These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The Two CSMs of EVE Online

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kelduum Revaan
The Ebon Hawk
#221 - 2011-10-16 23:27:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kelduum Revaan
ShipToaster wrote:
Kelduum Revaan wrote:
So, a care-bear corporation with 50B in kills and losses in the last month (interesting definition of carebear)


I dont think it is fair to use these stats to try to claim you are not a carebear corp as you have been in your wardec event for the last month. Were you not around 2000 members just before your month of fighting started and you lost at least 800 carebears for this event?
Maybe not directly, but it does somewhat call into question Poetics definition of 'carebear', especially as we have been PvPing a fair bit, and will continue to.

Also, while we did have just over 2,000 members before Incarna, the general rage and annoyance at CCP saw the number drop steadily as members move on and some newer players became inactive, pretty much confirming the CSMs stats in-line with the decline in PCU numbers. However this decline has been arrested, to the point where we're seeing it stabilise and slowly recover over the last few weeks.

Edit:
Handsome Hussein wrote:
The Uni already has a pretty stiff tax rate IIRC.
Actually, I dropped that to 0.1pct this morning, and it should stay that way for the next month at least.
Poetic Stanzitroll
Doomheim
#222 - 2011-10-17 02:39:21 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I haven't gone into any detail on how to fix it ... I'll leave that for others ... but I have pointed out the big big problem here (without mentioning the Uni), is that it is now impossible to engage highsec corps (other than through suicide ganking.) That removes them all from the sandbox ...


A box without sand is hardly a box at all, It's more like a 5-sided cube. And a sandbox without people is really just a 5-sided cube with sand. The solution is to fill the cube with people and surround it with sand!

-Check out my blog, it's the best!
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#223 - 2011-10-17 04:19:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:
So you're plugging some random numbers into a Google spreadsheet and using that as proof?
Yeah. Roll
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#224 - 2011-10-17 04:28:25 UTC
Poetic Stanzitroll wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I haven't gone into any detail on how to fix it ... I'll leave that for others ... but I have pointed out the big big problem here (without mentioning the Uni), is that it is now impossible to engage highsec corps (other than through suicide ganking.) That removes them all from the sandbox ...


A box without sand is hardly a box at all, It's more like a 5-sided cube. And a sandbox without people is really just a 5-sided cube with sand. The solution is to fill the cube with people and surround it with sand!


Minecraft talk O.o

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes
Jokerface666
Intergalactic Expeditionary Corp
#225 - 2011-10-17 09:50:54 UTC
Karim alRashid wrote:
Jokerface666 wrote:
So basically you are flaming that it costs now a lot of money to be able to shoot noobs.... instead of going out and engaging somebody of your size....


Actually, the discussed abuse of game mechanics does not differentiate between new and old players, on either side of the war declaration.

Also, EVE University are a pretty big size corp, 1300+ members, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the third or fourth largest in EVE. Plus, it has been stated a few times that there are about 300 or so members older than an year in EVE University.

All this begs the question: Do you even know what you are talking about or just came here to express
you e-hatred against somebody?


Ok i'll esplain it to you,

EVe UNI offers not only education for new pilots, it offers education for older pilots who want to try something else.
As an example: if you have only done PVP and some mining for the last 4 years in EVE, and you want to go for industry now for some reason,you either join EVE-UNI or read trough 100 of wiki pages.
Igualmentedos
Perkone
Caldari State
#226 - 2011-10-17 14:40:11 UTC
Azelor Delaria wrote:
Alrighty, still no word from the GM, but I just want to say the following.

A few months ago, CCP decided to remove the ability to make ships unprobable. This was done to “facilitate” more PvP, while also using the excuse that “no one should ever be truly safe” in EVE. The sandbox should not be so closed as to prevent combat between players. Carebears cried about this, of course, and I’ll admit I was one of them before I realized I didn’t truly care. I would just play a bit smarter and there we would go.

However, in the span of roughly six months, CCP has done a complete reversal of the “HTFU” stance. They have made it so corporations can be immune (or, rather, close to it) to war decs. They are creating a situation where you can legally close off your space. The sandbox for these people becomes only the people in the corporation and alliance, with everyone else becoming a nuisance at best.

Why is this? There is no way to say EVE University now becomes ”dec-proof”, something that Kelduum has wanted, if his posts are to be believed and that it wasn't something they wanted. Whether Poetic is right in Kelduum negotiating with CCP to implement such a thing is trivial. What matters is that the sandbox has been destroyed. Whether you agree with high sec PvP being legitimate or not, you have to understand it’s only a matter of time before other things come down the line that affect low-security space and null-security space. What’s next? Reintroduction of “unprobable” ships? Increasing the DPS of the sentry guns in low sec so that they insta-pop even a battleship?

