[11:33:48 PM] Luna: hello
[11:34:04 PM] tewkz: hi
[11:34:11 PM] tewkz: you should have asked me those questions in that post
[11:34:17 PM] tewkz: because they look like it'd be fun to answer
[11:34:22 PM] tewkz: let's pretend like i'm a test candidate :333
[11:34:49 PM] Luna: Well I didn't post the actual answers of the candidates for a reason so let's hear it :allears:
[11:35:15 PM] tewkz: re ask me the questions
[11:35:20 PM] tewkz: i dont want to dig through that thread
[11:35:30 PM] Luna: sure
[11:35:33 PM] Luna: Assume CCP aims to nerf tech by more evenly distributing tech moons across the universe. This would allow other and potentially smaller alliances a piece of the tech pie and give smaller alliances a chance to grow based on this but would potentially have a devastating effect on your own alliance's accounting. Ignoring whatever the remainder of the CSM thinks:
a) Would you be in favour or opposed to this?
b) Can you think of a better way to even out technetium without the logistical nightmare of shuffling moons causing pretty much everything to require reprobing? If you're against it, can you think of a compromise?
[11:36:02 PM] tewkz: I would be opposed to it
[11:36:23 PM] tewkz: I will agree that the tech 2 production cycle is heavily imbalanced towards a tech bottleneck
[11:36:31 PM] tewkz: however arbitrarily shuffling moons around is not the way to fix it
[11:36:36 PM] tewkz: the problems with that plan are many
[11:37:31 PM] tewkz: first of all, it would hurt many of the northern alliance and small alliances which already have tech past the point of recovery
[11:37:50 PM] tewkz: secondly, it doesn't actually stop large power blocs from controlling tech
[11:38:10 PM] tewkz: pl controls tech in nearly every region which has a tech moon now
[11:38:12 PM] tewkz: as does gsf
[11:38:25 PM] tewkz: and many of them are across the galaxy
[11:38:47 PM] tewkz: a compromise could be found by analyzing not the moons themselves but the production process
[11:38:57 PM] tewkz: moons are a symptom of the bottleneck problem
[11:39:12 PM] tewkz: the bottle neck could be solved in several ways
[11:39:40 PM] tewkz: one way is to add more materials, many moons in the universe don't have materials and this would slow down the bottleneck
[11:39:50 PM] tewkz: another way is to change the recipes for t2 components
[11:40:04 PM] tewkz: however, eliminating the bottleneck isn't entirely a compromise either
[11:40:24 PM] tewkz: there are many players that enjoy the conflict that technetium generates
[11:40:48 PM] tewkz: making production too easy or making resources too prevelant would eliminate a conflict generator, and eve needs all the conflict it can get
[11:40:54 PM] tewkz: instead
[11:40:57 PM] tewkz: a solution would be
[11:41:12 PM] tewkz: to take neo (which is primarily found in the south and opposes tech)
[11:41:34 PM] tewkz: modify recipes to make it a similar bottle neck to technetium
[11:41:57 PM] tewkz: and to look at empty moons as a way of ensuring that there are equivalent amounts of both, one in the north and one in the south
[11:42:44 PM] tewkz: this solves the problems of the north being such favored space for moons, it solves the problem of having one sole t2 bottleneck, it gives more moons for smaller alliances to try for, and it keeps the conflict generation
[11:42:53 PM] tewkz: as far as the devastating effect on my own alliance
[11:42:56 PM] tewkz: I have to take a strong stand here
[11:43:00 PM] tewkz: when you accept a CSM position
[11:43:05 PM] tewkz: you're not just a member of your alliance
[11:43:23 PM] tewkz: you have to make the game better for the game's sake, sometimes at the cost of what happens to your own alliance
[11:43:35 PM] tewkz: like an alliance ceo can't only focus on his own corp
[11:43:42 PM] tewkz: a csm needs to focus on all of the playerbase's needs
[11:43:53 PM] tewkz: as far as mittani wanting a nullsec csm
[11:44:16 PM] tewkz: he doesn't want a csm strictly to make nullsec much better than high sec or to create some dramatic power conglomerate
[11:44:36 PM] tewkz: he merely thinks that nullsec players have a better hand on what the playerbase wants and campaigned around that position
[11:45:32 PM] tewkz: (that's the end of my answer, jesus christ words)
[11:50:58 PM] Luna is now Offline (Replaced by new connection)
[11:51:00 PM] Luna is now Available
[11:51:34 PM] Luna: fucking clearwire >:V
[11:51:48 PM] tewkz: did you lose that wall of text
[11:51:56 PM] tewkz: [11:36:02 PM] tewkz: I would be opposed to it
[11:36:23 PM] tewkz: I will agree that the tech 2 production cycle is heavily imbalanced towards a tech bottleneck
[11:36:31 PM] tewkz: however arbitrarily shuffling moons around is not the way to fix it
[11:36:36 PM] tewkz: the problems with that plan are many
