Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4868
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:07:35 -
[1] - Quote
The meeting minutes from the CSM Summer Summit are now available!
Read all the details of what the CSM9 discussed with CCP developers over the course of three intense days in Reykjavik at the CCP headquarters.
Check out CCP Leeloo's latest dev blog CSM9 Summer Summit Minutes! to learn more about the meeting minutes, the next CSM summit and more.
The CSM Summer Summit minutes (146 pages in total) are available here.
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager
|
|
Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
160
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:22:41 -
[2] - Quote
EVE is real: I was there. |
ChromeStriker
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
777
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:25:06 -
[3] - Quote
O.o i thought these were lost
I joke
Seriously tho awesome
No Worries
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4091
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:26:24 -
[4] - Quote
The meetings. oh god the meetings.
I want a 'I survived the CSM 9 summer summit' tshirt.
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Mangala Solaris
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1154
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:28:34 -
[5] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:The meetings. oh god the meetings.
I want a 'I survived the CSM 9 summer summit' tshirt.
Trust when I say Winter is worse. Especially in Iceland. You'll come to miss daylight.
RvB Ganked: EVE's Number One Weekly Public Roam
|
|
CCP Leeloo
C C P C C P Alliance
424
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:31:15 -
[6] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote: I want a 'I survived the CSM 9 summer summit' tshirt.
First you ask for the minutes to be published in time, now the t-shirt. YOU WANT TOO MUCH!
CCP Leeloo | CSM Coordinator | Russian Community Coordinator | @ccp_leeloo
|
|
Sion Kumitomo
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
160
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:40:55 -
[7] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:The meetings. oh god the meetings.
I want a 'I survived the CSM 9 summer summit' tshirt.
I'm pretty sure what we call "meeting hell," CCP calls a regular workday. Those folks put in a lot of hours. |
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box
731
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:41:38 -
[8] - Quote
I still want a mug.
Member of CSM9
CSM9 Weekly Updates
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
947
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:42:29 -
[9] - Quote
The inch-mile cascade scenario is real
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Noriko Mai
1585
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 18:06:05 -
[10] - Quote
What's this new dogma thing? |
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4091
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 18:13:38 -
[11] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:What's this new dogma thing?
Dogma is the core engine for stats in Eve. How much damage do your guns do? Ask Dogma. How many shield HP do you have? Ask Dogma.
The downside is, the current version of dogma is based on the idea 'take a bunch of attributes from things, and add/multiply them together. return that'. It can't have specific values poked into it.
Brain in a Box is the name of the project to have things like your character skills all precalculated and stored in a central location, so it doesn't have to recalculate things each time you session change. Dogma needs a rewrite to be able to use the values from it.
That's being worked on.
http://youtu.be/diGYlJNpPEo?t=37m15s is part of a fanfest 2014 presentation on it.
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 18:14:33 -
[12] - Quote
Edit: Steve Ronuken beat me to it.
P.S. Hey, there's my name in the minutes!! \o/
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Noriko Mai
1585
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 18:25:44 -
[13] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:stuff
thx
|
Mister Ripley
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 19:51:33 -
[14] - Quote
I'm a bit sad that smallholding isn't mentioned. I'm kinda loner in EVE and it is something I look forward to since it was mentioned in 2011. Or can I assume that the plans for scalable POS imply a way for small entities to grasp thier little part of the universe to call home? |
Fonac
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
86
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:00:26 -
[15] - Quote
Was a very good read!
I'm really looking forward, to all the ideas and what they may one day become(hopefully sooner than later!) It also seems CCP has internally has become alot more productive, and are producing stuff much faster.
While beforehand, you often had the feeling that nothing new was revealed, or being worked on.. These notes are quite different. Literally every single topic, has juicy stuff in them.
The sov revamp looks tasty as hell, i can't wait to see it happen.
And finally; Pos and standing revamp... |
Lady Zarrina
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
162
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:30:02 -
[16] - Quote
Scanned through most of this and looks like Eve is heading towards some interesting (good) times. I am not a big Null guy, but the possible changes outlined for sov should make for some real interesting forum reading at the very least :)
And it was good to read you are ready to move on from Incarna. That was a horrid horrid mistake. For me, the biggest was ignoring the base game in favor allowing you to walk around in a closet. Most MMO's design continents and some even worlds, Eve has a whole universe. But then you stopped everything to to make a closet. And.... you wanted a slap on the back and attaboy to boot. Don't get me wrong, it looked great, so great my GPU melted. I'm sure my house would have burned to the ground if I walked around a populated station, I can only imagine a nuclear explosion if I undocked in Jita. Okay okay, got that outta my system.
So you did the 180, got back to the base and stepped up your game. And Eve need it, and it needs more of it, and from reading the minutes, you guys know where it is needed. But thank you flying spaghetti monster for getting brave again. It is time. Just do it wisely.
EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
71
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:43:47 -
[17] - Quote
Lady Zarrina wrote:Scanned through most of this and looks like Eve is heading towards some interesting (good) times. I am not a big Null guy, but the possible changes outlined for sov should make for some real interesting forum reading at the very least :)
And it was good to read you are ready to move on from Incarna. That was a horrid horrid mistake. For me, the biggest was ignoring the base game in favor allowing you to walk around in a closet. Most MMO's design continents and some even worlds, Eve has a whole universe. But then you stopped everything to to make a closet. And.... you wanted a slap on the back and attaboy to boot. Don't get me wrong, it looked great, so great my GPU melted. I'm sure my house would have burned to the ground if I walked around a populated station, I can only imagine a nuclear explosion if I undocked in Jita. Okay okay, got that outta my system.
So you did the 180, got back to the base and stepped up your game. And Eve need it, and it needs more of it, and from reading the minutes, you guys know where it is needed. But thank you flying spaghetti monster for getting brave again. It is time. Just do it wisely.
maybe you should stop playing eve on a broke as pc. im just saying, there needs to be immersion in stations, we need to be able to walk around and even chat with everyone that's in dock with us.. I have no sympathy and gives no fawks for someone whinning their pc couldn't handle walking around in a station.. sorry that's your broke as pc not mine.. I hope they add more into this walking in station add a lounge.. unlock the door or something cause its stupid not being able to.. its even more stupid not being able to yet seems ok to ccp make money from us by selling a $5 e-shirt, boot, pants for our avatars.. they need to fix this incomplete mess. |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
3608
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:45:55 -
[18] - Quote
Mister Ripley wrote:I'm a bit sad that smallholding isn't mentioned. I'm kinda loner in EVE and it is something I look forward to since it was mentioned in 2011. Or can I assume that the plans for scalable POS imply a way for small entities to grasp thier little part of the universe to call home? EDIT: Forum thread from CCP Greyscale and the respective DevBlog.
More scalable starbases are a thing we would probably need before we can achieve that particular bulletpoint, yes. |
|
Taresh Jahemis
Yashida Industries
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 20:51:10 -
[19] - Quote
Some parts of the minutes were annoyingly vague, for example:
Quote: Add a small handful of appropriate herbs. How am I supposed to know what appropriate herbs are? Isn't the whole point of a recipe to be specific?
On a more serious note, I really enjoyed reading the minutes and I am tremendously excited about the future of Eve. |
Erin Crawford
326
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:05:17 -
[20] - Quote
Taresh Jahemis wrote:...I really enjoyed reading the minutes and I am tremendously excited about the future of Eve. Agreed! Am also really excited about the future and what it may bring!
Especially glad to read this part, looks like a really positive attitude towards some greater, bolder moves...
Quote:CCP Seagull - For the record. This was so many years ago and we have done so much work to reach now. I, as the executive producer, am in a risk taking mode. But, in the new way that we work. Not just random things. We need to be bolder. We should be able to get over our trauma of Incarna. We need to own our game and be courageous with it. I think our players want that of us.
It's time to get over incarna and start taking risks again, educated and calculated risks of course, but we need to make sure that we deliver solid content to veteran players. We have trained players to be afraid of us doing big things. It meant we put something big out that was half done and it never got touched again. Us doing something big, such as industry, means CCP is going to mess it up again and we will have to pick up the mess. We, internally, have become scared in a sense of making bolder changes to the game so that we know we can control the outcome. Because we do not want to be perceived as messing up again. We can predict what is going on. That predictability is boring everyone to death now. We need to challenge and move forward with solid plans owned by teams that are building the vision in their hands. We need to turn up the volume.
|
|
Valterra Craven
302
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:06:05 -
[21] - Quote
One of the things that really annoys me about reading the minutes is that it seems like you guys come up with a lot of reasons on why something won't work rather than trying to work through the complications to make a viable potential change worthwhile.
The thunder dome is a prime example of this. You guys are worried about griefing with it.
Step 1. Make it deployable only on moons, stars, or planets where there are not already missions etc that go there (thinking about some of the static cosmos stuff in this regard) Step 2. Make it have a graphic sphere like warp bubbles. Step 3. Require the bubble to have a password to be setup (much like a pos sphere) before it onlines. Step 4. Require any ship entering the bubble require the password to be entered or you bounce off it (to prevent people from bumping you in. When you enter the password put in big bold red letters than anyone inside the bubble can shoot you at will without concord intervention. Step 5. Profit.
It irritates the mess out of me when I go to my boss and I say "I have this problem" and then he corrects me and says "you mean you have this opportunity to succeed", but really I think you guys could use a healthy dose of that mentality. |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
293
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:06:21 -
[22] - Quote
10/10 - Good recipes, will make Steve's sauce.
Then something about the art team and hats...does this mean that Mad Ani will finally have a fedora in game?
My general perception of the current CSM is that Sugar Kyle is an MVP and needs to be a permanent fixture. Her feedback seems to be extensive and really helpful. A good amount of mynnna's predictions about the power projection changes seemed to already have turned out false.
Tags for standings - DO IT NOW
FW Missions more open to interference - Also do this asap
A light gang-boosting destroyer - Do it but fix OGB before 2020 ok?
Also: I fully support separating jump clones for travel and jump clones for swapping implants. Allow swapping clones located in one system? Almost every week my gameplay is limited based on what clone I am in versus what activities I want to do in that area (e.g., I want to go on a null roam but am in a slave clone etc).