Tinfoil hattery or not, this has real and drastic consequences to all aspects of EVE Online. This now becomes a game of who has the most money. Ships were never to be balanced around price, so why should anything else?



Nobody in the Eve university is safe unless they stay in a station 24/7 and NEVER undock. I'm sorry, but what you're saying is all wrong because members are still vulnerable.
Wacktopia
Fleet-Up.com
Keep It Simple Software Group
#227 - 2011-10-17 14:43:55 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
There are two CSMs in this game.

The one that the players voted for. And EVE University.

The recent wardec policy changes are proof of EVE University, via Kelduum Revaan, being the other de facto CSM. CCP caters to their needs, without any oversight by the players. They've become a carebear haven. They are now effectively impossible to wardec. CCP gave them, in essence, a PvP flag. They can turn it on or off at their whim. Their decshield is 19 corporations strong, and they've been allowed to use an exploit to avoid the CONCORD costs of that decshield.

The only single danger left for them is the suicide gank. Any other method of PvP against them is fruitless.


Wanna fight them? Pretty sure I saw EVE Uni roaming low sec in frig blobs last time I was there.

Wanna war-dec them? Make a decent alliance and pay the bil/week fee.

What is exactly the problem here?

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com
Pherras Williams
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#228 - 2011-10-17 15:09:49 UTC
Wacktopia wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
There are two CSMs in this game.

The one that the players voted for. And EVE University.

The recent wardec policy changes are proof of EVE University, via Kelduum Revaan, being the other de facto CSM. CCP caters to their needs, without any oversight by the players. They've become a carebear haven. They are now effectively impossible to wardec. CCP gave them, in essence, a PvP flag. They can turn it on or off at their whim. Their decshield is 19 corporations strong, and they've been allowed to use an exploit to avoid the CONCORD costs of that decshield.

The only single danger left for them is the suicide gank. Any other method of PvP against them is fruitless.


Wanna fight them? Pretty sure I saw EVE Uni roaming low sec in frig blobs last time I was there.

Wanna war-dec them? Make a decent alliance and pay the bil/week fee.

What is exactly the problem here?




The problem is they suck at flying spaceships so they go for the "weakest " target they can find thinking that poppin noobs is pro
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#229 - 2011-10-17 16:22:49 UTC
Pherras Williams wrote:
Wacktopia wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
There are two CSMs in this game.

The one that the players voted for. And EVE University.

The recent wardec policy changes are proof of EVE University, via Kelduum Revaan, being the other de facto CSM. CCP caters to their needs, without any oversight by the players. They've become a carebear haven. They are now effectively impossible to wardec. CCP gave them, in essence, a PvP flag. They can turn it on or off at their whim. Their decshield is 19 corporations strong, and they've been allowed to use an exploit to avoid the CONCORD costs of that decshield.

The only single danger left for them is the suicide gank. Any other method of PvP against them is fruitless.


Wanna fight them? Pretty sure I saw EVE Uni roaming low sec in frig blobs last time I was there.

Wanna war-dec them? Make a decent alliance and pay the bil/week fee.

What is exactly the problem here?




The problem is they suck at flying spaceships so they go for the "weakest " target they can find thinking that poppin noobs is pro


sounds like everyone else in EVE - again, whats the problem?

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes
ShipToaster
#230 - 2011-10-19 04:21:45 UTC
Azelor Delaria wrote:
Today, I found a way around the decshield for EVE University. I checked with a GM to make sure it wouldn't be considered an exploit, and was informed that it was not. However, there is a portion that falls under the "grey area" (it would make it impossible for the decced corporation/alliance to toggle mutual on any wars they currently have). It also would put the dec fee at a flat rate, instead of it increasing exponentially.

The GM escalated me to make sure that they were correct, so once I have a clear answer, I will post how to get around the EVE University dec shield.

Sometimes, coming up with a solution while bitching about the problem works wonder. :D


Anything happening on this yet?

.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#231 - 2011-10-19 04:33:01 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
......


And this is a problem because ?????
OH it isn't fair right.
Well Yeh neither is EVE, funny how things look different when the shoe is on the other foot.

People complaining about getting war decc'd for no reason.
And now the war decc'rs can complain about not be able to war dec somebody.

Hmmm I call this BALANCE.


