open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Letter from the CSM
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

Fuujin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 21:48:00 - [151]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
Focussing on only one issue is going to cost us dearly in terms of lost time.

While the nullsec community might have been watching "in horror" at the backlog set up by CSM 5, that backlog existed for a reason - CSM was preparing a laundry list of fixes, second iterations, and wish list items. Where were the nullsec denizens when that list was being prepared? Why weren't nullsec issues supported sufficiently in the F&I and AH forums to appear in the crowd sourcing lists? Why weren't crowd sourcing sessions used by nullsec denizens to advance their gameplay preferences?

Subsequent iterations over the backlog could have scrapped some items, reprioritised others, and added more important stuff to the front of the queue.

If you're going to throw away that laundry list backlog and focus on just one item being implemented by one team, you're going to lose the opportunity to influence the other teams to produce stuff that the players want.

The CSM should be setting up a prioritized list for each team it interacts with. Team Gridlock is only focussed on the space simulation aspect of the game. There are other teams dealing with the UI, content and customer service.

Will we see other items beside "Time Dilation" in the spotlights any time soon, or does CSM6 feel that one spotlight is all they can manage at once?

What does CSM6 intend to do with the crowd sourcing and prioritisation list?

Will minutes or recordings of the "Fireside Chats" be kept (eg: publish recordings as podcasts) so that those of us not available to participate can catch up on the discussions at a later date?



Or you can realize that the backlog exists because CCP doesn't prioritize any of them aside from maybe the low hanging fruit scoopd up by Team BFF. When you go to iceland and hand them 10,000 points and say "do these please, thanks!" the only rational response is to scratch your head and toss them in the back of the queue, since they're all "important" and given dissonant supprot.

Focusing on a few issues and selling them as singular priorities--even if they're backlog retreads--is far more likey to be effectively realized than tossing handfuls of random ideas out like chaff and hoping some stick.

Butterbunz
Posted - 2011.04.11 21:50:00 - [152]
 

Any CSM want to comment on my last post?

Sturmwolke
Posted - 2011.04.11 21:52:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: LordElfa
Originally by: Sturmwolke
Sturmwolke
The responsible public will not engage with sound ideas and suggestions if you maintain a hostile environment full of trolls.



I've been through every post in this thread and the trolls appear to be those coming out against CSM6, not brought with them. Convince them to get the hell out and there won't be any damn hostility.


And is that all you have to say?

VaL Iscariot
Caldari
The Concilium Enterprises
Spectrum Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.11 21:54:00 - [154]
 

Hey CSM, here's a clever thought, unlike ccp listen to the players and make them give back our anoms. I don't want to grind missions again :(

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2011.04.11 21:59:00 - [155]
 

I think nobody expected that the huge success of CSM5 could be continued, but this letter is really a big step backwards.

CSM is one of the most important connections between the players (who are corporate stakeholders) and CCP, and you are reducing it to a SCRUM stakeholder. Of course it makes your day a lot easier in that respect.

But you seem to be motivated to work together effectively, so i am looking forward to what you can achieve. I'll try to measure you by your deeds, not by your words. Good luck!

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:03:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: VaL Iscariot
Hey CSM, here's a clever thought, unlike ccp listen to the players and make them give back our anoms. I don't want to grind missions again :(


Since Greyscale's dev blog was released between CSM5 and CSM6, and CSM6 was not consulted about the change, there's not much we can do about it, besides discuss it at the Summit. It's certainly a topic that we intend to discuss, both in terms of its impact, and the fact that it helpfully gutshot the CSM right out of the gates. Meissa informs me that CSM5 was not consulted, either.

Half of our job is to show the playerbase what we can accomplish in realistic terms, but also to grow the legitimacy of the CSM in everyone's eyes. That's much harder to do if sometimes CCP consults with us, and sometimes they don't.

I've made it clear in the anom thread that while I don't disagree that there should be differences between regions in terms of risk/reward, the way that this nerf was handled was awful, and on top of that the dev blog itself didn't make any sense - claiming that we would change our staging systems based on anomaly quality, for example. That was a real :cripes: moment.

Havlentia Castigatrix
Gallente
The Avalon Foundation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:03:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Butterbunz
Any CSM want to comment on my last post?


Didn't think it warranted more than a passing giggle, to be honest, 'butterbunz'.


