These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online Development Strategy (CSM Public)

First post First post First post
Author
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#41 - 2012-11-23 07:40:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
So to boil it down stop acting like a Null Sec lobby group and More like representatives of ALL players.


Why not ask Kelduum or Issler (the 2 highsec representatives) why they signed off on it going out as it did without any highsec content? Issler at the very least has been active - aren't you curious to find out why your highsec candidates have apparently failed highsec? Wouldn't you rather be proactive about this rather than just going the easy "ITS ALL A NULL CONSPIRACY" route which accomplishes nothing?

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Frying Doom
#42 - 2012-11-23 07:59:10 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So to boil it down stop acting like a Null Sec lobby group and More like representatives of ALL players.


Why not ask Kelduum or Issler (the 2 highsec representatives) why they signed off on it going out as it did without any highsec content? Issler at the very least has been active - aren't you curious to find out why your highsec candidates have apparently failed highsec? Wouldn't you rather be proactive about this rather than just going the easy "ITS ALL A NULL CONSPIRACY" route which accomplishes nothing?

Did they sign off on it all that was said was that the current ACTIVE CSM members did, besides the authors who knows what that means.

As I have said to you before I personally would like to see Null fixed but not at the expense of Hi-sec and after the POS's and the corporate management system was fixed. Which is exactly what giving Hi-sec minerals to Null will do.

Nor am I a CSM member, it is my interests I represent, not the player bases as a whole, just as it is in your best interests to represent your own, which you do frequently.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#43 - 2012-11-23 08:22:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
Did they sign off on it all that was said was that the current ACTIVE CSM members did, besides the authors who knows what that means.

As I have said to you before I personally would like to see Null fixed but not at the expense of Hi-sec and after the POS's and the corporate management system was fixed. Which is exactly what giving Hi-sec minerals to Null will do.

Nor am I a CSM member, it is my interests I represent, not the player bases as a whole, just as it is in your best interests to represent your own, which you do frequently.


Well, even if they aren't active, it'd probably be a good idea to find out one way or the other, wouldn't it? Get their answer and draw your own conclusions, I guess. Issler in particular is pretty active on the forums at least, shouldn't be a chore to get a hold of her and ask her what the deal is.

I'm not even going to bother talking specifics of the proposal with you (mostly b/c we did already in the Jita Park forums), just offering suggestions for you (or anyone else) that isn't satisfied with what you see. This CSM isn't dominated by nullsec at all, quite the contrary actually; the only co-authors you could call nullsec residents are Alekseyev and Trebor (at least I think, anyway, I CBA to find out where merc corps live), and neither of them are sov null participants*. They clearly thought that sov null issues are pretty important to fix - hell, you could probably even ask them why they had a hand in prioritizing issues that didn't necessarily directly pertain to their style of gameplay. Either way, something has to be better than grumbling about nullsec dominance that just isn't there.

* fun fact: Only 3 current CSM members are in alliances that actually hold sov - Greene Lee (AAA), Dovinian (TEST) and Darius III (Brick Squad). Only one of those members are top 7. Nullsec lobbying group, indeed!

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
#44 - 2012-11-23 08:40:04 UTC
"Woooo! Shinies!"

Linking system sov to activity, and allowing the systems to support that activity for more than single-digit players at the same time is probably the most significant change that 0.0 needs.

Pretty much none of the other changes are going to have a widespread effect as long as most of 0.0 space sits unused.

Oh, and what happened to those formal alliance agreement mechanics that Dominion was supposed to bring? Game mechanic supported renting/standing/etc.?
Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
#45 - 2012-11-23 08:56:15 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
...
Maybe 0.0 alliances should start actually doing something about that perception then? 0.0 holds the key to "fixing" hi-sec but they wont bother, it's much easier to claim that the others need to have their mechanics changed instead, because ::effort::

Hi-sec wont change, it's a needed and working game mechanic and player enforced "Anti-PK" systems don't work. It didn't save Felluca from Trammel, it didn't save Shadowbane from disintegrating; and no game dsigner worth their salt should ever rely on it to save anything in an online game.
Frying Doom
#46 - 2012-11-23 09:03:10 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:

* fun fact: Only 3 current CSM members are in alliances that actually hold sov - Greene Lee (AAA), Dovinian (TEST) and Darius III (Brick Squad). Only one of those members are top 7. Nullsec lobbying group, indeed!

