZ > Yup. Hopefully they'll list both though but like the "one vote only" policy I reckon it might change with the experience they gain from this time around. Money, etc. shouldn't buy power. Different (real-world) countries practice politics in different ways, and my view is that with the numbers CCP are putting on the Council then a representative democracy where people get elected with majority support but then act on behalf of all the player base rather than any segment that shouts loudest / pays for privilege / pods you! The numbers game is the same: the person elected first, with the highest number of votes, will be Chair of the Council, but it is quite likely they may have 10x the votes of the final person to be elected. But they are both *elected* and should be equal once they are serving on the council, otherwise it isn't democracy.

People play this game, pay CCP money, because they enjoy it. This shouldn't be about someone's idea of a power trip over other players; it should be about a shorter route to making the game better, for all, in all sorts of ways.

YT > Would you stand again if you didn’t get a seat this go around?

IZ > Almost certainly, Yes. Obviously I will look carefully at the voting stats; if it is clear that the support fell into Alliance lines then either campaigning needs to change or the election method does, but my aim in deciding to stand in the first place was to offer my experience and abilities to furthering EVE, and that won’t change if I fail on the first time around. There are over 60 candidates; nine will be elected and a few more kept in reserve as alternates. We shall see how it all pans out and, as someone inherently interested in the mechanics of elections and why people choose to support particular candidates when they have a choice on offer, then finding out the result of that is what I want to know. Ideally, it includes the election of me ;-P

I've had people comment on forums and blogs and in email that they support me, which is great. What I don't know - like every politician around - is how others feel about me and what support I'll have on the day (or, in our case, two weeks). Either way, I've kept the days for the meetings free and will continue to do so.

YT > How much support stuff have you gotten?

IZ > More than I expected, indeed it is always a surprise to get any as sometimes reading the forums one gets the idea that there are a lot of pilots apathetic to the idea! I think it is the fact that, except for those in large Alliances, nobody has an 'in-built constituency' of probable voters for them, so any news is good news and so far, all the 'news' I've been sent has been good news!

YT > What would your first priority be if you got on the council?

IZ > Get to know the other Council members. We will have to work as a team, not be competitors with our own special interests to the fore. We also need to work with CCP's team for the same reason. I've listed a few points on my blog entries, and there are clearly some "quick hits" that could be achieved, and I reckon that CCP know very well how bad the lag issue is, for instance, but at the Council can certain /emphasise/ that to them again!

Along with other issues; POS, corp management tools, drones, ship balancing, simple things like overview faults and improvements. The Council is a two-way thing, connecting CCP and the rest of the player base. It isn't a blockage, nor a body to make excuses to one for the actions of the other but a face-to-face type meeting between CCP and player representatives can more easily make progress than the written word on a forum or a petition.

Council = Clarity of information, I hope, and more than just 'information' but also the 'whys and wherefores' of why we love this 'game' so much we sit at keyboards for many hours every day *and* pay them money too.

"My name is Inanna and I am an EVE-online addict" ;-P

Having made it to some EVE-meets, I know plenty of others who feel the same way!

YT > Pay someone to beat us with a stick would feel better and yet here we are as I once put it. Lol

IZ > Ahuh, exactly. Every time I try to explain to my mother (who is getting on a bit) why I spend many hours a day doing this she just doesn't 'get it'. Unlike many 'games' this one is soooooo much more, and has so many more options as to what you can do and, more importantly, you can change your mind and do something else if you want to without being penalised or having to grind for months.

YT > How many people have you gotten hooked on eve?

IZ > About a handful for definite, but I tell lots more who might have signed up since I last saw them.

YT > What’s the weirdest thing you have ever experienced playing eve?

IZ > I don't "kiss and tell" ;-P but yes, my keyboards and screens are usable from in bed ;-0 and I think I'll draw a veil over any more of that! There is, though, something I noted at meets, which is that there is often some similarity between how people create their avatar and how they actually look ...

YT > not precisely what I had in mind either. *reaches for brain soap*

IZ > sorry! Usual things, so now not weird, are talking 'work' on the phone while using another hand to fight in PvP ... but that and similar keeps happening and I'm now getting practiced at it …

YT > yeah eve is excellent at training your multi tasking ability

IZ > … especially with your FC in one ear and the other on a phone call. (btw, I'm also keeping an eye on my alliance channel as we have some WTs nearish so I may get called away)

Lapis Zuni > (at the same time as I am flitting around losec collecting datacores and running missions)

IZ > yeah, the 'family' that plays together, stays together, or summat like that!