Rasha Tar
Caldari
Slaps n Tickles
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:05:00 - [158]
 

I don't know about anyone else, but I started playing eve for the SPACESHIPS and the massive battles.
If time dilathingy allows these fights to scale without the server going **** up, then that is a wonderful thing.

The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:05:00 - [159]
 

Originally by: Qoi

CSM is one of the most important connections between the players (who are corporate stakeholders) and CCP, and you are reducing it to a SCRUM stakeholder. Of course it makes your day a lot easier in that respect.



so what you're saying is that you preferred being lied to, and/or deluded?

when i ran on a platform of 'they're lying to you' and 'no more bull****', i wasn't kidding. what you think you have ('stakeholder') and what you actually have (scrum stakeholder) are two different things, and you're upset because you're having the illusions ripped away from you.


LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:06:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Qoi
I think nobody expected that the huge success of CSM5 could be continued, but this letter is really a big step backwards.

CSM is one of the most important connections between the players (who are corporate stakeholders) and CCP, and you are reducing it to a SCRUM stakeholder. Of course it makes your day a lot easier in that respect.

But you seem to be motivated to work together effectively, so i am looking forward to what you can achieve. I'll try to measure you by your deeds, not by your words. Good luck!


Is it really that awful that unlike former CSM's that tried to promise the world that this one is being reserved and honest about what they can and can't do?

It sounds like a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't to me. Be honest and you end up with insinuations of lethargy, say you can get it all done and you're accused of having delusions of grandeur. Which is it?

...and someone tell me how CSM5 had huge success?!

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:09:00 - [161]
 

Originally by: The Mittani

when i ran on a platform of 'they're lying to you' and 'no more bull****', i wasn't kidding. what you think you have ('stakeholder') and what you actually have (scrum stakeholder) are two different things, and you're upset because you're having the illusions ripped away from you.


You might want to look up the meaning of "corporate stakeholder" in an encyclopedia. The playerbase is one.

Mitchello
B O R G
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:10:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Qoi
I think nobody expected that the huge success of CSM5 could be continued, but this letter is really a big step backwards.

CSM is one of the most important connections between the players (who are corporate stakeholders) and CCP, and you are reducing it to a SCRUM stakeholder. Of course it makes your day a lot easier in that respect.

But you seem to be motivated to work together effectively, so i am looking forward to what you can achieve. I'll try to measure you by your deeds, not by your words. Good luck!


Come on, it doesn't have to be. They have been in office for less than a week, and yeah ok the campaign time was a bit meh in many regards.

But every CSM has a transition time. And every time people have to switch from the previous CSM to a next.

Sure, there is the topic of stakeholder, accountability, however you want to call it. But, the show does go on, this is not the only topic. CSM6 starts with Time Dilation, which is nice. Sure it has roots, but that does not mean to just write it off. On the contrary, one thing clear from CSM 4 and 5 was that constant communication and perception of pressure was a must. So at minimum for that this is something to consider.

Caution is always good. And yes, first impressions do have a hit, but this does go beyond that. No CSM is ever static. Give it a bit, follow the various CSM members and alternates, discuss with them and people elsewhere. On forums, on blogs, etcetera.

Yeah, I miss the position on accountability. Simple best practices case. That does not mean it is going to be absent. Could be, but doesn't have to.

Illwill Bill
Svea Crusaders
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:10:00 - [163]
 

Time dilation aside (it's a very interesting suggestion, and I look forward to seeing how it turns out), the current CSM seem to be too obsessed with 0.0.

I wish you good luck, guys, but the CSM needs to look at high-sec and lol-sec aswell (is it just me, or is WH-space actually working out well?).

Havlentia Castigatrix
Gallente
The Avalon Foundation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:11:00 - [164]
 

Originally by: LordElfa

...and someone tell me how CSM5 had huge success?!


I think that some people mistake the unholy outrage caused during the 'vote for us'/"we're ignoring the list of things" debacle as creating a reflected glory of sorts during the damage limitation phases. Unless they're referring to a candidate getting kicked out for 'insider knowledge', although you'd need to really spin to call that a win.

I _really_ would love to be a fly on the wall during the meetings when CCP have to deal with a lawyer asking the questions. Schadenfreude is delicious.


Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:13:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Qoi
I think nobody expected that the huge success of CSM5 could be continued, but this letter is really a big step backwards.

