These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Meissa Anunthiel for CSM 7 - (longest CSM member to date, for a reason)

First post
Author
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#1 - 2012-02-11 16:37:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel
DIRECT VOTING LINK. CLICK HERE TO VOTE

SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BY CLICKING 'LIKE' ▬►

Hello Everyone,

So here's my official candidacy thread.

For more than 3 years, I have been a member of CSM. I was in CSM 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. I was secretary of CSM 3 and Vice-Chairman of CSM 6.

I contributed to making the CSM what it is today every step of the way. Every term, I helped cement the CSM as a viable group to provide valuable feedback to CCP, improve the communication channels, and give CCP a better understanding of what we want, and why we want it.

I have an excellent knowledge of all areas of the game (I play in lowsec, wormholes, 0.0, I mission in highsec, do T1/T2/T3 manufacturing, etc.). At the same time I don't favor one part of the game over another, preferring instead that each be improved upon, and that, should they want it, paths exist for everyone to move from one playstyle to another with as small barrier of entry as possible.

Talking with a dev about my campaigning, he remarked that it was "hard to categorize "smart dude with a different perspective than most"". Yet this is what I am and what differentiates me from the other candidates. When they are focused on their own little corner of the game, I help make sure that the everyone is taken into consideration and not left aside. Because I have taken part in every playstyle, I know the particular challenges each group faces, and how each suggested change will affect everyone.
This part has been shown to be of utmost importance during this last CSM, when several self-serving suggestions made were opposed by no other member except yours truly, and occasionaly another member.
Not only am I able to take part in every single conversation topics with CCP when some members are unable to contribute due to lack of knowledge, but I am also able to provide CCP with solution paths that do not needlessly negatively affect playstyles when other members are unable to do the same because of a narrow vision of the game or lack of interest.

Due to a varied real-life experience as a developer and manager in different industries from video games to CGI movies to finance, I also am able to fully understand the developers when they come to us for feedback on graphics, general game design, technical issues or the status of the economy or the PLEX market. This experience, combined with years of communication with CCP, allow me to articulate things to CCP in a common language, guaranteeing a better understanding.

I have also shown over the years I am able to work gracefully in collaboration with other members no matter their origin, from newbie-focused ones to 0.0 focussed ones, with everything in between, while at the same time retaining independence and not feeling a need to bend to group pressure.

I will not list here anything the CSM as done as my personal contribution, but I can say with a straight face that everything that can be attributed to the CSM I have had a hand in.

If you have questions, I'll be very happy to answer them, you can also contact me in-game for a chat or shoot an eve-mail.

N'hésitez pas à me contacter pour plus d'information.
Contactame para obtener más información.
Bitte kontaktieren Sie mich für weitere Informationen.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#2 - 2012-02-11 16:38:03 UTC
reserved.

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#3 - 2012-02-11 16:41:19 UTC
Hi. Apparently I'm first.

What are your opinions on and desires for PVP in high security space?

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-02-11 16:52:47 UTC
+1!

Looks to be an interesting campaign year coming up! GL!

Questions for you:

How do you see wormhole space being developed in the coming year? Any specific changes in mind?

What are your thoughts on the UI? (For example, I would hate for CCP to open the UI to 3rd party modders - That leads to "must have" UI mods). Some updating would be great, but I don't favor 3rd party mods...

What about Hi-Sec? War-Dec mechanics/exploits/ and the relative dangers/lack of danger in Hi-Sec?

What about Low-Sec? I like the idea of it, but as it is now, there is nothing to do in Low-Sec, that can't be done better in Hi-sec/null-sec?

Goals/thoughts on Null-sec iteration? (Whatever happend to farms and fields?).

guess that's enough for now...

Again, GL!

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#5 - 2012-02-11 16:54:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Meissa Anunthiel
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Hi. Apparently I'm first.

What are your opinions on and desires for PVP in high security space?