Yes because what is the CSMs biggest problem after all the years of NUll sec dominance and control?

Credibility, so what do they produce, yet another document that can be added to all the rest made by the last few CSMs about Null sec. Honestly they should be bundled up and sold as fuel for fireplaces.

Yes Null sec needs fixing badly but without a proper thought out road map, that does not just hurt Hi-sec to improve Null, all we will get is another set of useless resource wasting fixes that got Null into the crap hole it is in today.

A lot of people talk of Wis being a waste of resources that should be spent on FiS, How is fixing Null especially sov Null (Now primarily owned by one alliance) not a waste of resources that should be spent on making Hi-sec better.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-11-23 09:07:01 UTC
People need to start seeing this game as a whole thing instead of putting on tunnel vision glasses and only giving a **** about one piece of the pie. This game, more than others, has a ripple effect. You toss a stone in one part and the other parts of the game are affected.

In all honesty every part of this game should get enough attention where everyone is at least a bit interested in every aspect, even if they decide to focus on one part at the time. You never know when you will become bored of wading in one part of the pool and want to go swim to another part of it. Won't be much fun if the part you swim to has a piece of feces posing as a Baby Ruth candy bar in it.

I hope one of you out there gets my reverse reference... Blink
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#48 - 2012-11-23 09:10:00 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Yes because what is the CSMs biggest problem after all the years of NUll sec dominance and control?


CSM 6 is the only CSM you can objectively say was dominated by nullsec, and that was largely backlash to CSM 5's highsec-heavy makeup actually being listened to by CCP. Then again, CSM 1-4 were the definition of useless so it's not terribly relevant.

Either way, you keep ignoring my point (Frying Doom ignoring a point to go off about whatever? You don't say!). You feel that this document doesn't adequately reflect the direction the game needs to go, that it's too nullsec heavy. Yet, it was authored by many people who have no stake in nullsec at all, so why won't you try talking to them about why they believe this? Hell, you pretty publicly stumped for Issler during the election, you'd think you'd at least care about her opinion. What gives? Are you afraid to PM them or something?

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Frying Doom
#49 - 2012-11-23 09:20:00 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Yes because what is the CSMs biggest problem after all the years of NUll sec dominance and control?


CSM 6 is the only CSM you can objectively say was dominated by nullsec, and that was largely backlash to CSM 5's highsec-heavy makeup actually being listened to by CCP. Then again, CSM 1-4 were the definition of useless so it's not terribly relevant.

Either way, you keep ignoring my point (Frying Doom ignoring a point to go off about whatever? You don't say!). You feel that this document doesn't adequately reflect the direction the game needs to go, that it's too nullsec heavy. Yet, it was authored by many people who have no stake in nullsec at all, so why won't you try talking to them about why they believe this? Hell, you pretty publicly stumped for Issler during the election, you'd think you'd at least care about her opinion. What gives? Are you afraid to PM them or something?

So as the Document is co-authored by Alekseyev Karrde, Hans Jagerblitzen, Trebor Daehdoow, and Two Step and it was unanimously endorsed by all active members of the CSM.

I know where Two step is from where are the others from?

As to Pming the members would it not have been easier if they had said these members agreed with this rather than the vague active statement? or if you believe so strongly that the Hi-sec candidates agreed to this why don't you go get quotes off them.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Snow Axe
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2012-11-23 09:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Snow Axe
Frying Doom wrote:
I know where Two step is from where are the others from?

