Sunday 28 February 2016

CSM Match is a website listing who the CSM candidates are going to be ( I think ).

I know that CCP passed my candidacy onto Eve match directly (a story in itself for another day)

So, I think there are 51 candidates for 14 positions.

Just cross referencing that list with Nosy Gamer's

I can not find Capri Sun Kraftfoods on CSM match though that campaign thread is still open.

Neither can I find a CSM match page for Rivver and her thread is still open.

Sapporo Jones is on CSM match however and I can't find his name on CSM wire yet

I have poked Nosy with this information to do as he sees fit.

Most pilots have added some information to CSM the match website.  To fill in all the details was more time consuming than I expected. Some 70 questions to answer, and most of them.  If a pilot has not answered any questions on CSM watch, I assume they are already very confident of their election result and may not need any more promotion by me either.

I am further behind in where I want to be for my own research on candidates (first life and eve life combining to create even less sleep opportunities), but do what you can with what you have.

I have moved some pilots from the previous post's consider list to a new 'not on CSM wire or CSM match' section.

In addition to Steve Ronuken I will also be endorsing Borat Gureen , and Joffy Alux-Gao ( ).  I will produce a 14 candidate list very soon, but wanted to call these 2 additional pilots out as I both respect their platforms (even if I do not 100% agree) and they have been kind enough to let me know I am on their recommended pilots list.

I expect my full list Tuesday or Wednesday downtime - later than it should be but I hear there is another downtime tomorrow when I would otherwise be on.

Wednesday 24 February 2016

CSM candidate investigation part 1

Like almost everyone out there, I know about me and my group, and far less about others.  I am further behind in this than I would like to be, and I am running as a candidate.

With the CSM voting, in order to make the best I can of my vote, I would like to have 13 other candidates I would like to endorse (because I obviously am going to recommend myself for first spot).

Initially I want a site to make life easier for me. has done a lot of the work.  It is missing some pilots and updates, and that is entirely OK. My research will also miss pilots as well.

If you want me to consider a candidate sooner than later, leave a comment, or as always, evemail DoToo Foo.

I have a blacklist approach to the candidates

  • Do not obviously target smaller organisations for not bending the knee.  Indiscriminate targeting is OK.  Deliberately taking territory for own use is also OK. Large block candidates will already be well represented.
  • Do not be a 'joke candidate'.  Reform agendas are ok.  Having a bit of fun is OK, but I want candidates to work for how they think Eve should be

Then I have a whitelist.
  • Be both passionate and intelligent about how you want Eve to look.  I do not need to agree with the view point ( I like warp core stabs but will support gankers and PVP candidates )

I am looking for something to show some effort. lists some CSM resources.  I want to see that a candidate is somewhere out there.

I will have made mistakes below, and surely have missed or mis-categorised someone.  I need to cross reference the CSM wire list to the candidate list.

This is a living document, and will change as I do my investigation. 


To be advised
If you use any third party apps, Evemon, Pyfa, Eve Central, Pirates little helper, Tripwire, siggy, then you want Steve on the CSM.

Worth a second look

I need to cut this list down soon.

Diana Olympos
Phoebe Freeport Republic.
Lone wolf / small group hunter ?
Maybe. Not on Eve Match.
Lowsec, endorsed by Eveoganda.
Asking for a chance to survive a gank.  Wants tutorials to include dscan skills.
Solo PVPer
Faction warfare
c5 pilot is good
PL ... not so much.  Hard Knocks has been accused of being a renter empire.  I need to investigate more.
Circle of two ... I need to do more research

Pass on these - Large bloc

Northern Army is a self described NCDot sister corp and a large coalition.

Pandemic Legion.
PL, but also therabois / small gang PVP.  CSM XI rep so some continuity.  Almost made it to the second look list says Northern Coalition.
EN24 editor, and I know the effort that goes into it (I was part of it for a while).  Still Pandemic Legion
While not an official large bloc candidate, his candidacy post encourages you to be a member of a large bloc
Mittani Editor
Pandemic Legion

Insufficient effort

Where is the link to more information?  I have no links to more information.