I want the wardec system to change from a griefing system it is today, to a war system it should be. I have been an advocate of that for the past years (along with Dierdra Vaal, of Eve Uni) and CCP seems now intent to grant us that wish. The way I would like to see it changed is to provide end conditions to war, alter the pricing structure and provide a way for "defenseless" corporations to defend themselves by proxy (mercenary market) should they so desire (this would be a boon both for mercenaries, for warring groups, and remove the need to "corp hop" by industrial alliances constantly wardecced by 2-member corporations). A number of suggestions have been made by CCP on that subject that I am in favour of but can't relay here as my own (and can't relay at all :NDA:).

As far as "non-consensual pvp" aka griefing/ganking is concerned, I believe this is a very important part of Eve that needs to be preserved (the idea that no space should be safe), but in continuation with past recommendations and changes to that effect, I want ganking to be an option, not a profit source (except when preying on careless people with more money than sense).

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#6 - 2012-02-11 17:09:25 UTC
i will vote for you if you support some of my ideas

What I am looking for a candidate is for them to:

1. support some sort of casual pvp via a contract system
2. enhance WIS
3. upgrade the mission system
4. make PI more like sim city/civ V
5. push to open up story lines for jove (possible WH expansion)
6. make FW include pirate missions like (kill so many people in system A)
7. make referendums for important CSM decisions… (if its real important we should all vote for it) this would be for major game changing things such as refocus and such
8. eliminate/reduce clone costs for players over 4 years old (to encourage pvp for old vets)
9. gethe fith subsystem for Tech III ships
10. kill all super caps (as in a real counter to them not this crap that I will only fly super caps now so give me back my sp cuss I cant use drones sh*t)
11. a way to integrate PI and ship crews and have an effect on your ships performance

Basically a CSM who represents the old vet casual pve/pvper

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#7 - 2012-02-11 18:15:59 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
i will vote for you if you support some of my ideas

What I am looking for a candidate is for them to:

1. support some sort of casual pvp via a contract system
2. enhance WIS
3. upgrade the mission system
4. make PI more like sim city/civ V
5. push to open up story lines for jove (possible WH expansion)
6. make FW include pirate missions like (kill so many people in system A)
7. make referendums for important CSM decisions… (if its real important we should all vote for it) this would be for major game changing things such as refocus and such
8. eliminate/reduce clone costs for players over 4 years old (to encourage pvp for old vets)
9. gethe fith subsystem for Tech III ships
10. kill all super caps (as in a real counter to them not this crap that I will only fly super caps now so give me back my sp cuss I cant use drones sh*t)
11. a way to integrate PI and ship crews and have an effect on your ships performance

Basically a CSM who represents the old vet casual pve/pvper

oh god Ugh

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#8 - 2012-02-11 18:16:38 UTC
+1 for Rooks and Kings

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Jennylicous
Doomheim
#9 - 2012-02-11 18:24:48 UTC
First off, thank you for not trying to take credit for CCP waking up and realizing they were ruining the game like some of the other current CSM members running for CSM7.

One of the most boneheaded things that CSM6 proposed was destroyable player stations. Really? Who does that benefit. I hope you weren't one of them.
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#10 - 2012-02-11 18:38:25 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
+1!

Looks to be an interesting campaign year coming up! GL!

Questions for you:

How do you see wormhole space being developed in the coming year? Any specific changes in mind?

What are your thoughts on the UI? (For example, I would hate for CCP to open the UI to 3rd party modders - That leads to "must have" UI mods). Some updating would be great, but I don't favor 3rd party mods...

What about Hi-Sec? War-Dec mechanics/exploits/ and the relative dangers/lack of danger in Hi-Sec?

What about Low-Sec? I like the idea of it, but as it is now, there is nothing to do in Low-Sec, that can't be done better in Hi-sec/null-sec?

Goals/thoughts on Null-sec iteration? (Whatever happend to farms and fields?).

guess that's enough for now...