My favorite line of the minutes:
CCP Greyscale: "We do not want to make anything ever again that cannot be blown up." |
Dersen Lowery
Drinking in Station
1238
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:06:35 -
[23] - Quote
Is "Gabe" CCP Nullarbor?
"Guilhem" and "Orvar" also appear in the Industry Recap, and Gabe gets called Gabriel once.
Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.
|
Dalilus
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
89
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:06:51 -
[24] - Quote
Things to do at the CSM summit...
Buff nullbear space, check Buff lowsec, check Buff carebear space, still looking into it
Favorite line: CCP Fozzie - To clarify: When we talk about content internally we are often talking about missions and that type of thing. If only we could believe you........ |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
293
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:39:18 -
[25] - Quote
From the minutes: Sion Kumitomo - The point is that people do not generally choose to live in nullsec for economic reasons they do it for aspiration reasons.
Wow, really, do the numbers bear that out? As if renters didn't exist? As if afk-tars / isktars didn't exist? You do realize that you can go look at NPC kill statistics on archives like dotlan, and it turns out that close to the same number of NPCs are killed in null as are killed in HS?
|
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
220
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:44:23 -
[26] - Quote
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:From the minutes: Sion Kumitomo - The point is that people do not generally choose to live in nullsec for economic reasons they do it for aspiration reasons.
Wow, really, do the numbers bear that out? As if renters didn't exist? As if afk-tars / isktars didn't exist? You do realize that you can go look at NPC kill statistics on archives like dotlan, and it turns out that close to the same number of NPCs are killed in null as are killed in HS?
It's called having your cake and eating it too. :) According to Fozzie the Nullbears are raking it in hand over fist.
CCP Fozzie - That being said I do still believe that is being a bit overstated. Considering so much of the actual ISK in the game is from null sec bounties. A lot more people are making their money in null sec |
Valterra Craven
302
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:44:48 -
[27] - Quote
Also, since I'm creating posts as I read through the minutes. I'm curious about why something like the Space Object Factory isn't adapted to other things, like Deployable objects, and clothing. It would be nice to have a base shirt type and be to chose the color of it for example, or have a POS have Quafe colors etc. |
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
72
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 21:58:56 -
[28] - Quote
Some good laughs in there -
page 24 in regard to post tiericide Meta0 CCP Rise - These are sometimes useful as they have way lower fitting requirements for niche fits. ---really? I have yet to find a use better than reprocessing them
page 25 in regard to DCU tiericide CCP Fozzie - People will have a clearer guideline on what module they need if they need to save on CPU or Grid etc. ---to my experience meta DCUs are only chosen if there's nothing else left to gimp that isn't a GUN
page 25 Mike Azariah - Defender missiles? CCP Fozzie - We'll probably find a different use for these, or just remove them from the game at some point. However, we may still say that ten years from now. ---Def-whatnow? *looks left, looks right* Never heard of such things...
page 26 T2 Crystals ---Scorch But yeah - T1 Mining crystalls aren't really worth it. Training for T2 crystals takes barely longer and the difference between T1 strip and T2 strip w T1 crystals is the same as T2+T1 to T2+T2. Combined with the fact that we are talking about something like a few cubic metres a second maximum difference here (Hulk with maximum MLU IIs and skills, Max skilled mindlinked Orca with T2 links) you either forego crystals completely and mine everything equally well or go T2 crystals and only mine what you have the crystalls for.
page 26 ---Faction CoProcs? Again - what for? 5link T3 OGBs? These are abominations anyway and should be put down (preferrably with Scorch if it was me).
page 27 ----Effectively Scorch OP vs PvE and Tach and Heavy Beam INMF OP vs PvP ? sounds balanced enough. Until you consider that people use a lot of Beams with MF in PvE too which makes me wonder why people say Scorch is OP ...
Have to agree with Valterra Craven - get that modular design stuff going ASAP. More content in less time. You can basically apply it to everything. Ships, stations, cloths, modules (aka turrets and launchers - still waiting for the remaining highslot 3d models), drones and so on and forth.
Oh yeah - didn't read the rest yet (anything but Ship&Module rebalance). Doesn't bother me a whole lot compared to the not so brilliant tiericide effort we've seen so far. |
Lady Zarrina
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
162
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:01:41 -
[29] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Lady Zarrina wrote:Scanned through most of this and looks like Eve is heading towards some interesting (good) times. I am not a big Null guy, but the possible changes outlined for sov should make for some real interesting forum reading at the very least :)
And it was good to read you are ready to move on from Incarna. That was a horrid horrid mistake. For me, the biggest was ignoring the base game in favor allowing you to walk around in a closet. Most MMO's design continents and some even worlds, Eve has a whole universe. But then you stopped everything to to make a closet. And.... you wanted a slap on the back and attaboy to boot. Don't get me wrong, it looked great, so great my GPU melted. I'm sure my house would have burned to the ground if I walked around a populated station, I can only imagine a nuclear explosion if I undocked in Jita. Okay okay, got that outta my system.
So you did the 180, got back to the base and stepped up your game. And Eve need it, and it needs more of it, and from reading the minutes, you guys know where it is needed. But thank you flying spaghetti monster for getting brave again. It is time. Just do it wisely. maybe you should stop playing eve on a broke as pc. im just saying, there needs to be immersion in stations, we need to be able to walk around and even chat with everyone that's in dock with us.. I have no sympathy and gives no fawks for someone whinning their pc couldn't handle walking around in a station.. sorry that's your broke as pc not mine.. I hope they add more into this walking in station add a lounge.. unlock the door or something cause its stupid not being able to.. its even more stupid not being able to yet seems ok to ccp make money from us by selling a $5 e-shirt, boot, pants for our avatars.. they need to fix this incomplete mess.
My PC was fine :) It was blazing hot, but fine. And almost everyone else who had a decent PC at release was saying the same thing. But I get it, you like walking around in stations.
EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
133
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:08:24 -
[30] - Quote
Nice read and good job of even getting it out early.
But is Ytterbium scared of creating skynet or why doesn-¦t he want the NPCs to behave like players?
Quote:We don't want to end up with NPCs ganking you and talking smack about your mother in local |
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
184
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:23:56 -
[31] - Quote
CCP Fozzie/Greyscale- A few notes that I hope you'll see and read. Note, only the first quote is about ore anomalies
CCP Fozzie wrote:Null sec mining is higher than its ever been I hope that you realize the source of this change. From my perspective, this is not due to a change in industry but due to high sec miners getting access to null sec ore anomalies via renting. Mining volume and minerals to market will change with Phoebe and the tightening up of many rental programs.
In order to change the increased mining from [more pve miners from high sec] to [more null sec residents mining because they need the local minerals], you really need to look at revisiting nullsec ore anomalies. I know Greyscale mentioned that it's been a while since he's looked at it. There needs to be fewer high end ores and more kernite or other mexallon heavy ores in the anomalies.
The mineral market is abysmal right now because of the huge surplus of high ends relative to the supply of low/mid ends. This supply imbalance is reflected in the price of the minerals- specifically Arkonor, which is the 3rd worst isk/hour ore as of writing this post. Fozzie- be sure that report you are looking at considers mining rate of the ore, not just the value of the minerals per unit or even one m3 of ore. (Mercoxit looks great on paper until you realize the subpar miners reduce the isk/hour to one of the worst ores).
CCP Fozzie wrote:That being said I do still believe that is being a bit overstated. Considering so much of the actual ISK in the game is from null sec bounties.
This mentality is extremely flawed. Actual isk entry into the game does not properly reflect wealth generation. So much of the ISK coming from null bounties is because there are few places where ISK actually enters the game. ISK is just a currency, it provides no value other than to barter for goods and services. Just because the currency is literally appearing in Nullsec, it doesn't mean that Nullsec is making more wealth or accumulating more goods and services because of it. As shown by many others and as mentioned to you at the CSM summit, the vast majority of nullsec income is not good at an individual level. "Good" income only comes from high end sites, which can only support a handful of players in any given system. The vast majority of all combat sites in null give worse ISK/hr than doing missions or most other activities in the game.
CCP Fozzie wrote:A lot more people are making their money in null sec
This is again largely due to renting. It's not like a gigantic group of players just permanently left high sec and joined nullsec coalitions. Players that were interested in PVE moved from High Sec or Low Sec into Null via rental programs. It is important that you understand the reasons for why there are more people making money and mining in null- it's because the large coalitions gave them a space to engage in PVE without worrying about having their sov evicted.
The changes that you are making are multi-tiered and seem overly beneficial to the game. We're having to make changes and adapt, which is a good thing. I just hope that as you continue to make changes, you take a real hard look at why things are the way they are, rather than just looking at the end result. Because of the limited information available to us, and going off of the CSM minutes, it does not look like there is a full grasp on impactful changes that are apparent to some of us in the analytic community.
Edit: typos/easier to read |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
135
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:30:40 -
[32] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:Is "Gabe" CCP Nullarbor?
"Guilhem" and "Orvar" also appear in the Industry Recap, and Gabe gets called Gabriel once.
"Gabe/Gabriel" is CCP RubberBAND, "Guilhem" is CCP Ytterbium, and "+ûrvar" is CCP Arrow, for those keeping track of the attendee lists.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Dwissi
Miners Delight Phoebe Freeport Republic
76
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 22:45:14 -
[33] - Quote
@CCP Leeloo Just on a sidenote - your signature link on the dev blog itself is leading nowhere ;)
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1357
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 23:04:04 -
[34] - Quote
I just skipped to the logo discussion before going back to bed, good idea here, I hope you implement the whole watermark thing soon.
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Scatim Helicon
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3063
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 23:12:39 -
[35] - Quote
CSM 9 minutes wrote:progodlegend - Is there any plan to introduce BPOs for these named items?
CCP Fozzie - We'd love to eventually but not right now. It is a dream thing. It fits into our general game design and our policy in Eve that if we can let players build it we should let them build it. There are various plans that people have looked at, but we're running a pass over the modules first. After that, we can look at it. It may come in a type where there is an item dropped by NPCs and you combine that with the T1 item to get the named item. It would also stimulate T1 industry.
OH GOD YES MAKE THIS HAPPEN
Quote:We have very high level ideas but it is not on the short term plan.