As to Pming the members would it not have been easier if they had said these members agreed with this rather than the vague active statement? or if you believe so strongly that the Hi-sec candidates agreed to this why don't you go get quotes off them.


Alekseyev and Trebor are in merc corps (Noir and DNS). They probably operate in null (couldn't tell you for sure, though being mercs I'd imagine part of that answer is "where the money is"), but neither hold sov. Hans is a FW guy (Minmatar). Can't answer the "active CSM" question since I don't know who's active and who isn't. Kind of embarassing that I have to tell you that when you've already decided that CSM 7 is dominated by null.

And you're right, it would be way better if the CSM members would explain themselves more often. They don't though, and you do actually have to prod them to get answers. Sucks, but that's the reality of the situation if you actually want answers. Of course, if you just want to skill all that work and keep pissing and moaning about invisible biases, go right ahead, and you'll be ignored by anyone with critical thinking skills as usual. Up to you, really :)

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["

Frying Doom
#51 - 2012-11-23 09:30:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
I know where Two step is from where are the others from?

As to Pming the members would it not have been easier if they had said these members agreed with this rather than the vague active statement? or if you believe so strongly that the Hi-sec candidates agreed to this why don't you go get quotes off them.


Alekseyev and Trebor are in merc corps (Noir and DNS). They probably operate in null (couldn't tell you for sure, though being mercs I'd imagine part of that answer is "where the money is"), but neither hold sov. Hans is a FW guy (Minmatar). Kind of embarassing that I have to tell you that when you've already decided that CSM 7 is dominated by null.

And you're right, it would be way better if the CSM members would explain themselves more often. They don't though, and you do actually have to prod them to get answers. Sucks, but that's the reality of the situation if you actually want answers. Of course, if you just want to keep pissing and moaning about invisible biases, go right ahead, and you'll be ignored by anyone with critical thinking skills as usual. Up to you, really :)

How is a bias invisible is they produce a document that is 2/3 fix Null? As I said yes Null needs fixing but properly and with only 20% of the population their and they are talking 2 full development cycles, it seems to quote Hans
"Do you think its responsible for CCP to spend an entire year working on something that affects a small portion of the population, when they could be fixing an area of space that affects multiple times that many players and subcriptions and potential subscriptions?"

Irresponsible and more likely to cause complaints and unsubs in the areas containing the majority of players.

Edit: oh as to the above, I believe Selene, Alekseyev and Trebor are all from Null sec but I could be wrong but most of the things I have seen from Noir and DNS were Null vids I believe.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#52 - 2012-11-23 09:35:51 UTC
Removed a non-constructive post.

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2012-11-23 09:50:57 UTC
Harbingour wrote:

I think one point he made is very necessary right now: how can we boost NULL without nerfing every1 else offQuestion

it's quite simple. And CCP should do NOTHING about it Shocked

Solution: players in 0.0 stop killing anyone and take territory of another alliances. Shocked
Result:
- Risk = 0, Reward is unchanged (even growing).
- Industry fixed - no need to manufacture lots of ships
- SOV fixed - no need to grind structures
- Risk/Reward for 0.0 == 0, so 0.0 become LOT MORE interesting and rewarding than any other areas of Eve Universe.

Simple? - check
Implementable? - not sure, because of players (you know, amateur, smart people as anyone knows)
Cool

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
#54 - 2012-11-23 10:55:33 UTC
All I'm getting from this thread is that High Sec needs someone who will be active and representing them in the next CSM.

James 315 for CSM.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-11-23 11:00:40 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
All I'm getting from this thread is that High Sec needs someone who will be active and representing them in the next CSM.

James 315 for CSM.

No.
Frying Doom
#56 - 2012-11-23 11:17:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
All I'm getting from this thread is that High Sec needs someone who will be active and representing them in the next CSM.

James 315 for CSM.

Ummm no

What we actually need are people that primarily concern them selves with pushing for fixes in things that effect everyone.