YT > no different up here local, security, recruitment and corp open while raid mining; running outta screen (I have a 14in widescreen).

IZ > ahuh ... so many options as to what to do in EVE. If we hadn't been chatting I'd have been mining a while. One of the comments I made on my blog was about better use of screenspace. More things about to become moveable in station, some of the in-space ones need to do the same at some point.

YT > Well they did make some improvement recently but yeah the space usage is just suboptimal

IZ > I've got both old and new clients running and interesting to compare them. One is on a standard screen the other wide, so again you can layout better on one than the other. One reason, I suspect, why I almost never do much with actually being able to see my ship while in space!

YT > Yeah, I’ve got that issue to always making right handed combat approaches because I cant see the left half of the screen

IZ > I now tend to think of things like an aeroplane flying in fog .. trust in my overview. At least one can layout to suit your preferences to some extent. I think the Chinese expansion was very good for that actually; by needing to adapt the language used in the interface it makes it easier to make other changes too, slowly reducing any remaining hard-coding.

YT > Is there any ship you feel has gotten the short end of the stick?

IZ > All of them and none of them! This whole "xxx needs balancing" applies to them all at some point and then others subsequently. CCP can't 'win' on that as there is no winning position. If every ship in the universe was "correct" (by whose decision anyway) then it could become boring. Each patch changes things slightly, as they would in the 'real world' as technology improves.

I have ships of four of the five races in my hangars, but yes I have preferences. Some of my ships have got 'worse' since I started, some better, some weren't in existence back then (!) but it is what makes it interesting. As a pilot you can't know what fit someone will have on a ship - in the same way that 'balance' issues aren't the main thing that will decide who wins a dogfight.

[18:25:23] YT > Have you been doing any particularly aggressive campaigning?

[18:26:58] IZ > Nope. Partially because there isn't a clear way to do so without annoying people (like spamming channels / forums) but more because I think it would be counter-productive to go overboard. I am listed in the right places and have made it as easy as I can for pilots to find out more about me, to contact me and ask questions, etc.

[18:35:01] YT > Well I’ve run dry my well of topics. I wish you the best of luck hope you get a seat.

[18:35:52] IZ > Many thanks; it has been interesting chatting ;-P

This conversation has been edited to remove gaps, correct typos and simplify reading. The original text log from the conversation, which took place ingame in the ZUNI Q&A channel, is available on request

The full list of candidates has now been published and an interesting mix of pilots it looks too! (Yes, I have linked to my competition; No, I don't want you to vote for them; Yes, I want you to compare them with me; Yes, I want you to vote for me, but I also believe in everyone being open and informed!)

Next, a couple more thoughts on life in EVE and the ever-present UI issues which could be improved to the benefit of all (and sadly I note that the jumping windows problem didn't get sorted in this week's patch) ...

Noting that the stats published by CCP about the applications received state "3 females applied and 61 males, making the female applicants 4,687% of the total pool. This corresponds very neatly with the overall player ratio, where the female population is 4,46% of the whole" then how about changing all the texts on missions and messages to reflect that women are in EVE! Currently it appears that all pilots are male and, quite clearly, we aren't! There are women playing men, and men playing women, of course, but somewhere around the system there are translation tables for other languages anyway so just translate the 'english' into something that admits to both or it neutral?

and let's have a "clear all waypoints" option that doesn't require us to open the map.

A couple of days ago I commented about the cargo hold size problem when you are in dock. Wouldn't it be really useful if you could see what fittings one of *your* ships had when you weren't actually in it? When you just know you have a particular unit in one ship that you need *right now* then instead of going onboard each one in turn (mmin 30 seconds or so each) you could just look at the shipfit to retrieve it.

The Council for Stellar Management elections are about to be upon us. 64 candidates have been accepted; you are selecting nine to represent all pod pilots.

Voting opens on May 5th and lasts for two weeks.



I am an independent candidate; although a member of a corp and an alliance I did not ask their permission, nor seek their explicit support. I believe the CSM will work best where the members are not trying to represent some few but where they seek to support the many.