Steve Ronuken - Could you potentially introduce these as a "fail" for T2 invention.
CCP Fozzie - This is possible so long as we didn't devalue the the loot drops for people. This is far into the possible future BOOOOOOOO.
Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1357
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 23:28:37 -
[36] - Quote
About the awoxing stuff:
Make it a toggle: "This corporation allows its members to freely shoot at eachothers" or This corporation does not allows its members to freely shoot at eachothers" clearly visible in the show info.
In the second case, the corp CEO can set an X timer value to turn off the toggle: "WARNING: This corporation CEO can allow members to shoot at eachothers at any moment." "This corporation CEO can allow members to shoot at eachothers after X hours notice."
Problem solved. You have corps with corp pvp enabled at all times. You have corps with corp pvp disabled, but able to turn it on at any moment, and the system informs new players about this eventuality. And at the other extreme you have super-safe corps that have pvp disabled and a 24h notice.
Obviously if the CEO adjusts the notice time, the CEO cannot then immediately turn on the pvp flag.
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1357
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 23:48:24 -
[37] - Quote
About the New player experience, and little things in general : - We need a shortcut to open the fleet window, please.
About the New player experience and the fact that new players don't know they need to have their skillqueue running at all times, and/or that they don't even know its there : - Make it so that when your skillqueue is empty, that the little empty skillqueue bar on the neocom, below the portrait, would turn red and slightly blinky. Of course if you are not multiple character training, and you already have another character on the account training something, the thing wouldn't turn red.
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
806
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 00:11:48 -
[38] - Quote
This almost made me cry a little.
Quote:DJ FunkyBacon- Make HICs boost, then people could catch supers in lowsec and would actually fly hics there.
Now I have to fit 2 bubbles, one scripted, a cloak, a probe launcher, and a set of boosts? Along with the comedy 100,000 ehp tank...
But I get the premise of why it was even proposed.
Quote: Sugar Kyle- We have these small groups with 1-3 people and they canGÇÖt just bring an Eos along. It is going to affect them. We have these small groups and I feel we should have these small groups. And these small groups are willing to fight larger groups but if the larger group has boosts and the small group does not it really becomes a question of do they have any reason to try. It has to be looked at and considered.
Boosts, the methods and ships that can use them, and how they actually work need to be looked at.
Yaay!!!!
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2012
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 00:49:52 -
[39] - Quote
it would be cool if they figured out a way to meld the free form sov with the occupancy sov... kinda like they have in fw just cuss you occupy that system does not mean you own it and visa versa. So there could be various things that could attract you to just occupy that system but not go threw and actually claim sovereignty which would have its own benefits but also detractions in the form of upgrades and such.
Also i think for capturing sov space it should be a random mix of various areas that have to be captured that eventually leads to a complex where the sov unit is actually held.
There would be various activities such as mining pve pvp hacking/scanning that would be required to either hold on to the system or take it over...
like a special mineral that cannot be transported between starsystems but has to be used to power the sov claim unit. So this would force an active player base to farm the mineral to keep the system going for peace time and threw a siege.
While a system is sieged the attacking force would do objectives that would allow them to achieve a tiered level of occupancy and once its at a final level they would then be able to start targeting and hacking and powering thier own sov systems to take over the system from the other party.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Galphii
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
289
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 00:53:10 -
[40] - Quote
A fascinating read as always I enjoy the candor of everyone present talking in real terms about where Eve is and where it needs to be.
X
|
|
Arronicus
Bitter Lemons Brothers of Tangra
1206
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 01:25:55 -
[41] - Quote
RE: Replacing resigned members: Running another election is just going to allow major interest groups to shoehorn in another candidate. Passing the invitation to join to the candidates who got the next highest tallys of votes is far more reasonable toward respecting the votes of the general playerbase, and does not double the voting power of major coalitions. |
|
CCP Falcon
9230
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 01:29:03 -
[42] - Quote
Galphii wrote:A fascinating read as always I enjoy the candor of everyone present talking in real terms about where Eve is and where it needs to be.
I spent three days being the secretary ***** for the summit, and tried to catch as much as I could.
When CSM added to it, we got a lot of extra material too, and in the editing process, I certainly tried to keep it direct and to the point.
Good to hear that you read it that way
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
|
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
263
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 02:27:29 -
[43] - Quote
Amazing minutes, really liked the format and they seemed far more "open" that past summit minutes, if that makes sense.
Correction on Page 77 - This is the Corporations and Alliance section, but the headline says Team Five-0
> Alliance logos: Please, make this happen! The watermark idea is a good idea, sure it's not perfect, but it's definitely better than the current no-new-logos situation.
> CEO switch to turn on/off ability to shoot fellow corpmates: Love this idea, love the thinking behind it! See what Altrue posted above about messaging and options/warnings/time limits on toggling this, it's a great idea that addresses the concerns raised in the minutes.
> Corp Invites: Oh please let me be able to send an invite to join my corp to a player! Yes, it could lead to scamming/griefing/spamming of invites, but you could put limits on how many invites are open to reduce the spamming issue, and scamming/griefing isn't necessarily a bad thing ...
> Nullsec/renting: "Sion Kumitomo - It is what I dislike about renting. These are people who wanted to carve out their own destiny and they are locked into a serfdom." Spot-on, Sion.
I know I could get a system in nullsec for my alliance pretty much any time I wanted to, but it would be as a pet, renter, or otherwise subsuming our identity to a larger group, and any of that is anathema to me and my alliancemates. Should we ever go the sov path, I want it to be something we accomplished together and are emotionally invested in the gaining and holding and keeping of.
Just paying isk to someone for space (that doesn't have our name on it) is no challenge, no sense of accomplishment, but currently, it is truly the only feasible way for a small alliance to live in sov space without becoming a pet or becoming lost in a big alliance (although that is changing, drastically changing, with Phoebe and subsequent changes *fingers crossed!*)
Don't get me wrong - there is nothing inherently "wrong" with people renting space, if that is how they choose to play, but the simple fact it is essentially the only way for small alliances to get a foothold in sov space is no choice at all.
I look forward to the days when renter space is just one option among many that a player or alliance can choose as their way of getting a foothold in sov space.
> Bookmark packs: "Discussion about "bookmark packs" and configuration settings (much like overview packs) concluded that dragging a bookmark into chat to share it would be awesome, but that not everyone is as awesome as CCP Karkur. "
Oh please, make linkable bookmarks a thing... /me gets on knees and begs ...
> NES Store Add long, curly hair please!
> My favorite quote: "Sugar - They are trying to find their childhood again. They remember why they like Eve. They remember being excited about Eve. "
Fantastic job on the minutes! Very impressive!
GG
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe
8
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 02:40:58 -
[44] - Quote
CSM minutes as always are a great read, showing a lot of insight into CCP and CSM.
Couple of things I would like to point though. The most important part of CSM meeting, EVE roadmap, the single biggest thing that keeps a lot of people interested in the game (hey one day it might actually become interesting again, so I;ll just stick around), this part is under NDA, what ****. We, me, all players want to know what is on the roadmap, what I can expect to happen in next 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, in the future. We all know you are working on new Dust, Valkyrie, corporations, alliances, sov, starbases, etc, but clearly these are just topics, I want to know how far are you into them, what hurdles, what achievements you have, I don't think this expectation is unreasonable. You have so many fine ways of communicating with players, EVE TV, forums, devblogs, CSM, yet you somehow ALWAYS chuck things in the last minute, we are 5 days away from Phoebe and we don't 100% know what's going to be shipped!
On second point, a lot of null sec work discussed in CSM summit has already been out (power projection etc.) but what has been discussed in the Summit and in various media afterwards is very worrying. "CCP Greyscale - We'd like to be in a position where there are dense pockets of activity in nullsec to create clusters that are worth defending rather than a spread of population over a wider area that will afk at the first sign of trouble." What you MIGHT be saying here is that in system XXX with sec status -1.0 a big alliance will have 40 NYX ratting 24/7 because this is worth defending and no one is going to EVER be able to challenge that! What I want to get across in this post is the fact that no system should be used by more then 10-20 people at the time, this is what current null sec systems can sustain and this is what shouldn't be under any circumstances EVER changed upwards. When someone tackles a rating NYX or a ratting Archon, an alliance will have a choice, light a cyno or get a defence fleet into the system through gates to defend it NOT just warp other 50+ people from other anoms.
Just my 2 cents here, trying to put it across back to CCP while they are still early in the design cycle but also reminding them that your communication with clients is poor.
Thank you. Michal
|
Zappity
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
1500
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 02:59:26 -
[45] - Quote
CSM minutes wrote: As this is a very short session, Steve Ronuken thought he'd bulk it out a little with a recipe for his favourite bolognese style sauce. Since bolognese is not under NDA, this remains in the minutes... Hehe :)
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Persifonne
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 03:27:32 -
[46] - Quote
CCP Masterplan - We're looking at changing three things before the end of the year. First is the intracorp aggression rules - At the moment all members can now freely aggress each other. We are looking to change this so that being in the same member corp does not give you the right to legally kill your corp mates. The main goal of this is to make recruitment safer for the recruiter and the recruitee.
Page 70something...... WTF???
No. |
Xuixien
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1874
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 03:33:28 -
[47] - Quote
CCP, when will you stop buffing HiSec?
[u]Epic Space Cat[/u]
|
mr ed thehouseofed
Wrought iron Industries
19909
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 03:37:15 -
[48] - Quote
great read , looking foward to seeing some of these things being implemented
i want a eve pinball machine... -áconfirming -áCCP Cognac is best cognac
|
Persifonne
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 03:49:12 -
[49] - Quote
CCP says its cuz players hide in ncp corps[ie their stats on player retention for npc corps == ccps money lost] to avoid safaris.
No ccp its cuz of wardecs. Thats why in npc corps.
So remove wardecs!! |
Zappity
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
1500
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 06:16:57 -
[50] - Quote
What does this mean?
CSM Minutes wrote:CCP Fozzie: To go back to Funky's words on the back and forth balance, there's a discussion whether we want EVE to be hard and gritty or whether we want it to be tough. It's a discussion that comes up every couple of years and we'll maybe look at it at some point.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2012
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 06:25:58 -
[51] - Quote
Persifonne wrote:CCP says its cuz players hide in ncp corps[ie their stats on player retention for npc corps == ccps money lost] to avoid safaris.
