These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Issler Dainze for CSM7! Hear the bears roar!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#241 - 2012-02-06 08:45:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. The move from highsec to low or null shouldn't be such a steep cliff and the rewards should be more appealing. This could be done largely by CCP actually do what it has been promising to do for the past two years, like complete the "industry" half of the Dominion expansion, and stop ignoring wardec exploits in highsec which have become common practice and actually fix them.

Unlike a lot of people, I don't think highsec players are inherently 'cowardly' or inferior for using tricks like NPC corp alts and dec shields to avoid the risk of unconsensual PVP. Like nullsec players who keep alts in highsec, it's that they are placed at a competitive disadvantage against their peers in the goal of acquiring ISK if they don't wait out wardecs, don't corp/alliance hop, not use NPC corps to evade PvP, station games, etc. All those things that few highsec people I've talked to can say they enjoy, or that's the reason they started playing EVE, but they all do it anyway because who wants to be a loser? EVE is a harsh game that has little mercy for those who fail to adapt.

When POCOs were rebalanced so that there was an advantage to using ones in lowsec, I don't think it made the game worse for PI players. Rather the opposite, it gave those who dared challenges as they engaged in PvP in the goal of reaching a lowsec POCO in their hauler without getting ganked by pirates, all for the goal of making an extra 5-10% profit.

I think a lot of highsec players would be willing to step up and give up some of their PvP-free safeties it meant their competition was forced to as well. I don't think they'll ragequit like a lot of people think, and it's not like adding more risk-free PvE has been a stellar way of retaining EVE subs anyway (Tyrannis, Incursion).
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#242 - 2012-02-06 08:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
I believer very few nullsec players would care if the game was rebalanced to the point where it made sense that they did all their PvE in null, so long as it meant their competition had to as well.

Pretty much, yes. If one's alliance was more/better able to get their slaves mining and producing they would have a definite edge. It would also have the side effect of being able to hear the squeals of pain from highsec.

If Jita was for example, by just some bug or something, turned into say a 0.4sec region for a day or so, I would log into my market alt just to see the amazing local chat. Undock and get twice the killmails!


It's an efficiency thing. We don't mine because it's inefficient, and we produce in high/don't produce because it's inefficient. Highsec is something common to all nullsec groups, whereas null production capabilities are not.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Gevlin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#243 - 2012-02-06 08:48:40 UTC
Had an opportunity to talk with the mittani, and listen to some of this other Goon comments.

He did mention most of the Sucking chest wounds are fix, leaving development of Low Sec and Null sec at a balance level.

Once the major issues of Faction warfare and null sec are address he would not mind to see WIS.


So the candidate pushing for items out side of of null sec should not be as tough as it would have been if you were apart of CSM 6

the candidate will have to look at ways to play the game differently. From the last minutes it seemed the talk was about how the "Drone" Regions were not operating like the rest of null sec. and needs to be simplified to be the same as the rest of null sec.

But on the other hand no-one wants drone regions because it sucks...

personally out side of the Insta Pop of the Titan capital sized weapons the super cape issue is almost

Captial sized tackler would also be nice as well, to tackle those super caps.

Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#244 - 2012-02-06 08:53:30 UTC
Arcathra wrote:
You are right. As far as I can tell (never was in nullsec) that seems to be one of the bigger problems in nullsec. The dependency or perceived dependency of high-sec. I agree with you that there has to be done something about that. No one should be dependent on a part of the game that he don't wants to play. But that also applies to high-sec players. They don't want to be forced into something because it benefits nullsec in some way. Not that surprising that they feel a little bit left out even though they are not that tiny minority that some nullsec people always try to make of them.

The questions are what can be done to make the situation for nullsec better? Maybe some changes have to come to high-sec but this has to be dicussed with the high-sec people. I'm sure there can be found some kind of middle ground both can live with. At the moment it seems that it is perceived by a lot of high-sec players that nullsec players try to force changes to get rid of them and their playing style. Considering that we have as much high-sec players as nullsec players that can't be the way to go, can it?

That is the reason we need one or two good candidates to make that discussions even possible.

One of the common misconceptions is high has no representation on this CSM. Thats not really true, because about half the CSM are NOT nullsec candidates... We got 5 on the main CSM, vs 4 who are not part of nullsec alliances. Sadly tho, fixing nullsec has to take priority, given that it is eve's main selling point(even if people end up mining in highsec for years).

Why did you join eve? was it because of the stories you heard, or because someone told you that the farming in highsec was so uber?