Again, GL!


In the coming year, I see wormhole fixes more than wormhole improvements per se. Unless they are things that benefit everyone. Namely, during CSM 5 and 6, I identifed many issues plaguing the life in wormholes, and many of them are on the list of fixes being worked on as we speak. I don't know that all of it will be fixed, but many are on the radar. The list includes such things as T3 refitting in space, changing implants, POS Improvements (hangars and stuff). I personally didn't recommend "huge changes" to wormholes as a priority. Wormholes work fine as they are, it's living in it that's sometimes needlessly cumbersome. So, I see and recommend fixes for life in wormholes, no big changes.

UI Modding is something I don't like or want, my thoughts on the idea are expressed in CSM3 meeting minutes I believe, but the summation of it is that, while a positive thing because in many regards the Eve UI sucks, it would lead to easier botting and an uneven playing field when it comes to PvP. Right now everyone has to deal with the same poorly displayed information in the Overview (which I requested be redone in a way that makes sense). Eve is already very competitive, but at least we're all equal when it comes to the UI.

Highsec, see previous post, if you have further questions based on that, please shoot

Lowsec has been in dire need of improvement for a while. The problem is that it's a tricky bit to balance. Too good and it becomes a playground for large alliances, too bad and nobody wants to play in it. Also there's lots of conflicting objectives. Highsec dweller want it safer so they can get in, pirates think it's already too easy to avoid gatecamps. What I'm focussing on currently is trying to increase the population by 2 sets of measures. One is fixes/redo/changes to Factional Warfare, which is a subject in its own right, but takes place in lowsec for a large part. More FW participants, more targets for pirates. Also more possibility for people aligned with a FW faction to PvE. The industrial part of lowsec is trickier. The way I approach it is through risk mitigation mechanics, or at least trying to find ways that foster both life in lowsec and a richer target environment for others.

Nullsec. Farms and fields. The 3 most serious aspects of it that I want to see changed is the sov mechanics (they're not fun), "farms and fields" (ie, an industrial makeover, but that part requires changes to highsec/lowsec/WH/drone regions, it's tricky to balance but it's very desirable. I've made a lot of suggestions on that front), and a way for smaller entities to be able to live there without having to JOIN bigger alliances (ie, treaties).

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#11 - 2012-02-11 18:48:13 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
i will vote for you if you support some of my ideas

What I am looking for a candidate is for them to:

1. support some sort of casual pvp via a contract system
2. enhance WIS
3. upgrade the mission system
4. make PI more like sim city/civ V
5. push to open up story lines for jove (possible WH expansion)
6. make FW include pirate missions like (kill so many people in system A)
7. make referendums for important CSM decisions… (if its real important we should all vote for it) this would be for major game changing things such as refocus and such
8. eliminate/reduce clone costs for players over 4 years old (to encourage pvp for old vets)
9. gethe fith subsystem for Tech III ships
10. kill all super caps (as in a real counter to them not this crap that I will only fly super caps now so give me back my sp cuss I cant use drones sh*t)
11. a way to integrate PI and ship crews and have an effect on your ships performance

