open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked [CSM6] Seleene - EVE ONLINE: ITERATIONS!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic

Mary Christmas
Legio Noviomagum
Posted - 2011.03.06 13:21:00 - [91]
 

i was not gonna vote this time round but you have my vote seleene so thats 2 votes for you

Bomberlocks
Minmatar
CTRL-Q
Posted - 2011.03.06 18:20:00 - [92]
 

Your background at CCP is invaluable, Seleene, but I might have voted for you for the banner campaign alone. Very Happy

As it is, you get my second account's vote.

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.03.06 20:07:00 - [93]
 

Seleene

Knowing the ins and outs of ccp makes you a key member of the community.

My request for you to get my vote is, keep an open mind and make sure all parts of the community are represented from the small time mining corp to the power block alliances.

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:50:00 - [94]
 

Edited by: Seleene on 07/03/2011 21:43:48
Originally by: Raid'En
as an ex-dev, what do you think about the dififculty of remaking the corp roles system, as there's lots of issues for pos security ?


I can't really speak to that except from a design angle and acknowledge that revamping that system has been something the designers have wanted to do for a long, long time. The issue is more about getting it moved up in the backlog and finding a way to have such improvements slotted into a released feature. That way there would actually be programming time and QA assigned to achieve this.

Quote:
and on a bigger subject ; the dead horse about POS themselves... everyone agree that it would be very hard to do, but what would be your opinion on what do to about POS?


I'd like to see the current starbases be relegated to a purely military role and actual "Personal Owned Structures" be introduced. Modular add-ons, white picket fences, all that jazz. Of course, POS code makes the coders eyes bleed and then there would have to be Art done for it all. The in house term used for this (as it has been discussed in the past and talked about at FanFest) were 'Shanty Towns' that players could build in space. TLDR - I want to see modular player structures, like legos in space. Hell yeah.

Originally by: Javelin6
Seleene, how should Black-Ops Battleships be iterated on? Your thoughts on "AFK cloaking" and what you feel should be achievable goals for small stealth fleets?


Black Ops need love so bad that it's criminal. These ships should be doing amazing James Bond stuff that no other ships can do; at the very least they need a serious look-at because I see them bridging Stealth Bombers to targets more often than actually doing anything themselves. Sad

The AFK cloaking thing is annoying as hell and could 'easily' be solved by requiring cloaks to use fuel (like LO) in order to operate. Fuel usage could be a simple calculation based on mass and ships that are supposed to cloak would obviously be more fuel efficient. The only real problem with this is that any mechanic like that would require a 'cycle time' like guns or anything else that consumes "ammo", which cloaks do not have. I'm sure it could be programmed to work like this but for whatever reason this issue remains untouched.

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
My request for you to get my vote is, keep an open mind and make sure all parts of the community are represented from the small time mining corp to the power block alliances.


Absolutely. It's core to my campaign. I'm not really interested in seeing one part of the game achieve dominance or attention over any other outside of the fact that I do prefer to see more SPACESHIP oriented stuff over the paper dolls of Incarna. Primarily I would just like to see what we have now completely fleshed out and finished. That's what iteration is all about. The onus is on CCP to prove to us that Incarna is going to have enough relevant actual game play to justify the time they are spending on it.

As an aside, I spent two hours on EVE University mumble last night answering questions and taking in what all they had to say (recording available here) so my attention is definitely not limited to just the "big stuff" in EVE. Smile

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.03.07 20:13:00 - [95]
 

Well, generally speaking;

Your campain theme "iteration", is a good one imho and really what CCP should focus on. On most subjects I think I share your opinion, or at least go in the same direction. But this:

Originally by: Seleene
The AFK cloaking thing is annoying as hell and could 'easily' be solved by requiring cloaks to use fuel (like LO) in order to operate.


I'm personally one who love small-scale warfare. EVE is severely lacking love in that department. Sitting 10+ players fighting 10+ players is boring as hell and extremely predictable when you played this game for X years. What is fun (and often challenging), is to try to beat anything on your own. The cloaks are one of the few tools we have available nowadays, barring having multiple characters in same system logging on/off in a rotation.

It's just way too easy to lock down gates as it is. The regional gates was a nice addition, but it is still pretty ridicilous. I go through lowsec and there's 10+ guys sitting with instalocking HIC's that will and can kill anything that is not supertanked or cloaky.

I go through 0.0 and boom, you enter alliance/coalition X's space and there is six t2 large bubbles with ceptor swarms greeting you.

All this is fine, they use the tools within the game to 'defend space', or whatnot. There is really only three tools available to fight this:
* Speed. This was changed on a big scale by the nano changes. I actually support those changes, but it did kill off the roaming potential by alot, and did promote blobbing (as did the DD changes).
* Cloaks. It's not dead certain you will pass camps, and with non-covops cloaks you still need warp-ins/bounces, etc.
* Intel. Scout, spies, etc.