LolLolLolLolLolLol



EVERYBODY KNOWS
Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#232 - 2011-10-19 04:55:53 UTC
Forgive my ignorance but how is the new policy ONLY helping Eve U?

Can't anyone do this? or did I miss something?
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!
Skunk Gracklaw
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#233 - 2011-10-19 07:24:04 UTC
Apollo Gabriel wrote:
Forgive my ignorance but how is the new policy ONLY helping Eve U?

Can't anyone do this? or did I miss something?

You are correct. The only reason it's getting any attention is because the OP has a grudge against e-uni.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#234 - 2011-10-19 15:21:19 UTC
Andrea Griffin wrote:
Not that one person matters much, but I would occasionally make donations to Eve Uni and send new pilots looking for a corporation there as well. I will no longer do so and will, in fact, discourage new players from joining. This is absolutely inappropriate behavior and against the spirit of Eve.


And ******* with people until it forces them to stop playing a video game is against the spirit of profit, which EvE was designed for.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
ShipToaster
#235 - 2011-10-19 16:11:46 UTC
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:
Apollo Gabriel wrote:
Forgive my ignorance but how is the new policy ONLY helping Eve U?

Can't anyone do this? or did I miss something?

You are correct. The only reason it's getting any attention is because the OP has a grudge against e-uni.


*sigh*

The OP did over sensationalise this and it got off topic quickly but what happened here is important.

What is being said here is a little more complex than it appears on a surface read. The wardec issue itself is of relatively minor importance as is eve universities involvement. This thread does make the claim that there are two CSM's but does not really go into enough detail of the reasoning for this. I dont speak for PS and his reasoning might be very different from mine but I will try to explain it as I see it.

The CSM are the elected representatives and are empowered to discuss issues with CCP. They have access, responsibilities, duties and procedures and this defines what the CSM is. This is the legitimate method that was set up after previous alleged corruption (added alleged and did not say who was involved or when to be careful here but many will know what this is about, find out if you dont know) and is accepted by all eve players to some degree as it is accessible to all eve players.

By directly discussing game changes with player(s) not in the CSM then CCP can be said to have created another CSM like group. CCP have legitimised eve university through their ceo and given them special access similar to that which the CSM has without extending the same opportunity to all other eve players.

For me the problems this raises are trust, openness and fairness.

Trust. I want CCP to be as impartial as they can be. Some decisions on game mechanics will go your way, some wont, but you want to believe that you have been fairly treated. I am assuming that the wardec reversions are temporary and that new mechanics or simply fixed mechanics are coming soon (tm) but if wardec changes favour eve university then I will always think that this decision was based on discussions that most of EVE was unable to participate in. This for me is the issue in a nutshell.

Openness. The CSM are to a large degree open about their dealings with CCP, as are CCP themselves, but I have no minutes describing what was discussed between eve university and CCP. The EN24 article may be referring to this when it talks about secrecy and secret meetings.

Fairness. I have no idea what impact discussions between eve university and CCP will have on EVE. I dont like this. I dont like the fact that all alliances were not asked by CCP what CCP can do to help us.

.
Igualmentedos
Perkone
Caldari State
#236 - 2011-10-19 16:32:53 UTC
ShipToaster wrote:
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:
Apollo Gabriel wrote:
Forgive my ignorance but how is the new policy ONLY helping Eve U?

Can't anyone do this? or did I miss something?

You are correct. The only reason it's getting any attention is because the OP has a grudge against e-uni.


*sigh*

The OP did over sensationalise this and it got off topic quickly but what happened here is important.

What is being said here is a little more complex than it appears on a surface read. The wardec issue itself is of relatively minor importance as is eve universities involvement. This thread does make the claim that there are two CSM's but does not really go into enough detail of the reasoning for this. I dont speak for PS and his reasoning might be very different from mine but I will try to explain it as I see it.

The CSM are the elected representatives and are empowered to discuss issues with CCP. They have access, responsibilities, duties and procedures and this defines what the CSM is. This is the legitimate method that was set up after previous alleged corruption (added alleged and did not say who was involved or when to be careful here but many will know what this is about, find out if you dont know) and is accepted by all eve players to some degree as it is accessible to all eve players.

By directly discussing game changes with player(s) not in the CSM then CCP can be said to have created another CSM like group. CCP have legitimised eve university through their ceo and given them special access similar to that which the CSM has without extending the same opportunity to all other eve players.

For me the problems this raises are trust, openness and fairness.

