These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev blog: CSM8 - 1st Summit Minutes Published

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#21 - 2014-01-02 22:15:46 UTC
I, for one, am absolutely outraged

I will decide just what I'm angry about after reading the document

But CSM8 should feel ashamed about whatever it's going to be
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#22 - 2014-01-02 22:16:13 UTC
Heh, I like UI session outcome: you agreed that something has to be done and best way to do it is to never actually make it done because ship rebalancing already set the precedent for neverending story and people are happy about it.

Why HUD has to be docked at edge of the screen? Why I cannot fiddle with overview settings when docked? Why fit added to market quickbar doesn't contain ship too or at least some info about ship like name of hull in brackets or sth? Why d-scan angle slider steps are not equal for each "X degrees" setting? Why d-scan is in same window as probes scanning interface?

Invalid signature format
Ali Aras
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#23 - 2014-01-02 22:18:51 UTC
Ah, I think you're misreading that one-- something has to be done, something should be done, and it should be a multi-expansion graduated process so everyone can get benefit quickly, with the end goal of probably everything will be different (or at least rethought). At which point, more work will *still* need to be done.

That kind of stuff is a good question, and it's exactly the kind of stuff this process is intended to address.

http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#24 - 2014-01-02 22:20:48 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
On the player retention thing, I will point out that measuring "engagement" by measuring wether a player reached or don't an arbitrary milestone ingame is not exactly failproof.

How engaged is someone who only runs missions, but has run in excess of 1,500 missions over 5 years?

How engaged is someone who only mines rocks, but has done it for years upon years?

Is it engagement enough to write in excess of 400 posts at the forums each month? Spend like 20 hours a week writing and reading about EVE?

Of all the silly things CCP ever did to me, calling me "not engaged" because I never went to null or reached some other random milestone ingame may be of the silliest.

If I was not engaged, Dr Whatsyourname, I would not have given in excess of 1,000 euros to your company.

And now it turns I am not even deemed worthy of keeping as a customer because "I am not engaged enough" and my kind leaves too often. Roll

That's pathetic.

I have a suggestion. If most people will not cross the social wall, or will not enter the sandbox nor miss it... have a revolutionary idea, free of charge: deliver them exactly what they want with a EVE twist rather than shake your head and say "too bad, they weren't engaged enough" as they leave.


How about calling you "not engaged" because you've repeatedly stated in the plainest terms that you're not interested in what EVE has to offer and you're only here until the day Star Citizen launches?

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Nicen Jehr
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#25 - 2014-01-02 22:27:32 UTC
project 2 is replacing local and dscan with an intel system that requires gameplay

Little Things to improve ≡⋁≡ | My Little Things posts
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#26 - 2014-01-02 22:31:23 UTC
When was last really visible UI change done? Brackets, targets, effects bar - it was all Inferno, followed by info panels in Retribution. Don't tell me that fixing slider on d-scan or unlocking HUD from edges of the screen would take more than 1 year of work. Gradual progres? Of course! But let us actually see that progress not only "we talk, we have ideas, nobody works on it".

UI is important for everybody from 1 minute newbie to 10 years vet. Making it easy and fun to use should be equal to ship rebalancing efforts not always at back burner waiting for CCP karkur to get bored and do her usual awesome stuff.

Invalid signature format
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#27 - 2014-01-02 22:35:46 UTC
Admittedly, I am parsing and fast-reading for juicy bits... but found another one I read fully.

On the Team Kuromaku meeting and PvE:

Ghost sites are an instance of something that's wrong with PvE, namely, rewards are locked by system security. Having a 100% certainty that I will never find anything worth my skills, my ships and my experience, means that I am 100% sure to not waste time on ghost sites unless i am really bored and want first-hand experience to tell how pointless is to propose a veteran player to waste time in an activity that rewards him less than mining a rock (the whole hisec exploration suffers this, btw).

I don't care if the chances of getting a wormhole-grade reward in hisec were 1% of those of wormhole space -as long as they are higher than 0. Ghost sites who only drop crap in high security space (MY 5 YEARS HOME) are an insult to my inteligence, my skills, money and experience. Telling me that I should go elsewhere is not a sandbox, but arrogance.


About the possibility of new PvE, more challenging, it will be welcome as long as it comes on top of the current content instead of replacing it. If I lose a billion ISK ship in a challenging PvE content, I will need to recoup that loss by farming L4s, not by risking yet another ship into yet another one-size-fits-all challenging PvE.

Also, in terms of "challenge", the new anti-drone AI is a PITA, not a challenge, specially when you're flying a drone ship and the new anti-drone AI means that you're privileged with having your weapons destroyed by NPCs so you better fly a missile boat or a turrets boat. Tinkering with NPC AI should not be the *only* challenge.

Also, the main problem with the current missiosn is that they're completely charted territory, beaten and traversed in every way for literally years. New missions, even without any other fancies, would keep the content fresher. I am aware that novelty always wears off faster than it can be produced (also are other issues like code maintenance), but there should be a middle point between having a "mission of the week" and "let's celebrate Gone Berserk's 7th anniversary by running it the 700th time".

