I see a number of people campaigning for your votes on the platform of “X is wrong. Vote for me and I’ll fix it”. I think this isn’t a particularly good method for determining who should form the CSM.

The CSM are supposed to present the views of the players, not just the CSM candidate and their corp/alliance.

In addition there are some issues that are universally supported, such as fixing the corp interface which has been terrible for years.

These in my opinion are not valid campaign platforms because then you the voters see no differentiation between the candidates. However that said I guess a quick summery of the obvious is useful to ensure my position on some things is clear.

If I get voted into the CSM I will:

  • Continue to chase CCP for answers to the Issues in progress (those which have been voted on by the CSM but have yet to have a reply from CCP)
  • Accurately relay topics raised in the Assembly Hall to the CSM.
  • Evaluate the proposals fully, mindful of their impact on smaller gang pvp amongst other things.
  • Vote based on the proposal raised, not on the politics of the person/corp/alliance that raised it.

As I say, this should be stating the obvious, but sometimes it does not hurt to do so 😉

So what do I mean with the title of this post?

I feel strongly that proposed changes raised in the Assembly hall should be presented accurately, but there are a few instances where I feel this has not happened and I wanted to bring up a specific example of this.

Retweak Minmatar Ewar ship web abilities

From the linked wiki page

Summary

Minmatar Recons suffered more than any other kind in the Empyrean Age expansion with the so called ‘Nano Nerf’. They are now unable to dictate range effectively during engagements.

Solution

Make the Huginn more like the Curse in that it’s EWAR abilities are more important than damage. The 5% missile launcher ROF per level of the Recon Ship skill is changed instead for 5% stasis webifier effectiveness per level. Additionally the Hyena loses it’s signature radius reduction bonus and gains the 5% web effectiveness bonus per level of EAS. Even at level 5 with 60% webs both ships are only upgraded to 75% webs, however, this gives them a much more defined role. The Rapier will remain as is.

Now I have an interest in this topic because I like many other people believe the Rapier is unable to do the job for which it was intended. It shouldn’t be a solo pwnmobile of course but it should have the tools to web a fast moving ship down to the point where the rapier itself is able to dictate range (i.e. the target is now slower than the Rapier).

But this proposal specifically excludes the Rapier? From the linked Assembly Hall forum thread

I would suggest (as with other EWAR) that webs be left as is for ships without a bonus (i.e.60% speed reduction)..but perhaps introduce a 2.5-5% bonus per level to web strength for both Minmatar recons and the Hyena.

So the CSM voted on CCP making changes to just the hugin and hyena. It seems to have deliberately excluded the Rapier. I don’t feel in this instance that the original proposal as supported by the players in the Assembly Hall was fairly represented.

I feel all proposals should be presented as originally posted in the Assembly Hall. During the discussion/debate it is fine for CSM members to suggest a alternative changes within the framework of the topic (in this instance the proposal in the same Assembly Hall thread to remove the Target Painting bonuses from the base ships and replace with a web strength bonus that would then be passed up to the T2 versions. This would have made the bellicose more useful and make the vigil into a nice T1 tackler).

You might claim the net result is the same either way because ultimately CCP make the choice of which ships to include in the rebalancing and considering that many of the newly changed faction ships have 90% webs thanks to ship bonuses I think this will have been on their minds. But that is not the point, the topic was edited before submission to the CSM and that in my opinion is wrong.

I am not trying to get voted into the CSM to push my vision for how the game should be changed or otherwise campaigning on specific changes.

I am running because I wish to ensure that the views of the players are presented without bias and that any discussions thereafter have representation from the small gang PvP and non spaceholding 0.0 alliance perspectives.

TL:DR

If voted in to the CSM I will accurately represent the proposals as voted on by the players without making amendments.