These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

So, CSM 8 Members....

First post
Author
Sith1s Spectre
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#1 - 2014-04-05 12:44:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Sith1s Spectre
What's with this in the CSM minutes and both Chitsa and James supporting changes to Pulsars and Wolf Rayets?

The amount of dumb ideas suggested for WH space in the minutes here is just beyond belief and neither of you deserve our votes.

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/csm/CSM8WinterMinutes2014.pdf

Resident forum troll and fashion consultant

Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-04-05 12:45:38 UTC
Chitsa, WTF? pull your damn head in.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Winthorp
#3 - 2014-04-05 12:48:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Winthorp
Why wouldn't James or Chitsa support this nerf, they live in a no weather C5 and continually have refused a fight when it came into our home Pulsar even know our fleets have happily ended up in their home system ready to fight an even number of times...

EDIT: A lot more things scared me about the minutes but i will make a more detailed post on those later.
Sith1s Spectre
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#4 - 2014-04-05 12:53:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Sith1s Spectre
I don't understand how the 2 of those particular systems impact on capital reps anyway.

If any systems need addressing more than anything else it's the fact Red Giants can give some stupid buggy bonuses up from a c2 to a c6 and the stupid slowcat cataclysmic variable carriers

Resident forum troll and fashion consultant

corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2014-04-05 13:19:13 UTC
I really don't see any issue with pulsars or wolf rayet (black holes yes). At the end of the day they need a different type of fleet, which people should be able to do. Come one we are meant to be the kings of adaptability. I have no idea what they mean by the affecting cap reps (will ask James and Chista about that).
Tyrant Scorn
#6 - 2014-04-05 13:37:34 UTC
Now is the time to ask those questions to James and decide for yourself if you're going to support him for a second term. I haven't read the minutes yet so I have no idea what the fuzz is about yet.
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#7 - 2014-04-05 14:40:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Kynric
I shouldn't care about c4 holes as I don't spend much time on the c4 highway, but it bugs me a bit that most of the current reps and candidates who also don't live in them want to change them in a fundamental way which is likely in opposition to why the current people who live there live there. Currently the tend to be quiet isolated places and giving them dual statics will make them noisy busy places. That situation indicates how some of the candidates think as they are clearly looking out for what makes their game better rather than representing the interests of those who live there. A more reasonable way to accomplish a less invasive change would be to add some periodics rather than completely changing the fundamental nature of living in those systems. I would like to see candidates that think like that as representatives of a larger group rather than merely of their own corner of space.

Also hands off my gorgeous blue sky. Its a handicap for pve due to large sigs making it hell on the webbers which we happilly bear because it throws those who are stuck on using one fleet comp for all situations off balance. One would think variety would be preferred rather than the current stale predominant doctrine.

Why fozzie would lament it being difficult to buff capital reps really hurts my head. Yet the minutes do not indicate that anyone challenged that concept. Stronger capital reps won't make my game any more fun.
Tyrant Scorn
#8 - 2014-04-05 15:00:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyrant Scorn
Kynric wrote:
I shouldn't care about c4 holes as I don't spend much time on the c4 highway, but it bugs me a bit that most of the current reps and candidates who also don't live in them want to change them in a fundamental way which is likely in opposition to why the current people who live there live there. Currently the tend to be quiet isolated places and giving them dual statics will make them noisy busy places. That situation indicates how some of the candidates think as they are clearly looking out for what makes their game better rather than representing the interests of those who live there. A more reasonable way to accomplish a less invasive change would be to add some periodics rather than completely changing the fundamental nature of living in those systems. I would like to see candidates that think like that as representatives of a larger group rather than merely of their own corner of space.

Also hands off my gorgeous blue sky. Its a handicap for pve due to large sigs making it hell on the webbers which we happilly bear because it throws those who are stuck on using one fleet comp for all situations off balance. One would think variety would be preferred rather than the current stale predominant doctrine.

