These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: CSM Meeting Minutes - Summer 2012

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#261 - 2012-08-04 10:20:50 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes


They seem to have thought that for the last year, when the NURVDRAEKZOMGOP!!!111oneoneone! whinge-baby jihad started.

Seemingly out of nowhere.

I wonder just why that is?

Tanking is really all that thing does well, plus ranged moderate DPS --essentially limited to one damage type-- decently.

Star Wars: the Old Republic may not be EVE. But I'll take the sound of dual blaster-pistols over "NURVV CLAOKING NAOW!!!11oneone!!" any day of the week.
Lili Lu
#262 - 2012-08-04 13:05:17 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes

Sure when you read what you want to read so you can post a hoped-for pithy retort, instead of reading what is actually written.Straight
None ofthe Above
#263 - 2012-08-04 15:15:39 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes


I blame the goons (of course).

You guys are the Drake blobbers extraordinaire, throwing off all the statistics.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Vanessa Vansen
Vandeo
#264 - 2012-08-04 15:29:09 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Vanessa Vansen wrote:
So, drop the slot requirement of the skill hardwiring implants.
Let us drop the implants wherever we want to from slot 6 to 10.
This would allow us to really go for what we want to!


The purpose of the slot requirement is to require you to make a choice between two implants that are useful to your particular enterprise. Thus you have to make a choice between the Mining Foreman Mindlink (having your cake) and the Highwall mining implant (eating your cake).


Well, you would have more choices but you would still be restricted to 5 implant slots but you could fill them more like you needed them
Lili Lu
#265 - 2012-08-04 15:49:42 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes


I blame the goons (of course).

You guys are the Drake blobbers extraordinaire, throwing off all the statistics.

Unfortunately you can't just blame the CFC usage of this year. Stats have been that way for years. Everyone at every level of eve pvp has been overusing the damn things.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#266 - 2012-08-04 17:02:35 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes


I blame the goons (of course).

You guys are the Drake blobbers extraordinaire, throwing off all the statistics.

Unfortunately you can't just blame the CFC usage of this year. Stats have been that way for years. Everyone at every level of eve pvp has been overusing the damn things.



easy solution reduce the range of Heavy missiles and then make a mod that increases its range like a tracking comp...

that way if you want to shoot out to 75 km you would need atleast on of these which should greatly reduce the ehp of drakes and make them more inline with the rest of the tier two bc's

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Tarryn Nightstorm
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#267 - 2012-08-05 00:39:38 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
wait do people actually think that HACs and command ships are eclipsed by drakes

Sure when you read what you want to read so you can post a hoped-for pithy retort, instead of reading what is actually written.Straight


(I can't believe I un-blocked this useless tit for this, but whatev'...)

Sorry Lili + whichever sock puppet alts you're using this week, but Whinge-Baby Jihad(TM) dogma repeated ad nauseam does not count as valid counter-argument.

Next!

Star Wars: the Old Republic may not be EVE. But I'll take the sound of dual blaster-pistols over "NURVV CLAOKING NAOW!!!11oneone!!" any day of the week.
Veryez
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
#268 - 2012-08-05 02:21:54 UTC
First off, I like this format of CSM minutes. Sure it takes more time to read then over, but I prefer details and the ability to come to my own conclusions.

Next, I want to thank Seleene and Trebor, for their dedication to the community and their hard work at the meeting. Seleene has taken communication with the community to a new (and better level) with his frequent posts and his Blog/Tweets, that takes dedication and commitment, so thank you (and keep herding those cats).

Trebor was obviously well prepared for this meeting, his preparation shows through in his questions. I am glad to have someone take his election so seriously.

Two Step, though he appeared argumentative at times, brought a lot of energy and preparation into this meeting. It seemed like he was able to talk on every issue, and I do agree with his assessment that Wormholes are "perfect". To me Wormholes are an example of how good EvE (and CCP) can be.

To the other CSM members, while you might not have always been active in every area. You all had no problems speaking up in your areas of expertise and for the most part were fairly logical and I believe a credit to your constituents.

