These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CSM9 Winter Summit minutes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#121 - 2015-01-24 07:59:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
On the issue of Battleships, one thing that stands out to me is the Marauder ability of functioning as a miniature Dread with Bastion mode. It isn't a complete redefinition of Battleships, but I consider the addition of Bastion mode a significant gesture toward making Battleships more interesting.

I think the answer lies in raising the DPS ceiling of Battleships and Battlecruisers by 50%, mostly due to their signature radius being disproportionately big compared to their current DPS figures, as well as every other factor of their classes. The basic idea is bringing Battleships and Battlecruisers closer to bridging the gap between subcapitals and Dreads.

corebloodbrothers wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
Many of us have bent EVE to our will, through time, and experience, and wits, but this type of painful, unsatisfying experience is not what popular games are made of. If you tell me the goal is to maintain a cult following, I will give up my hopes of EVE becoming something more.



I am in eve cause its a kick ass ride tbh, i te a game that has captivated me in a way i never thought possible. Considering i am crazy enough apperenlty about it that i am typing this ina icelandic hotellobby aftehr a week of back to back meetings :)

To see eve has a future, a direction and a plan that guides the big thing of things and is in a healthy state to put it out there is one of the thingsi take home with me, others are dedicated and talented people, engaged players and the beatu of eve in its play, grapics, emergent addictive elements and the social community around it

Call me a eve junkie:)

o7 to the CSMs for your service.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#122 - 2015-01-24 10:08:26 UTC
Good work on the fast relese of the minutes!
Strange picture of the cat though, is that Schrödingers cat?
Like the NDA topic it stands in i am geussing it is both dead and alive untill we open the (sand)box (eve) .

No local in null sec would fix everything!
CCP Leeloo
C C P
C C P Alliance
#123 - 2015-01-24 15:45:35 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:

Strange picture of the cat though, is that Schrödingers cat?


This is CCP Kitteh, he belongs to CCP Falcon and me :3

CCP Leeloo | Community Developer | @ccp_leeloo | leeloo@ccpgames.com
CCP Leeloo
C C P
C C P Alliance
#124 - 2015-01-24 18:42:10 UTC
Day four. PDF & TXT

CCP Leeloo | Community Developer | @ccp_leeloo | leeloo@ccpgames.com
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2015-01-24 18:57:58 UTC
and the circle is complete

enjoy, folks . . . .we worked hard, whether it shows or not

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Makoto Priano
Kirkinen-Arataka Transhuman Zenith Consulting Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#126 - 2015-01-24 18:58:40 UTC
:D

Thanks for the swift posting, Leeloo! I was wondering if you all would be working on this on Saturday. Thanks much for getting it up, and hope you get to properly enjoy the weekend. :)

Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
EnyoEnyoEnyoEnyoEnyoEnyo EnyoEnyoEnyo
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#127 - 2015-01-24 19:40:36 UTC  |  Edited by: EnyoEnyoEnyoEnyoEnyoEnyo EnyoEnyoEnyo
CCP Leeloo wrote:
Day four. PDF & TXT


Quote:
CCP BasementBen said that are also a lot more things going on too, including multiplayer animation,
temporal anti-aliasing, renovation of deployable structures, kill marks on ships to count kills performed
in that hull, as well as more ship redesigns for the Enjo, Ishkur, Sin, Keres, Chimera, Cerberus, and
others


I want you to know that Im mighty mad about this sudden and unexpected namechange to the best ship in eve. I hope CCP will fix this great error in no time.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#128 - 2015-01-24 20:06:10 UTC
Good job all. Thanks for the effort and top marks on the minutes.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#129 - 2015-01-24 20:33:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
balancing meeting was the one of most interest too me.. i wonder if there was more said in detail and more ships discussed?
some things i would like too see addressed are

- T3 ships having T2 resists removed.. it should be the domain of T2 ships only having inbuilt T2 resists.. a hull advantage..
- removing rigs is the favoured option for sure on T3's (less expense, also less HP trimarks/extenders good thing)
- i would like a stronger discussion on subs and T3 hulls, they are hugely expensive now and any nerfs would need price reductions here, for sub switching too happen they need too be cheap too even consider buying stacks of the different subs either for in station changes or for putting in cargo for switching during fleet roams/ moving too hunt a target.
-remove SP loss .. its a pointless punitive mechanic
- build in fitting/HP etc into the hull so swapping subs is easier too do. slots being removed and the mods stripped every time you change a sub is unnecessary time wasting, and it would be easier for comparisons being able too look at the ships attributes, rather than the 10's of subs there are.

on combat bc's
- i would like the current ABC's talos etc moved to a T2 hull as they are specialist ships using oversized guns
- this would allow some of the current CBC's moved into the attack section thus allowing more mobility on those that need it

on capitals
- removing logi bonuses/ links from basic carriers would allow supers too have that as their domain instead giving them a use
- add supercarrier skillbook too further separate them from carriers
- also remove sentries/ heavies from carriers
-remove drone/fighter assist

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#130 - 2015-01-24 22:33:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Rain6637 wrote:
On the issue of Battleships, one thing that stands out to me is the Marauder ability of functioning as a miniature Dread with Bastion mode. It isn't a complete redefinition of Battleships, but I consider the addition of Bastion mode a significant gesture toward making Battleships more interesting.