CSM is one of the most important connections between the players (who are corporate stakeholders) and CCP, and you are reducing it to a SCRUM stakeholder. Of course it makes your day a lot easier in that respect.

But you seem to be motivated to work together effectively, so i am looking forward to what you can achieve. I'll try to measure you by your deeds, not by your words. Good luck!

Huge success? While they had successes, I wouldn't call CSM 5 a huge success. They called BS on what became the 18-month meme, and then convinced CCP to deal with a few issues that had been sitting in the wish list for years.

This CSM is calling for Time Dilation which would have pretty dramatic ramifications on the mechanics of the game. If they can get it through, I would call the success of CSM 6 on par with that of CSM 5. If they can accomplish more, great.

VaL Iscariot
Caldari
The Concilium Enterprises
Spectrum Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:14:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: The Mittani
Originally by: VaL Iscariot
Hey CSM, here's a clever thought, unlike ccp listen to the players and make them give back our anoms. I don't want to grind missions again :(


Since Greyscale's dev blog was released between CSM5 and CSM6, and CSM6 was not consulted about the change, there's not much we can do about it, besides discuss it at the Summit. It's certainly a topic that we intend to discuss, both in terms of its impact, and the fact that it helpfully gutshot the CSM right out of the gates. Meissa informs me that CSM5 was not consulted, either.

Half of our job is to show the playerbase what we can accomplish in realistic terms, but also to grow the legitimacy of the CSM in everyone's eyes. That's much harder to do if sometimes CCP consults with us, and sometimes they don't.

I've made it clear in the anom thread that while I don't disagree that there should be differences between regions in terms of risk/reward, the way that this nerf was handled was awful, and on top of that the dev blog itself didn't make any sense - claiming that we would change our staging systems based on anomaly quality, for example. That was a real :cripes: moment.


Thanks for supporting the community. You've said more in this single post alone then ccp even cared to mention in the anom threadnaught.

You have my bow

BFF <3

Shinigami Zetsui
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:21:00 - [167]
 

Edited by: Shinigami Zetsui on 11/04/2011 22:21:34
Originally by: Butterbunz
Only one week in and I already wish that CCP would spend the money it takes to run CSM to make another HTFU music video. In just this topic alone, I have read nothing more then petty name calling (neckbeard, basement dweller, etc) and your typical tough guy attitude.

First and foremost, when becoming CSM check your ****ing in game personality at the door. I don't care if you're some big shot in game or RL, but you need to listen to the people you signed up to represent. Rather than trying to win a vote of confidence by trying to be the winner of a flame war, how about you try to press an issue with a problem/issue the players (CCP's source of income) have.

The biggest issue we need to address is the public support for the CSM. Frankly, I couldn't give two ****s about whether or you have a strong sway with CCP or nothing more than glorified sock puppets. You need the support of the players to press on. Imagine this: The majority of the players support your agenda (Updated regularly and discussed in an open forum. CSM has/gains a major backing by the player base and presents a proposal to CCP. CCP reading the proposal will try to actively enter some form of negotiation (feasibility and such) and try to make it work rather than shoot it down outright. If CCP does shoot down an proposal, that would cause one hell of a PR ****storm. They would have to give reasons for it, and the CSM could give player oriented feedback to help CCP suggest plausible ways of implementing the changes.

Realistically you guys are supposed to act like lobbyists (to an extent). Just because you think you might get shut down doesn't mean you shouldn't even bother trying. Have weekly blogs to demonstrate some form of progression to a goal. You could even schedule bi-yearly (bi-termly if the CSM term is less than a year) proposals. Research, debate, and discuss your goals and ideas, then as a unified body make the proposal.

This does in fact mean a lot of time needs to be spent doing the job, but hey, if you don't want to do the work don't run for candidacy.

Inb4 a bunch of degenerative 4chan flamewars Rolling Eyes


I'll repost my post with a less comic alt.

Camios
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:24:00 - [168]
 

Edited by: Camios on 11/04/2011 22:24:18
While Time Dilation will probably solve the unfairness due to lag, Time Dilation will not change the game; the way to survive will always be "bring more people" and we'll hit the server limit again.
Time dilation sounds like a plaster on a really more complicated problem that would need a gameplay fix instead: Null Security space has evolved in a poor way: either you blob or play the elitist game with SCs.