No ccp its cuz of wardecs. Thats why in npc corps.
So remove wardecs!!
No i say remove non noob npc corps from the game.
After you play the game for a month you get a pop up saying that you have now graduated from the basic training and its time to either join a corp or form a corporation.
Dont remove wars remove npc corps that cant be war decced
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
23414
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 06:37:57 -
[52] - Quote
starting at page 124, general game design. stopping by to chime in with my support for this tidbit:
Quote: CCP Soniclover - It is not great that you can only do level fours for a certain number of agents and if you wanted to go and work for another faction you have to start with level ones again. It is a ridiculous thing. It can also become an issue if you have been working for a faction for a long time and now you need to correct your standings. The only option is to do level one missions for a long time. There should be ways for you to rectify this beyond endless level one missions. We are looking at something similar to Tags4Sec
It may be a while before I try missions again, or need to fix my standings (with Gallente, for the very reason mentioned by Soniclover), but with the standings situation in the same place I left it, this is really good news to hear. Even that it's being considered.
Standings for tags thread of mine from not too long ago
For the sake of full disclosure, the specific missions that I farmed (and trashed my standings) was the Enemies Abound series, in Caldari space. With two or three shooters, and a logi or two, they can be farmed like mini incursions. Compared to incursions, the payout is about the same per pilot, although the value is in the faction tags dropped in Enemies Abound rather than LP. There's a bit more gate travel involved than incursions, but the location is stable and incoming DPS is lower. The skill requirement is also lower, with Oracles or Tornadoes for the shooters, and a scimitar or two as logi. 4 or 5 characters versus 10, with a total ship and fittings cost around 500 million ISK, rather than blinged Nightmares for 8 shooters.
o7
still reading, xoxo2soniclover.
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
|
CCP Leeloo
C C P C C P Alliance
430
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 06:56:02 -
[53] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:RE: Replacing resigned members: Running another election is just going to allow major interest groups to shoehorn in another candidate. Passing the invitation to join to the candidates who got the next highest tallys of votes is far more reasonable toward respecting the votes of the general playerbase, and does not double the voting power of major coalitions. Let me explain why I consider this a bad idea.
1. People, who gave their vote for the candidate who had to resign are **** if we just grab the next guy on the list. If we re-run the ballot without the one who has left, then all those votes are back in the basket, so people still have their CSM rep accordingly to their votes. This will also encourage people not to vote randomly.
2. If you happen to be #15 you will do all you can to make sure that at least one person leaves the current council. I would not appreciate that kind of encouragement... However, if you don't know who will leave you can't precisely predict who will be next on the list.
3. Same as 2 it can backfire to the person who is #15 or whichever is next on the list, he can get harassed and all that bad stuff. Which, again, I would love to avoid.
CCP Leeloo | CSM Coordinator | Russian Community Coordinator | @ccp_leeloo
|
|
Arronicus
Bitter Lemons Brothers of Tangra
1206
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 06:59:52 -
[54] - Quote
Session: Nullsec, Page 61
"CCP Fozzie - We have said in the past that we want there to be more interesting gameplay there. AFK cloaking, however, is an entirely social form of power. To me, it is the equivalent of posting on the forums until someone stops ratting. It has the same physical impact in many ways. ..."
It would be nice here if we could have some clarification of whether CCP Fozzie has ever been to nullsec before or not. Without getting into a discussion of whether AFK cloaking is good or bad, whether it is harmful to the game or not, whether it should be changed, or not, to say that it is entirely social and equivalent to forum to forum posting is not only naive, but shows an utter lack of understanding for nullsec resident disruption, and alternative isk rackets.
Forum posts by random alts do not make players dock up. They do not carry the potential to drop fleets into your system. They do not carry the potential to snag a stray hauler on the gate, or ninja loot from a faction/officer spawn.
I'm not looking for Fozzie's head on a pike, that is completely unreasonable, but this sort of comment when it comes to game design brought up by the CSM is the sort of thing that erodes chunks of player confidence. |
drunklies
Manson Family Advent of Fate
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 07:01:03 -
[55] - Quote
Quote:. Add a small handful of appropriate herbs.
CCP publishing a recipe using unspecified herbs, no way that could go wrong. Cooking will commence at 16:20.
Favorite line :)
Quote:CCP Gargant - Sven >>>CHange to CCP name<<<<
Otherwise an excellent document. It is immensely reassuring to know the levels and aspects of the game that are considered by the CSM, and the candor in their responses. Bring on phoebe and 2015. |
Arronicus
Bitter Lemons Brothers of Tangra
1206
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 07:02:58 -
[56] - Quote
CCP Leeloo wrote:Arronicus wrote:RE: Replacing resigned members: Running another election is just going to allow major interest groups to shoehorn in another candidate. Passing the invitation to join to the candidates who got the next highest tallys of votes is far more reasonable toward respecting the votes of the general playerbase, and does not double the voting power of major coalitions. Let me explain why I consider this a bad idea. 1. People, who gave their vote for the candidate who had to resign are **** if we just grab the next guy on the list. If we re-run the ballot without the one who has left, then all those votes are back in the basket, so people still have their CSM rep accordingly to their votes. This will also encourage people not to vote randomly. 2. If you happen to be #15 you will do all you can to make sure that at least one person leaves the current council. I would not appreciate that kind of encouragement... However, if you don't know who will leave you can't precisely predict who will be next on the list. 3. Same as 2 it can backfire to the person who is #15 or whichever is next on the list, he can get harassed and all that bad stuff. Which, again, I would love to avoid.
While these are very valid points, it just seems kindof silly to allow a group of 15,000 players to muscle in 2 candidates. Additionally, a large group could do the same as #2 that you mentioned, doing everything they can to make sure at least one person, other than their elected candidate leaves, allowing them to mass vote in a second? I wonder if to that, not allowing players who's votes counted toward a currently seated CSM member, who is not the one that stepped down, would be doable? A revote, that only counted the votes of those whose vote is not currently represented. |
Dwissi
Miners Delight Phoebe Freeport Republic
76
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 08:31:23 -
[57] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:CCP Leeloo wrote:Arronicus wrote:RE: Replacing resigned members: Running another election is just going to allow major interest groups to shoehorn in another candidate. Passing the invitation to join to the candidates who got the next highest tallys of votes is far more reasonable toward respecting the votes of the general playerbase, and does not double the voting power of major coalitions. Let me explain why I consider this a bad idea. 1. People, who gave their vote for the candidate who had to resign are **** if we just grab the next guy on the list. If we re-run the ballot without the one who has left, then all those votes are back in the basket, so people still have their CSM rep accordingly to their votes. This will also encourage people not to vote randomly. 2. If you happen to be #15 you will do all you can to make sure that at least one person leaves the current council. I would not appreciate that kind of encouragement... However, if you don't know who will leave you can't precisely predict who will be next on the list. 3. Same as 2 it can backfire to the person who is #15 or whichever is next on the list, he can get harassed and all that bad stuff. Which, again, I would love to avoid. While these are very valid points, it just seems kindof silly to allow a group of 15,000 players to muscle in 2 candidates. Additionally, a large group could do the same as #2 that you mentioned, doing everything they can to make sure at least one person, other than their elected candidate leaves, allowing them to mass vote in a second? I wonder if to that, not allowing players who's votes counted toward a currently seated CSM member, who is not the one that stepped down, would be doable? A revote, that only counted the votes of those whose vote is not currently represented.
I very much like this idea as well. The remaining members already have proven to be voted for - a revote by the same rules for a member that steps down will just repeat the result that was already given to form the then acting CSM. But every vote that isnt represented by then is basically invalidated - so choosing out of that pool or electing just with those votes would be the most decent approach. In most democratic election systems there will be a 'pull' from those who havnt made it into a council without a complete revote. The 'pulled' member might not be the perfect representative for the open topic but will definitely have been voted for during the same elective period. The council is supposed to represent - not make lonely decisions of what they believe is right. So in the end it doesnt really matter if the 'pulled' member is the perfect pick for the topic as that person can overcome this by enhanced communication with the playerbase.
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
313
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 10:06:41 -
[58] - Quote
The amount of "unorthodox" phrasing and missing words in sentences in the minutes is impressive.
iveeCore: PHP library for calculation of industrial activities, now with Hyperion support
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
868
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 11:25:05 -
[59] - Quote
Yay for the Minutes.
Small convenience request: make the table of content bullet points links to the respective pages. |
ChromeStriker
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
778
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 11:43:17 -
[60] - Quote
I would like to ask that the bolognese is surved at fanfest... thank you
No Worries
|
|
Speedkermit Damo
Demonic Retribution
363
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 11:51:26 -
[61] - Quote
Interesting read.
Especially the nullsec section. I'm pleased that CCP Greyscale recognises the glaring issues with nullsec and the steps necessary to make nullsec exciting once again.
I only hope that CCP has the courage do go through with it and not cave in the the inevitable pressure and whining from many of the more entitled players who have got used to having everything handed to them on a plate.
Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
|
Nathanael Ashcroft
Ganking Jita Guard
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:34:14 -
[62] - Quote
Always interesting, but regarding the whole suppression of corp member aggression I would suggest thinking ouside the box and revising at the same time other mechanics.
I totally agree that being in a corp should not be an agreement for being able to aggro and be aggro. But what about fleets ? Aggroing fleet members is still triggering flags and CONCORD response while being a much more situational and tactical position, also more easily escapable. So why not make fleet members able to aggro eachother ?
It wont delete infiltrating corps or ganking unsuspecting members, but at least it wont be a constant menace as you have to accept the fleet invite. Moreover it will release some pressure from the logi player using some guns...
Accepting a fleet should be : "i'm ok for fighting alongside these guys for the next minutes/hours and thus accept the risk of some friendly fire occuring" It will also make open fleets more risky and force mining corp to work their diplomacy side if they want to open their fleet to blues. |
Mixu Paatelainen
Eve Refinery
177
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:36:38 -
[63] - Quote
Fozzie has a... direct... style. |
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
85
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:42:37 -
[64] - Quote
Very nice. Thank you for doing the summit & the minutes!