I think the answer lies in raising the DPS ceiling of Battleships and Battlecruisers by 50%, mostly due to their signature radius being disproportionately big compared to their current DPS figures, as well as every other factor of their classes. The basic idea is bringing Battleships and Battlecruisers closer to bridging the gap between subcapitals and Dreads.

corebloodbrothers wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
Many of us have bent EVE to our will, through time, and experience, and wits, but this type of painful, unsatisfying experience is not what popular games are made of. If you tell me the goal is to maintain a cult following, I will give up my hopes of EVE becoming something more.



I am in eve cause its a kick ass ride tbh, i te a game that has captivated me in a way i never thought possible. Considering i am crazy enough apperenlty about it that i am typing this ina icelandic hotellobby aftehr a week of back to back meetings :)

To see eve has a future, a direction and a plan that guides the big thing of things and is in a healthy state to put it out there is one of the thingsi take home with me, others are dedicated and talented people, engaged players and the beatu of eve in its play, grapics, emergent addictive elements and the social community around it

Call me a eve junkie:)

o7 to the CSMs for your service.


i would suggest the dps ceiling needs to be put on cruisers.. the dps of things like gilas/VNI's/Ishtars and a few others are what makes bc's and battleships less useful.. aswell as bc's excessive sig radius.. and fitting needs a bit of a raise on bc's aswell as making T1 links more accessible too younger players in these ships..

a combination of overbuffing cruisers and overnerfing bc's and some battleships being left neglected, plus warp speed changes

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#131 - 2015-01-24 22:51:08 UTC
Ishtars need to achieve at least 50% of all PvP damage to get touched upon?
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#132 - 2015-01-24 23:23:49 UTC
On day 4;

has either CCP and/or CSM talked about promoting voting for CSM X

or did that not make the minutes or is NDA-ed ?

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
Master Dumi
Gladius Veritatis
Goonswarm Federation
#133 - 2015-01-25 02:47:13 UTC
Dear friends,

No one is upset by the fatigue generated by small ships using JB's ?
The home terrain advantage created by the JB in 0.0 space is now close to nothing due to fatigue.

The whole point of the Pheobe changes was to generate more fights but after a few months we can see that all the Jump-Changes killed the 0.0 warfare. This was a clear mistake, a lot of 0.0 members are against that but I did not see any mention about that at CSM lvl.

Every time CCP is "hitting with the nerf bat" a ship or a ship class players find another ship or ship class to use for large PvP warfare and then the CCP will eventually nerf that ship or ship class.

BALANCE seems the word CCP does not understand when changing ships, interceptors with too much DPS, some destroyers doing more DPS than a Cruiser, many cruisers doing more DPS than all the T1 BC, battleships outgunned and undertanked ... we see less and less BS fleets except a few faction ones.

The Carrier was the capital ship helping a player to move his ships and assets and now is just a drone boat.

Syri Taneka
NOVA-CAINE
#134 - 2015-01-25 02:50:07 UTC
So, we're talking about ditching off-grid fighter assignment? You want to take the last useful thing about carriers away from them, too...

Is it a broken mechanic? Definitely. How broken is easily illustrated by this kill ( https://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=14917447 ), wherein myself and an alliance mate camped a gate with a t2 large bubble and fighter-assisted interceptors (the Tempest pilot was a lucky-timed kill whore, having gotten caught in the bubble on their way through our 2.5-man camp). That does not mean it should be done away with altogether. Carriers still need some reason to exist, after all.

There have been many proposals to how to deal with this issue without simply removing it. Since the primary problem it creates is the ability to give a normally low-damage ship very high DPS (~800 from a properly-fit Thanatos, assuming maximized skills for all parties and no faction+ mods), the most obvious counter is to simply reduce the number of fighters that can be assigned to a given player.

Reduce to how many? I'm thinking 1.

1 fighter (2 DDAs) has identical average DPS as an un-modded Gecko on a Drone Boat (ie Dominix, Ishtar, Nestor). It moves up to 50% faster while MWDing (no mod/rig bonuses), has less than half the tracking, orbits more slowly, and orbits closer. It has only ~50% more total EHP, and about half the market value. It does only 2 types of damage, rather than all 4.