Why fozzie would lament it being difficult to buff capital reps really hurts my head. Yet the minutes do not indicate that anyone challenged that concept. Stronger capital reps won't make my game any more fun.


To be fair, there have been plenty of townhall meetings and forum posts asking for opinions and from what I have been hearing is that the C4's could use double statics. If there is such an opposition against it, I have yet to hear it in masses. I have heard more people speak in favor then against, actually, you are the first...
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#9 - 2014-04-05 15:11:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Ab'del Abu
Sith1s Spectre wrote:
I don't understand how the 2 of those particular systems impact on capital reps anyway.


Neither effect impacts capital reps exclusively, however, survivability for specific setups is significantly higher due to resist bonus/shield buffer/cap bonus ...

Having said that, I don't think there is anything wrong with wolf-rayets and pulsars.

So CCP actually wants to buff capital reps, yes? I hope they're not really serious about this ... shield dreads are already ridiculously over-powered.
Proclus Diadochu
Mar Sarrim
Red Coat Conspiracy
#10 - 2014-04-05 15:19:51 UTC
Based on the reading of the Summit minutes, the following was brought up during the Wormhole discussion:

Quote:
Fozzie says that CCP could consider changing [Blackholes], but they would also want to consider changing other systems, such as Pulsars and Wolf Rayets (mostly due to the inability to buff capital reps because of those systems).

My understanding of this statement would be that due to the “Shield HP” bonus of Pulsars and the “Armor Resist” bonus of Wolf Rayets, that any subsequent buff to capital reps implemented by Team Five 0 would break the gameplay in those systems. However, it isn’t mentioned that the “Overload” bonus of Red Giants and the “Remote Repair/Transfer Amount” bonuses of Cataclysmic Variables would also be impacted by any buff to capital reps.

My opinion is that these wormhole effects for all four of those wormhole types should be unchanged. I spent the better part of a year as a Pulsar resident and my Daktak brethren spent much of their time in their adored Wolf Rayet. The amount of fun we had in those systems was uncalculable, and I have spoken with many people who share their enjoyment of these system types.

I’m also of the opinion that capital rep buffing isn’t a broken mechanic, at least based on my knowledge (however, Team Five 0 may have a different vision that involves buffing capital reps) and as such shouldn’t justify negatively impacting wormhole space and our effects. Black holes should be changed, although I’m not avidly supporting any “industrial” bonuses, as I don’t see the increased resident/activity potential there.

As an aside, Kynric mentions that “it bugs [him] a bit that most of the current reps and candidates who also don't live in them want to change them in a fundamental way which is likely in opposition to why the current people who live there live there.” I did propose my view about the C4 Super highway, and I wrote an article that spurred quite a lot of feedback, debate, and discussion (including many normally quiet residents). That led to me writing a follow-up article where I took the feedback and expanded the discussion to further the various alternatives being proposed. I’m not suggesting that your comment was directly pointed at me or whomever, but I thought I’d provide feedback to your perspective.

Minister of High Society | Twitter: @autoritare

E-mail: [email protected]

My Blog: http://diogenes-club.blogspot.com/

The Diogenes Club | Join W-Space | Down The Pipe

Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#11 - 2014-04-05 15:50:35 UTC
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

To be fair, there have been plenty of townhall meetings and forum posts asking for opinions and from what I have been hearing is that the C4's could use double statics. If there is such an opposition against it, I have yet to hear it in masses. I have heard more people speak in favor then against, actually, you are the first...

Long ago LSKYL lived in a c4/C2 (and before that a c3 and before that a c2/c2.) We were small, focused on our own game and probably the last thing we would have done is post anything on forums or attend a townhall. I suspect that is very common in that space. I would not interpret a lack of political activity to mean they don't care about their homes.
AssassinationsdoneWrong
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#12 - 2014-04-05 15:50:55 UTC
These minutes confirm what anyone with half a brain already knew. The current WH CSM's HAVE TO GO!! Thank God it's only one to get rid of.