For example fixing

  • Corporation Management
  • Pos's
  • Continue to help and support all ship rebalancing
  • Inflation
  • Improvements to the skill trees
  • Weapon balancing
  • Mining ships and barge improvements/alterations
  • Trade and market improvements
  • Ui improvements
  • New specialist ships

And the list goes on.

Then give ideas on the ways CCP can help gain new players as well as player retention. Using the governing stats of player area occupation as a guide.

The CSM is a representative body of the whole of EvE, so their efforts really should come down to where the numbers of people play are and therefore if 20% of the population live in an area, it is reasonable to spend 20% of the remaining resources left (after using the majority on things that effect everyone) on the 20% of the population, even if 20% is just the slow building of a real roadmap of what to do.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#57 - 2012-11-23 11:21:20 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
All I'm getting from this thread is that High Sec needs someone who will be active and representing them in the next CSM.

James 315 for CSM.


Why? To ensure that 0.0 gets abandoned for another 3 years?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
Somethin Awfull Forums
#58 - 2012-11-23 11:39:24 UTC
CCP Eterne wrote:
Removed a non-constructive post.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2213902#post2213902

Or GTFO is something CCP consider to be the solution to their trouble.

If so, have blue tags use the forums by adding more endorsements to GTFO

R.I.P. Vile Rat

Mag's
Azn Empire
#59 - 2012-11-23 11:43:48 UTC
Seleene wrote:
Well, I tend to just talk about whatever is a problem in the game, regardless of what sector of ~space~ it's in. Smile

Also, this picture is relavent.
The low sec and null sec pictures need swapping tbh.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#60 - 2012-11-23 13:20:16 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:
All I'm getting from this thread is that High Sec needs someone who will be active and representing them in the next CSM.

James 315 for CSM.

Ummm no

What we actually need are people that primarily concern them selves with pushing for fixes in things that effect everyone.

For example fixing

  • Corporation Management
  • Pos's
  • Continue to help and support all ship rebalancing
  • Inflation
  • Improvements to the skill trees
  • Weapon balancing
  • Mining ships and barge improvements/alterations
  • Trade and market improvements
  • Ui improvements
  • New specialist ships

And the list goes on.

I can perfectly well see James contributing in a meaningful manner to all of these.

  • James spends a lot of time managing his own personal corporation. I'm sure that he'd have a lot invested in the potential for a better corporation management UI.
  • I have to admit that perhaps James isn't the best candidate with experience of POSes. However, there are 14 members on a CSM; it'd be a bit much to expect them all to specialise in every single area.
  • James and the New Order are 100% in support of all ship rebalancing, and certainly have lots of constructive ideas. For example, a velocity increase to the Stabber Fleet Issue?
  • James and the New Order are already attempting to deal with inflation by reducing the flow of minerals into the market from AFK miners and botters.
  • See POSes.
  • See ship balancing.
  • James has a lot invested in the balancing of mining ships and mining barges. Who could be a more suitable candidate to oversee this?
  • James has revolutionised the trade industry in places such as Halaima, Abudban, Tolle and Kamio.
  • Like everyone else, James has to play through EVE's UI. I should think anyone would be qualified to do this.
  • James would probably be very good at suggesting specialised ships. The bumping profession, for example, has long gone without a purposed ship. With the introduction of yet another mining ship in Retribution, I'm sure that James would be very active in campaigning for balance in this area.

Frying Doom wrote:
The CSM is a representative body of the whole of EvE, so their efforts really should come down to where the numbers of people play are and therefore if 20% of the population live in an area, it is reasonable to spend 20% of the remaining resources left (after using the majority on things that effect everyone) on the 20% of the population, even if 20% is just the slow building of a real roadmap of what to do.

That's not quite how it works. The CSM is representative of everyone who voted in the elections, since people presumably voted for candidates that promised things that they wanted. Therefore, if every candidate pushes for his own goals, it should work out properly. If you didn't vote, that's your own fault.