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Arcathra
Technodyne Ltd.
#245 - 2012-02-06 08:59:21 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. The move from highsec to low or null shouldn't be such a steep cliff and the rewards should be more appealing. This could be done largely by CCP actually do what it has been promising to do for the past two years, like complete the "industry" half of the Dominion expansion, and stop ignoring wardec exploits in highsec which have become common practice and actually fix them.

Unlike a lot of people, I don't think highsec players are inherently 'cowardly' or inferior for using tricks like NPC corp alts and dec shields to avoid the risk of unconsensual PVP. Like nullsec players who keep alts in highsec, it's that they are placed at a competitive disadvantage against their peers in the goal of acquiring ISK if they don't wait out wardecs, don't corp/alliance hop, not use NPC corps to evade PvP, station games, etc. All those things that few highsec people I've talked to can say they enjoy, or that's the reason they started playing EVE, but they all do it anyway because who wants to be a loser? EVE is a harsh game that has little mercy for those who fail to adapt.

When POCOs were rebalanced so that there was an advantage to using ones in lowsec, I don't think it made the game worse for PI players. Rather the opposite, it gave those who dared challenges as they engaged in PvP in the goal of reaching a lowsec POCO in their hauler without getting ganked by pirates, all for the goal of making an extra 5-10% profit. I think a lot of highsec players would be willing to step up and give up some of their PvP-free safeties it meant their competition was forced to as well. I don't think they'll ragequit like a lot of people think, and it's not like adding more risk-free PvE has been a stellar way of retaining EVE subs anyway (Tyrannis, Incursion).

Sounds very reasonable, thanks for your insight.

I by myself would really like to live in low-sec for example, but I know that I can't sustain my inevitable losses I would have there. So I would have the problem to hop once in a while into high-sec to make some ISK or have an alt there, too. I would also be glad if that limitations wouldn't be there.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#246 - 2012-02-06 09:29:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Arcathra wrote:

I by myself would really like to live in low-sec for example, but I know that I can't sustain my inevitable losses I would have there. So I would have the problem to hop once in a while into high-sec to make some ISK or have an alt there, too. I would also be glad if that limitations wouldn't be there.


As a career militia pilot this is something I can't share enough with players - losses in lowsec are not unsustainable by any means, as long as some safety measures are taken.

You can move just about any ship about, with enough planning, scouting, proper fitting, or proper flying technique.

I totally respect those that enjoy low-risk, low-reward activities in high sec, but for those thinking lowsec is some big bad cesspool that will gank you left and right, its only that way if you don't take the time to learn low-sec travel and safety 101.

I don't say this to sound all badass, I'm a pretty mediocre PvP pilot. I'm just saying, from someone who runs a POS in lowsec, mines gas, runs PvE sites, all that kind of stuff, low sec is very survivable. I think most people have a few bad experiences than get turned off to lowsec, instead of simply adapting to a different way of doing work there.

So much talk of risk / reward will be talked about in the coming debates - I think its important to note that the only risk you take in lowsec, is when you choose to ignore basic self-defense and safety. Sometimes I'll leeroy a non-stabbed, non-cloaky Logistics ship out to rendezvous with a fleet. THAT is risky. I'm taking a chance that because the fleet is further away, I don't have scouts and might be tackled along the way.

But mining in lowsec? Ratting in lowsec? Hauling in lowsec? These aren't activities that should really be seen as "high-risk". If I'm doing any of those, its in a ship with a cloak, or a ship that's aligned, and I'm actively using my scanner. If I see danger, I warp. Thats a controlled situation, not risk.

You could even call this carebearing if you want to, since you're actively avoiding PvP. But however you slice it, I want to encourage highsec players seeking greater reward to come out to lowsec and try it out - NOT because we want to gank you, (some do) but because if you're flying properly you can virtually eliminate the risk element and make a lot more money doing the same things you love to do in high sec.

Just ask one of us how to be safe before you do. Leeroy on out, and you WILL be taking the risk!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Arcathra
Technodyne Ltd.
#247 - 2012-02-06 09:48:12 UTC
Yeah, I know that. I've flown through low-sec more than once and also had a POS there for about half a year. It was fun, but very taxing to earn ISK down there. I and my Corp mostly ended up earning ISK with missions in high-sec and doing some exploration sites and wormholes in low-sec just for fun.

I would really like mining and industry in general to become a more profitable activity in low-sec.
Vasya Kosyakov
X-Exclusion-X
#248 - 2012-02-06 09:52:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Vasya Kosyakov
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Vasya Kosyakov wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Goonswarm Recruitment wrote:
Goonswarm Federation, the one true Photobucket alliance hereby declares its support for the VOR. I also hereby declare my intention to make sure everything on Photobucket is VORPORN, (Voice of Reason Party Organizationally Recognized Newbees)


Thats why no one should take GSF serius


They should all be shot and removed from the "game", Racist, Bigoted, Eve ***** that they are......