Last but not least, player-generated and player-driven PvE should be given some thought. There is nothing more challenging and less farmable than what a player set up for his own goals -but again, on top of the existing missions, not replacing them.

We need MORE PvE not just "ITERATED" PvE.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#28 - 2014-01-02 22:44:14 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
On the player retention thing, I will point out that measuring "engagement" by measuring wether a player reached or don't an arbitrary milestone ingame is not exactly failproof.

How engaged is someone who only runs missions, but has run in excess of 1,500 missions over 5 years?

How engaged is someone who only mines rocks, but has done it for years upon years?

Is it engagement enough to write in excess of 400 posts at the forums each month? Spend like 20 hours a week writing and reading about EVE?

Of all the silly things CCP ever did to me, calling me "not engaged" because I never went to null or reached some other random milestone ingame may be of the silliest.

If I was not engaged, Dr Whatsyourname, I would not have given in excess of 1,000 euros to your company.

And now it turns I am not even deemed worthy of keeping as a customer because "I am not engaged enough" and my kind leaves too often. Roll

That's pathetic.

I have a suggestion. If most people will not cross the social wall, or will not enter the sandbox nor miss it... have a revolutionary idea, free of charge: deliver them exactly what they want with a EVE twist rather than shake your head and say "too bad, they weren't engaged enough" as they leave.


How about calling you "not engaged" because you've repeatedly stated in the plainest terms that you're not interested in what EVE has to offer and you're only here until the day Star Citizen launches?


The notorious fact that I am not interested in "what EVE has to offer according to CSM Malcanis" doesn't means that I am not interested in getting more of what EVE currently offers to me, or even getting something of what EVE used to be meant to offer and "others" aim to deliver.

By the way, your "Play this way or go away" mentality is a plague in EVE. I wonder if CCP devs are inmune to it...

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-01-02 22:50:32 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
On the player retention thing, I will point out that measuring "engagement" by measuring wether a player reached or don't an arbitrary milestone ingame is not exactly failproof.

How engaged is someone who only runs missions, but has run in excess of 1,500 missions over 5 years?

How engaged is someone who only mines rocks, but has done it for years upon years?

Is it engagement enough to write in excess of 400 posts at the forums each month? Spend like 20 hours a week writing and reading about EVE?

Of all the silly things CCP ever did to me, calling me "not engaged" because I never went to null or reached some other random milestone ingame may be of the silliest.

If I was not engaged, Dr Whatsyourname, I would not have given in excess of 1,000 euros to your company.

And now it turns I am not even deemed worthy of keeping as a customer because "I am not engaged enough" and my kind leaves too often. Roll

That's pathetic.

I have a suggestion. If most people will not cross the social wall, or will not enter the sandbox nor miss it... have a revolutionary idea, free of charge: deliver them exactly what they want with a EVE twist rather than shake your head and say "too bad, they weren't engaged enough" as they leave.


You mention reading and posting on the forums a lot. I would guess that'd be one thing that sets you apart from other players with an otherwise similar in-game profile who flame out and leave due to lack of engagement.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#30 - 2014-01-02 23:12:02 UTC
And ccp rise noted that pve is the main thing people do in eve... interesting

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#31 - 2014-01-02 23:13:12 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
On the player retention thing, I will point out that measuring "engagement" by measuring wether a player reached or don't an arbitrary milestone ingame is not exactly failproof.

How engaged is someone who only runs missions, but has run in excess of 1,500 missions over 5 years?

How engaged is someone who only mines rocks, but has done it for years upon years?

Is it engagement enough to write in excess of 400 posts at the forums each month? Spend like 20 hours a week writing and reading about EVE?

Of all the silly things CCP ever did to me, calling me "not engaged" because I never went to null or reached some other random milestone ingame may be of the silliest.

If I was not engaged, Dr Whatsyourname, I would not have given in excess of 1,000 euros to your company.

And now it turns I am not even deemed worthy of keeping as a customer because "I am not engaged enough" and my kind leaves too often. Roll

That's pathetic.

I have a suggestion. If most people will not cross the social wall, or will not enter the sandbox nor miss it... have a revolutionary idea, free of charge: deliver them exactly what they want with a EVE twist rather than shake your head and say "too bad, they weren't engaged enough" as they leave.


You mention reading and posting on the forums a lot. I would guess that'd be one thing that sets you apart from other players with an otherwise similar in-game profile who flame out and leave due to lack of engagement.


Well, I am word-loomer and a story-teller at heart. Not reading and not writing about something that grabs my attention is not an option to me, and EVE is truly fascinating.... but improvable. Blink

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Jelani Akinyemi Affonso
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2014-01-02 23:19:22 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
And ccp rise noted that pve is the main thing people do in eve... interesting


funny isn't it?

lol

but I guess that is why CCP seem reluctant when it comes to PVE. If they mess it up then that means a lot of **** off players.
Imagine a world where we have to live with more "Dinsdales"? Roll

I'm a mostly PVE player myself, but sighh...

mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#33 - 2014-01-02 23:20:01 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
On the player retention thing, I will point out that measuring "engagement" by measuring wether a player reached or don't an arbitrary milestone ingame is not exactly failproof.