[11:37:31 PM] tewkz: first of all, it would hurt many of the northern alliance and small alliances which already have tech past the point of recovery
[11:37:50 PM] tewkz: secondly, it doesn't actually stop large power blocs from controlling tech
[11:38:10 PM] tewkz: pl controls tech in nearly every region which has a tech moon now
[11:38:12 PM] tewkz: as does gsf
[11:38:25 PM] tewkz: and many of them are across the galaxy
[11:38:47 PM] tewkz: a compromise could be found by analyzing not the moons themselves but the production process
[11:38:57 PM] tewkz: moons are a symptom of the bottleneck problem
[11:39:12 PM] tewkz: the bottle neck could be solved in several ways
[11:39:40 PM] tewkz: one way is to add more materials, many moons in the universe don't have materials and this would slow down the bottleneck
[11:39:50 PM] tewkz: another way is to change the recipes for t2 components
[11:40:04 PM] tewkz: however, eliminating the bottleneck isn't entirely a compromise either
[11:40:24 PM] tewkz: there are many players that enjoy the conflict that technetium generates
[11:40:48 PM] tewkz: making production too easy or making resources too prevelant would eliminate a conflict generator, and eve needs all the conflict it can get
[11:40:54 PM] tewkz: instead
[11:40:57 PM] tewkz: a solution would be
[11:41:12 PM] tewkz: to take neo (which is primarily found in the south and opposes tech)
[11:41:34 PM] tewkz: modify recipes to make it a similar bottle neck to technetium
[11:41:57 PM] tewkz: and to look at empty moons as a way of ensuring that there are equivalent amounts of both, one in the north and one in the south
[11:42:44 PM] tewkz: this solves the problems of the north being such favored space for moons, it solves the problem of having one sole t2 bottleneck, it gives more moons for smaller alliances to try for, and it keeps the conflict generation
[11:42:53 PM] tewkz: as far as the devastating effect on my own alliance
[11:42:56 PM] tewkz: I have to take a strong stand here
[11:43:00 PM] tewkz: when you accept a CSM position
[11:43:05 PM] tewkz: you're not just a member of your alliance
[11:43:23 PM] tewkz: you have to make the game better for the game's sake, sometimes at the cost of what happens to your own alliance
[11:43:35 PM] tewkz: like an alliance ceo can't only focus on his own corp
[11:43:42 PM] tewkz: a csm needs to focus on all of the playerbase's needs
[11:43:53 PM] tewkz: as far as mittani wanting a nullsec csm
[11:44:16 PM] tewkz: he doesn't want a csm strictly to make nullsec much better than high sec or to create some dramatic power conglomerate
[11:44:36 PM] tewkz: he merely thinks that nullsec players have a better hand on what the playerbase wants and campaigned around that position
[11:45:32 PM] tewkz: (that's the end of my answer, jesus christ words)
[11:52:16 PM] Luna: I lost the last six lines apparently
[11:53:24 PM] Luna: I think it's also a fair estimation that he want s anullsec candidate to keep the highsec in check from demanding stupid shit they don't understand the mechanics or reason of
[11:53:33 PM] tewkz: yeah, that's what i meant
[11:53:44 PM] tewkz: or that's part of what i mean when i say that nullsec knows what the playerbase wants
[11:53:52 PM] Luna: alone those same lines, assume CCP's plan for balance, stating that a nerf was going to happen (much along to same lines as they stated a JB nerf was going to happen this last year :argh:) and their idea was to open up moon mining to w-space. It would be difficult if not impossible to have a bloc with a true stranglehold on anything (just a logistical advantage) and the logistical nightmare of reprobing everything all the time could be prevented. Can you see anything wrong with such a mechanic change?
[11:57:11 PM] tewkz: a few things
[11:57:25 PM] tewkz: first I'd tell CCP to be sure that the moon distribution remains the same as in K space
[11:57:47 PM] tewkz: as far as blocs with strangleholds, that's not entirely true
[11:57:59 PM] tewkz: AHARM has a stronghold on quite a few holes and the isk needed to expand as necessary
[11:58:15 PM] tewkz: the biggest issue i have however is that these moons are basically unassaultable
[11:58:27 PM] tewkz: it's the equivalent of adding rare moon minerals to high sc
[11:58:29 PM] tewkz: sec*
[11:58:41 PM] tewkz: reinforcing a pos in a wormhole is a TREMENDOUS challenge
[11:58:57 PM] tewkz: and if they add moon minerals to w-space they will have to change w-space to accomodate conflict
[11:59:13 PM] tewkz: a few things they could do just off the top of my head
[11:59:56 PM] tewkz: add different towers to w-space that have less ehp and maybe smaller stront bays
[12:00:00 AM] tewkz: and modify all the existing ones
[12:00:08 AM] tewkz: just add "wormhole" somewhere in there
[12:00:12 AM] tewkz: amarr wormhole control tower
[12:00:12 AM] tewkz: etc.