I offer myself as your candidate.

I ask for your vote so that you may have a voice.

Chat on the in-game channel ZUNI, keep up with campaign news on InannaZuni.com, or read my blog here on LJ with your questions and my answers.

Some of my thoughts on UI issues and possible improvements:

first, the 'quick-and-easy' ones:

1. It is easy to create a new bookmark while you are flying around without having to upon up People & Places in the neocon, yet you can't remove them the same way. Given that adding and removing display items is always just a right-click away, why isn't removing a bookmark?

2. When a pilot is offered a mission there is a small map of the immediate constallation shown in the Overview and Objectives. Thing is, while there is a nice "You are here" circled, the destination system isn't marked! Sometimes it is the other way around, but I've yet to see *both* marked at once.

3. You don't always start talking to agents while in their station. How about adding a (clickable) link to their current base of operations underneath those of their Corp, Divisions, Race, and Bloodline? Saves overhead on opening up that People & Places tab again.

then a few others to make a pilot's life easier.

4. The Personal Assets screen is one of many that get heavily used but isn't as user-friendly as it could be. What about adding:
- (a) an option to sort the list by number of jumps. When you've filtered the list to get the piece of kit you urgently need how near or far it is should be one click away, not a maths lesson in your head.
- (b) the "Group" column isn't always sufficient. Add a further column so that you can browse for 'ships' and such 'major groups'.
- (c) and on a similar point, change the search box to not just require the actual name of the desired item, but allow groups (eg "battlecruiser" or "ships"

5. It used to be that if you opened the cargo hold of one of your other ships in dock you saw its accurate size; especially useful when you are moving stuff between holds. Trouble now though is that if you aren't actually *in* a ship then the cargo hold size reverts to the default size for that class of ship and not to what it should be with the extenders, etc. that you have installed. This makes things unneccesarily difficult, especially for haulers and traders.


Let me know your thoughts ...

IZ

(as asked by Caldari Navy Ibis)

Q: Who are you and what do you primarily do in EVE?


Hi. I'm Inanna Zuni, a Sebiestor Minmatar, currently in service with The Causality, who are affiliated with Electus Matari. Some might call me a 'carebear' though I've never liked the term myself, mostly because it is too simplistic! Although I mainly run (losec) missions for isk I also do all the other things like manufacture and mine, and some solo and alliance fleet PvP too alongside helping out newer pilots when I can. My family includes my mother - Willow Zuni - who is a trading and hauling specialist, and my sisters Friday and Lapis. Lapis does lots of research-type stuff I believe. Overall we do the RP thing as that is what makes EVE so much more than 'just a game'.

To some extent I'm a missile-BC specialist (I ::heart:: my Drakes!) but I'll fly anything up to BS size from all four races and I'll often do recon. I live in the Molden Heath / Heimatar / Metropolis area most of the time.

IRL I'm a communicator, an educator, a designer and code hacker (usually PHP lately). I talk at conferences for a non-profit I'm closely involved with (which you'll all have heard of) and generally do things I enjoy as I love helping people learn more. I live in London (the UK one) and have an MBA (one of the things that interests me about EVE is the whole 'player-driven economy' thing) as well as lots of computers and an interest in politics, life-long learning, and food. I'm Alison.

Q: Can you give an example, either from real life, from EVE or from another MMO of when you've had to remain objective in an issue that negatively affects you or someone close to you?


I removed myself from a project under my control (at work) once where I felt that my approach had actually become the blocking issue. Different people obviously have different ideas on the best approach to solving a problem and just because you are the lead on something doesn't make you automatically right (even if you are - lol) when due to time constraints a workable-but-not-perfect faster solution becomes necessary.

Q: How did you react to that situation? Is there anything you feel you could have done better, now that you have the benefit of hindsight?


No, it was the right decision based on the changed circumstances. Didn't make me happy, but that wasn't the point.

Q: As a pure example, imagine you were in Alliance A and a proposed change in game mechanics would be beneficial to your corp and allies but disadvantageous to your enemies, Alliance B who happen to outnumber you 3:1 in membership. How would you disasociate yourself from the pressures you might feel and ensure you are giving fair and unbiased representation of the player-base? How easy is it to put personal feelings aside?