How engaged is someone who only runs missions, but has run in excess of 1,500 missions over 5 years?

How engaged is someone who only mines rocks, but has done it for years upon years?

Is it engagement enough to write in excess of 400 posts at the forums each month? Spend like 20 hours a week writing and reading about EVE?

Of all the silly things CCP ever did to me, calling me "not engaged" because I never went to null or reached some other random milestone ingame may be of the silliest.

If I was not engaged, Dr Whatsyourname, I would not have given in excess of 1,000 euros to your company.

And now it turns I am not even deemed worthy of keeping as a customer because "I am not engaged enough" and my kind leaves too often. Roll

That's pathetic.

I have a suggestion. If most people will not cross the social wall, or will not enter the sandbox nor miss it... have a revolutionary idea, free of charge: deliver them exactly what they want with a EVE twist rather than shake your head and say "too bad, they weren't engaged enough" as they leave.


You mention reading and posting on the forums a lot. I would guess that'd be one thing that sets you apart from other players with an otherwise similar in-game profile who flame out and leave due to lack of engagement.


Well, I am word-loomer and a story-teller at heart. Not reading and not writing about something that grabs my attention is not an option to me, and EVE is truly fascinating.... but improvable. Blink


Right, but that's still an additional thing similar looking players may not have going for them.

Am kinda curious what prompted you to jump to the "My kind isn't worth keeping" conclusion though, because don't remember anything even close to that being said and a skim of that session's minutes confirms. What?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-01-02 23:24:42 UTC
mynnna wrote:


Right, but that's still an additional thing similar looking players may not have going for them.

Am kinda curious what prompted you to jump to the "My kind isn't worth keeping" conclusion though, because don't remember anything even close to that being said and a skim of that session's minutes confirms. What?


/me nods. Anybody who thinks that CCP is trying to kill off PvE play or PvE players needs to reread the minutes. It just ain't so.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#35 - 2014-01-02 23:31:38 UTC
Jelani Akinyemi Affonso wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
And ccp rise noted that pve is the main thing people do in eve... interesting


funny isn't it?

lol

but I guess that is why CCP seem reluctant when it comes to PVE. If they mess it up then that means a lot of **** off players.
Imagine a world where we have to live with more "Dinsdales"? Roll

I'm a mostly PVE player myself, but sighh...



but yet drone assist has been in game for 10 years and is used by pve alot but yet some people in 0.0 stated to use it against the goons and now it has to be nerfed?

interesting.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#36 - 2014-01-02 23:34:04 UTC
I hope the official CSM8 secretary Kesper North appreciates all the hard work the other members put into making the minutes Cool

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#37 - 2014-01-02 23:34:17 UTC
tl;dr; NDA

Roll

Signatures should be used responsibly...
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#38 - 2014-01-02 23:38:28 UTC
Thank you.
Jelani Akinyemi Affonso
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2014-01-02 23:45:27 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Jelani Akinyemi Affonso wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
And ccp rise noted that pve is the main thing people do in eve... interesting


funny isn't it?

lol

but I guess that is why CCP seem reluctant when it comes to PVE. If they mess it up then that means a lot of **** off players.
Imagine a world where we have to live with more "Dinsdales"? Roll

I'm a mostly PVE player myself, but sighh...



but yet drone assist has been in game for 10 years and is used by pve alot but yet some people in 0.0 stated to use it against the goons and now it has to be nerfed?

interesting.


How did we jump from PVE to drone assist just now?

Anyway, I'm still relatively new but I'm sure there are countless examples of things that were in game for years but still have been iterated, changed or nerf. It's something that if you are an eve player that you should expect.

The most recent major item that was nerf was tech, and from what I heard it was in games for years.

But in my opinion, I like drone assist but I believe a compromise can be found. Ppl just need to relax and have a discussion about it and a solution can found.

Seems to be some pretty decent solution that have been put forth in the comment section of Jester's blog: http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2013/12/drone-assist-needs-to-die-redux.html
Vivi Udan
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#40 - 2014-01-02 23:49:41 UTC
Quote:
Seagull continued with an overview of the future of the EVE/DUST link. This part of the
meeting was so NDA that all memory of it was surgically removed from the CSM before
they were allowed out of the room.
-page 35 of the CSM 8 August 2013 Minutes

Assuming someone in the CSM finished training NDA Clearance L5 and managed to jumpclone before CCP initiated the surgery...

Was the CSM (either as a group or individually) happy with the next installment to the EVE/DUST link?
Was it something that could be looked at as 'ambitious' enough to encourage a vast amount more EVE players to actively or passively engage with DUST? or was it another stepping stone?
Were these additions/modifications to the EVE/DUST link going to happen soon or Soon™?


On a side note, personally I feel capitals need to be rebalanced sooner (no ™) rather than later.
Assuming this post shows up twice, I blame the internet.

The Mittani of House GoonWaffe, First of His name, King of the Goons and VFK, Master of griefing, Lord of the CFC, Warden of the West, and Protector of Deklein.