Some specific thoughts, The CSM chairman should be elected by the CSM members, popular vote is wrong. Overall, the CSM and CCP is too narrowly focused on 0.0. Here's my first fix for 0.0. Remove local, do it now. Perfect intel in a crutch for people, and needs to go with no replacement. We Wh dwellers make do, once you get over the initial shock of not having perfect intel, you learn to deal with it. Here's another thought, when you make stations destructable, make stargates destructible/buildable too (but say it takes 24 hours to build). This introduces the ability to completely isolate an enemy and/or bypass one of their strongly defended systems.

Lastly on ship balancing, it sounds all well and good, but I am against it since it tends to "dumb down EvE". It pigeon holes ships into roles, and setups. I can fly every sub cap ship in EvE at lvl 5 skills and use every t2 weapon in the game, the last thing I want is to only be able to use a ship in one or two roles. I like that fitting a ship requires thought , and that it is possible to 'skin a cat' in different ways. When EvE stops being "spreadsheets online", is probably the day I'll end all my accounts.

Lastly, earlier in the year CCP stated they wanted to do something to recognize EvE's long time players and thank them. I would have expected to see something about this "Player Experience" section on Friday. Sadly CCP and the CSM said little to nothing about any initiatives in this direction. I understand the desire to help newer players and to get them to stick with EvE, but as CCP earlier said this was also important, I would have hoped for some information here too.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#269 - 2012-08-05 09:22:54 UTC
Goddamn right Im a warrior!!! I spent last three days reading these minutes. Now can I get a medal please? Oh and Please make the minutes more condensed next time? While I understand what youre trying to do with accountability is making people read a book everytime the right thing to do?

Thanks anyway for the work put into making this.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Reicine Ceer
State War Academy
Caldari State
#270 - 2012-08-05 13:25:12 UTC
CBA reading through 14 pages of "herp CCP dont know what theyre talking about" rubbish; just wanted to thank all those involved at CCP and the CSM for putting the time and effort into both the meetings themselves and the minutes! I've wanted for a long time to read what goes on, and i found it really interesting. Cheers guys!
Mr Reaperz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#271 - 2012-08-05 15:56:35 UTC
Most of this looks good, thanks for making it public I have just 1 complaint.
Three reasons not to knock pve carriers out of anomolies CCP Soundwave mentions this around page ~85.

Reason 1, PVP. Because finding and killing a carrier ratting is the one of the ultimate OMG moments for any gang in eve. In fact, it is rare to get more excited in this game than catching one of these babies in a belt / anom.
It does happen, and it's epic for whoever gets the kill, example.
http://gents.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=14022049

Reason 2, PVE. An expensive fit machariel or vindicator can do sites almost as fast or faster depending on skills. Often players run with a machariel or vindicator or two tengu's and drones assigned from their carrier. Small reminder, if someone trains fighters 5 and can clear sites faster I believe that should be acceptable. They are risking an extremely expensive and slow ship.. and trained a skill (Fighters 5) that takes 50 days.
If you risk 2B+ in ships and have trained a 50Day skill i'm of the impression you should kill stuff faster than a cheaper and more agile well fit vindicator (Risk/Reward).

Reason 3, Capitals. Having and using capitals is probably one of the largest factors that differentiates null sec from high sec. We can purchase capitals and use them. The carrier has two main uses, moving large numbers of ships for deployments vast distances and triage. The third, and often most fun use, is for certain escalation sites, anomolies, and assigning drones. I see the ability to use these big beasts to make some isk as one of the coolest reward for living and fighting in null sec. Bear in mind that often carrier pilots are engaged in wars defending or taking space in 0.0 meaning they should be able to make more isk when they do have time to make isk so they can go back to fighting.


Final Statement
If we are ignoring null sec except poses for the next two years, can we completely ignore us and leave this change out that will just **** off 0.0 carrier pilots? We have a capital that we can actually use for our own benefit and its friggen fun/cool to be able to use a capital. If we don't like carriers because they don't require ammo like other ratting vessels thus requiring freight into the game. Maybe make it so when killing npc's the carrier must use a special ammo (no more expensive that normal ratting ship ammo) to get this process involved as well. Otherwise, please leave anomoly carriers alone, for pvp, pve, and having a useful capital.