So your answer to a racist, bigoted group infesting the game is to round them all up, shoot them, and remove them from the game. That's not hypocritical at all, not one bit! Roll


Well now your being flippant.......

This is exactly the action taken by pest controllers when faced with an infestation of disease ridden corpse chewing sacks of pestilence and same methods for the treatment of a plague or virus all be it with the cunning use of drugs...... So to be shot or pumped full of cleansing drugs and generally removed from society.... make a choice....

P.S Defending goons also makes you part of the problem, not the solution......

Surely we can all unite against the goons... :-)

P.P.S - Goons are fun, to look at and hear their opinions about the world (i meant eve, Goons do not educate well about real world things, sends them into a paranoid rage that there may actually be life outside of the basement)

P.P.P.S - Ok I've gone soft, keep the goons, they are ok really, everyone is entitled to their piece of eve, could you just leave some for the rest of us and think before you start talking.....
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#249 - 2012-02-06 10:42:15 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. (...9


To put it short, you want to shove nullsec down hiseccer's throats. How original. Roll

I have a better idea. You fix whatever you want to fix in nullsec and LEAVE HISEC ALONE.

YOU LEAVE HISEC ALONE AND FIX NULLSEC ISSUES IN NULLSEC ALONE, GET IT??

It is absolutely ludicrous how hiseccers must fight not just to get more content and gameplay, but to just bloody preserve their gameplay from the interference of nullsec whiners!! Evil
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#250 - 2012-02-06 11:09:14 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. (...9


To put it short, you want to shove nullsec down hiseccer's throats. How original. Roll

I have a better idea. You fix whatever you want to fix in nullsec and LEAVE HISEC ALONE.

YOU LEAVE HISEC ALONE AND FIX NULLSEC ISSUES IN NULLSEC ALONE, GET IT??

It is absolutely ludicrous how hiseccers must fight not just to get more content and gameplay, but to just bloody preserve their gameplay from the interference of nullsec whiners!! Evil



All my characters are based in High Sec atm and haven't been in a sov holding corp/alliance in many years and have no intent to join one. I agree with Nicolo's statement you quoted. ..Although I also think Local Intel should go in Null which Nicolo hates Blink

My point Indahmawar is that you and others like you need to get it in your head that you do not represent all High Sec residents.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#251 - 2012-02-06 11:20:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Xorv wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. (...9


To put it short, you want to shove nullsec down hiseccer's throats. How original. Roll

I have a better idea. You fix whatever you want to fix in nullsec and LEAVE HISEC ALONE.

YOU LEAVE HISEC ALONE AND FIX NULLSEC ISSUES IN NULLSEC ALONE, GET IT??

It is absolutely ludicrous how hiseccers must fight not just to get more content and gameplay, but to just bloody preserve their gameplay from the interference of nullsec whiners!! Evil



All my characters are based in High Sec atm and haven't been in a sov holding corp/alliance in many years and have no intent to join one. I agree with Nicolo's statement you quoted. ..Although I also think Local Intel should go in Null which Nicolo hates Blink

My point Indahmawar is that you and others like you need to get it in your head that you do not represent all High Sec residents.


Albeit you are right that i can't speak for all of hisec, you are pretty misguided to share Nicolo's trolling about how fixing someone's gameplay must be done by spoiling soemone else's gameplay. Every hiseccer I encountered but you agrees that hisec must be fixed without harming nullsec, whereas nullsec trolls such as Nicolo are well known for asking that hisec is spoiled in favor of nullsec.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#252 - 2012-02-06 11:47:13 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:

Albeit you are right that i can't speak for all of hisec, you are pretty misguided to share Nicolo's trolling about how fixing someone's gameplay must be done by spoiling soemone else's gameplay. Every hiseccer I encountered but you agrees that hisec must be fixed without harming nullsec, whereas nullsec trolls such as Nicolo are well known for asking that hisec is spoiled in favor of nullsec.


I guess people see what they want to see, but I assure you I am not the only High Sec resident that thinks it should be made much more dangerous. Not only to re-balance risk vs reward between different parts of space, but to improve gameplay in high Sec itself.