Totally easy to put the personal aside. I've been involved in (RL) politics over the years, and taking an unbiased overview of the situation and options is a pre-requisite for that. In standing for CSM I did not ask permission of my Corp or Alliance, and I will never consider myself as their representative in any way. Indeed, were it asked of CSM members that they removed themselves from their Corp and Allianec for the six-month period of service (joining a CSM corp, or whatever) I would be fine with that. As I see it, the need for the CSM is to take an educated and knowledgeable view of where EVE is at and where it should go, and be unbiased in that by not playing favourites; all pilots need to benefit, not just some few.

Q: As a delegate to the CSM, what expectation of privacy and anonymity do you have? Using the example above, even the announcement of a unanimous vote without specifics could still cause Alliance A members to feel resentment toward you if they became aware that you had voted for an issue that ultimately benefitted your enemies in-game. How would you deal with potential backlash from friends and allies if you vote against what they believe is right?


I have no such expectations. I stand independent of my Corp and Alliance as an "EVE pilot", nothing more, nothing less. If people want to engage in a 'backlash' for something they are welcome, but at root EVE is 'just a game' (a really great one which offers so much more, true, but still a game for all that.)

Q: Again using the example above, what would you do if you suspected that a fellow councillor was abusing their position to try and manipulate decisions to their benefit, how would you address that issue and what do you feel you would need to be cautious of when doing so?


The CSM has only the 'power' of persuasion; nothing of actually *making* something happen. If a council member persuaded me that something was a good idea then it probably is; conversely, if I start out thinking it is a bad idea I will attempt to convince them they are wrong. Such is the benefit of open and direct discussion.

Q: I'm aware that you probably haven't had the opportunity to gather feedback at this stage, but if you were to pick three topics right now that you feel genuinely warranted being brought to CCP's attention, what would they be and why?


1. Server lag. No question about it. It must be unacceptable for someone to lose their ship and pod to a black screen or a complete lockup.
2. ISK farmers. How about they get flagged with a price on their head?
3. Pre-patch testing. Not always, but fairly regularly, something goes wrong with a patch. I've been a programmer for an awfully long time, so I completely accept that you can't test everything every time, but still. I use SiSi when I can, and some of the issues will obviously get found on there, but some won't, and UI ones affect pilots the most.

Thing is, CCP already know of those three, so let's look at three less talked about:

A. UI Ease of Use. Some things can only be done with a mouse (like launching drones), some are more effectively done with the keyboard, some need both every time. When you, as a pilot, are really busy (getting caught in a gate camp, whatever) you need as many UI functions as possible available in multiple ways so that *you* can choose what works best for you. The ESC manu is there to enable some pilot shortcuts; extend it further. Also remove some of the minimum size display limits on the HUD so people can use their limited screen real-estate how they find works best for them.
B. Corp Hangars. The present audit trail and locking / control functions are pitiful and need extending to become properly useful. Back in the day of a smaller pilot population you quite possible knew your co-pilots much better and knew whether to trust them of not. Now that is less likely as the population has increased so much.
C. Missions. Everyone does them - even if you are in 0.0 I bet you have alts who still do - and new arrivals to EVE need them as part of their training. Agent and mission handling needs improvements, such as not offering the same mission twice in a row (sometimes three times!) and making lo-sec missions more rewarding from their hi-sec versions to offset the increased risk (and help draw people to losec areas too)

Q: While we're talking about feedback, is there any primary medium you believe you will use for gathering it?


All of them. IG channels and mail, OOG mail, forums and my website (http://InannaZuni.com)

Q: When reading EVE General Discussion to look for pertinent issues for the community, what one criterion would you feel was the absolute most important in deciding whether something is worthy of further discussion or not? Why?


Multiple pilots from multiple alliances in multiple races and multiple security states. Everyone has a view, but 'quick hits' are possibly what matters most in the short term, and that means finding and resolving the issues that affect most of us first.

Q: Do you believe the CSM's role is to be exclusively about in-game issues (or those which affect in-game issues such as abuse of Dev powers) or do you think there will be some effect on the community side of EVE such as, for example, EVE TV, Alliance Tournaments, Fan Fest, etc?


I have no doubt that EVE is a community anyway; it doesn't just have a community 'side'. All pilots interact with each other and whilst the CSM is intended to have its primary focus on in-game issues those 'outside' events clearly have a part to play in feeding information and ideas both ways.