Nullsec
The direction(s) for nullsec sound very cool but I was a bit confused, with things like these maps:
http://www.gfycat.com/FlashyInstructiveGrackle
and then I was really surprised to hear that "not having names on the map" was even an option. Why wouldn't I or other players want that?
I can't really imagine how the point generation and the upkeep of structures with those changes would work. That being said I think ultimately it ends up in a discussion about how much every single activity in eve factors into that and how different kinds of content are weighed , which is bad because you'd be judging different playstyles.
But the idea of your structures and infrastructure being safe as long as you live in the system, are around and are somewhat defending it successfully and this "active eviction" or invasion talk sounds really interesting.
Granularity is also something I would very much like to see. Intermediate levels from mobile depot to pos to outpost. Again I am not sure how control of different objects in space would work. The most likely thing for me would be planet ownership associated with all things orbiting it, stations, belts etc.
I am also in favor of having game mechanics like bounty, coms, intel, navigation and all the stuff that just "happens" be dependant on structures you have to put up, maintain and keep safe by being around.
Community / Organized Play / PVE design
Occupancy and the idea of spreading pve content over larger regions in combination with the movement changes kind of contradict each other don't you think?
Growth
Concerning the growth team stuff and the skins: I thought it was already established that there are different kinds of people who will pay for different kinds of things.
I am sure there is a market for super rare and expensive skins from the NES as well as rented skins for corporation and alliance members and one time use skins as rewards or drops. Please don't lock groups of players out by only providing skins through +30% in price in isk or real money.
"Revisiting systems"
Just as a general feedback, I joined after retribution so I know eve from that point on, I don't feel like you really have "revisited and iterated on systems" as much as you might think. At least it didn't really feel that way.
The exception: The industry changes were really nice and kudos for removing the loot spew.
Things like warp speed / balance / ship changes, that's not iterating on how the systems work, that's just what inputs and outputs they give.
I mean I believe you might be doing a lot of code maintanence that players don't and shouldn't hear about but in terms of
"Hey we introduced this feature and we're changing it in a critical way because it's not working out as we thought." That doesn't really happen. Things that I think would be on that list are PI and ISIS (which are partially hidden by the windows you have open, ISIS only has 2 scroll states) ISIS really only has UI issues, The whole Dust integration that happened and now there are like 20 planets where you can bring the second to smallest ship class and only if you are in FW...
I guess compared to the amount of promise and PR build up these ideas have the amount of impact on gameplay they have and had is fairly small. PI as a passive activity you do for 5 minutes and planet shooting with all those conditions, aren't really a lot more than well polished prototypes.
In short "putting it out there, see what the players think and iterate on it" really didn't see a lot iterating from my point of view.
Overall I'm really happy with what's being done though.
Hope restored.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
10399
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:40:09 -
[65] - Quote
If you actually take the step to removing awoxing without drastically buffing highsec PvP and nerfing CONCORD, I am going to unsub all of my accounts.
Non consensual PvP either exists, or it doesn't. EVE was founded on non consensual PvP. It is the only reason I play this game.
Removing it is where I draw the line. I will not play a game where the only means to inflict a PvP interaction on another player is consensual, as wardecs currently are.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
xXxMLG420sw4gxXx
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:48:49 -
[66] - Quote
Wow...no more awoxing? What's the next step, can't aggress players in highsec?
Not that this was that unexpected considering the way Eve has been going recently, but still, what happened to HTFU? Are we going from adaptation and survival to grinding and hugs?
|
Notorious Fellon
348
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:53:45 -
[67] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:If you actually take the step to removing awoxing without drastically buffing highsec PvP and nerfing CONCORD, I am going to unsub all of my accounts.
Non consensual PvP either exists, or it doesn't. EVE was founded on non consensual PvP. It is the only reason I play this game.
Removing it is where I draw the line. I will not play a game where the only means to inflict a PvP interaction on another player is consensual, as wardecs currently are.
Send me your stuff.
Also: no one cares if you throw a fit. Threatening to quit is about the lamest response one can give. Learn to adapt; just like you tell everyone else when changes come along that benefit you.
Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space
10401
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:00:18 -
[68] - Quote
Notorious Fellon wrote: Send me your stuff.
No, I'll actually spend it all in an orgy of ganking before I biomass.
Quote: Also: no one cares if you throw a fit.
Just when carebears throw a fit, right? One is totally legit, and one is totally not.
Quote: Threatening to quit is about the lamest response one can give.
I am not threatening anything. I play this game exclusively for non consensual PvP. Everything else is secondary or tertiary as a concern in my eyes.
If the thing I like in the game is removed, it is a simple fact that I will cease playing it.
Quote: Learn to adapt; just like you tell everyone else when changes come along that benefit you.
"Changes" does not equate to the removal of a playstyle. If missioning were quite simply removed tomorrow with no replacement, I would fully expect the mission runners to quit the game.
The difference being of course, that I don't actively go around asking for some people's playstyles to go away entirely.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
xXxMLG420sw4gxXx
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:12:54 -
[69] - Quote
Notorious Fellon wrote:Also: no one cares if you throw a fit. Threatening to quit is about the lamest response one can give. Learn to adapt; just like you tell everyone else when changes come along that benefit you.
I don't know if I've ever got to tell anyone to adapt. We've gone from tanking concord while camping highsec gates to almost absolute safety, which is quite a one-sided set of changes in the last 10 or 11 years. It's a completely different game than it used to be, and I'm not sure I want to be a part of it anymore. |
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:22:11 -
[70] - Quote
Can we please go back to the constructive posts re: the minutes? Thanks. |
|
Suzuka A1
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
41
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:17:50 -
[71] - Quote
I would like to nominate CCP Leeloo for Employee of the Month.
Never forget the battle of Z9PP-H-á
What actually happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcUwTmHY74
Battle Report: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?42836-They-Might-Be-Giants-The-Southwest&p=497626&viewfull=1#post497626
|
Valerie Valate
Church of The Crimson Saviour
639
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:19:06 -
[72] - Quote
My first impression, is that I don't like the idea of standings decaying.
I spent a fair amount of effort to get my Blood Raider standing up to above 9. I did this, to add some measure of authenticity to my rp shenanigans.
If I have to maintain those standings, then that means I have to stay in Delve, and not interact with the vast majority of people that my shenanigans would be applicable to.
Similarly, an acquaintance feels some level of achievement in having shot so many npcs, that they are at -10.00 standing to the npc factions.
Also, my standings mean that members of my corporation, may install jump clones in blood raider stations, which again, adds a measure of authenticity to things.
So, if the positive standings that I put effort into achieving, decay into nothingness, because I don't want to be tied to a station in Delve, then I would be unhappy.
to describe the effort that I put in: I flew out to Delve in an Executioner frigate, with some blueprints. I refined mission loot to build better ships (punishers and coercers), to do missions with, fitting them with mission loot, when that loot was superior. It was an enjoyable adventure. Everyone I knew said it couldn't be done. They were wrong. lol. |
Regnag Leppod
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:43:43 -
[73] - Quote
I don't usually read the minutes, but I decided to browse through these.
I rather like CCP Greyscales ideas/vision for what a POS should be like, though some of his statements seem to contradict themselves.
I'm very much on board with the idea of a POS being "home", but I won't be logging off from one until I can dock and not have to worry about finding myself floating in space when I log back in a few days or so later. Yes, it could be construed that I'm asking for outpost level defense on a POS, but if you want a POS to be a place that your average player can call "home", it's going to need some safety.
Overall though, CCP needs to decide who they want to own a POS before they make changes to them. You can't expect to create a POS system that people can call "home" then give it tiny amounts of defense, and expect your average small corp to even bother using one. If your vision is that only corps with 100+ people have a POS, fine, but it's going to need to handle the actions/needs of that many players. To say they need to be scalable is fine, but then you lose the "home" idea completely except for the high level ones, which puts us right back at having outposts.
Love the enthusiasm and the ideas, but find your foundation first please. |
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc. V.L.A.S.T
7
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:22:07 -
[74] - Quote
Access to "Jessica" would be awesome. Alliance battle reports. Cluster news. All rendered in a eve video would be great. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
6320
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:51:26 -
[75] - Quote
I for one have not read the minutes but am thoroughly outraged regardless.
[/rablerablerable]
actually cheers for this, though i am concerned for awoxing, highsec may get a tad on the safe side.
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:15:37 -
[76] - Quote
Regnag Leppod wrote:
Overall though, CCP needs to decide who they want to own a POS before they make changes to them. You can't expect to create a POS system that people can call "home" then give it tiny amounts of defense, and expect your average small corp to even bother using one. If your vision is that only corps with 100+ people have a POS, fine, but it's going to need to handle the actions/needs of that many players. To say they need to be scalable is fine, but then you lose the "home" idea completely except for the high level ones, which puts us right back at having outposts.
Love the enthusiasm and the ideas, but find your foundation first please.
Yes. This is why some of us have been shaking the bushes and talking to people about POS to compose a document for CCP about how players actually use, see, and view their POS vs what metrics say about them. They are not jumping into the POS changes but looking to turn it into the homes and wanted objects that they should be.
Member of CSM9
CSM9 Weekly Updates
|
Dwissi
Miners Delight Phoebe Freeport Republic
77
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:26:45 -
[77] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Regnag Leppod wrote:
Overall though, CCP needs to decide who they want to own a POS before they make changes to them. You can't expect to create a POS system that people can call "home" then give it tiny amounts of defense, and expect your average small corp to even bother using one. If your vision is that only corps with 100+ people have a POS, fine, but it's going to need to handle the actions/needs of that many players. To say they need to be scalable is fine, but then you lose the "home" idea completely except for the high level ones, which puts us right back at having outposts.
Love the enthusiasm and the ideas, but find your foundation first please.
Yes. This is why some of us have been shaking the bushes and talking to people about POS to compose a document for CCP about how players actually use, see, and view their POS vs what metrics say about them. They are not jumping into the POS changes but looking to turn it into the homes and wanted objects that they should be.