High Sec needs attention, but the fixes are to Wardecs, people using NPC corps to avoid risk and consequences, Faction Warfare, and to radially change or abolish the abomination that is High Sec Incursions.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#253 - 2012-02-06 12:09:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Xorv wrote:
standard nullsec troll drivel


2/10 nullsec troll detected, hiding posts.
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#254 - 2012-02-06 12:42:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Che Biko
Seleene wrote:
My goal is that CCP continue to finish and iterate on every area that they have neglected over the past NINE YEARS, not just the past 18 months.
I hope you'll agree that Incarna is one of the most incomplete features to date, if not THE most incomplete feature to date.
I don't fully agree with Fazmarai, but I understand how she feels all to well. When Incarna was cancelled (yes, CQ is not Incarna for me), Crucible left a bitter taste in my mouth that even all the goodness within could not persuade me to get in my pod again. The many little improvements seemed insignificant next to my big disillussion.
On the other hand, the presumption that nothing was done for FiS during the development for Incarna is false as wel. Only mentioning the amazing progress during the war on lag (which benifits mostly nullsec and Jita (not that I want to say all improvements during the same period were just for nullsec, just that they did get a piece of the cake)) should prove it to be false.

Sadly the chairman is listening to people who aprove of his social skills (because they have similar social skills?), and many of those call us barbie fetishists. The chairman is ignoring us after failing to understand what we want, not being his constituents, and none of the other CSM members make up for his flaws. Is at least some involvement in the pro-WiS threadnaught to much to ask for?
I'm glad CCP finally did what the CSM did not: communicate with us. It's really sad that CCP had to do this directly. This makes it clear that there are at least some flaws in how the CSM is supposed to function: representing ALL players.
Two step wrote:
I also missed the part where the CSM banned RP though, so maybe I am just not paying attention today.
Maybe this perception has something to do with how the chairman regards roleplayers and how the december minutes do not contain one instance of the word 'roleplay' or any variation thereof.
Two step wrote:
The role of the CSM isn't to play Junior Game Designer and come up with some new system for mining. CCP has people to design stuff. If fact, those people are kinda protective of their jobs and really don't appreciate some amateur telling them what to do.

I would expect someone who has been on the CSM before to know all this.
Fortunately CCP already has ideas for mining, closely mirroring Issler's view. We just need a CSM to tell them we would like to see them developed.
Also, I don't agree that CCP does not appreciate our input. It's not like they have to do everything we suggest. I would expect someone who is part of the CSM to know this.P
BTW the apparent attitude in posts like yours is really one of the things that bothers me most about the current CSM, mostly the chairman.

Now on to the VoR party. I don't really agree with the name. I probably would vote for something like the 'forgotten party'. The areas in EVE that have been neglected: Roleplay, mining, lo-sec, and bounty hunting just to name some.
I am sympathetic to the voice of reason party, but in the end I will not vote for someone because he represents certain areas, but because I agree with him/her about those areas and the game entirely. That might or might not be a candidate for the VoR party or the forgotten party.
But most of all I would like to see a CSM that actually represents and communicates with players they don't disagree with, and understands them, so they can actually do what they are supposed to do: represent ALL of us. As long as that happens it doesn't really matter if my candidate gets on the CSM or not, but that is sadly not the case. That is why I would also like to see a different CSM structure, to help prevent certain players/areas from not being represented.

But what would I like to see in a ideal (VoR) candidate?
- Understanding roleplay, preferably also tabletop RP experience (character centered WoD players preferred over action centered D&D playersP), and solid RP experience in EVE. Someone who understands that the "bad guy" RP'ers have been neglected in features such as Incursions and FW, and that altruistic capsuleers (and Roc Wieler for example) will rarely, if ever, buy stuff in the NeX store.
- Belief in the vision of building the ultimate sci-fi universe. That includes WiS of course.
- Willingness to present the opinions and requests of those you don't agree with to CCP. (a.k.a. representing all players a.k.a. being a CSM member)
- Someone with at least some interest in asking CCP to iterate on forgotten/neglected areas.
That is all.Big smile

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#255 - 2012-02-06 14:25:49 UTC
Che Biko wrote:
Seleene wrote:
My goal is that CCP continue to finish and iterate on every area that they have neglected over the past NINE YEARS, not just the past 18 months.
I hope you'll agree that Incarna is one of the most incomplete features to date, if not THE most incomplete feature to date.
I don't fully agree with Fazmarai, but I understand how she feels all to well. When Incarna was cancelled (yes, CQ is not Incarna for me), Crucible left a bitter taste in my mouth that even all the goodness within could not persuade me to get in my pod again. The many little improvements seemed insignificant next to my big disillussion.
On the other hand, the presumption that nothing was done for FiS during the development for Incarna is false as wel. Only mentioning the amazing progress during the war on lag (which benifits mostly nullsec and Jita (not that I want to say all improvements during the same period were just for nullsec, just that they did get a piece of the cake)) should prove it to be false.

Sadly the chairman is listening to people who aprove of his social skills (because they have similar social skills?), and many of those call us barbie fetishists. The chairman is ignoring us after failing to understand what we want, not being his constituents, and none of the other CSM members make up for his flaws. Is at least some involvement in the pro-WiS threadnaught to much to ask for?
I'm glad CCP finally did what the CSM did not: communicate with us. It's really sad that CCP had to do this directly. This makes it clear that there are at least some flaws in how the CSM is supposed to function: representing ALL players.


That's the funniest part, CSM6 has called bullshit on themselves by ignoring the threadnaught on WiS. With that and the inherent diifculty to have a candidate elected without a power bloc behind it, I am not really confident that we can succeed to make ourselves heard through the CSM. So maybe the next logical step would be talking to CCP themselves.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#256 - 2012-02-06 16:15:41 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
To put it short, I feel that the rewards for living in null for the average player should be increased and the risk of living in highsec should also be increased. (...9


To put it short, you want to shove nullsec down hiseccer's throats. How original. Roll

So in your mind, 'risk' and 'PvP' is synonymous with nullsec?
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#257 - 2012-02-06 19:43:28 UTC
Traxev wrote:
You should go play farmville.

While I am all for free and open discussion on the forums, I think we need to draw the line at obvious hate-speech like this. Twisted

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#258 - 2012-02-06 20:19:21 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
So in your mind, 'risk' and 'PvP' is synonymous with nullsec?

GIven there's wardec campers in Jita looking for easy kills, I'd say 'risk' and 'PvP' are located conveniently in Jita.

My market alt probably can't undock without being podded instantly, for example.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#259 - 2012-02-06 20:27:53 UTC
Over the weekend I spent some time thinking about how to best succeed at getting some of our candidates elected.

I came up with some ideas and I want to bounce them off folks following this thread. By the way thanks for making this the most active Jita part thread at the moment! Keep this up and we will wins some seats in CSM 7.

1. Is the Voice of Reason party the right name? Something as simple as having the right name can make a huge difference. So thoughts on what name resonates the most.

2. There have been some great folks that came forward so far with ideas but have decided to not run because of the time commitment. For that reason I am going to create a party advisory council. These would be folks that would take on a role throughout the CSM 7 as their time permits with specific game area focus and assist the elected candidates refine their focus. So thoughts? Anyone interested in a "cabinert" role?

3. We need to narrow our focus. Here are some potential areas. So I think mining is definite the top ranked issue and I know there are others. Feedback?

a. mining

b. high missions

c. casual play

d. NPC corps

e. ambulation

f. alternatives to Technetium

g. RP

h. exploration.


Once I settle the issue of the party name I'll get a domain and a website with blogs and a forum for the party.

So let me know what you all think about these ideas. Let's see if we can get the areas of primary focus down to the top few and then develop a great plan to get support and win some seats in CSM 7!

Also still hoping for a few more candidates to join the effort and now looking for avisory board members!

Issler
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#260 - 2012-02-06 21:11:49 UTC
Houm... still thinking about a name, but meanwhile...

We can split the focus points into two cathegories:

- Things that could be acomplished as "fixes" (change/add mechanics)

mining, exploration, more / better missions...

- Things that should be created from scratch

WiS content, casual gameplay, endgame content for hisec...

In a way, there are so many hisec issues that need attention that they can't be forwarded to CCP all in a row; nullsec CSM will be pushing two or three issues as most, and thus spreading hisec's efforts in many areas could be self defeating. Also, whatever candidate was elected, should look forward to cooperate with nullsec CSM, else would be regarded as obstructionist which would be harmful for hisec interests.

The point is telling CCP that hisec also wants their attention, and then go and push a couple of issues. The more handy are, likely, mining and WiS. Mining because CSM is already willing to think of it, so a hisec candidate should protect hisec interest (not nerfing ores nor ice in hisec nor WH, FAI), assist the CSM in pushing CCP to defeat bots, et cetera; and WiS because arguably it's absolute bullshit to have the avatar technology and let it rot in a prison cell for a year or two or how long takes team avatar to grow to a usable size and get the necessary workforce. In the meanwhile, the NEx could use some attention, be filled with the already developed content and get a price cut... then add limited multiplayer ability to CQ (invite buddies), add some simple animations (emotes) and let players determine how to use that. Or, even in a smaller scale, just enable to switch clothes w/o redoing the portrait. Throw us a bone.

Also, from a moral standpoint would be interesting to ask what the hell did they planned to do with the CQ provided they are developing WiS gameplay now, rather than before launching Incarna... Question