Assembly Hall

Once again, CSM 11 visited CCP at our Reykjavik HQ for their second summit. This involved four days of meetings between CSM members and CCP developers. As part of the summit process, a set of meeting minutes are released. You can now view the meeting minutes here.

Please feel free to discuss the minutes and ask further questions to the members of the CSM in this thread.







Edit: Added the missing link. ISD Max Trix
Edit 2: Messed up the url Fixed now.

I had hoped the overhaul of the NPC mission system was farther along than these exploratory questions suggest. It's desperately needed.

On the first question, I don't think PvE needs to be harder overall. Some small, newly authored, randomly selected goals inside of a mission could keep the overall difficulty (if measured in damage and hitpoints) the same, while providing new choices we haven't seen before. For example, one time you're asked to rescue the Damsel just like it is today, from a structure with the usual defenders. Another time, Zor undocks as you approach or start shooting the structure, takes the Damsel and microjumps (one time only) 100km away: forget the structure, you've got to stop Zor.

On the second question, I think new players should be able to get into most level 4's during their second month; a sense of progression and ability is important for retention; every month a new player has to decide if its worth it to keep paying.

The Burner missions provide great info up front so a player can make an informed choice about the (intense) difficulty, its a good template to follow for the most difficult content to help avoid morale-crushing losses. The other level 1-4 mission texts aren't nearly as helpful; most players are recommended to consult external mission reports. Marauders were overhauled (Bastion mode) with the realization that level 4's were too grindy, and here's the ship class players should aspire to fly, for best isk/hr.

Aryth brought up the topic of Shield Capitals and how there are issues with being extremely 
vulnerable to energy neutralizers. CCP said they would revisit it after releasing shield slaves. 
CCP said that they were also aware of application issues with Caldari weapon capitals. 

Edit: Sorry, missed it when I read through the first time and didnt come up under missiles <3 - any kind of roadmap on this?

Bobmon brought up the topic of capital ship movement via tethered structures. CCP 
responded that they're not happy with the current system, but it was again a matter of 
priorities compared to other work they needed to do.

Fairly disappointed in this response in all honesty, I'd like to see dev work go into making sure feature and content work and are balanced before deciding they're "good enough" and wandering away. I understand the reasoning, but it's pretty darn overpowered at the moment.

-

Because EVE PvE is not intrinsically fun. If it were, more people might look for it to be.

The more ppl will do pve the more pvp targets you will have. I'm more concerned about all this NPE thing. It seems to not accomplish anything spectacular yet. After initial boom PCU is dropping, but hey new SKINs everywhere...

Question is what is good NPE?

We don't need new NPC AI. I've wondering what is the purpose for those new mining fleets. We can interact with only by shooting them. What the point here? So miner gankers have more fun? It has nothing to do with improving any pve experience, apart from I can see the fleets on my d-scan sometimes.

We need something more than "warp to site, shoot trigger, loot, warp off". After 15 sites most of pve players will uninstall. Where is the fun? In unpredictability. In difficulty. I've done all kind of noncombat exploration sites, all types of 1-4 DED sites, most of unrated complexes. Loot table is good (most of it), but they are all the same. This is no game for pve oriented players. They will be bored too quickly.

Even in high-security space people doing PvE provide targets for someone (read: MTU killers/baiters, mission item stealers, suicide killers of blinged ships, etc...).


Not sure if it is a problem though. Look at Burner missions.



The problem as i see it: CCP cannot find sweet-spot (or they do not want to).They either make stupid AI low-reward NPCs (look at recent event) or totally overpowered NPCs with big rewards (Burners, i'm looking at you!). As result such things are not popular among 'casuals'.

I believe exploration is a perfect example of properly done PvE. It is totally PvE but to find it people go for low-sec and 0.0-space and even wormholes providing PvP.

Why do we play games? To be bored? It's doesn't matter how high reward would be if game become second job. If I'm willing to spent part of my free time to the game I want its mechanism to be entertaining. Exploration is all about rewards ofc, thats why we "exploring", to find some good stuff.
PI is good example, it may bring a lot of reward (ISK) but did you ever do it? I manage to do it for a week. Then I throw up and went back to exploration.

Edit: second good example are events. I do them for the rewards (booster mostly). Do I enjoy them? NO, because they are boring.

Hi,

I am surprised that nobody has yet picked up on the potentially coming changes with a new forum. If i have understood correct CCP will give up (or will no be able) to binding a name in the forum to an actual character that belongs to the respective EVE account. I personally find it very undesirable not to be able to match a forum post to an in game character. That opens a lot of possible abuse situations. I hope the CSM will push to make sure that does not go ahead the way it looks in the minutes.

Have FuN!
Zora Dijon