Basically a CSM who represents the old vet casual pve/pvper


1. You can already casual PvP in wormholes, lowsec, mutually agreed upon wardec, joining Red vs Blue (or FW) or simply by can stealing. I'm not sure a contract system would add much.
2. In due time, when the rest of the game is fixed.
3. Yes and no. There needs to be more content, more diverse content, but some players like the predictability of the current missioning system and those needs are as valid as the ones who wish for more challenge.
4. Yes
5. Depends, I favour improvements on the storyline, but I don't think Jove is the way to go, that card can be only played once and I'm not sure now is the time
6. Pirate missions and more engaging pirate content, yes. The basic FW is in direst need of an overhaul however. So it's a question of resource allocation. I'm not opposed to it.
7. Most of the things we do is not deciding things, it's giving feedback, explaining what we want, but most of all *WHY* we want it so CCP can make a decision. Any candidate who tells you we decide things is lying, we influence the decision process thourgh advise and feedback, which is very different. When the points of view are diverse and no clear picture exists, we recommend CCP take it to the forum to get a wider set of opinion (and they do it)
8. I agree it's an issue, the way I proposed it be changed is to make the clone cost be a rent instead of a buy, the base price of which is the current value of a clone divided by its average "life expectancy". So it wouldn't be a cost on podding, yet the cost should still increase over time as you get more skills.
9. Yes, but not as much of a priority as the rest.
10. I don't like them, I'd rather they hadn't existed, but since they're here, I'd rather make them useful in a way that doesn't require more supers on the field. ie, decreased return on extras being fielded, much in the same spirit (but not form) as there is a decreased return for fielding fleet command ships.
11. I don't see how to integreate PI with ship fittings, and for ship crews, it's a fun/good iea, but it's difficult to balance. Not sure it's a priority

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#12 - 2012-02-11 19:01:37 UTC
Jennylicous wrote:
First off, thank you for not trying to take credit for CCP waking up and realizing they were ruining the game like some of the other current CSM members running for CSM7.

One of the most boneheaded things that CSM6 proposed was destroyable player stations. Really? Who does that benefit. I hope you weren't one of them.


It's been a combined effort. CSM 5 warned CCP this would happen, and what they should do instead. CCP didn't, it took the jita riots and mass unsub to make them understand. But when it *did* happen CCP went with what CSM 5 and 6 had advocated (small fixes) in larger quantities and general fixes/less shiny (which is what every CSM I've been part of had requested).
Taking credit means "were it not for me, it wouldn't have happened". I don't do it because others have had significantly identical ideas, my job is to voice the sensible ideas, not to say they're mine. And as far as this particular change of direction is concerned, I'm as much to thank as others like Dierdra Vaal, Vuk Lau, Mittens, Trebor, Mynxee, Larkonis, Teadaze, etc. who had said basically the same thing on this issue.

As far as destructible Outposts are concerned, I believe it's a good idea, done right...
One wants players to be able to live in outposts with the knowledge their assets are secure, or they won't live in 0.0 at all and it would be terrible for the game. On the other hand one would think that in war, large forces can have subsequent negative impact on the lives of people living there, albeit with significant effort. So I'm in favour of it, but (as always) under certain circumstances.
If it's keeping things as they are with the ability to destroy outposts and the contents therein, I'm against it.
If it's changing things with the former caveat in mind but one can still cause lasting significant damage, then I'm in favour.

Like most subjects, trying to summarize it in one statement "I want destructible outposts" is the wrong approach, for me, but I'll explain at length why I think a thing is a good idea, and provide my rationale for it (albeit succintly here).

Hope that answers your questions


Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#13 - 2012-02-11 20:16:29 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
i will vote for you if you support some of my ideas

What I am looking for a candidate is for them to:

1. support some sort of casual pvp via a contract system
2. enhance WIS
3. upgrade the mission system
4. make PI more like sim city/civ V
5. push to open up story lines for jove (possible WH expansion)
6. make FW include pirate missions like (kill so many people in system A)
7. make referendums for important CSM decisions… (if its real important we should all vote for it) this would be for major game changing things such as refocus and such
8. eliminate/reduce clone costs for players over 4 years old (to encourage pvp for old vets)
9. gethe fith subsystem for Tech III ships
10. kill all super caps (as in a real counter to them not this crap that I will only fly super caps now so give me back my sp cuss I cant use drones sh*t)
11. a way to integrate PI and ship crews and have an effect on your ships performance