On top of this, I propose:
a) Remove the ability to follow targets in warp. There are relatively few circumstances where this is desirable, anyway, as they are very easy to shake or kill when away from the main hostile fleet.
b) Allow them to be effected by warp disruption, enabling them to be prevented from being sent back to their host by canny controllers, to prevent loss.
c) Remove the ability for Drone mods to effect Fighters (further reducing the extra DPS potential to 100/125 per fighter, slowing them down, and making them track worse again).
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#135 - 2015-01-25 02:57:14 UTC
Quote:
Sugar Kyle asked about the Sisters of
EVE Epic Arc, specifically regarding the last two NPCs. In many
cases new players can't kill them and require the assistance of other players. She suggested it may prove
to be a barrier for some players and suggested looking into how many new players compl
ete the
missions or give up. CCP Affinity answered that they can certainly look at individual NPCs. Mike also
suggested that they could look at adding text to recommend bringing along a friend.


hey i remember this from 2011

i fought the second-to-last boss in a coercer. i had to ask rookie help chat "the prophecy is shooting a wavy red thing at me and my capacitor's gone, what's going on and how do i stop it?" because of course i was completely out of cap, coercer crippled. i eventually killed it solo, after fitting my own vampire, but it took a long time. these days i guess the vamp effect'd appear near the capacitor readout

i had to ask for help for the last boss, and helped out someone else sometime after i'd done it. i don't think it's a bad thing that the boss requires teamwork, but yeah making it clear that teamwork is desirable is a good move

i still don't like that the tutorials and the quest lead newbies into mission running, because level ones/twos are tedious, have zero interaction with others and pay ridicuously poorly. i'm convinced this leads to poor retention. my first few months were spent being bored running the same bloody missions until i got a battleship
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#136 - 2015-01-25 04:26:33 UTC
Quote:
Xander asked about the long term plans for supers and whether or not simply removing them and
refunding SP was an option. CCP Fozzie confirmed they had no concrete plans for the moment and that
deleting them and refunding SP was
something they would like to avoid.



kinda curious as to where the **** that question came from and what would make someone even consider this O_o i dont think there has ever been an instance in the entire history of eve that an entire hull was removed from the game and i hope that this was never even considered by CCP.
Kage S3kkou
State War Academy
Caldari State
#137 - 2015-01-25 06:18:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Kage S3kkou
ITTigerClawIK wrote:
Quote:
Xander asked about the long term plans for supers and whether or not simply removing them and
refunding SP was an option. CCP Fozzie confirmed they had no concrete plans for the moment and that
deleting them and refunding SP was
something they would like to avoid.



kinda curious as to where the **** that question came from and what would make someone even consider this O_o i dont think there has ever been an instance in the entire history of eve that an entire hull was removed from the game and i hope that this was never even considered by CCP.


I think Xander's question comes from the fact, that these ships haven't been rebalanced as Yet and there is no firm indication from CCP as to when they will be looked at.
CCP has in the past said they want to and that they want to redefine the roles of Carriers, Super's as well as Titans, from what they currently are. But that the Dev's are prohibited from doing what they want to do, to rebalance & redefine them, due to the code re-write being incomplete. Hence limiting what they can and can't do with them. So CCP wants to wait, until the code is finished and they can change these ships to new and different roles, from what they currently fill.

On Communication, and before Fanfest happens this year;
I wish that CCP would stop coming out at Fanfest and telling us stuff they have no intention of following thru with.
We have heard in the past about tessellation, ring moon mining ( just to name a few) & many, many more things, all of which seems to have been ditched.
Just give us the facts & tell us what your going to actually follow thru on, rather than pie in the sky idea's that sadly might never happen.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#138 - 2015-01-25 06:34:24 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:

There was a features and ideas thread about learning implants. The short version of my conclusion after chewing on that thread was make jump cloning within the same station zero-cooldown. That way you can maintain a learning clone and a PVP clone. Implants should not be removed, for the reason of gameplay for people who collect them.


This dovetails into something that came to mind. Instead of the active clone doing the learning, how about the clone in station be the one actually doing the learning? From a lore-ish point of view this appears to be more plausible - why tax a mind that is already dealing with an active day in the pod when the resting clone isn't getting anything done?? I was stuck on the cool down issue, but making it zero makes it all work. IdeaIdea
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#139 - 2015-01-25 06:39:56 UTC
Asayanami Dei wrote:
Noriko Mai wrote:
Asayanami Dei wrote:
ludicrous speed! GO!

You no tell CCP make Dark Opaque theme. Bad CSM you, very bad!!!

Or is
Quote:
[...] including things like contrasting themes.
maybe something similar?

We did ask, minutes aren't a transcrip just a summary.


So a highly requested tweak is asked about but no one bothers to write it down? What else important had been dropped on the floor?
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#140 - 2015-01-25 06:46:09 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
XeX Znndstrup wrote:
Dear CCP, dear CSM,

You spoke about "social clubs" or "societies" page 17.

Simplier, i would suggest to speak about Organizations.
We have players or non players corporations or alliances.

There are non players organizations (SOE for example) but no players organizations.
They would allow to gather players who have a same objective without breaking their freedom to be in a corporation or to be solo.

And we would use like this a concept that already exists in Eve but not available for players.

Why shouldn't we be able to build a SOE type organization in game ?

Good summit and best regards.



That IS what the societies are. Player made groupings and tools to facilitate them.

m


Mike is just looking to attend a Red Hat Society ball in drag.