For the 1-10 man gangs who like to roam, their greatest tools as is today is the recons, stealthbombers and t3 (with or without interdiction nullifier). Or, faster ships with cloaks. You may have noticed more and more players drop that medium neut on their Vagabonds to put a cloak.

And at the end of the day, the "only" thing AFK cloaking really do, is to put people at unease. You still have time to GTFO when the cloaker decloaks. You still have the option to fly with friends. And you still have the option to take other defensive precautions, like having neut/ecm-drones, etc. Using your brain, d-scan and not being lazy.

TL;DR - this is a major issue to those of us who miss the oldschool roaming. Wolfpacks and guerilla warfare. Stuff dies when you decloak, not while being invisible.

I'm quite disillusioned personally both with CSM, and with CCP's love for the blobbing in EVE. I was starting to get slight hope there was a reason to vote this CSM, but this stance is a major gamebreaker so I guess those 5+ votes you were gonna get from me, will go nowhere. As last year. Confused

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.07 21:05:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Seleene on 07/03/2011 21:06:56

Misanth, my thoughts on this issue stem from more than JUST the "AFK cloaking" stuff as you describe it. I find it "annoying" because I see it as part of a larger problem. I simply think that this issue, like countless others, needs iteration. Think about it - cloaking has not been touched from almost the day it was introduced. No further balancing, no serious looks at how it might be used better, nothing. Why don't specialized ships get some kind of surprise bonus when they de-cloak, or other bonuses that offset negatives? My opinion on this in no way means it's the exact thing that might be implemented. I gave a very short example in response to a specific question. Any solution to the matter would come as the result of input from multiple sources.

I see all of this as more of a general balance issue. I would like to see ships that are specialized in using cloaking technology get more specific bonuses to using them while slapping a cloak onto a Raven or something would still work but impose some sort of penalty. That sort of thing. I hope that clarifies my answer a bit more.

Valator Uel
Caldari
Mercenaries of Andosia
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.08 10:27:00 - [97]
 

Iterations is IMHO really the key to improving EVE. Working on old features will bring new life to them, introduce new features and make using them more effective. There are so many missing features that would make a previous expansion so much more complete. Iterations is the way forward.

Natalia Kovac
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2011.03.08 11:36:00 - [98]
 

Edited by: Natalia Kovac on 08/03/2011 11:37:17
Seleene, what went through your mind when you first heard this?

Sidenote: didn't it all feel so real back then, like it actually meant something? Wtb those days back tbh.

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.08 15:35:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: Natalia Kovac

Seleene, what went through your mind when you first heard this?

Sidenote: didn't it all feel so real back then, like it actually meant something? Wtb those days back tbh.


I loved it. Suas was very... talented. Very Happy

Blog update about the Lost in EVE debates and the EVE Uni class that I did this weekend is now up: LINKAGE


Weltact
INVICTUS.
Posted - 2011.03.08 20:21:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Seleene

Blog update about the Lost in EVE debates and the EVE Uni class that I did this weekend is now up: LINKAGE




Wow. That was a long recording. But damn worth listening to. That really cleared up so much, amazing.

Thank you, that was really excellent.

Minerva Seraph
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:59:00 - [101]
 

Edited by: Minerva Seraph on 08/03/2011 22:00:39
Seelene, you are probably the candidate with the broadest perspective in the game. The leader of one of the most successful 0.0 based alliances and later, a member of the Eve development team, you seem to be naturally the player with the wildest eve career.

What do you feel is an appropriate scope for Player/Dev interaction? What are the lines of the GM Vs a GM? Do you feel that they communicate closely enough?

Without necessarily describing the process of developing resolutions to bugs (which, I'm assuming, is a major NDA issue), do you feel that CCP's current process for handling them is appropriate (including the turnaround time to creating and ultimately releasing a fix)?

It's often stated that CCP doesn't deal with players who use bots to play the game for them. Do you believe that there is a foundation for this perception? Do you think that this is a problem that needs to be dealt with? Can it? (With respect to your NDA obligations!)

You've dealt with the CSM in the past. How did you feel about meeting teh CSM prior to your visit, and did your perception change afterward? Do you feel that the CSM has enough capacity to affect change to the scope that players tend to promise during the election cycle?

Edit:
As a player, a developer, and a candidate, which of the past CSMs do you feel were most effective, in general, and in terms of specifics?

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.09 03:56:00 - [102]
 

Edited by: Seleene on 09/03/2011 04:40:28

Minerva, I'll give your post the attention it deserves in the morning when I have time to make a proper reply. Smile

In the meantime:

VOTING HAS OPENED!

Folks, of course I would like you to vote for me, but please just VOTE. I would not be doing all of this if I did not believe it would matter. I don't need anymore 'free trips to Iceland'. I've been on both sides of the fence both as a Dev and as a player - believe me, a solid CSM can help!

Go. Vote. Help make EVE a better game for everyone. Very Happy

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.09 08:02:00 - [103]
 

By far the best candidate to vote for!

