Assembly Hall

This is something I don't like. There was a topic about missiles rebalance/mods on official forums and I've heard there was a disscussion on reddit about it with devs involved. Madness.

EvE has broad spectrum of activities, we can't assume CSM members done all of them. I'm playing for 2,5 year and don't even touch FW because of standing loss. Maybe it's time to vote for some kind of ppl good at one aspect of the game like low-sec, WHs, Industry etc. instead random dozen with 1/3 of them comes from goons just beacuse they have crushing voting supremacy comes from alliance numbers.

Most of it is NDA, but last time Fozzieman spoke too much on o7 show about minerals change and there was speculation on market.

I just like to say.....


"Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down".


Perhaps there was such a large amount of content with the PvE (yeah, actually I mean FW) discussion that the minutes are pages and pages long?

More likely they're trying to figure a way so 3 minutes of casual talking while half the CSM was outside of the boardroom looks as if CCP cares for PvE players...

I have to say that asking all the thousands of players to try to take up a private coorespondance with each csm member is about the worst idea out there. There is no transparancy for one. Are the csm going to privately tell every person "yes I agree" even when they recieve contradictory advise? Who knows?

Second it is an incredibly ineffecient way to communicate with thousands of players to ask them each to individually write you and then you can individually respond. And what sort of in depth discussion could writing a letter have?

I don't expect csm to answer every thread on every type of forum. That is the point. There should be *one* thread for each topic they intend to address and the csm who is addressing that topic only need to check one place. The ideas are out in the open (not just through private letters) and the community can actually take part in the process.

Mike thanks for the concerns.

Ill just address each numbered point:


1)Again what you say is the point that needs to be addressed. The idea is not that the csm should read all the forums. Rather I say if a csm member is going to present something to ccp then that csm member could post some of their ideas in a single thread. Players could pitch in their ideas. (again if you want to reduce the amount of noise ask that players only post in one or 2 such csm topics)

The current situation effectively means no one has any clue what the csm are doing with ccp. Like I said, csm had a session with ccp about faction war. Did anyone know what the csm was going to tell ccp before other than the csm members themselves and perhaps thier relatively small cliques of friends? No because there is no format where players can easily learn what csm are thinking on the topics they are interested in.

Look on reddit look at blogs listen to podcasts and hope some of these mention something you're interested in. The thing is EVE is so big that most likely most of what is posted/said there will not be of interest to most players. By having a seperate thread for a topic players can learn what the csm thinks about the topics that are important to them. Why should I have to register for reddit and a thousand different blogs in order to talk about ccp's csm?



2) Topics can wander no doubt sometimes it is because the effects of what is talked about go beyond what people think. Other times its because people are off topic. We are talking about how representation needs to be done in this thread because it seems it was a topic of the summit. But yes this thread would be overbroad. The thread topics should be of more limited scope but some leeway should be offered. There is no magic formula but its also not an impossible task. Honestly, unless csm can actually get player input csm is at best a waste and at worst misleading ccp about what players want.

3) Transparency transparency transparency. Now CSM are seen as just a bunch of special interests that do not even allow players to know what they are advocating until it is done. And until csm opens up beyond private emails with thier friends this view will be justified. I have no idea who you speak to nor do I care. I am however interested in the *ideas* you want to present to ccp. Why wouldn't you (or other csm) want players to know what ideas you intend to propose, so they can give input?

Right now the messages and formats are so diverse across the internet they are effectively hidden.

4) I am glad you are all for openness. I would suggest that csm members simply start a seperate thread about what they might talk about for the next summit. So for example, if you were planning on presenting something in the fw topic then you would put in to that thread what you wanted to say. If you had nothing you were planning to say in the fw thread then you wouldn't *need* to follow it the thread at all. No one from csm would need to post at all. But then don't be surprised when players think little of csm.

Players who are interested in that topic can post. If the thread gets too unwieldly you have to at least count it as some sort of plus in that players are actually taking interest in the csm. But yes there might be negatives to the threads getting too large. And in those cases moderation or splitting of topics may need to happen.

Not consider an idea due to some personal grudge against the poster? That fits the view many players have that csm are just special interest groups for their friends.

5) I would like to know what your views are on topics. Private emails you have with others is not going to help.

Let's say day 4 comes out and people want to address some of the topics in an open way. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a seperate thread for each topic? I mean posting in this thread will just a be a huge mass of different topics. That is all I am suggesting. I would just like to see separate threads that address the topics csm intends to propose to ccp. Is that asking too much?

The Day 4 minute PDF closes with "this is the end of Day Two".

other than that, thanks!! Lots of NDA, but thanks!

Which section was missing? The pdf version has not changed.
edit: Info about Faction warfare and PVE was missing in the first version per the new post.

still not the new version for me

still no mention of when T3 cruisers are going too get a nerf bat/ rebalance, its sooooo.. overdue and needed.

links should be a permanent bubble (invisible) that buffs anyone inside it from say 50km upto 75km maybe, as the different types of links could have different ranges, say siege and armour links could be shorter ranged than the info and skirmish links.

http://pastebin.com/TiSSBX43 if you want the text from the missing section.

(the CDN has long cache timers. Depends where you are in the world, what you see)