Just no

Trolls not required

Locked threads.
Has asked for his candidacy thread to be locked.
Has withdrawn his candidacy

Edit: crossed out a couple of players no longer appearing on csm wire or eve match.
CSM wire has no information.
Wormhole, merc contracts, NPSI, public fleets in WSpace.  Previous candidate re-running.

Monday 22 February 2016

Player owned customs offices and possible replacements

What are Customs Offices (commonly known as POCO's) good for?

Poco's are a method of claiming a planet.  If I have a customs office up, that planet is mine, and you may do PI on it at my pleasure.  Foo's pleasure is easy to come by, but when <that other mob> have it, it can be difficult.  You can export without a customs office, but only in small volumes and with generally much higher taxes.

Poco's are a source of taxation for corporations.  The Foo corps generally charge 4-5% tax depending on standing.  Other organsations may charge 15% tax.

Poco's put ships into space to remove.  When someone wants to grind out a customs office, 500 DPS is required to keep up with the shield regeneration, and need to do an additional 14M damage on top of that (link).  This is within the realm of a patient small corp (2 AFK laser Myrmidons can do it slowly), and fairly easy for a large corp.   Both the grinding of POCO and the ganking of the small fleet are content.

They are a PI and ISK sink to manufacture.  When we want to claim a system, and have ground out the old customs offices, it requires both concord LP (for the egg) and a fair amount of PI.  When the next 'would be' owner turns up, the process is repeated.

The hunter can use these as a place to gank the unwary PI farmer.  They are not so good to catch the paranoid PI farmer (link).  Mind you, it is very easy to stop being paranoid and become the hunted.

What are customs offices bad at?

Customs offices are full of old bad legacy code.  Apparently when we get citadels, we get nice new shiny toys, and the customs office interface will be old, tired and cranky.


There is an appetite for changing structures at CCP at the moment.  Some CCP representatives in the tweetfleet Structures and CSM rooms

Should one Citadel be able to access one planet, some or all planets in a system for PI?

Can customs offices be removed from the game, with Citadels replacing this functionality?

Should Citadels be able to interact with the customs offices via NPCs?

PI could additionally be improved in a citadel via rigs or service modules.


If the customs office functionality is removed from game, will it make it too simple, boring or otherwise prevent pilots from going to space?  This includes the PI ecosystem, farmers, manufacturers,  haulers, gankers and even the occasional real PVP fight .

In my (not so) humble opinion 

Keep the customs office in some form

I like the flag planting that comes from having a customs office.  The ability to say "This is mine", whether it be in highsec or in nullsec is relevant, to control the space around us.  Marmite offered (by threat of wardec) to relieve me of a highsec customs office.  I declined and set up in a 'one wardec - one tiny corp - one customs office' situation.  Marmite have the ability to take it away, but if they want that customs office, they will have to be try hards.

I had previously bought then lost a lowsec customs office empire.  I have fought for customs offices in other areas of space.

Opportunity for disruption.

At the moment PI can be interrupted.  As the hunted, PI collection makes for compelling gameplay, and is far more interesting than clicking the buttons to reset factories, or even the original layout.
As a moderately competent PI farmer, I want my skills and knowledge to mean something.

I would prefer the hunters speak form themselves, but can well imagine the WH solo hunter community outcry if the PI farmers become even safer.

If PI can be collected in the citadel directly from the planet or customs office, then there should be some method of blockading a planet.  Some form of interdiction or siphon unit , say one that takes time to deploy, has a reinforcement timer and requires 1 unit of strontium clathrates per day.  Say this unit can be avoided by flying directly to the planet, or give by using existing launchpad facility with a larger volume (the current volume is too small to be usable). 

I do not mind a griefer blockading a system providing they commit resources.  I do not mind a 2 bit industry corp defending themselves against a lone wolf, or hiring mercs to defend them.  I run a 2 bit industry corp.

I don't really mind what form disruption takes, but there should be the real chance of disruption.

How many planets should a Citadel service?

0? 1? Some? A system?  A constellation?  A Region?

I don't want to have to place 1 citadel per planet.  A customs office is well priced to be an achievable challenge for the new industry corporation (at about 100M).  A system of customs offices is a stretch goal for that same corporation but fairly easy for a large corp. 