Every new iteration discussed have been around making it easier and fluffier for C5/C6 folks (to the point where these minutes are even specific about it being mostly related to cap reps and I would bet my left nut that over 90% of caps in W-space are in C5/C6 space).

So summarizing whats going to be cool about being in a C5/C6 soon. You'll be able to armchair roll knowing any targets you find can't see you until its too late. Haven't got the fleet comp to combat a pulsar fleet? No problem we nerfed the effects for you guys! Black Hole? thats ok because everybody moved their hulks into them now because they really are as stupid as you think they are.

But hey let's not forget that James looks at his Siphons everyday and then gets the kid at the end of The Simpsons to say "I made this!"

Looking at it top down, the only real representation is going to come in the future from people in lower W-space or outside of W-space because it is obvious none of our recent CSMs can make a decision without running it through the C5/C6 "What's in it for SSC and bros?" mill first.

I pray the current candidates can make a strong and compelling condemnation of the current CSM and sell the community on being able to think of us all as a whole but I would not be surprised to find that the WH community start to believe that WH's are best represented by proven CSM "listeners" outside of W-space than those in them.

Ball's in your court guys.

The Nexus 7's

What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#13 - 2014-04-05 16:12:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
A few of the system effects in C5/C6 space could do with a nerf as they allow people to create overpowered setups.

Masterplan proposed adding some more systems without any moons. This was well received as
well. Chitsa mentioned that such idea was already discussed a while back and it was called C7
space.


I'm glad CCP are considering adding new space insted of listening to some of the idiots on this sub forum who are afraid of change Big smile
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
#14 - 2014-04-05 16:24:05 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
All systems need to be nerfed so I never have to leave my armor t3


Fixed to what you are actually saying

No trolling please

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#15 - 2014-04-05 16:31:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
yup got it in one bane! I want wolf-rayets nerfed so my armour ships are better Roll

... But don't worry, this change wont happen anytime soon, (if at all) so you guys can keep using your crappy ishtar fleet to exploit your home advantage Smile
SKINE DMZ
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2014-04-05 16:41:09 UTC
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Based on the reading of the Summit minutes, the following was brought up during the Wormhole discussion:

Quote:
Fozzie says that CCP could consider changing [Blackholes], but they would also want to consider changing other systems, such as Pulsars and Wolf Rayets (mostly due to the inability to buff capital reps because of those systems).

My understanding of this statement would be that due to the “Shield HP” bonus of Pulsars and the “Armor Resist” bonus of Wolf Rayets, that any subsequent buff to capital reps implemented by Team Five 0 would break the gameplay in those systems. However, it isn’t mentioned that the “Overload” bonus of Red Giants and the “Remote Repair/Transfer Amount” bonuses of Cataclysmic Variables would also be impacted by any buff to capital reps.

My opinion is that these wormhole effects for all four of those wormhole types should be unchanged. I spent the better part of a year as a Pulsar resident and my Daktak brethren spent much of their time in their adored Wolf Rayet. The amount of fun we had in those systems was uncalculable, and I have spoken with many people who share their enjoyment of these system types.

I’m also of the opinion that capital rep buffing isn’t a broken mechanic, at least based on my knowledge (however, Team Five 0 may have a different vision that involves buffing capital reps) and as such shouldn’t justify negatively impacting wormhole space and our effects. Black holes should be changed, although I’m not avidly supporting any “industrial” bonuses, as I don’t see the increased resident/activity potential there.

As an aside, Kynric mentions that “it bugs [him] a bit that most of the current reps and candidates who also don't live in them want to change them in a fundamental way which is likely in opposition to why the current people who live there live there.” I did propose my view about the C4 Super highway, and I wrote an article that spurred quite a lot of feedback, debate, and discussion (including many normally quiet residents). That led to me writing a follow-up article where I took the feedback and expanded the discussion to further the various alternatives being proposed. I’m not suggesting that your comment was directly pointed at me or whomever, but I thought I’d provide feedback to your perspective.

