Jita Park Speakers Corner

Can't break the NDA to discuss undisclosed, nonpublic plans which may or may not exist; I felt it was a productive discussion, though.

Once he gets re-elected, you can expect him to communicate again in Nov 2012.

As a megalomaniac and/or a narcissist, I should have made this thread ages ago, but I was pretty busy ramming my head into a CCP-shaped brick wall. With the refocusing won and Winter looking to be a smooth and excellent expansion for once, I guess I have more time.

1) people always says small alliances can't make a place on nullsec, do you agree ? if so, do you have an idea on what to do ?

2) do you consider this expansion enough to fix your beloved nullsec, or will you still concentrate your efforts on nullsec on priority for the next one ?
for example, you didn't though about FW, but did you though about how to make lowsec a more interesting place ?

3) with the new nebulaes and new battlecruisers, the winter expansion will have a lot of shiny with its fixes, while the first goal was to fix things. was it CCP who wanted shiny, or a common agreement ?

4) are the establishements out for a long time, or may they come back on the next espansion ? would you go for a closer or more far release of incarna related content ?

5) you obviously like the possibility of non consensual pvp on high sec, but do you consider the insurance for loss against concord a good thing ?

6) does your action against miners have a link to your position on ice being available so easily on high sec ?

I would like to know how you think about this stuff mentioned by Hilmar in that Eurogamer interview.

Do you see any way the CSM could benefit from a change in structure? Do you think the CSM is adequatly representing all players?

There is currently a rather large imbalance between the effort needed (manpower + coordination + logistics + skills + money + etc.) and profits to be made in manufacturing common items (not talking about caps/supers) locally in 0.0, and the effort needed and profits to be made in simply importing them via freighters/JFs from Jita. Do you think this is an issue? If so, do you have an idea of a solution?

What would you think of a hypothetical scenario where 0.0 is still mostly dependant on highsec import for supply of low-level materials (minerals, datacores, decryptors, TI mods...), but most of high-level construction happens locally? What game mechanics could be changed, added, or removed to make this happen?


How do you like the new cyno effects?

How do you feel about the recent changes to PI Customs Offices?

Do you feel this falls under the 'Farms & Fields' discussion you had previously?

Do you feel this will be a successful way for smaller entities to generate ~gudfites~ and 'fight the man' of larger Sov Holding Entities?

Your thoughts on the player created taxation, the office's eHP values, etc. etc. yadda yadda?

And yes, I actually like the clickfest that is PI. Guilty pleasure.


Also, what happened to the so called "Fireside Chats" we had a ways back from CSM6? This thread is great but I enjoy hearing from all of the CSM Members, yes, even Trebor.

Nerf supercaps and boost anomaly income, as well as provide more sources of isk for starting alliance by buffing exploration and fixing the Tech problem.

Looks like we've already got the supercap thing and the anomaly thing in motion.



Winter is a start, but only that. I half suspect that the supercap nerfs will not go far enough (Titan guns blapping BS with ease) and the sov system is a disaster. The Winter expansion will triage a lot of EVE's sucking chest wounds if implemented properly via TiDi and cap rebalances, but there's still a lot which is wrong that doesn't reach the level of 'fix this or your subscriber numbers will plummet'.

I'm not a lowsec guy. I think it needs fixing, but most 'lowsec voters' throw in for Meissa, who lives there. My idle opinion is that lowsec is so borked that it'd require an entire expansion to fix it and revamp it, not just a few tiny tweaks here and there. But there's a huge difference between 'my idle opinion' and 'things I expend political capital on'.



This seems like a false dichotomy. There'a a demographic from failheap that loves to howl about 'shiny'. New art tends to improve the game, I didn't pay much attention to the nebulae as a CSM but my jaw dropped when I logged into SiSi today.

The winter expansion is full of critical fixes, and those fixes address the most grevious of sucking chest wounds: Supercaps, Lag, Pos Misery, and a bunch of other things which I can't announce because ~NDA~.



NDA on details. I personally don't trust CCP to implement WiS content after the Incarna disaster. I'm against wasting time on non-spaceship content while EVE itself is at risk.



5: I think that the people in hisec who think that removing insurance from Concord losses will protect them would be in for a nasty, nasty surprise if that comes to pass.

Vile Rat and I would like to see insurance removed from Concord losses, because the isk involved is trivial to the gankers, and I suspect that the suffering from the victims will be ever more delectable if they cannot rationalize the gank as an economic act.

6: I'm a big fan of ice belts in hisec. The CCP guys on the alliance tournament video commentary just sort of popped out with the 'remove hisec ice' idea. I will be very, very, very unhappy if hisec ice is removed, because I enjoy having belts full of docile, entitled victims to torture at my leisure.

Suggesting that I have a 'position' on hisec ice is exactly why I made this thread; I don't support removing hisec ice at all. Glad to clarify the random misconception.

7: Another problem with these forums is only being able to use five quotes in a post. That's dumb.

I think the CSM needs one change only for CSM7: a minimum signatures requirement to be added on the ballot. Something relatively minor, like 100 signatures.

CSM6 had 50+ candidates. 20 of those were 'real' candidates with actual support. The rest were random no-names who swung only a handful of votes, and thus the votes they received were wasted.

Siloing proposals are dumb if you exercise a modicum of intelligence to analyze them. I'm technically a hisec representative right now, as I spend much of my time in hisec killing miners or in Jita killing pods and frigates. Many nullsec players have the 'majority' of their characters in hisec doing this or that.

The CSM, like all democratic bodies, represents those interests which care enough about their issues to get off their asses and vote in an organized way. This means that the unorganized and unmotivated are completely unrepresented, just like in the real world.

I think hijacking is an amusing idea, but entirely new features like this are likely to drop below the sucking chest wound threshold of political action so I'm not likely to make a formal thread about it in the CSM forums or rally support for it in a summit session.

I might toss it into Skype in the CCP/CSM channel, or mention it while drinking with the devs after-hours. Beer and Skype can make magical things happen outside of the normal order of development.

That doesn't mean your idea will survive beyond an initial sniff test. (How do you balance it with people who are afk on gates, not bots? Do we want people to be afraid to use autopilot for fear of having their freighters and orcas hijacked? I might, but it might not be worth the potential loss of subscribers to CCP. How hard is it to code such a thing? How many sprints would it take? Is there something else more broken than this to deal with first? Aren't belt-bots being policed by gankers already? Aren't mission and anomaly bots more a problem, and this wouldn't impact them, would it? Why have the ship follow yours, why not have the hijacking have their pod eject from their hull, so you're forced jump from your hijacking ship to the stolen hull? etc etc etc. In fact, the more you ask these questions, the less solid your idea becomes.)