A few of  medium citadels per system would be OK.  Maybe a large serving twice the area of a medium?  Or to stop unnecessary replication, maybe a medium citadel could server a system.  These are all options.

Add your two ISK worth as a comment.  One thing some readers of this blog can do is PI.

Monday 15 February 2016

Are you a member of the 1 in 12?

I am reviewing CSM candidates at the moment, coming up with a first pass of recommendations. Some of the candidates are either among the 1 in 12, or someone close to them is.

I am talking about color blindness.  1 in 12 males can not see colours properly, the most common being red/green colour blind.

In Eve, we use colours to distinguish items.  The most common being a group being set red, or that we shoot red crosses.

Normal Vision
Usable but overheating will be hard

Normal vision was hard enough
Red Green Colour blind scanning

My son grew into red/green colour blindness . He can recall seeing differences as a pre-teen where it is now just another brown.

In your corp, full of mostly male players (as most corps are), 1 in 12 is colour blind.  If they are not, it is because they are no longer playing.  They generally won't bring it to your attention, there will just be some tasks in eve they do not like doing.

That said, we can all do what we can with what we have.

Nvidia graphic drivers allow colour rotation, or at least the last few we have in our household can. Nvidia Control Panel -> Display -> Adjust desktop color settings.

For the Red/Green colour blind you can rotate the red into blue which is much more visible to you. Eve will look weird, but more useable.  I know my son uses this to play some games where distinguishing between green and red is mandatory.

Default Hue

Hue @ 225 degrees. Taken with camera as it is only the display that has changed colour and not the underlying image an app that my son uses to good effect - allowing him to both 'rotate' colour spectrums and show others how it looks

I am not a graphic designer or a user interface specialist.  I also well know that a lot of assistance technology uses the same hooks as botting software.

I won't often talk about such things in public.  Maybe I should more.  I have already blogged about lack of contrasting colors in scanning, and there has been some improvement on the marking of signatures.  The scanning screenshot above is from a previous post.  Was the change driven even in part by my blog?  I don't know, nor does it matter.

Ideas like this do not require non-disclosure agreements, and as such can be asked for regardless of the season. For those wanting to push this a bit harder, why wait?  is the features and ideas thread is a suitable place to drum up support.  Contact an existing CSM rep ( if you don't already know one)

Edit: Re-embedded colour blind images

Saturday 13 February 2016

CSM Summit coming up

It covers the second summit of CSM X.

I wish to cover a few things from it.  (OK,  I seem incapable of few).

Brain in a box : This has been a bigger project than many players will realise, and has nearly had it's desired goal : nobody noticing.  However, I have heard reports of many more pilots piling into systems without soul crushing lag.  It also has laid the framework for on grid links which some will love and those with off grid boosters will probably hate.

Capital Ships: For those that think that CCP doesn't listen to complaints, please see the backflip on using carrier skills for both Force Auxilleries and existing Triage Carriers.

Project Discovery (the new science project). I have not done any of this.  I was reading some comments from those doing it in the test servers, and some concerns that it was more a test of getting the mob guesses quickly rather than the correct results.  I am sure that this can be tweaked by review later, and adjusting the rewards for those getting correct results rather than common results.

Nullsec and Sov.  While entosis links are a maligned mechanic, I still endorse a bit of trolling here and there.  Troll mechanics is what keeps the largest groups from claiming unused empty space.  Please allow trolling  (or ambit claims) on at least unused systems.

In regard to ship balance, fits and ships will come and go.  I am well aware that pilots train into the flavour of the day,  small nerf will make pilots grumpy, but as it is where their skills are in these ships, they will continue to be flown after small nerfs.

Players seem to love events and new content (eg Frostline).  These are worth continuing.  Seasonal events with even dropping only vanity items seem to be a popular event.  (I say this second hand as I have not flown many)

Wormholes are near and dear to my heart.  Citadels are coming, good.  They will drop loot when destroyed, also good.  Currently POS only provide contents killboard information (and maybe loot drops?) based on what is in SMA's and not on the contents of corp hangers, assembly and research arrays. This was hard earned knowledge due to an exceptionally expensive failure on my behalf.  Will citadels drop only ships, or will they also drop contents of personal hangers or corporate offices? 