[12:00:18 AM] tewkz: another thing they could do
[12:00:42 AM] tewkz: is create a way for players to keep entrances open longer and allow more mass through
[12:01:29 AM] tewkz: perhaps a low ehp-no stront bay structure that players can anchor near a wh in k-space or in w-space on the other side of the hole that keeps open a way in and that the defenders need to kill
[12:01:38 AM] tewkz: a wormhole blockade unit if you will
[12:02:41 AM] tewkz: off hand the idea sounds fine to consider but there are a lot of intracacies that ccp will have to pay attention to that the csm needs to remind them of
[12:04:23 AM] Luna: Now assume the line of your fellow CSM members is that, yes, a balance is necessary, but interfering with W-space is the wrong way to do it. How would you sell the CSM line and what, if anything, would you offer as a competing option?
[12:07:20 AM] tewkz: let me think a bit
[12:07:57 AM] tewkz: in order to sell the csm line
[12:08:07 AM] tewkz: I would have to focus entirely on the problems with using w-space
[12:08:48 AM] tewkz: and I would also have to argue against CCP's benefits
[12:09:06 AM] tewkz: CCP argues that a bloc wouldn't be able to have a strangle hold on any materials
[12:09:08 AM] tewkz: that's true
[12:09:17 AM] tewkz: but adding them to w-space will immediately devalue all the materials
[12:09:33 AM] tewkz: blocs wouldn't be able to have strangle holds on ANYTHING, moons are what make sense
[12:09:41 AM] tewkz: and that would kill the ability and efficacy of large blocs
[12:10:21 AM] tewkz: adding moon materials to w-space is the equivalent of adding the drone regions to high sec
[12:10:43 AM] tewkz: wormholes are very, very safe as it is
[12:11:01 AM] tewkz: and this isn't a successful way of generating conflict, which is what the game needs right now
[12:13:43 AM] Luna: One of a few good responses. How about a competing option? (feel free to take your time on this, it's probably not something to be casually considered unless you've already formulated a plan for this sort of thing)
[12:14:01 AM] tewkz: that would be the modification of blue prints and neo i mentioned earlier
[12:14:18 AM] tewkz: it creates more conflict, a second bottleneck, and geographically allows for very important moons to be controlled everywhere
[12:15:14 AM] tewkz: while buffing neo in a sense nerfs tech, if they both remain bottlenecks in t2 production, and if they are far enough apart that one coalition can't hold enough of both moons to strong-arm them it shouldn't affect a bloc level's power to have income
[12:15:18 AM] tewkz: while creating room for more conflict
[12:15:37 AM] tewkz: and more spaces for small alliances to grow into bloc level entities
[12:16:40 AM] tewkz: a single bloc can't control enough of the nullsec area to strong arm everything in the world
[12:16:50 AM] tewkz: and as far as the fear of a northern and southern giganto bloc
[12:16:57 AM] tewkz: that sort of already exists except everyone avoids the south
[12:17:10 AM] tewkz: this doesn't address this problem but it doesn't hurt anything with regards to that problem either
[12:17:26 AM] tewkz: another cool thing that they could do to balance space
[12:17:32 AM] tewkz: is to create 3 regions geographically
[12:17:45 AM] tewkz: one with tech, one with newneo (neoneo, heh), and one with drone rats (which are fucking absurd)
[12:17:49 AM] tewkz: that'd be cool too
[12:18:15 AM] tewkz: if they want to create conflict then evenly creating bottlenecks and spreading things out geographically should be fine
[12:18:42 AM] tewkz: ideally yes, tech would be spread across the universe, but it's a bit too late to start from scratch and any move towards starting from scratch is terrifying and will no doubt have dire consequences
[12:20:37 AM] Luna: You're the first person to consider more bottlenecks instead of fewer in the interest of making more conflict acknowledging that a balance won't simply make superblocs cease to steamroll everyone else at their whim
[12:20:42 AM] tewkz: I'm not sure what else to add that wouldn't be repeating myself and would sound like I'm stretching for content
[12:20:57 AM] tewkz: how'd i do boss :3
[12:21:18 AM] tewkz: ever since becoming ESG ceo I've been more interested in improving myself and my space-capabilities
[12:22:36 AM] tewkz: is being the first one to say something like that good or bad? i could be really, really dumb and everyone else is right
[12:22:37 AM] tewkz: heh
[12:27:24 AM] tewkz: aaaa did you lose internet
[12:27:40 AM] Luna is now Offline (Replaced by new connection)
[12:27:42 AM] Luna is now Available
[12:27:54 AM] tewkz: [12:20:42 AM] tewkz: I'm not sure what else to add that wouldn't be repeating myself and would sound like I'm stretching for content
[12:20:57 AM] tewkz: how'd i do boss :3
[12:21:18 AM] tewkz: ever since becoming ESG ceo I've been more interested in improving myself and my space-capabilities
[12:22:36 AM] tewkz: is being the first one to say something like that good or bad? i could be really, really dumb and everyone else is right
[12:22:37 AM] tewkz: heh
[12:27:24 AM] tewkz: aaaa did you lose internet