Thanks,
Reap
Davicent Kashada
Perkone
Caldari State
#272 - 2012-08-05 16:34:32 UTC
I love the additional detail that the long format provides. Hopefully they stick with it into the future.
mjgvjbk
Wombo United
#273 - 2012-08-05 23:39:29 UTC
Hmm not sure what happened here but WTF would you guys fuk with solo pirating to a degree that it would now go the way of the dinosaur ? What is so wrong with doing eve solo at any level ?
Just like Two Step said

Quote:
There are plenty of people out there that consider 10-15 people small gang PVP. Just because it doesn't fit into your master plan for how EVE PVP should work doesn't mean it is wrong. Perhaps you might spend a little more time outside of your bunker and see how the rest of us inferior people play the game.

So why break low sec for the solo pirate ? Roll why do gate guns need any work at all - leave things that aren't broken along FFS?

Go fix corp management and alliance management like you keep promising.


Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2012-08-06 00:49:37 UTC
Tsubutai wrote:
Karl Planck wrote:
woa woa woa, what the F*CK is this

Quote:
CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out.


I AM PLEADING with you, don't do this. This will absolutely murder lowsec. Not liking LOWSEC gate camps is one thing (nullsec is apparently fine to camp) , but enabling fast tackle on any gate in lowsec is going to put a absolute stop to the traffic that exists there now.

And this wont even stop camps (as i assume this is the intention of the change). All it will promote is the time honored tradition of bouncing.

How does this work with cycling between targets?

I'd like to strongly echo these concerns, albeit for slightly different reasons. To drop a triage carrier in under 5 minutes, you're looking at 3-4k+ dps. If that's applied in the same way that current sentry damage is (i.e. perfect tracking, full damage anywhere within 150 km of the gate), it basically makes it impossible to have any kind of extended small-scale gang engagement on a lowsec gate outside of FW since such fights generally require one side or the other to take GCC, and that's far too much extra dps to cope with on that scale when you can't mitigate it through range/tracking. As Karl notes, it would have basically no effect on gatecampers since they'll just chill at off-grid safes between ganks, but it'd cripple small-scale roaming pvp.


Please, please don't do this. As mentioned, a fast tackle interceptor or frigate should not be allowed to live if it goes GCC on a gate. If it can, there will be absolutely no traffic in lowsec because it will simply be too risky. This will also make it impossible for pirates to use logi on gates even if they are aggressed first, since the logi will be flagged for repairing -5's and will be popped in
short order.

For all the moaning and complaining from lowsec and FW people, it's not actually that bad. We don't need frigate combat on gates. If your intention is stop almost all pvp in lowsec except for FW, then this change is fabulous. Otherwise, it is a horrible idea on some many levels.

.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#275 - 2012-08-06 01:13:36 UTC
Remember everyone, this is a thread about the minutes, there are plenty of threads popping up to discuss the content itself.

For those concerned about the gate gun changes, there's been a decent discussion going on over here. I'm sure its not the only thread, but its the one I've been posting in if you want to see how I feel about the gate gun change.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
mjgvjbk
Wombo United
#276 - 2012-08-06 05:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dosnix
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Remember everyone, this is a thread about the minutes, there are plenty of threads popping up to discuss the content itself.

For those concerned about the gate gun changes, there's been a decent discussion going on over here. I'm sure its not the only thread, but its the one I've been posting in if you want to see how I feel about the gate gun change.



*snip*
Avoiding the profanity Filter is not allowd
+
Personal Insults are not allowed

Due to this, I´ve fixed your post

Kind Regards
ISD Dosnix
BlankStare
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2012-08-06 07:23:52 UTC
Maybe next time it would be better to have separate 'official' threads for each section of the minutes and merely have a locked thread which links to each of them from the first post.
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#278 - 2012-08-06 11:15:06 UTC
I've only just started reading the Minutes, just got down to this part
Quote:
he noted that some people do not run for CSM because they don't want their real-life identity associated with their in-game character

I can confirm that I for one have never run because of this.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#279 - 2012-08-06 11:29:40 UTC
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#280 - 2012-08-06 12:30:47 UTC
I liked the conversational minutes format from the first part, but can understand if it is too much work.

I also liked the style of the rest of the minutes with attributable quotes and such.

Great work everyone who contributed, thanks!

Content:

- POS changes - DO WANT! All of it! Nao! :)
- Gate guns ramping up - Ugh, Don't like.
- CSM members should elect their chairperson.
- Real Names and accounability are fine.
- Scamming for votes, C'est la EVE.

Overall, it sounded like a good meet. Thanks to all!

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.