Basically a CSM who represents the old vet casual pve/pvper


1. You can already casual PvP in wormholes, lowsec, mutually agreed upon wardec, joining Red vs Blue (or FW) or simply by can stealing. I'm not sure a contract system would add much.
2. In due time, when the rest of the game is fixed.
3. Yes and no. There needs to be more content, more diverse content, but some players like the predictability of the current missioning system and those needs are as valid as the ones who wish for more challenge.
4. Yes
5. Depends, I favour improvements on the storyline, but I don't think Jove is the way to go, that card can be only played once and I'm not sure now is the time
6. Pirate missions and more engaging pirate content, yes. The basic FW is in direst need of an overhaul however. So it's a question of resource allocation. I'm not opposed to it.
7. Most of the things we do is not deciding things, it's giving feedback, explaining what we want, but most of all *WHY* we want it so CCP can make a decision. Any candidate who tells you we decide things is lying, we influence the decision process thourgh advise and feedback, which is very different. When the points of view are diverse and no clear picture exists, we recommend CCP take it to the forum to get a wider set of opinion (and they do it)
8. I agree it's an issue, the way I proposed it be changed is to make the clone cost be a rent instead of a buy, the base price of which is the current value of a clone divided by its average "life expectancy". So it wouldn't be a cost on podding, yet the cost should still increase over time as you get more skills.
9. Yes, but not as much of a priority as the rest.
10. I don't like them, I'd rather they hadn't existed, but since they're here, I'd rather make them useful in a way that doesn't require more supers on the field. ie, decreased return on extras being fielded, much in the same spirit (but not form) as there is a decreased return for fielding fleet command ships.
11. I don't see how to integreate PI with ship fittings, and for ship crews, it's a fun/good iea, but it's difficult to balance. Not sure it's a priority



ok so you have my vote... +1 from me...

in regards to the pvp contract system... perhaps it would be better as an enhancement to mutual war decs...

honestly i dont have that much time to play right now and causual in eve terms usually means a few hours of time imvestment...

i would like to post a pvp contract have some random person accept it... we undock and knock the crud out of eachother till one is dead...

this could be less then a 30 min time investment...

as you said there are the usual means to find a fight... can fliping... roaming in low sec. gate camps... and so on... but as i said thats time consuming... so for me i just dont have the time investment for it anymore...

i am one of those old vets who still pays for eve but ends up just changing skills every now and then and having a casual pvp contract system would invigorate some life into eve for me...

plus if they made PI like civ V i think i would start playing 23/7 again...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Lord Maldoror
Fairlight Corp
Rooks and Kings
#14 - 2012-02-11 21:01:55 UTC

I've never met anyone who works harder for the game than Meissa. He is well versed in industry, pvp, pve and game mechanics of all kinds. He considers everything calmly, patiently and intelligently and so it's no surprise that he is the longest serving CSM ever.

Aside from being an asset to the fleet, he's also the first person we ask when we encounter something we're unfamiliar with. "Anyone know how this works? Is Meissa on?..."
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#15 - 2012-02-11 21:27:35 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
(...)
2. enhance WIS
(...)


2. In due time, when the rest of the game is fixed.


Isn't that a bit too broad and dismissive? How can we determine when the "rest of the game" can be considered already "fixed" so WiS is fixed too? One year? Two years? Don't care?

And now, seriously...

WiS era sólo un truco de marketing, ¿verdad? NUNCA pretendieron en serio que tuviera contenido o fuera de alguna utilidad, ¿sí? Por eso justo ahora hay 5 pobres diablos (Team Avatar) a los que les han cargado el muerto de intentar dotar a WiS de algo de contenido... ¡¿tres años después de iniciar el desarrollo de WiS!?
Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
#16 - 2012-02-11 21:54:48 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
(...)
2. enhance WIS
(...)


2. In due time, when the rest of the game is fixed.


Isn't that a bit too broad and dismissive? How can we determine when the "rest of the game" can be considered already "fixed" so WiS is fixed too? One year? Two years? Don't care?

And now, seriously...

WiS era sólo un truco de marketing, ¿verdad? NUNCA pretendieron en serio que tuviera contenido o fuera de alguna utilidad, ¿sí? Por eso justo ahora hay 5 pobres diablos (Team Avatar) a los que les han cargado el muerto de intentar dotar a WiS de algo de contenido... ¡¿tres años después de iniciar el desarrollo de WiS!?


Let's elaborate a bit more then.
I think the idea of InCarna/Walking In Station to be a good one, I think avatars add immersion, I like the way they're done, I like the environments.
However all that is meaningless without having the ability to have them interract, and have engaging gameplay that takes place in your character.
These will help getting new players to the game, and provide a richer environment for roleplaying.

The cost of developping this feature has however been at the expense of the game we signed up to play (one about spaceships). So I'd like to see it built upon slowly but steadily. Right now, however, I believe things such as lowsec, factional warfare, 0.0 fixes when it comes to sov and industry, highsec wars take precedence.

It so happens that CCP is still developping World of Darkness, and while we can expect that to take a tad longer than if CCP Reykavik was working on InCarna, it still means that the "common codebase" will still improve when it comes to character interractions. So we'll get InCarna improvements "for free" at some point rather than having Eve be the engine that drives WoD development.

WiS no esta solo un truco de marketing, le empezaron con el sentido real de hacerle una parte importante del juego. Es simplemente que no tuvieron una buena estimacion del tiempo que tomaria. Sé que tres años parece mucho, pero CCP no tiene nada experiencia con el desarollo de juegos con personas, solo de un juego con naves. Hay un momento en que se debe entender que el desarollo va a tomar mas tiempo que tienen, y eso es. Dales algunos meses y estoy seguro que tendrémos novedades

Member of CSM 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7

Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#17 - 2012-02-12 02:54:12 UTC
Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Hi. Apparently I'm first.

What are your opinions on and desires for PVP in high security space?


I want the wardec system to change from a griefing system it is today, to a war system it should be. I have been an advocate of that for the past years (along with Dierdra Vaal, of Eve Uni) and CCP seems now intent to grant us that wish. The way I would like to see it changed is to provide end conditions to war, alter the pricing structure and provide a way for "defenseless" corporations to defend themselves by proxy (mercenary market) should they so desire (this would be a boon both for mercenaries, for warring groups, and remove the need to "corp hop" by industrial alliances constantly wardecced by 2-member corporations). A number of suggestions have been made by CCP on that subject I am in favour of but can't relay here as my own.

As far as "non-consensual pvp" aka griefing/ganking is concerned, I believe this is a very important part of Eve that needs to be presere (the idea that no space should be safe), but in continuation with past recommendations and changes to that effect, I want ganking to be an option, not a profit source (except when preying on careless people with more money than sense).

I generally agree with you, though you were not too specific about how you envision these changes. (perhaps something like this.)

I also agree about the issue of suicide ganking needing preservation, but I do not see any possible way to preserve suicide ganking without making ganking for profit a common and vital option. As you said, you should never be safe; flying with three billion isk in your cargo is idiotic in low/null, and it should not make you invulnerable in hisec nor should it automatically destroy all of your drops. Ganking, and by extension ganking for profit, are here to stay.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

T'amber Anomandari Demaleon
#18 - 2012-02-12 07:31:03 UTC
All my vote are belong to you

www.shipsofeve.com

Cephara Naloe
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-02-12 09:47:58 UTC
+ 1 like for you.
Good french feedback to the community, if my english was better I'll help you in CSM charge. Eve is a serious business afterall.
More WH like of course and little PVP group / skirmishes are so important to WH inhabitants.

"L'amour fait l'espoir, l'espoir fait chier." Un crétin.

testobjekt
Goonswarm Federation Human Resources
#20 - 2012-02-12 16:14:37 UTC
How can a member of the dreaded CSM5 argue to have any pros?
123Next pageLast page