Any reason for not 'shaking those bushes ' in the public? Its simply hard to see from our side who gets to deliver input to you guys and who isnt. Doesnt look very representative when it happens without 'us' being able to see the different views and usages that are discussed and risking that some views never get listed.
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4105
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:28:55 -
[78] - Quote
Dwissi wrote:Sugar Kyle wrote:Regnag Leppod wrote:
Overall though, CCP needs to decide who they want to own a POS before they make changes to them. You can't expect to create a POS system that people can call "home" then give it tiny amounts of defense, and expect your average small corp to even bother using one. If your vision is that only corps with 100+ people have a POS, fine, but it's going to need to handle the actions/needs of that many players. To say they need to be scalable is fine, but then you lose the "home" idea completely except for the high level ones, which puts us right back at having outposts.
Love the enthusiasm and the ideas, but find your foundation first please.
Yes. This is why some of us have been shaking the bushes and talking to people about POS to compose a document for CCP about how players actually use, see, and view their POS vs what metrics say about them. They are not jumping into the POS changes but looking to turn it into the homes and wanted objects that they should be. Any reason for not 'shaking those bushes ' in the public? Its simply hard to see from our side who gets to deliver input to you guys and who isnt. Doesnt look very representative when it happens without 'us' being able to see the different views and usages that are discussed and risking that some views never get listed.
Actually, we have been asking in public. The discussions with people tend to be in private, due to opsec, but the asking was public.
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
388
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:51:29 -
[79] - Quote
There's a load of ways to regulate AWOXing without removing it. An SP-related blanket of concord protection for new players, increased tools for corps to pursue AWOXers beyond standard kill rights, removal of insurance payout for the aggressor on the next ship of theirs killed by corp mates, and every other half-measure between CCP's current proposal and the system of old. The onus should always remakn on corp members to protect themselves, or strike back at AWOXers.
This is the next step towards theme-parking highsec, and worries me greatly. CCP is overstepping a more balanced regulation of AWOXing by a huge degree.
Also, as an RvB player this breaks the legs of every special event we do.
-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE."
- traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed]
|
Dwissi
Miners Delight Phoebe Freeport Republic
77
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 00:01:35 -
[80] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Dwissi wrote:Sugar Kyle wrote:Regnag Leppod wrote:
Overall though, CCP needs to decide who they want to own a POS before they make changes to them. You can't expect to create a POS system that people can call "home" then give it tiny amounts of defense, and expect your average small corp to even bother using one. If your vision is that only corps with 100+ people have a POS, fine, but it's going to need to handle the actions/needs of that many players. To say they need to be scalable is fine, but then you lose the "home" idea completely except for the high level ones, which puts us right back at having outposts.
Love the enthusiasm and the ideas, but find your foundation first please.
Yes. This is why some of us have been shaking the bushes and talking to people about POS to compose a document for CCP about how players actually use, see, and view their POS vs what metrics say about them. They are not jumping into the POS changes but looking to turn it into the homes and wanted objects that they should be. Any reason for not 'shaking those bushes ' in the public? Its simply hard to see from our side who gets to deliver input to you guys and who isnt. Doesnt look very representative when it happens without 'us' being able to see the different views and usages that are discussed and risking that some views never get listed. Actually, we have been asking in public. The discussions with people tend to be in private, due to opsec, but the asking was public.
Well - the asking being public isnt really helpful. Its the results of discussions or the discussions themselves that matter. And i simply dont see the 'opsec' part you state. No need to state systems and/or positions or details that might give too much away. Things can easily be 'generalized' for bullet points - but not knowing who delivers that input in the end makes it not very representative.
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
|
Regnag Leppod
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 02:42:48 -
[81] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:[quote=Dwissi] Actually, we have been asking in public. The discussions with people tend to be in private, due to opsec, but the asking was public.
Is there any one in particular that an evemail can be sent to then with such information? "opsec" is one of those issues that's kept me from being completely open about issues like this. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4107
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 03:11:13 -
[82] - Quote
Regnag Leppod wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:[quote=Dwissi] Actually, we have been asking in public. The discussions with people tend to be in private, due to opsec, but the asking was public. Is there any one in particular that an evemail can be sent to then with such information? "opsec" is one of those issues that's kept me from being completely open about issues like this.
Pick a CSM member that you think you can trust enough
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 04:19:13 -
[83] - Quote
Dwissi wrote: Well - the asking being public isnt really helpful. Its the results of discussions or the discussions themselves that matter. And i simply dont see the 'opsec' part you state. No need to state systems and/or positions or details that might give too much away. Things can easily be 'generalized' for bullet points - but not knowing who delivers that input in the end makes it not very representative.
We're not done. For weeks we've been asking and poking for info from people. We hit twitter during the session when we were given permission to start the project. Corbexx, not surprisingly, has gotten the most feedback. Then it is gathering it up. Hes made a nice form and shared it. Then its just inputting it. I will probably place a summary mine on my blog for those interested as I often do. But that depends on the people as well. Some people are very private about what they do. They will talk to us but they don't want people to know that they live in X area and do Y things. If someone asks me not to share beyond CCP what they have shared with me, I will not.
All it is, is questions such as: What does your POS mean to you? What do you do in it? What do force fields mean to you? How would you define your POS to someone? Why do you have a POS? What do you want from them?
The goal is that a POS that appears to be mining a moon mineral might be seen as a moon mining op or maybe a reaction POS. It may turn out that the person also researches there and houses their super carrier there. They may see it as their super POS but they run the moon to help pay for fuel. CCP's metrics will not see all of that but they would like to. Therefore, some of us are asking and gathering it up and making a big list that just says things that people use their POS for and see it as, for CCP to read and use to understand what players are doing and using their POS for.
Because we have spoken to CCP we can process and present the information fairly clearly. That's it.
Member of CSM9
CSM9 Weekly Updates
|
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box
733
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 04:20:05 -
[84] - Quote
Regnag Leppod wrote: Is there any one in particular that an evemail can be sent to then with such information? "opsec" is one of those issues that's kept me from being completely open about issues like this.
Pick a CSM member that you are comfortable speaking with.
Member of CSM9
CSM9 Weekly Updates
|
Sarah Harpoon
The Scope Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 06:49:04 -
[85] - Quote
it's funny how you mention wardecs as an alternative to awoxing, when all that turns into is station games
you also mention suicide ganking as a better way to assassinate someone - as if that's more easy for a newbie to understand?
help ccp i'm confused |
Dwissi
Miners Delight Phoebe Freeport Republic
78
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 08:24:16 -
[86] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Dwissi wrote: Well - the asking being public isnt really helpful. Its the results of discussions or the discussions themselves that matter. And i simply dont see the 'opsec' part you state. No need to state systems and/or positions or details that might give too much away. Things can easily be 'generalized' for bullet points - but not knowing who delivers that input in the end makes it not very representative.
We're not done. For weeks we've been asking and poking for info from people. We hit twitter during the session when we were given permission to start the project. Corbexx, not surprisingly, has gotten the most feedback. Then it is gathering it up. Hes made a nice form and shared it. Then its just inputting it. I will probably place a summary mine on my blog for those interested as I often do. But that depends on the people as well. Some people are very private about what they do. They will talk to us but they don't want people to know that they live in X area and do Y things. If someone asks me not to share beyond CCP what they have shared with me, I will not. All it is, is questions such as: What does your POS mean to you? What do you do in it? What do force fields mean to you? How would you define your POS to someone? Why do you have a POS? What do you want from them? The goal is that a POS that appears to be mining a moon mineral might be seen as a moon mining op or maybe a reaction POS. It may turn out that the person also researches there and houses their super carrier there. They may see it as their super POS but they run the moon to help pay for fuel. CCP's metrics will not see all of that but they would like to. Therefore, some of us are asking and gathering it up and making a big list that just says things that people use their POS for and see it as, for CCP to read and use to understand what players are doing and using their POS for. Because we have spoken to CCP we can process and present the information fairly clearly. That's it.
Awsome - thats the answer that is very helpful! Thank you for taking your time to clarify this
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Erin Crawford
328
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 10:23:37 -
[87] - Quote
pg 44:
Quote:At this point Corbexx asked if it would be possible to give more people access to Jessica GÇô CCPGÇÖs engine for making cinema tics and used in the likes of Clear Skies 3. CCP Falcon and CCP Dhalgren confirmed that this is something they will look into further as the potential benefits could be huge.
This would be mind-boggling awesome!!! I'm sure there are many that would love to make custom scenes and visuals, both static images and movies using Jessica.
In fact one of the reasons why I became interested in EVE was that i saw some artwork others have done using the bare-bone-basics and having to hack together using photoshop and 3rd-party app that extract, convert models and textures so they can create EVE scenes - and they never look as good or as authentic.
Having access to Jessica would allow for incredible EVE-related artwork to be created - this in itself will both directly and indirectly market EVE even more...
Imagine the type of high quality Corp Recruitment Ads that could be created using these tools! In fact, player-made story lines of events that have occurred in game could be re-created, animated and turned into visually stunning movies - control the cameras, flight-paths, explosions, etc... The opportunity for player-generated visuals, both still and movies, would be amazing.
Please, make it happen!
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
23528
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 11:39:07 -
[88] - Quote
pretty much player-generated advertising, that everyone would enjoy.
fwiw, +1
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Winter Archipelago
Fade.
277
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 04:52:26 -
[89] - Quote
Mangala Solaris wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:The meetings. oh god the meetings.
I want a 'I survived the CSM 9 summer summit' tshirt. Trust when I say Winter is worse. Especially in Iceland. You'll come to miss daylight. I'm not that bad. Just take off the blindfold!
Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Ships, Mods, and Dolls.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Suddenly Spaceships.
205
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 16:52:59 -
[90] - Quote
I didn't think you (CCP) had the balls to consider removing 'Sov' but I'm pleased to be proved wrong.
In my opinion, the worst change to the game came just shy of 10 years ago (24/11/2004 to be specific), with the introduction of the artificial 'sovereignty' mechanics. Every change since then has just iterated downwards.
Burn it all to the ground, if people want a silly no-benefits 'flag', good for them... but, going down this route this could be the best [potential] change to have occurred in the game.
... just don't screw it up!
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
138
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 17:16:01 -
[91] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:Access to "Jessica" would be awesome.
