EVE Information Portal

YES YES YES, Finaly, i will read them!!!

---

Hey, can someone take it jo John Lander / CCP Unifex??

It is 1000 times better a Sand-castle POS then a Modular POS.... People want to build it and shape it... not to put modules together into specific slots......It is a tool for the enablers and a goal for the instigators... not just the same as a t3 that is only fresh for a whille... it will be boring soon... we need starbases to manage, and to create stuff and lore in them....

Also this doesn't affect only the people that manage them (that is a big number) but also affects everyone that uses them and rellay on them to do activities, that are almost all nul-sec/ WH space players ... and I mean by this the mot part of the active EVE players....

People really need a POS to call it home, to remove this dependence from hi-sec and from the alliances and the blob Outposts and stations to have a chance in the game...

You are pointing the problems but moving the solutions to the other way...

Reading the minutes, I got the Idea that the Pos rework was sent to the Not So Soon... This really made me sad. I was expecting a big industrial upgrade to the game, something that was going to make the game interesting again....

I liked the Idea of The expansions giving the content to all players... And managing a starbase would be an endgame goal for many players... I just hope that it happens slowly instead getting 100% halved....

---

Second part:

"Greyscale responded that this idea of static infrastructure created a ‘movement’ conflict"

Again, the solution goes to the POS... Why not move the I-Hub to a Alliance POS? and give it all the abilities of a POS? including the proposed jump drive/ market and all... it would solve this problems...

Remember... POS = Plater Owned Structure. It should be configurable... it could be a stargate, could be an I-hub, could be a custom Office, could be a dockable thing... but why can't we have this freedom!? is EVE stucked in the POS = stupid buble thing!? Is this all the freedom that we will have in this game?

---

To me it looks like CCP destroyed most of the work of the last meeting... = (

The actual POS system is a PAIN, and is hard to make content using them... people get tired of bashing them.. living in them, trying to manage stuff in them and using them.... I hope CCP reconsider this decision...

---

TO VOTE FOR THE POS GO HERE http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/i-am-small-portion-of-community.html

As expected - just useless null-sec PvP metagames.

Or did I just missed topics about WiS, hi-sec boosts, better missions?

Wow. What a disappointment.

113 pages and so little to say. No firm plans for anything. No real goals, just a very general direction? Do we need a CSM for that? No commitments to anything in particular. No plans in place for summer or winter yet....

I feel like you owe me money for making me read that, CSM.

(*insert colorful language*)

Already set for upcoming market speculation. Also looks like intense debate, pretty sure the livers had a hard time every evening.

If you have some time to kill, I have some suggestions on more productive things you could do than read the minutes (having read them myself):

• Google cat pictures on the interwebs
• Go for a personal yo-yo record
• Mine veldspar
• try to fill up a sheet of notebook paper w/ ink from a ball point pen
• Count the number of cars that go by on your street tonight
• sit and stair at the wall
• spin your ship
• spin around in a chair

You'll feel better being more productive tonight.

Interesting read.

There was a definite step away from rhetoric suggesting exact features and changes. My best guess would be that this is an "expectation management" exercise. Not necessarily a bad thing either.

Could someone from the CSM confirm if this was intentional and discussed?

Thanks to all for the effort made getting these out. Much appreciated.

Do you guys even grasp what you are talking about?



On a more constructive note: I have dealt with POS in the past. I don't do much POS work anymore now. Did it ever cross your mind that the small group of people doing POS stuff these days might grow vastly, if POS are actually not a reason to hurt yourself anymore?

(This is obviously directed at CCP, not the CSM)

My favorite part was how the majority of the CSM was hounding on how wars were unfair because it means that people who want to play nice can be hurt by people who don't. I have to say that my faith in Alek as a candidate was restored beyond measure. As much as I've disagreed with him in the past, he's the only person who was in that room who has a decent understanding of the actual happenings in many of the war decs/merc community. Hans and Seleene also made good points in this section of the notes, particularly regarding the idea that non-consensual PVP in high sec should not be limited to suicide ganking.

It also seems that there is this assumption that most decs are giant groups destroying little ones. For the vast majority of people I know, it is the exact opposite. Small, organized groups go to war with several hundred people simultaneously, as it's the only way to get sufficient targets to have a good time.

War decs should remain a tool that people can use to destroy others' high sec holdings, regardless if the defender wants the aggressor too. There are already a plethora of options for the defenders against aggressors. Everything from, don't undock to opening up the dec for allies. For absolutely trivial amounts of ISK a very large number of groups will join the war as a defender and go after the aggressors. Granted, not all of them will be good or useful, but many of them will be. The ally timer, however, should not be reduced. I realize this hurts people trying to defend POSes, but giving less than 24 hours notice to the aggressors that they're about to deal with a lot more risk is not exactly fair. I fundamentally believe that all war timers should be uniform. If it's twelve hours for an ally to join, then it should be twelve hours for the warm up timer, and the cool down timer. If the aggressor is going to have less warning regarding more risk, then so should the defender.

Honestly, the biggest problem regarding decs is the whole mutual situation. In order to fix dec shield, CCP introduced the option for aggressors to retract a war made mutual. This mechanic entirely removes the primary purpose of declaring a war mutual, which is to introduce real risk to the aggressor that they will be stuck fighting the defenders, even if they don't want to. The proper way to fix this is to change mutual wars such that the defender pays the dec fee each week to keep the war mutual. If they stop paying, the war finishes at the end of the current 7-day cycle. If both sides want a truly mutual war (such as RvB), the aggressor would be given an option to confirm mutual once the defender declares the war mutual. This confirmed mutual would be free for both parties.

In general, I was slightly disappointed, but was absolutely appalled by the majority of the CSM (and CCP Solomon) in the dec discussion.

I'm going to admit I was wrong. When the first set of full fat minutes came out I hated them, however, they are actually growing on me now: good job.

Looking forward to the BO tweak, thank goodness.

The titan hull idea is frankly genius.

Lots of really good stuff to look forward to, thanks!

I read the minutes and I can't say that I feel any more knowledgeable about the future of EVE than I did before

The same repetitive discussions as every year and no open analysis of why the previous summit was such a waste of time (0.0 "farms & fields" revamp, modular POS system, treaties, ...) and how to prevent the same thing from happening again (or at least how to adjust the way in which these "valuable" brainstorming sessions that never get acted upon are communicated to the players).

No progress regarding the CSM's stakeholder status, voting reform is back on the table but no progress there either.

Most sessions seem to end without any sort of conclusion or commitment but with a "we will discuss this further in private" which is not terribly useful to the rest of the EVE playerbase (no published minutes from conversations on the CSM forums or via Skype chat).

I can see the intention behind the 3/5/10 year plan idea but I can't see even a three year plan going over well - publishing it would only emphasize for how long many major issues are not going to be fixed. Do we really need :36months: ?

Tradeable vet rewards with benefits such as a longer skillqueue, neural remaps, ... sound like a huge can of worms but the discussion seemed to be in a too early stage to warrant serious concern (but still... where do CCP employees live that they even consider handing out 3m unassigned SP as part of a Power of 2 promotion has to be that "fearless" viking mindset...).