What I am concerned about is reading that Citadels may not provide contract ability at first.  The ability to move items between pilots not currently in the same corp is important.  Currently I use freight containers sitting in the POS forcefield.  As contracts are not easy (or they would have already been done), are citadels replacing one set of 'legacy problems' with another set of problems.  Or are they really 'coming soon'?

I have already said that I feel Citadels dropping loot to be a good thing.  However, with wormhole citadels having both a shorter 'grind down' window, and dropping at least some loot (instead of magical fairies taking both time and ISK to whisk treasured possessions to safety), I would like to see some other offsets for users of citadels in wormhole space.

For the new player experience, I would like to ensure the ability (on singularity at least) to be able to run the new starter missions.  Maybe I can and don't know it.

I love the new Eve launcher.  Players are still having problems copying old settings to the new settings.  Also, at one point I could log into one account and have all 4 appear.  Since the recent purge I can not do so any more.  I don't know how I set it up before so can't repeat it.

Crest.  Steve had good results with the CREST market browser.  I can't repeat it, but that might be my PC's setup. has some things of concern.  I also think that pilots should be encouraged to use bug reports where there are errors.

Finally, I note who is attending and who is not.  Combined with known grumbling from various quarters and a change in staff from CCP, it ... appears that CSM X has not been a happy place.  Those that think that CSM is the tool of any given player group should take note.

Friday 12 February 2016

Cap stable interview and review

I have just listened to the Cap Stable review of my interview with them.

The review was at  ,  starting at 31:58 for my review.

The original interview is at

I was fine for the interview.  I did some of my homework, including listening to previous interviews from last year. I am an OK public speaker, though not as good as I should be given my training (an accredited coach for an public speaking organisation - Rostrum Australia).

I did have fun in the interview.

After the interview, I was shattered.  Some comments saying I did well.  Other comments saying not as well as I could have. I was too afraid to listen to my interview.

Listening to the CSM Watch review of interviews, I feel a lot better.  Thanks.

A couple of points that came up in the review. 

I do not have a large bloc behind me.  I will need you the reader of this blog to help get my name out there.  I will turn up to the opening of an envelope.  I will talk to any group, large or small.  Industry or PVP.

If you like my blog or even the odd post, please share it.  Hell, recognition is good, so even if you don't still share it.

In terms of talking to developers, yes, I will be able to talk their language. I have two first life 9-5 titles :  Senior Business Systems Analyst, and Release Manager, with previous titles of Analyst / Programmer.  I know how to talk to developers.  (With my current roles, they don't always like what I have to say, but that is a different conversation).

Anyway, thanks to the guys at Cap Stable.  If anyone would like to ping me, my contact details are here

Thursday 11 February 2016

Inject all the skills

You can now inject a skill even if you do not have it's pre-requisite skills.

This is part of the changes with the latest patch and skill injectors.  That means, anyone in null with a jump clone can jump to highsec, (or daytrip as a wh pilot) plug in whatever skillbooks they may want, and head home to train as they want.

There should not be any need to pay over the odds for skillbooks in null, nor be unable to train that next desired skill in a wormhole.  Of course, this requires forethought.  As such ... next trip to null, I will restock skillbooks.

I have another thought and there may be a time I would be tempted to use skill injectors (but still not any extractors).  That is on those horrible skills where, in the middle of one remap, you need to swap to a different one.

An example is tactical logistics reconfiguration.  

You have dreams of being a repair pilot in a capital ship (previously a triage carrier, soon to be a force auxiliary pilot)

You have been training Long Range Targeting 5 and Signature Analysis 5, both are int/mem skills.

Next you need to train what is now called Logistics  Cruisers 5, which is a willpower/perception train.  Then .. you go back to Int mem to pick up Tactical Logistics Reconfiguration, which you really want at 5.  After just a few more int/mem skills (Capital emissions and remote capital armor/shield) you will most likely want to swap back to Per/Willpower for your new hull.

Now this swap back and forwards is painful to anyone trying to optimise attributes.  Plenty of capital pilots before me have done it, and more will continue to do so. 

Even a new capital pilot will suffer from diminishing returns, and I certainly know that mine also have subcap skills so will experience them even more. The temptation will be there if I go through this on another pilot.

Skill injectors have been railed against, but the prices and trading say that someone is buying them.

Saturday 6 February 2016

Skill packet costs

Skill packet costs are announced.

1 empty packet : 999 Aurum (1 plex == 3.5 empty packets)
5 empty packets : 4499 Aurum (1 plex == 3.89 empty packets)
10 empty packets : 7999 Aurum ( 1 plex == 4.38 skill packets)

(30 days gametime == 1 Plex == 30 days multi character training == 3500 Aurum )

A skill packet will hold 500,000 skillpoints consumed.

Looking at the 'best case', +5 learning implants, best remap, I calculate 2700 skillpoints per hour, with a plex being 'worth' at most 1,944,000 skillpoints, though this is slowly over the month and not 'upfront' like an injector.  This pilot could fill 3.89 packets per month.

On the other hand, with the worst possible attributes, no implants, I calculate 1530 skillpoints per hour, or 1,101,600 skillpoints.  This pilot can fill 2.20 packets per month.  Even more relevant, this type of pilot may be better buying skill injectors than multi pilot training.

Those looking to give their main a boost regardless of cost will consume skill injectors.

For those looking to give low skill alts a boost and are in no particular rush, it will become a decision between stopping their main training, purchasing a plex/multi pilot training certificate, and purchasing skill packets.   Trading, industry and cyno alts often fall into this bucket.

What we do not know is how many pilots are willing to pay Plex to give up part of themselves (in the form of now useless historical training).  There are plenty of pilots who have now useless 'industrial' skills on the PVP mains, but these pilots are broke.  There are pilots who have surplus isk on their trading accounts, but they will have to sink a the cost of a month game time plus skillpoints give some up to a month of game time in training.

As a side note, I am astounded that pilots are currently unable to sacrifice their PI skills.  I have no intention of selling any skillpoints on any pilots (alt, main, useful, or temporarily useless).

I think the following pilots will be interested in skillpoints.

  • Those that want a boost on their main, and are prepared to pay (probably first life cash) for diminished return.
  • New alts wanted now and not later.  Things that spring to mind
    • Cyno alts : 1 packet for Cyno 3, 4 packets for Cyno 5 
    • Defensive scanner alts (Astero, cloak, scanning mids) : 1 packet
    • Offensive scanner (as above, expanded probe launcher, covert cloak, coprocessor 2) : 2 packets
    • Gnosis booster (T1 boosts) (6 tech 1 links @ with 2 relevant specialist 4): 7 packets.
    • T1 fit cruiser for a single skill packet.  This includes a gankalyst.
The other thing with skill boosters, is they are based on a lot of waste.  Several redditors are not amused.  I think this is not unintentional.

There is no easy way to align aurum purchase needs with aurum packages.  Aurum can be bought for cash in packages of 900, 1,950, 4,035, 40,600 and 21,200 bundles, or 3,500 for a plex.  This means if you want to purchase a 5 packet bundle, you will need to buy 2 different aurum packages and will have left over Aurum.

The same applies to many skill bundles.  A cyno 5 package on a new alt costs 3.2 packages - you either need to be patient with 3 packages, or splurge on the 4th.  Eve skills are generally based around based maths, 500k is just short of the 512k you will want for a lot of skills. That said, I don't think you will actually care that much as a consumer because you will have other skills to consume any spare skillpoints.

In summary, skill packets will cost at least the equivalent of subscription costs, plus the seller's fee to offset the lost skillpoints.  Many (but not all) uses of these will better solved with multi pilot training certificates.  For pilots requiring large amounts of training the existing character bazaar is likely a cheaper option.

Thursday 4 February 2016

Dust 514 RIP, new unspecified PC game (re)announced.

For those that don't know, Dust 514 (a first person shooter somewhat linked to Eve) is end of life, to be closed on May 30th, 2016.

CCP have plans to build something better on the PC. ... build a new game from scratch using Unreal Engine 4 while harnessing all our learnings from DUST 514 ...