CCP have noted that as EVE has grown in population it has become much more of a 'world simulation' than a 'game'; modelling financial and trading markets is as interesting (to me) as the PewPew, seeing how piracy has grown when it wasn't part of the initial EVE concept likewise. EVE has become pretty self-sustaining, and in my view the Council for Stellar Management is another step in that 'game world' becoming self-aware.

Q: Please sum up the key messages of your candidacy in 100 words or fewer.


I believe that the large alliances already have input to CCP via the Devs and GMs who have their alts with them (and there is no substitute for direct experience, so this is a good thing) as do EVE-TV and the other cross-over groups, but the small alliances, stand-alone corps, solo players who mission, manufacture, mine or trade don't always have a place to get their views across. For more than two years I have mostly been that solo player, making isk however I could, making new friends and enjoying life in New Eve.

I offer myself as your candidate.

I ask for your vote so that you may have a voice.

Q: Anything else you'd like to add?


Voting matters, whether it is in the 'real' world for a president or a party who will govern you for four years, or in EVE where the elected councillors will only serve for six months. Both serve you and both, in their own ways, matter.

If you choose not to vote you can't complain afterwards.

So vote.

Preferably for me, Inanna Zuni. Thank you
http://InannaZuni.com/

I was asked yesterday what I thought should be 'done' about pilots who come along and scavange wrecks while another pilot is still doing the mission that creates them. After all, a large part of the 'payment' on some encounter missions is the drop value, and that means both the loot *and* the salvaging bits and pieces.

Thing is, at the moment, taking the dropped loot is illegal and will get you flagged, but salvaging doesn't, and though some pilots have said that they consider it to be "stealing" too, CONCORD (and CCP) don't. Given that not everyone will scavenge the wrecks they create though - either because they don't have the skills, the equipment, or the time - it is reasonable that the minor profession of itinerant scavenger should be continued, but maybe with a small change.

* If the scavenger is in the same gang as the missioner, then fine; no problem.
* If the missioner is still in the deadspace / mission area, then salvaging their wreck becomes stealing and will be flagged.
* If the missioner isn't still there then it is stealing / flaggable for ten minutes after the ship was destroyed (in case they've gone to a local base to get their scavenging ship) but then becomes free for all to salvageif they don't return in that time.

How does that work for you? Let me know what you think by pressing post a new comment below ...

Originally by: Sylthi
Actually, if you had read the .pdf document more carefully, or been in game when it happened (as I was) you would know that this IS, in fact, try #2. I find your optimism.... interesting. Perhaps if you had been here the first time and seen how the devs really just let it die on the vine (as I saw), you would have a slightly different attitude.

Actually, I have and I did. Thing is, whilst there are certainly some comparisons with the past attempts to try something similar I believe - based on the content of the PDF primarily - that this is a sufficiently different beast with a wider remit that it offers more opportunity to be useful to both pilots and CCP alike.

I find optimism is the best way to go into a situation; plan for the worst but hope for the best and the likelihood is you'll get something in between. Start out thinking it will fail and that is what you guarantee it will do. Whether we call this the first try or second try though it is still, imho, something worth trying as a new route to interaction, involvement and improvement.

IZ

Yes, I do have this thing for alliteration - sorry!

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=636642&line=317)

Originally by: Alex Redwidth
Can't say I have any interest in the CSM, nor do I have any faith it'll have a constructive influence on my own game experience within Eve, as has been said it puts the influence directly in the hands of a select few in large corps/alliances in game.

If you don't try you can't achieve. This is the first time of trying the CSM idea and, I have little doubt, the second will be different, as will the third. But starting out without faith that it might work is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe it is worth trying. especially as it could benefit all of us, not just the 0.0 or the pirates or the missioners, miners, manufacturers and traders in Empire, but every pod pilot there is.

Whether it is just the big alliances who get people elected is also up to you and every0ne else; currently the Devs and GMs play their alts with those alliances (generally a good thing, by the way, as there is no substitute for real involvement on a live system) but what is now needed is a little love and interaction with us Empire pilots.

And that is why I am standing.

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=636642&line=315)

Winterblink has usefully created a list of declared candidates for the nine positions on the CSM ...