You don't want unfettered access to Jessica as it is now. Think of it like a combination of a Python shell and raw access to the internal Trinity graphics engine scene graph, down to the tiniest internal detail, plus a huge menu of every random Python script that anyone from the beginning of EVE ever thought might be a good idea.
Unlike a tool like the Starcraft 2 level editor (which is available to players and really awesome, by the way) Jessica exposes details almost all the way down to the metal on the graphics system that you'd never want to see as a player.
Turning Jessica into something suitable for what the community would like to use it for, or making a new tool for that purpose, is all possible, but it would be a major project.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Flamespar
Pradox One Proficiency V.
1245
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 09:07:58 -
[92] - Quote
Would "being in risk taking mode" include opening a particular door?
Also modular POS with explorable interiors would be amazing.
I want my space bar at the edge of the universe.
Also please add towels and toothbrush to the NeX store
EVE Chronicle: An audio drama set in the EVE universe
http://evechronicle.blogspot.com.au/
https://twitter.com/Flamespar
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
205
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 23:24:03 -
[93] - Quote
GJ everyone involved!
I'm extremely happy about the vision for future starbases, it is exactly what I personally hope the starbases will on day be. Castles among the stars. Customisable cities both for micro corps and megacoalitions, together with custom ship skins are features that may appear superficial at first glance, but will create a much stronger emotional connection between the players and New Eden. This kind of personal dimension is exactly what game needs to reach new levels.
There was lots of other good stuff too, along with the abovementioned I got the feeling that CCP has rebuilt the temporarily lost confidence. New release model works incredibly well, and Phoebe shows that the time of bold changes and actual expansions is here :)
Keep up the good work!
|
Dradis Aulmais
Ignite Llc. V.L.A.S.T
9
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 02:49:10 -
[94] - Quote
Jessica sounds like aNightmare to use but since we dropped the expansion videos, have a usable interface for customers to use would make sense. You have basically a program that reached is basic life expectancy now your remonatized it as a customer generated ad content machine. Boom. Customers are happy they can create videos outlining their love for this game and CCP has a cheap source of ad revenue. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
102
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 07:54:26 -
[95] - Quote
Quote:CCP Greyscale (about starbases) - Inspirational - They need to look fuc*** awesome, and people need to want them and want to be around them and have them and use them and like them and want them and stuff. I love you man. Anything that won't look like stick with bubble or cheap russian MIR. I just need to figure why i would need that thing.
Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
_I am the night. I'm Bantam. _
|
Dwissi
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
78
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 10:04:17 -
[96] - Quote
Finally through with the entire thing - what a read.
Many fantastic things in there - good job CSM 9.
2 things i am still concerned about:
The trend to make low sec a pure roaming and pve farming area is kind of scary to me actually. I had hoped for some more activity for making low a habitable area again. It used to be a great 'training&staging' area for corporations and alliances as a first step before trying to go to null sec. Starting to get established away from major market hubs, developing your own market etc - all that is completely missing in there.
POS discussion. An open forum about it would be great. Right now many dont even consider putting any up - so these people will not be included in the POS discussion because the statement says 'collect from people how they use them right now'. Reasons for not having one are plentiful - its too complicated, not cost effective enough .... - you extend that list as you want. But any future changes should really include the people who are not running them right now and not just the ones who do. Especially with the stated possible changes to null sec a large group of players should be involved to avoid another cascade fail for null. POS have a much larger meaning for smaller entities who are not as much represented in null discussions as they didnt have a chance to go there on their own yet. A POS is always a mid-step in between no docking and a full blown station - it seems to be forgotten really in the entire discussion about them right now.
Edit: making a POS a single-player owned structure was one of the worst things that has been mentioned in there
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
76
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 10:35:26 -
[97] - Quote
Above discussion about a messy to use tool not open for everyone to play with right now becomes rather amusing if "Da Tweekaz & In-Phase - Bad Habit" is playing while one skims through it.
Back on topic: so basically what you're telling us is "we couldn't possibly release it as is because we'd be ashamed of ourselves" ? ^^ Because, judging by the effort the community has and does invest into their favourite game, I bet there are quite a few that would come through with a new video even if it's nearly unusable.
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Quote:CCP Greyscale (about starbases) - Inspirational - They need to look fuc*** awesome, and people need to want them and want to be around them and have them and use them and like them and want them and stuff. I love you man. Anything that won't look like stick with bubble or cheap russian MIR. I just need to figure why i would need that thing.
I'd love to see the TEC Argonev-class Starbase as some sort of Caldari Navy Stronghold. It certainly looks, though more plain, better than 4-4. Then one thinks about IP shenanigans that that would cause and hope is crushed under the iron heel of banhammer wielding legalese adjutants. |
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2881
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 12:30:44 -
[98] - Quote
Quote:Steve - is there any way to make mining more exciting CCP Fozzie/Petur - we'd love to make this way more sci-fi and procedurally generated. Changes have been made. we have to wait for that to settle down, but there is more we can do.
I'm sorry but exactly what changes have been made to make mining more exciting?
Invalid signature format
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
141
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 16:00:54 -
[99] - Quote
Dradis Aulmais wrote:Jessica sounds like aNightmare to use but since we dropped the expansion videos, have a usable interface for customers to use would make sense. You have basically a program that reached is basic life expectancy now your remonatized it as a customer generated ad content machine. Boom. Customers are happy they can create videos outlining their love for this game and CCP has a cheap source of ad revenue.
A little explanation on why I said this would be a major project:
You're asking for an animation authoring tool, and Jessica is not designed to serve that purpose. It's for making EVE graphics assets. It just happens to provide a somewhat clunky way to do part, not all, of the animation authoring process for our cinematics team. Because of this, a player-suitable tool for authoring animations would require significant reworking.
By the way, we still have a cinematics team and they're still working on trailers. Our release cadence change means they may not be tied to an expansion release, but in the future there will still be EVE trailers. Which makes me happy.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Erin Crawford
331
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 18:25:34 -
[100] - Quote
I was hoping to have something that allows one to use and create imagery with the EVE assets using it's rendering engine for authenticity purposes - using anything else always looks hacked.
Heck, I would be overjoyed at simply being able to tinker around until I would finally figure out how to create a scene for a still image - forget animation and movies, just creating some still images would be amazing.
It's a pity, but understandable. Thanks anyways.
|
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
147
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 22:27:27 -
[101] - Quote
Erin Crawford wrote: It's a pity, but understandable. Thanks anyways.
Aww! I think it would be awesome to have some kind of public content authoring tool too. Don't worry, we hear you.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
33846
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 00:48:30 -
[102] - Quote
Session: Ship and module balancing Page 24: CCP Fozzie - Where meta 4 items are better than T2 we'll be downgrading them so that T2 are always superior. I do not think that having unique faction items is bad or that we will have to do much to them.
Sugar Kyle- Where will COSMOS modules fit in with regards to this? CCP Fozzie - They'll fit in fine with this, and their biggest advantage is that they have among the best fitting requirements. We don't really want to change them too much at this time. Faction stuff that has an advantage probably won't change.
Instead of constantly nerfing stuff, how about buffing those few T2 items that need to have better attribute stats compared to their meta lv 4 counterparts.
Also you guys definitely need to buff Storyline / Cosmos modules, most of them are rated meta lv 6 yet have attribute stats worse than meta lv 4 mods.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Sugar Kyle
Snuff Box
741
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 02:23:25 -
[103] - Quote
Dwissi wrote:Finally through with the entire thing - what a read.
Many fantastic things in there - good job CSM 9.
2 things i am still concerned about:
The trend to make low sec a pure roaming and pve farming area is kind of scary to me actually. I had hoped for some more activity for making low a habitable area again. It used to be a great 'training&staging' area for corporations and alliances as a first step before trying to go to null sec. Starting to get established away from major market hubs, developing your own market etc - all that is completely missing in there.
I do not believe that low sec is a training ground. It is an area with its own unique mechanics and much of its lifestyle is quite different from null. Low sec is not a stepping ground. It is an independent area. If someone wishes to live in low sec, lovely, but it is not about training wheels. Low, like high, null, and wormholes contains players of all ages, abilities and ship types interacting in its unique environment because that is the type of game play the residents enjoy.
I run two market hubs in low sec. They are both successful and profitable. I manufacture and build in low sec. I own POCOs, my corporation owns POS. All of these things are alive and viable.
But yes, I am quite focused on a more dynamic game play where residents do not simply sit but live within an area finding what they need from system to system. I have many wishes for low sec and this is only the start. The fixes for escalations that are coming in excite me. I love the ships out in space, hunting in belts, flying and dying and living in low sec.
Member of CSM9
CSM9 Weekly Updates
|
Dwissi
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 05:02:00 -
[104] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Dwissi wrote:Finally through with the entire thing - what a read.
Many fantastic things in there - good job CSM 9.
2 things i am still concerned about:
The trend to make low sec a pure roaming and pve farming area is kind of scary to me actually. I had hoped for some more activity for making low a habitable area again. It used to be a great 'training&staging' area for corporations and alliances as a first step before trying to go to null sec. Starting to get established away from major market hubs, developing your own market etc - all that is completely missing in there.
I do not believe that low sec is a training ground. It is an area with its own unique mechanics and much of its lifestyle is quite different from null. Low sec is not a stepping ground. It is an independent area. If someone wishes to live in low sec, lovely, but it is not about training wheels. Low, like high, null, and wormholes contains players of all ages, abilities and ship types interacting in its unique environment because that is the type of game play the residents enjoy. I run two market hubs in low sec. They are both successful and profitable. I manufacture and build in low sec. I own POCOs, my corporation owns POS. All of these things are alive and viable. But yes, I am quite focused on a more dynamic game play where residents do not simply sit but live within an area finding what they need from system to system. I have many wishes for low sec and this is only the start. The fixes for escalations that are coming in excite me. I love the ships out in space, hunting in belts, flying and dying and living in low sec.