CCP are a company, and have to have a reasonable expectation of a return of any new expenditure, preferably with a profit on top of that.  Other games can can be subsidized in part by Eve itself, and I encourage a level of risk with new ventures, but I understand closing what I understand to be a loss making venture. 

The Eve player base is PC based.  Dust was Play Station 3, and that platform is very much end of life.

I have never played Dust, I do not own a console, and in general do not play first person shooters.

The Dust players who are about to have their internet pixels turned off have my sympathy, and it is a sobering reminder to us playing other games, that hosted platforms can indeed be turned off.

Dust players have the consolation prize of tiered recognition rewards. 

I have been involved in software development far too long, and know well enough that software delivery always takes far longer than the developers and their publishers think.

Once on a PC I will even have a closer look at the new game.  Fanfest will have more details in April.  I ... just would prefer to see a little more 'sugar coating', possibly in the form of a real replacement game, to soften the blow to our cousins in Eve, either that or possibly a longer period of life support to tide players over until the new software arrives.

Who knows, I maybe overly pessimistic, and there might be a new game released before the end of May.  Maybe, but probably we will be without an Eve FPS for a while.

Tuesday 2 February 2016

Single Transferable Vote : The voting method of CSM and how to take advantage of it.

This is a post for those interested one method that CCP uses to get player feedback.

The council that represents players to CCP (the makers of our fine and sometimes frustrating game) is called the Council of Stellar Management, or CSM.

14 players are elected by players to this council via a Single Transferable Vote:

Confusing words for many, by at its heart, this is a voting method to ensure that the population can get a group that we are happy with to represent you, or failing that, at least someone we can live with. If your preferred candidate fails, your vote is moved to your next preferred candidate. If your preferred candidate is chosen by more than enough, a portion of the vote is also transferred to your next candidate.

You will get to choose up to 14 candidates.

Under this method, each and every candidate that is elected must get 1/14'th of the remaining vote, or just over 7%.  Based on previous voting numbers, this equates to roughly 3000 votes.

If you are a candidate, with STV voting it is in your interest to form a ticket with other like minded candidates.  Put yourself at the top of your ticket, but encourage others to give preferences to other like minded candidates.  

And of course encourage other like minded candidates to do the same.  (Self interest acknowledged)

If you are a voter (and all candidates are eligible to be voters), then in a few months time, vote.  Also get all others you interact with to vote as well.  This includes alt accounts.  If you have 5 active accounts you are allowed (and even encouraged) to vote 5 times.

With many approximations, (and apologies to STV purists) when the voting is done the process looks something like this.

  1. Sum up everyone's top preference.  
  2. Any candidate with more than a 'quota' (let's say 3000 votes) is elected. 
    1. Remove the elected candidate from getting any more votes.
    2. Remove the consumed votes.
    3. Surplus votes are available for later preferences.
  3. If no one was elected at step 2, 
    1. Remove the candidate with the least amount of votes.
    2. These votes are available for later preferences
  4. If 14 candidates have not been elected yet, sum up all remaining votes and goto step 2.
STV has some differences from other voting methods.
  • If your 'group' has enough votes for over 2 candidates, your group will get 2 candidates and influence the election of a 3rd.
  • If there are 2 similar candidates each with nearly enough votes, one of these will (usually) be elected.
Some questions that often get asked of voting in general.
  • Q: I have 1 vote, a candidate needs 3000 votes, mine doesn't matter.  
    • A: Far fewer votes than this seperate the last seat. 80 votes for CSM 9. and approximately 280 votes for CSM 10.  Plenty of elections come down to just a handful
  • Q: What's the deal with the last candidate?  That guy only got a handful of votes yet got in?
    • A: The last elected candidate is often not anyone's first choice but a compromise.  This candidate still gets more 'rough' support than anyone else.  

Some other players will tell you that CCP will only listen to that other large group, and will then argue about what defines that other large group, and then tell you not to vote.  They will then complain that other large group gets all the influence.    Then they tell you CSM has no influence at all.  Or too much influence.  I get confused about that.

Work out who best represents you and vote for them.  Give preferences to other similar candidates. Encourage your associates, corp members, friends in Eve to vote.  If you have multiple alts, vote often.

You will get the candidates you deserve.

It's up to you, the voter, to elect the candidates you want.