The large alliances already have input to CCP via the Devs and GMs who have their alts with them (and there is no substitute for direct experience, so this is a good thing) but the small alliances, stand-alone corps, solo players who mission, manufacture, mine or trade don't always have a place to get their views across. For more than two years I have mostly been that solo player, making isk however I could, making new friends and enjoying life in New Eve.

I am an independent candidate; although a member of a corp and an alliance I did not ask their permission, nor seek their explicit support. I believe the CSM will work best where the members are not trying to represent some few but where they seek to support the many.

I offer myself as your candidate.

I ask for your vote so that you may have a voice.

Inanna Zuni

Website: http://InannaZuni.com/
Discussion: http://inanna-zuni.livejournal.com/

Originally by: Altpause
I am amazed that people are spending all this time and effort on a meaningless PR trick.

Whether it is 'meaningless' is up for discussion, but there are clearly many pilots - like myself and those others who have declared their intention to be candidates for the CSM - who believe that it is not meaningless whatsoever but presents an opportunity for fruitful discussions and action.

Sidebar: some say that spending "all this time and effort" and money on an online game is "meaningless", but I very much doubt that you are in that group! (and I know I'm not)

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=181)

Originally by: Kel Dario
I don't need any attention seeking egos to interpret for CCP my opinions. If CCP really want to know they could just ask me. Failing that they can do as they always done, read the written posts on the forum by players in areas of concern and judge the various opinions pro's and con's against each other.

Indeed they could, and the forums are one way of doing that. As of 31 December 2007, EVE Online had 220,000 active subscriptions and even if every one of those people posted just one suggestion CCP would be reading all year to just catch up let alone do something.

In most countries IRL we get elections for representatives to some sort of state government, local council, town hall. The CSM is an attempt to do something similar (though it won't have any 'power' beyond that of reasonable persuasion - and some us can be pretty persuasive!) and I believe will work best if it isn't a case of "the usual suspects" doing that work but pilots selected from the wider EVE population.

Originally by: Kel Dario
The people in this thread who announced they will candidate are already disqualified in my eyes because you look like a bunch of ego-driven fools. A few of you I have never even heard of before. And I read this forum a lot. And Verone is to much in bed with CCP so it will be a cold day in hell before I place my vote on you.

So unless someone turns up that I really believe will act in the best of the game (and not just for his own ego) I will have to find a good anti-candidate to vote on to mark my displeasure.

Aren't these two points self-exclusive? You probably haven't heard of me before, for instance, yet I read the forums very regularly and post when I have something useful to add. There are so many threads though it isn't a surprise if you haven't seen my name prior to declaring my intention to seek election.

I'm not in this for "ego"; I get enough massaging of that if I want it IRL (lol) I'm just someone who - probably like you - found EVE Online one day, started playing it and found that it was something I enjoyed doing - a *lot*. So I'm still here in game and offering myself as someone to 'get in the way' a bit to help improve stuff.

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=135)

Originally by: Letouk Mernel
What the community wants can best be expressed through a few polls, which CCP can do at the login screen easily enough. I mean, this is what you'll get, 50% want x, 20% want y, etc etc.

If you can manage to write a simple straight-forward question that has a yes / no answer *and is meaningful* than all well and good. But life isn't that way inclined. I love the way that EVE offers lots of ways to everyone to do their own thing, and whilst I may not like being podded by a pirate (for instance) I will certainly never want to see them removed from the 'game'! They weren't designed-in to EVE by CCP but they became a core part of the game as the numbers of players have increased. Maybe there is an argument to make bad pirating more difficult (eg. how about insurance premiums being related to CONCORD standing? You have a -9.9 standing and your premium is 90% of the replacement cost but a +9.9 one and it is reduced a little but not enough that getting a friend to blow you up makes a profit) - good pirates don't lose more but bad ones learn by experience to get better! For me personally I don't want 'better' pirates coming to find me, but it would make the decision to pirate more 'interesting'.

Pilots can proposed ideas - there are lots of suggestions daily on the forums and some, I feel, are too personal to the pilot concerned but others present a possible improvement in the wider aspect of the *game*.

EVE is a game you can never 'win' as such, but you set your own targets and try to achieve them. You can ask corpmates, alliance members, random people on local what they think. but the good questions are nearly all open-ended and not simple to answer. The CSM is a way to get intelligent people together, who each take on board the feelings and suggestions of the wider pod pilot population, and use their own experience and knowledge to find and offer that solution to CCP.