Throws lasso at Sugar and calms her down - sshhhht - its all good! :D
Please look at my liitle marks up their - its for the lack for any good wording that i used 'training&staging' for that particular point. And you are very mistaken if you believe i made any generalized direct comparison between null and low - i used to live in low myself long enough to agree in parts to 'unique'. But bottom line is that its nothing but a more hostile empire space due to the lack of concorde and having capitals being allowed. All other empire mechanics apply to low and 'real' inhabitants like you and your group are pretty much an exception and not the rule. I do recall an interview in a blog where you admitted yourself that there is an obvious lack of others doing what you do.
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Dwissi
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 05:02:32 -
[105] - Quote
damned double post - delete
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
208
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 09:47:08 -
[106] - Quote
Most would argue that hisec is the transition zone to nullsec. Lowsec and w-space attract those with the bloodthirst gene, and L4 mission runners are drawn to the nullsec farming grounds.
Perhaps nullsec becomes more attractive to PVP players in the future?
|
Dwissi
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 10:25:31 -
[107] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Most would argue that hisec is the transition zone to nullsec. Lowsec and w-space attract those with the bloodthirst gene, and L4 mission runners are drawn to the nullsec farming grounds.
Perhaps nullsec becomes more attractive to PVP players in the future?
That statement was only true for the stagnating null sec era - thats why i phrased 'used to be' which points to before that time. With Phoebe we are basically going back to those times because no more hotdropping across the entire board. People where not settling in low anymore because you would be plumbed and raped by every major player at will - that will not happen anymore(hopefully).
Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins
Before someone complains again: grr everyone
Greed is the death of loyalty
|
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
77
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 11:36:15 -
[108] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Session: Ship and module balancing Page 24: CCP Fozzie - Where meta 4 items are better than T2 we'll be downgrading them so that T2 are always superior. I do not think that having unique faction items is bad or that we will have to do much to them.
Sugar Kyle- Where will COSMOS modules fit in with regards to this? CCP Fozzie - They'll fit in fine with this, and their biggest advantage is that they have among the best fitting requirements. We don't really want to change them too much at this time. Faction stuff that has an advantage probably won't change.
Instead of constantly nerfing stuff, how about buffing those few T2 items that need to have better attribute stats compared to their meta lv 4 counterparts.
Also you guys definitely need to buff Storyline / Cosmos modules, most of them are rated meta lv 6 yet have attribute stats worse than meta lv 4 mods.
DMC
Disagree - for those items where Meta4 is as powerful the problem is clearly with the Meta scaling. T2 is defined as being 20% better. If we take a look at say TPs Meta4 are allready 20% better in the most important stat - signature increase of whatever you choose as your unlucky victim for the electro-optical guidance system. The application stats are equal, the activation cost LOWER as is the FITTING. While lower activation cost and fitting might be understandable it would have had to come at the 16% improved performance that Meta4 should have (unless the T2 items allow for T2 charges which makes Meta4 have the T2 base allowable (see Guns)). |
CaldariCitizen 32453253
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 11:31:31 -
[109] - Quote
Lets kill more ways of playing the game : ^ ) |
Scheulagh Santorine
The Math Department
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 22:13:57 -
[110] - Quote
CSM & Developers,
I have read some of the minutes focusing on the subject of corporation aggression changes, particularly the Team Five-O sections. I have some questions about what I am reading. In the following exchange (Text 1) it not clear whether CCP means that the confusion associated with being shot by corp mates and Concord does not responding versus Concord does respond when they are in an NPC corp? Considering this rule has been unchanged for over a decade, is a change to this rule less confusing than consistency?
And what, if you would be kind enough to explain, is intended by the term 'old Eve'?
Another exchange (Text 2) seems to equate war declarations and low-sec/worm-hole/0.0 baiting as equivalent play styles to the complex of players and corporations that have emerged in high-sec, working together to expose theft and subversive combat opportunities? Is it your contention, in the last quote, that the aggression flagging mechanics would be too confusing to identify in-corporation aggression versus out-of-corporation aggression?
Thank you for clarification on these issues.
Regards,
S. Santorine
============================== I used to shoot things. Now I do math.
S. Santorine
Writings on some formal methods in EvE-Online: Ship Motion in EVE Online
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2829
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 23:58:39 -
[111] - Quote
I have deleted a redundant double post.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2086
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 00:25:04 -
[112] - Quote
Scheulagh Santorine wrote:CSM & Developers, I have read some of the minutes focusing on the subject of corporation aggression changes, particularly the Team Five-O sections. I have some questions about what I am reading. In the following exchange ( Text 1) it is not clear whether CCP means that the confusion associated with being shot by corp mates and Concord does not respond versus Concord does respond when they are in an NPC corp? Considering this rule has been unchanged for over a decade, is a change to this rule less confusing than consistency? And what, if you would be kind enough to explain, is intended by the term 'old Eve'? Another exchange ( Text 2) seems to equate war declarations and low-sec/worm-hole/0.0 baiting as equivalent play styles to the complex of players and corporations that have emerged in high-sec, working together to expose theft and subversive combat opportunities? Is it your contention, in the last quote, that the aggression flagging mechanics would be too confusing to identify in-corporation aggression versus out-of-corporation aggression? Thank you for clarification on these issues. Regards, S. Santorine
As to the first point. It was a nonintuitive rule from the start and the cause of confusion all along. So the change was the right thing to do and not a cause of further confusion.
Old Eve would be the original version with all its bugs and quirks. Each quirk could be argued against, using the grandfather clause of 'that is how it has always been'. The argument doesn't hold water when the newer way is better. If you disagree with this have a scribe calligraphy up your reply as that is how it should be done, none of the newfangled computer or electronics.
One the second point we were saying that there should be a difference between the flagging mechanisms but this has been solved with the changes in intercorp aggression. So I fail to see your point unless it is a convoluted way to bring back an inherently bad mechanic.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Scheulagh Santorine
The Math Department
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 03:04:54 -
[113] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:
As to the first point. It was a nonintuitive rule from the start and the cause of confusion all along. So the change was the right thing to do and not a cause of further confusion.
Old Eve would be the original version with all its bugs and quirks. Each quirk could be argued against, using the grandfather clause of 'that is how it has always been'. The argument doesn't hold water when the newer way is better. If you disagree with this have a scribe calligraphy up your reply as that is how it should be done, none of the newfangled computer or electronics.
One the second point we were saying that there should be a difference between the flagging mechanisms but this has been solved with the changes in intercorp aggression. So I fail to see your point unless it is a convoluted way to bring back an inherently bad mechanic.
m
Your response to the first point about the existing mechanic being confusing repeats the reason that one of the developers cited for the reason to make the change. Did the committee consider that there are many 'complicated' mechanics in EVE as with many other games. If complexity is the issue, why was there no proposal considered to streamline corp aggression mechanics instead of making a drastic change? My suspicion on the lack of diverse discussion on this point is in part that there exists some misunderstanding of the impact of these changes. This view was reinforced with my interaction with Xander Phoena.
I'm going to ignore your second paragraph as it is unrelated to this discussion -- we're talking about a successful computer game whose rules should only change if there is a good reason.
On the questions I asked about the second Text link, I agree that there are a lot of flagging states that players need to learn so perhaps there is some friction there. On the other hand, there does not seem to be a response to the larger question. I'll ask it again directly:
- What equivalence does the CSM and developers see between war declarations and baiting tactics as equivalent play styles to the complex of players and corporations that have emerged in high-sec, working together to expose theft and subversive combat opportunities?
Regards,
S. Santorine
============================== I used to shoot things. Now I do math.
S. Santorine
Writings on some formal methods in EvE-Online: Ship Motion in EVE Online
|
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
2086
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 03:20:24 -
[114] - Quote
Scheulagh Santorine wrote: If complexity is the issue, why was there no proposal considered to streamline corp aggression mechanics instead of making a drastic change? My suspicion on the lack of diverse discussion on this point is in part that there exists some misunderstanding of the impact of these changes. This view was reinforced with my interaction with Xander Phoena.
I'm going to ignore your second paragraph as it is unrelated to this discussion -- we're talking about a successful computer game whose rules should only change if there is a good reason.
On the questions I asked about the second Text link, I agree that there are a lot of flagging states that players need to learn so perhaps there is some friction there. On the other hand, there does not seem to be a response to the larger question. I'll ask it again directly: [list]
What equivalence does the CSM and developers see between war declarations and baiting tactics as equivalent play styles to the complex of players and corporations that have emerged in high-sec, working together to expose theft and subversive combat opportunities?
I didn't say complex, I said counter intuitive . . . or dumb. The ability to shoot a corp mate out of the blue in hisec with no legal repercussions was a dumb rule and lasted waaaaay too long in the game.
There was a good reason to change it, so we did.
I do not answer for all the CSM nor CCP. But if you want my answer as a CSM member (and candidate) there are connections but not equivalence. War decs and baiting are the offence, the other is the defense. Equivalence? No.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Scheulagh Santorine
The Math Department
20
|
Posted - 2014.12.10 17:32:37 -
[115] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote: I didn't say complex, I said counter intuitive . . . or dumb. The ability to shoot a corp mate out of the blue in hisec with no legal repercussions was a dumb rule and lasted waaaaay too long in the game.
There was a good reason to change it, so we did.
I do not answer for all the CSM nor CCP. But if you want my answer as a CSM member (and candidate) there are connections but not equivalence. War decs and baiting are the offence, the other is the defense. Equivalence? No.
m
There are many counter-intuitive rules in EVE. If you are interested in a list I can provide one, starting with the rules of combat and ship motion in the game of which I have dedicated considerable study. These counter-intuitive rules have made for rich interaction, and their long-standing does not qualify them necessarily for change.
As for having 'good' reasons to make this change, I've gone back to the text of the minutes and identified this section (Text3) which seems to outline CCP's real motivation for the changes. The fact that the corp aggression rules have created emergent game play is being trumped by the concerns over how some players respond to adversity. While my anecdotal experiences with being the victim of corporate intrigues in my first months of play does not apply to all players, most people have the grit to stick with the game.
On the other hand, my recent experiences with the high-sec groups who exploit aggression mechanics, while brief, was a genuinely refreshing way for a veteran to experience the game and meet new people. It is my sincere hope that developers will consider giving something back to this community.
Regards,
S. Santorine
============================== I used to shoot things. Now I do math.
S. Santorine
Writings on some formal methods in EvE-Online: Ship Motion in EVE Online
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |