Jita Park Speakers Corner

Yeah, stuff like this is ~the dream~ of a properly new and improved contract system. Anything that helps reduce button clicking and allows you to be more efficient.



CCP has acknowledged that this is something they need to finish / fix.



There's been a LOT of talk about this and we will be discussing this more in depth in the lead up to the December summit.



What we DO know is that both of these are being developed with all players in mind, not any one play style.

You seem to be completely ignoring what I'm saying too and have been from the start. I am merely hanging onto the original point of all this - to which you seem to have no answer, so when I repeat the question, you just say "You're ignoring what I'm saying" because you're NOT SAYING ANYTHING.

Yes that's correct, we want stuff to happen when we want it - representing the user base means exactly that point of view. Did you think the EVE ONLINE userbase was made up of people who when told the changes that have been put off for 10 years will just go "Oh another 2-3 years, no problem" ?!?!?

It seems to me that when CSM's decide they are going to tell people "Here is a list of things I will change" it doesn't mean "If you vote me in this year, 2 years from now you might get what you want - maybe, or at least half get it, and then 2 years after that if you try really hard you might be able to get something else, so vote for me".

It means asking CCP to make some changes AT LEAST IN THE INTERIM which are small but might have a larger impact. There's the fruit you need to run to the store to get, then there's the low hanging fruit in reach right outside on the tree.

AT THE VERY LEAST you might have meeting minutes showing where you got them to agree AT LEAST IN THEORY to the changes YOU agreed in theory to. However, there's NOTHING.

I fail to see where this has happened. All I see is a future release schedule which CCP themselves might've just given us, completely circumventing any worries of NDA and meeting minutes a time consuming issue in itself.

I TOTALLY fail to see where you are relevant if this is the way things are to go.

If you are not representing the userbase, then who are you representing at these meetings?

It seeems like the only point of view you have to bring back is CCP's and have actually accomplished nothing you set out to do - going by your own blog even.

Even if I completely discount the stuff *I* asked you to do - which you agreed to.

I go back to your blog and find you've also managed to do exactly ZERO of that too.

Give me a ******* break dude.

You seem to be under the impression that the CSM can demand something get fixed, and CCP jumps to do it. I consider them more like the US President who comes out and says "I wanna do this and that." then it goes to Congress, and they decide if it's going to get done or not. CCP is Congress, and have decided no on the things you want to get done.

Endless ranting in an AMA thread is rather childish. Make your own thread about how you're not going to vote for him next time because he isn't able to snap his fingers and get things done, like you perceive Mitt could.

Rev, you need to get down off the soapbox, throw the hot iron back into the water bucket, and settle the **** down. If you expect your demands to be taken seriously, the first step is learning that nobody gets to make demands of the CSM, just like the CSM doesnt get to make demands of CCP.

If you've been paying attention to any of the CSM's work at all, you'd know we are knee-deep in obtaining stakeholdership for the first time out of any of the previous CSM's. Maybe at that point we will have the power to play shuffle-board with expansion content, but until than we advise CCP, we don't tell them what to work on in what order. You're expectations are unreasonable and out of line with how the CSM and CCP operate, and you've been extremely rude to Seleene here who has been incredibly patient trying to help you understand the process you claim to care enough to be involved with.

If you want to make a difference, learn a bit about how we work, what the CSM can and can't accomplish, and learn a bit about how to constructively dialogue with someone in a constructive fashion. You're not impressing anyone here, you're not "holding us accountable", you're not calling us on some failure, you're just acting like a jerk that doesn't know any better.

Quite the contrary. I'm saying the above precisely to point out why Revolution Rising isn't obtaining the satisfaction he desires. First of all, he doesnt appear to have any clue as to how the CSM operates, what we're capable of doing or not doing, or how we go about accomplishing our goals, he also seems to think that yelling finger-pointing and calling us failures, liars, or worse is somehow going to miraculously convince us that he's a reasonable, chill individual with some good ideas that need to be brought up with CCP.

The reason I'm jumping in here, and the reason that Seleene has been trying to get Rev to knock this tirade off, is because its severely distracting and drives other people away from the thread. The great irony here is in that complaining because the CSM didnt operate the way he thinks we should operate, and because he's under the gross misunderstanding that CSM sets the agenda for expansions, he's actually doing more damage to the process of the CSM interacting with players and getting you the information we have (which is one of the things that IS in our realm of control.)

You're absolutely right, you deserve your questions answered, and I'll make sure Seleene revisits them at his next convenience. I think he's a bit exasperated right now, for good reason, and I hope Rev's behavior here has been a good example to others about how NOT to interact with the CSM if you expect a positive result. Throwing tantrums may get more immediate attention (to stop threads from being **** up to the point where they're not worth using) but respectful inquiries will always go higher up the chain with both the CSM and CCP.

False: the EVE-O forums are choked and congested by whine, not powered by it. You're kidding yourself if you think those that scream the loudest get some priority over those that don't. They may get a CSM, or CCP staff, or ISD member telling them to knock it off sooner than others, but there is not "whiner's democracy" where you can threadnought a feature into existence. Those that think things operate that way are sorely mistaken.

Even the CSM can't vote things into existence, the only currency that we exchange is whether you can convince someone something needs to be done now, not later. Players need to convince the CSM that something needs to change (whining louder doesnt work, you have to articulate yourself with some evidence) and the CSM has to convince CCP something needs to change (by articulating ourselves with evidence from the players). At any point CCP might be limited on resources even if they agree, they might agree something needs to be done but it fits better with their expansion plan than ours, until we've achieved full stakeholder status we'll never have that "make it happen" power that Rev expects that we hold.