Coalitions gameplay is the problem. While its scale is fascinating and awe inspiring, it kills the server (and will kill it even with time dilation, perhaps even if the playerbase does not keep growing).
But please note I'm not against coalitions, I'm not against PL.
I'm against the fact that if you don't play one of these roles you cannot survive in nowadays 0.0; thus if you want to survive you must play that server killing game.
To solve the problem beyond Time Dilation, we'll either need a radical sov mechanic change (so that battles are fought over many sistems at once) or some tools for the small independent entities



Don't nerf coalitions, just boost the ability of small independent entities to survive in nullsec without blues.
It should not involve POSes and Outpost, but smaller and less visible stuff.

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:24:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: Bagehi

Huge success? While they had successes, I wouldn't call CSM 5 a huge success. They called BS on what became the 18-month meme, and then convinced CCP to deal with a few issues that had been sitting in the wish list for years.

This CSM is calling for Time Dilation which would have pretty dramatic ramifications on the mechanics of the game. If they can get it through, I would call the success of CSM 6 on par with that of CSM 5. If they can accomplish more, great.


You are right, calling it a huge success wasn't exactly the right phrase. But we saw progress that you couldn't see in previous CSM terms. (Previous CSMs were of course important for the success of CSM5, too.) Now i'm not so sure if the new strategy of CSM6 will work out.

I completely agree that time dilation is a much needed mechanic if it works out technically, but the CSM shouldn't forget the bigger picture either.

BurntCornMuffin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:29:00 - [170]
 

Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:30:43
Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
but you need to listen to the people you signed up to represent.


We didn't vote for him because we had to tell him what to do, we voted him in because we knew he'd do his own thing, which we are confident is the smart thing. If he had to actually listen to us, he'd be talking about removing Concord from the game, and adding Goon faction ships that resembled little yellow bees and frog pillows.

Cortante
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:30:00 - [171]
 

This CSM is little more than a Northern Coalition CSM. The effect of Time Dilation will only help people bring a bigger blob, which favors the Northern Coalition.

Nothing Mittani or any of the other NC CSM members espouses will help smaller entities, nothing they espouse will break up the ****ty powerblocs that have choked out the flavor of 0.0. The first big idea? Making it easier to bring a blob and win.

End of the day, don't encourage Mittani or any of his yes-men by engaging with them, tell CCP that the CSM doesn't represent you and that CCP should take their ideas and opinions with the tiniest grain of salt.

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:32:00 - [172]
 

Originally by: Camios
Edited by: Camios on 11/04/2011 22:24:18
While Time Dilation will probably solve the unfairness due to lag, Time Dilation will not change the game; the way to survive will always be "bring more people" and we'll hit the server limit again.



I'm waiting with giddy anticipation at the Dev blog to come Soon on the time dilation thing to know for sure, but I'm fairly certain it could be implemented to scale....so the more people load the node, the more it dilates.


Meissa Anunthiel
Redshift Industrial
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:33:00 - [173]
 

Originally by: Illwill Bill
Time dilation aside (it's a very interesting suggestion, and I look forward to seeing how it turns out), the current CSM seem to be too obsessed with 0.0.

I wish you good luck, guys, but the CSM needs to look at high-sec and lol-sec aswell (is it just me, or is WH-space actually working out well?).


Don't worry Illwill Bill, while a significant part of this CSM is composed of 0.0 dwellers, they're not the only ones.

You might be surprised at the willingness of some of them to listen with interest to your requests, even if they pertain more to lowsec and highsec. If you don't trust them to carry your message adequately (or have the appropriate knowledge to be able to defend them appropriately), you can always feel free to contact me. I'm industrialist/PvEer during the day, and non-sov/lowsec PvPer during the evenings (and wormholer during some week-ends :p).

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:38:00 - [174]
 

Originally by: Camios
To solve the problem beyond Time Dilation, we'll either need a radical sov mechanic change (so that battles are fought over many sistems at once) or some tools for the small independent entities

Don't nerf coalitions, just boost the ability of small independent entities to survive in nullsec without blues.
It should not involve POSes and Outpost, but smaller and less visible stuff.

And this has been proposed to CCP. In fact, the CSM 6 has one of the people who designed a better sov mechanic on it. If CSM 6 can get CCP to iterate on sov, Eve would be a better place. I think many of the CSM stated at one point or another their desire for iteration on sov. It was my hope in voting for them that they would push for that iteration.