I'm impressed with how much you involve yourself already, lets just hope you will keep it up but you got my vote +1

Also chitsa.. WTF?

I disagree

James Arget
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#17 - 2014-04-05 16:47:06 UTC  |  Edited by: James Arget
Ha ha ha, oh wow, you guys. First up, please for the love of bob be specific when you have a gripe, and don't just link to the entire minutes pdf. Luckily, there's only one find result for "wolf" in the entire doc, so I'm pretty sure you're mad about:

Quote:
Fozzie says that CCP could consider changing them, but they would also want to consider
changing other systems, such as Pulsars and Wolf Rayets (mostly due to inability to buff capital
reps because of those systems). The CSM expressed their support.


Which is funny, because it says right there why the change is even on the table. Right now capital shield boosters are unaffected by shield command links. During the command ship and boosting rebalance, CCP Fozzie planned to change them so they would affect cap shield boosters as well. Except, if that were to happen, a well fit Chimera would be able to tank a Bhaalgorn and Moros, and run local AND triage reps, all cap stable. If you don't think that's broken, I don't know what to tell you. Wolf-Rayets are pretty well balanced at the moment, and aren't insanely strong even though the effect is formidable. They're really only mentioned because they're the flip side of a pulsar. I feel pulsars synergize perhaps a bit too well with Chimeras, but I would only want minor changes (only the cap rechage bonus) if nothing else is being changed that would affect them; i.e. command link effectiveness.

You can put away the pitchforks now.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org

James Arget
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#18 - 2014-04-05 16:50:11 UTC  |  Edited by: James Arget
******* **** quote and edit are too close to each other.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org

Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
#19 - 2014-04-05 16:51:17 UTC
James Arget wrote:


Which is funny, because it says right there why the change is even on the table. Right now capital shield boosters are unaffected by shield command links. During the command ship and boosting rebalance, CCP Fozzie planned to change them so they would affect cap shield boosters as well. Except, if that were to happen, a well fit Chimera would be able to tank a Bhaalgorn and Moros, and run local AND triage reps, all cap stable. If you don't think that's broken, I don't know what to tell you. Wolf-Rayets are pretty well balanced at the moment, and aren't insanely strong even though the effect is formidable. They're really only mentioned because they're the flip side of a pulsar. I feel pulsars synergize perhaps a bit too well with Chimeras, but I would only want minor changes if nothing else is being changed that would affect them; i.e. command link effectiveness.

You can put away the pitchforks now.


First you want to nerf pulsars and now you want to take my pitchfork?!?! FOR SHAME P

No trolling please

Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
#20 - 2014-04-05 17:09:21 UTC
Kynric wrote:
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

To be fair, there have been plenty of townhall meetings and forum posts asking for opinions and from what I have been hearing is that the C4's could use double statics. If there is such an opposition against it, I have yet to hear it in masses. I have heard more people speak in favor then against, actually, you are the first...

Long ago LSKYL lived in a c4/C2 (and before that a c3 and before that a c2/c2.) We were small, focused on our own game and probably the last thing we would have done is post anything on forums or attend a townhall. I suspect that is very common in that space. I would not interpret a lack of political activity to mean they don't care about their homes.



Honestly I must have missed the townhall announcements/ C4 threads.

As C4 dweller I don't think they need dual statics. But we would adjust to them and it would be fine I'm sure. Personally I would just like to see C4's get the same kind of random connections that every other class can get. A big part of the reason C4's are so isolated is not a single vs dual static, but because they never get any random outgoing connections. Even C5/C6 WH's can get a random HS connection, or connection to another WH class etc. The only way to ever get anything but your static in a C4 is if someone else rolls into you.

123Next pageLast page