And hopefully, where the CSM agrees that something needs to happen and there are no technical or commercial reasons that it shouldn't, then we can all look forward to its implementation. The CSM is not the answer in itself, but it a way of getting one ...

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=134)

Originally by: Verone
It's my personal feeling that when the CSM takes an issue to CCP, with suggested resolutions from the community, both the positive and negatives need to be brought to the table as well as the positives and negatives of potential solutions.

Absolutely. Whilst we tend to think of much in EVE (and in 'real' life) as all or nothing, positive and negative, black and white, in reality everything is shades of grey. How each of us perceive that grey depends on the lighting ;-P

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=107)

Originally by: Cailais
The key factor some might argue, is how will a CSM represent a issue / view they do not believe in ...

CCP: "Agenda item No.2 - WTZ, over to you council members"
CSM: "Its a bad idea"
CCP: "Ok, moving on, Agenda item No.3..."

Not gonna happen if you elect me. I enjoy being a devil's advocate anyway, but more to the point if other players think something has merit and I haven't in the past then I will research the subject for myself before the meeting to understand *why* some pilots believe this could be a good thing. This is an attempt at representative democracy, where each pilot elected represents all, not a delegated democracy where we are only there to put one point of view.

Originally by: Cailais
Even worse perhaps is that the 'masses' demand something which is actually bad for EVE. And the CSM, eager to fufill their promise to their voters pressure CCP for its implementation.

Id like to know what the candidates think of this 'candidate dilema'.

Taking my earlier point onwards, the CSM have the possibility to act as a buffer in both directions; finding a better explanation (from the Devs, the GMs or the other CSM members) as to why something sounds a great idea but wouldn't work in practice (or just couldn't be implemented without breaking lots of other stuff) is, for me, part of the job we are seeking to do.

You are electing people to the CSM who will be there for only six months; time to get started. If you don't like what we do you don't re-elect us and if you do you can only re-elect us once more anyway. The CSM might be biased to the large alliances or pirates or missioners or whatever in one 6-month incarnation, but the next time around will almost certainly be different. By definition, each Council will only be able focus on small range of ideas, but if it works - and the first Council will show if it does - then everything will get covered in time.

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=105)

Originally by: Cailais
I hope and intend to keep asking the 'awkward' questions of the candidates, to press them on their views and to ultimately ask why should they win my vote.

Ask away. In the politics that lead our Earth-bound countries we rarely get the chance to directly question candidates for election; here you do!

Yes, I have views on what is happening with EVE and where I'd like to see it head, but I'm also wanting to hear from a wider range of pilots as each player's point of view is different in the details. My idea isn't necessarily your idea, but both will have merit.

Originally by: Lurana Jade
Like some other dude said, its going to all be LowSec prats, 0.0 mega-alliance men, and maybe some T2 BPO uber rich industrialists. Nothing there for me, way I see it. Nor anything for a n00b, rookie, missioner or miner.

Well I'm not a prat (or a man) or rich either. I'm a missioner and miner and a poor pilot most of the time (around 60mill ISK in my wallet at the moment and about eight ships, all BC or smaller) but I enjoy the 'game' for what it is. Scanning the market history to set the right price; manufacturing the occasional T1 product (usually for my own use!), running missions and scavenging them, and learning to make my way in the world is what keeps me here.

I see the CSM as a way to get more involved in the background to the EVE universe, not as a way of duplicating existing routes to the devs and GMs (though improvements could be clearly and quickly made to the boards, they already provide the mechanism for many ideas and complaints) but of getting involved in how to improve the 'game experience' of us, the p(l)ayers.

Of course there is clearly a PR / marketing aspect to that; CCP need to make money in order to ensure we get our 'fix' of EVE and pretty regular content and quality upgrades too.

IZ

(http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=replyquote&threadID=731959&line=71)

You may have read on the forums and news channels that there are to be elections to the first Council of Stellar Management in a few weeks. I've been reading the papers on the ideas behind setting this up and I think it offers a great opportunity for a wider spread of pilots to give their input and comment on what is happening - and could happen - in our EVE universe.

So I am standing for election!



Ask me your questions here and I'll reply here too (and link them from my campaign website).

Vote for Inanna Zuni!