Trust. I want CCP to be as impartial as they can be. Some decisions on game mechanics will go your way, some wont, but you want to believe that you have been fairly treated. I am assuming that the wardec reversions are temporary and that new mechanics or simply fixed mechanics are coming soon (tm) but if wardec changes favour eve university then I will always think that this decision was based on discussions that most of EVE was unable to participate in. This for me is the issue in a nutshell.

Openness. The CSM are to a large degree open about their dealings with CCP, as are CCP themselves, but I have no minutes describing what was discussed between eve university and CCP. The EN24 article may be referring to this when it talks about secrecy and secret meetings.

Fairness. I have no idea what impact discussions between eve university and CCP will have on EVE. I dont like this. I dont like the fact that all alliances were not asked by CCP what CCP can do to help us.


Do you have proof that this is going on? If so, I would love to see it.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#237 - 2011-10-19 19:51:45 UTC
Igualmentedos wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:
Apollo Gabriel wrote:
Forgive my ignorance but how is the new policy ONLY helping Eve U?

Can't anyone do this? or did I miss something?

You are correct. The only reason it's getting any attention is because the OP has a grudge against e-uni.


*sigh*

The OP did over sensationalise this and it got off topic quickly but what happened here is important.

What is being said here is a little more complex than it appears on a surface read. The wardec issue itself is of relatively minor importance as is eve universities involvement. This thread does make the claim that there are two CSM's but does not really go into enough detail of the reasoning for this. I dont speak for PS and his reasoning might be very different from mine but I will try to explain it as I see it.

The CSM are the elected representatives and are empowered to discuss issues with CCP. They have access, responsibilities, duties and procedures and this defines what the CSM is. This is the legitimate method that was set up after previous alleged corruption (added alleged and did not say who was involved or when to be careful here but many will know what this is about, find out if you dont know) and is accepted by all eve players to some degree as it is accessible to all eve players.

By directly discussing game changes with player(s) not in the CSM then CCP can be said to have created another CSM like group. CCP have legitimised eve university through their ceo and given them special access similar to that which the CSM has without extending the same opportunity to all other eve players.

For me the problems this raises are trust, openness and fairness.

Trust. I want CCP to be as impartial as they can be. Some decisions on game mechanics will go your way, some wont, but you want to believe that you have been fairly treated. I am assuming that the wardec reversions are temporary and that new mechanics or simply fixed mechanics are coming soon (tm) but if wardec changes favour eve university then I will always think that this decision was based on discussions that most of EVE was unable to participate in. This for me is the issue in a nutshell.

Openness. The CSM are to a large degree open about their dealings with CCP, as are CCP themselves, but I have no minutes describing what was discussed between eve university and CCP. The EN24 article may be referring to this when it talks about secrecy and secret meetings.

Fairness. I have no idea what impact discussions between eve university and CCP will have on EVE. I dont like this. I dont like the fact that all alliances were not asked by CCP what CCP can do to help us.


Do you have proof that this is going on? If so, I would love to see it.

I'm tired of posting the damned links to this question over and over ... someone else can do it ... but Kelduum has admitted several times in forum posts that he discusses changes with CCP devs and has sent them suggestions on fixes that would be helpful to the University.
Skunk Gracklaw
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#238 - 2011-10-19 19:54:33 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I'm tired of posting the damned links to this question over and over ... someone else can do it ... but Kelduum has admitted several times in forum posts that he discusses changes with CCP devs and has sent them suggestions on fixes that would be helpful to the University.

You realize there is nothing wrong with that, right?
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#239 - 2011-10-19 19:59:31 UTC
Skunk Gracklaw wrote:
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
I'm tired of posting the damned links to this question over and over ... someone else can do it ... but Kelduum has admitted several times in forum posts that he discusses changes with CCP devs and has sent them suggestions on fixes that would be helpful to the University.
You realize there is nothing wrong with that, right?
As the name of this thread suggests, and as ShipToaster eloquently expanded upon ... its a second, one-man CSM (Kelduum), who has no accountability to anyone but himself, and no vision for the game beyond that of his carebear corporation.
Handsome Hussein
#240 - 2011-10-19 20:04:28 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
As the name of this thread suggests, and as ShipToaster eloquently expanded upon ... its a second, one-man CSM (Kelduum), who has no accountability to anyone but himself, and no vision for the game beyond that of his carebear corporation.

As usual, blowing **** way out of proportion. If Kelduum talked to CCP about something and CCP decided it was a Good Idea to implement, how is that a problem? It's CCP's game and CCP has a right to implement or act upon any suggestion they damn well see fit. They will have to deal with the consequences, but it is still their sole decision.

Leaves only the fresh scent of pine.