Time dilation is a start though, because even if sov is iterated on, those giant fights will still happen. The cause of those giant fights is almost always a super cap being tackled and the ensuing escalation to save/kill it and whatever else ends up being tackled in the process. So, regardless of sov iteration, time dilation is required.

LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:40:00 - [175]
 

Edited by: LordElfa on 11/04/2011 22:41:59
Originally by: BurntCornMuffin
Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:30:43
Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
but you need to listen to the people you signed up to represent.


We didn't vote for him because we had to tell him what to do, we voted him in because we knew he'd do his own thing, which we are confident is the smart thing. If he had to actually listen to us, he'd be talking about removing Concord from the game, and adding Goon faction ships that resembled little yellow bees and frog pillows.


That would be a very cool idea for a prize in a corp tournament. The winner would get their own faction frigate added to the game which would be visually designed by the winning corp to reflect their style.

Or perhaps an entire faction set with Frigate, Cruiser and Battleship. I'd fly a Goon Bee.

BurntCornMuffin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:41:00 - [176]
 

Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:43:03
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
You might be surprised at the willingness of some of them to listen with interest to your requests, even if they pertain more to lowsec and highsec. evenings (and wormholer during some week-ends :p).



I keep alts in Empire for various reasons, some for shopping, some for building, some for scamming, and I know plenty of dudes who keep alts to run missions, research, and all sorts of other things. Improvements to empire may not be as nice to me as 0.0 improvements, but they are necessary and cool for many 0.0 players who follow this practice (this is to say, just about all 0.0 players).

Shinigami Zetsui
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:41:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: BurntCornMuffin
Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:30:43
Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
but you need to listen to the people you signed up to represent.


We didn't vote for him because we had to tell him what to do, we voted him in because we knew he'd do his own thing, which we are confident is the smart thing. If he had to actually listen to us, he'd be talking about removing Concord from the game, and adding Goon faction ships that resembled little yellow bees and frog pillows.


So everyone voted for them to do as they please? Or were you talking about representing Goonswarm??

LordElfa
Gallente
Golden Lyon Warriors
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:52:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
Originally by: BurntCornMuffin
Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:30:43
Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
but you need to listen to the people you signed up to represent.


We didn't vote for him because we had to tell him what to do, we voted him in because we knew he'd do his own thing, which we are confident is the smart thing. If he had to actually listen to us, he'd be talking about removing Concord from the game, and adding Goon faction ships that resembled little yellow bees and frog pillows.


So everyone voted for them to do as they please? Or were you talking about representing Goonswarm??


No, they voted for them because they trust them to do what's best for the game and not to be Goon's mouthpiece. They'll do what they were voted to do which is work hard for the benefit of the entire EVE playerbase.

BurntCornMuffin
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:52:00 - [179]
 

Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:54:45
Edited by: BurntCornMuffin on 11/04/2011 22:53:34
Originally by: Shinigami Zetsui
So everyone voted for them to do as they please? Or were you talking about representing Goonswarm??


He wasn't elected to act as a proxy to players wishes, he was elected to make the decisions swiftly and in player's stead. He may do something one subset of players disagrees with, be it goons or another group, but that's beside the point. By choosing to elect him, the Eve playerbase as a whole gave him authorization to act on his own, because enough Eve players found mittens to be a capable enough guy to make those decisions. Beyond that, he doesn't owe us anything.

^^ Essentially a wordier version of what LordElfa said. He knows what's up. ^^

Jonathan Malcom
Gallente
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.04.11 22:53:00 - [180]
 

Originally by: Cortante
This CSM is little more than a Northern Coalition CSM. The effect of Time Dilation will only help people bring a bigger blob, which favors the Northern Coalition.

Nothing Mittani or any of the other NC CSM members espouses will help smaller entities, nothing they espouse will break up the ****ty powerblocs that have choked out the flavor of 0.0. The first big idea? Making it easier to bring a blob and win.

End of the day, don't encourage Mittani or any of his yes-men by engaging with them, tell CCP that the CSM doesn't represent you and that CCP should take their ideas and opinions with the tiniest grain of salt.


The person with the most friends wins. Welcome to social dynamics.

But no, you're absolutely right. 20 man corps should absolutely be able to challenge 5000 man alliances. I mean, that's fair, right?


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (11)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only