Case in point: There's 100-page threadnoughts about Incarna - and that's not coming in winter. The Faction Warfare threads? roughly 20 a piece now, having doubled in size after the announced changes. The reason you see so much of player's own feedback about NPC, AFK speedfarming, and the excessive amount of isk for little work being put into practice this winter is because we've worked hard to keep those threads from devolving into the type of useless crap that Rev's been foaming about for 4 pages now.

Just to answer Che bilko's question about self-destruct, from my perspective this was about giving pilots credit for their work. Self-destruct as far as I know is more about giving yourself a quick trip home, or to keep an enemy from killing you if you were say trapped in POS in a wormhole and it was hopeless - it wasnt intended to way to be way to troll those that had done the work of finding you, tackling you, and killing you successfully. This is obviously CCP's vision for them, since they made the changes to support this. As far as the CSM goes, we're not all in agreement. I personally love killmails on self-destructs, I think everyone taking part in an engagment should get credit (including logistics). Others on the CSM feel differently, and like it as a tool to blue-ball your enemy. Its a subjective decision, to some degree.

Now regarding the mining barges - this is something I wanted to speak on for a minute because I sense that the underlying question isn't as much about the barges in particular as the treatment of industrial ships vs combat ships, or about CCP's lack of adherence to ship model traditions in general. And this is a good point. I wanted to note the recent addition of logistics frigates, there was some controversy over the fact that the navitas was picked as a logistics frigate (everyone wanted it to be the drone boat) and even more controversy over the fact that the inquisitor would become the logistics frigate instead of the tormentor.

The bottom line is that CCP makes these decisions based on a variety of reasons, and changing the purpose of a hull and moving it out of alignment with how the players saw it, is by no means limited to mining barges. It's an issue that will come up constantly as all the combat ships are worked on. In fact, I'd say its to CCP's credit that they gave industrialists one of the earliest set of rebalancing work rather than saw it as something less important to be tackled when combat ships were complete. Only the developer who made the final call on the art asset to be used can say for themselves why that decision was made.

Ok I will admit I do completely agree with that, The riots were just a side effect as were the threadnaughts.

Some threadnaughts are for a reason, with the players expressing their disgust at something, and yes CCP is a business and money is always the bottom line and so it should be.

So yes some threadnaughts are the result of player dissatisfaction while others are just because players want to make a threadnaught. My main point was the fact that the levels of whining (if you exclude the meta gaming) has reached epic proportion, this is not due to player dissatisfaction in a lot of cases, more that some players have learned to use the forum for whining over nothing.

So from the perspective of a cheap renewable power source, Eve-Online forums are powered by whine. If you took out the whine where would they get the power from?

Errr, what "demands" ?

See this is typical of you guys now. This is part of the very poor politicking I keep referring to.

These aren't my "demands" these are your platforms for being in the CSM. Seleene and others HAVE EXPERIENCE in CSM, if he knew he couldn't get this stuff done at the time of election - why'd he say all that crap about industrial expansions and ask for all the input in the first place ? AND THEN say he was going to get it done.

I'm not exactly sitting here with a gun to rodyas's head screaming "Meet my demands or the clown gets it."

If I have a demand - it is this.

"Do what you said you would do".

If some poor fanboy somewhere finds that an emotional or kneejerk - or any kind of jerk - reaction I'm terribly sorry./sarcasm



Well that's a far cry from CSM 6, which happened to be exactly that. In the aftermath of the Jita Riots, wasn't it determined that CCP asked the CSM for input for their future work and how relevant it was to the playerbase ?

If you can't ask them to do things, then I suggest telling US that you can get certain things done is an obvious blunder on your parts. Saying, "We will get X changes done" in a system where you can't suggest to CCP that particular things need priority over others, is again - your mistake.

Noone is asking for anything here that wasn't discussed before you were elected to CSM.

Your idea that I am misinterpreting what CSM can do, or that I'm misinterpreting the relationship between CSM and CCP is nice and all, but that doesn't really let you off the hook, sorry.




I've had constructive dialogue with you guys - you included Hans, now's past time for that.
Now it's time for you guys to do what you said you would do.

It's easy to attack me personally in light of the fact that nothing you've said when being elected has remained true for the people that put you there. What happened to constructive dialogue you asked for 1 sentence ago? I'm sure everyone in the world who finds someone who refutes their obvious line of B.S finds that person a jerk.

People who have no way to refute a point, often sink into personal attacks I hear.

Perhaps less personal attacks and less trying to control what I'm saying, and more dialogue with your drinking buddies in iceland to actually get some of the stuff done that you said you would do ?

Take an objective look at what's gone on here, is THAT really so much to ask for?

1. The things that some of you promised would be FIXED in the next iteration weren't even mentioned in the minutes.

I mean part of your job was to bring some of the issues that people showed up and told you about - and some people put in more effort than others, not just me - out of the darkness of obscurity and into the light of CCP knowing about them - this wasn't done as far as I can see.

2. You're telling me that if you guys were to email Jon Lander and ask him for some of these interim changes for the winter expansion for a few things that seem to have totally been left out - so that people waiting for them would have something in the meantime that was playable and not be waiting YEARS - he'd just say go to hell ?

I really don't care if you have to go with your hat in your hand saying "Please Sir, can I have some more?".

If these two points remain true then yeah, I'd call that a huge failure of spodumain proportions.

Malc's quick Spodfix™: Add a bunch of low-end minerals to it, sufficient to make it the 4th or 5th most valuable ore. This simultaneously makes it worth mining and increases the quantity of low-end minerals locally available to 0.0 industry.

And Revolution: the essential precodition of someone doing what you want is their having the motivation to do so. Unfortunately, since none of the CSM reps are your mom, you simply being angry isn't going to be sufficient. You need to put forward your ideas in a constructive, coherent, non-confrontational way. Which is a skill you need to work on. Remember that these people are unpaid volunteers, not your maid.