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.03.09 10:03:00 - [104]
 

Edited by: Misanth on 09/03/2011 10:10:04
Originally by: Seleene
Misanth, my thoughts on this issue stem from more than JUST the "AFK cloaking" stuff as you describe it. I find it "annoying" because I see it as part of a larger problem. I simply think that this issue, like countless others, needs iteration. Think about it - cloaking has not been touched from almost the day it was introduced. No further balancing, no serious looks at how it might be used better, nothing. Why don't specialized ships get some kind of surprise bonus when they de-cloak, or other bonuses that offset negatives? My opinion on this in no way means it's the exact thing that might be implemented. I gave a very short example in response to a specific question. Any solution to the matter would come as the result of input from multiple sources.

I see all of this as more of a general balance issue. I would like to see ships that are specialized in using cloaking technology get more specific bonuses to using them while slapping a cloak onto a Raven or something would still work but impose some sort of penalty. That sort of thing. I hope that clarifies my answer a bit more.


I'll buy two things of that.
* That cloaks havn't been revised since implementation, is not ideal.
* That certain ships use the cloak as a 'safe' and thus get, in some sense, immortal. Like ratting Ravens. The NPCing ships is one of my targets, playing small-scale, so I understand this sentiment.

However, I'd still like you to revise that thought as to looking at the cloak as a whole bares the issue. I'll tell you why this is a major gamebreaking issue for me, personally, and I bet many others:

I specialize in cloaking and guerilla combat.
Right now, for example, I have multiple accounts sitting in hostile 0.0 and hunting targets. Using cov ops ships scouting, and non-cov ops ships utilize the cloak to hunt.

No-one forces you to play that way, bring friends:
That'd be all well and fine, if it wasn't the few things called "TZ", "RL interruption" and "limited gametime". Without cloaks, I'd be forced to high- and nullsec alone. Should null and WH be for fulltime and blobs alone? That is the cost of losing the cloak.

Why a fuel-bay/timer on the cloak doesn't work:
You surely understand I'm often camped in. Sometimes by as many as 50+ players camping in my single character. Often with many bubbles on the only outgate(s). Sometimes I get camped in for days, before I can barge out before/after d/t. Remember how the coaltion locked down BoB in Delve some year ago. It's the same thing, but on a smaller scale.

A very recent example; yesterday I killed a Drake that was ratting in a dead-end system. My scout found him, I enter local, warp my Curse to his belt and engage him. Suddenly local doubles up. I keep a close look at scanner, Typhoon lands.. The Drake died, and I managed to keep the Typhoon disabled before anything else arrived and I could get out. Then I cloaked up. Now there's only one gate out, the locals know my ship and will of course try to get revenge. I manage to slip out near a d/t, using a scout. But already initiating the combat I was at a disadvantage. They have numbers, they have more damage, tank, etc, I have the element of surprise and get to chose when to engage.

TL;DR - putting a timer on cloaks, would be a buff to local inhibitants, a great deterrent to guerilla warfare and another boost to blobs.

Edit; Oh and to add to the "bad" part, where certain ships like ratting Ravens being "immortal". Yeah, that isn't good and ideal. But the only threat they are, is to CCP through bots. PvP wise, it is no concern. Is it worth killing off the guerilla warfare, for that, instead of trying to fight botting through mechanics that would have far less effect on nullsec warfare?

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.09 10:32:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Seleene
Folks, of course I would like you to vote for me, but please just VOTE.

Two votes added for the good cause.

Good luck.

Roime
Gallente
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:08:00 - [106]
 

You make a lot of sense.

Thank you for a mature and logical approach & best of luck, you got my vote.

- Corbin Alistair Roime

Virtuozzo
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:55:00 - [107]
 


Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.03.09 12:59:00 - [108]
 

I actually activated an old account to add a vote for Seleene. Go get 'em, boy.

Chuc Morris
Posted - 2011.03.09 14:31:00 - [109]
 

I would like to see serious persons take care of our opinions and there is no doubt for me that you, Seleene, are one of them.

Had to splash my votes between you and someone I realy think can do a great job with you has Rip, someone who I'm deeply convinced has the tools opinions and with someone has you that can make the difference we expect from this new CSM.

Wish you good luck and see soon enough my favorite candidates work together.

Natalia Kovac
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2011.03.09 17:15:00 - [110]
 

Voted for Seleene with both my accounts. Good luck, I reckon you'll do a great job.

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2011.03.09 18:38:00 - [111]
 

My votes went to Seleene as well. I believe that a former CCP Dev is in the best position to have positive interactions with CCP.

Besides, if Mynxee supports Seleene, that's really all the endorsement I need. Mynee is awesome and was a great CSM chair.

Minerva Seraph
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2011.03.09 19:17:00 - [112]
 

I voted for you Seleene. I think you've offered the best overall experience portfolio, and the other candidates appear eager to work with you. I also think that CCP would enjoy hearing a seasoned-developer's version of the ideas expressed within the CSM. I wish you the best.

Trebor is probable a shoe-in for a spot as a delegate at this point, but I'm afraid that he'd slow down the CSM process as chair - he seems to get the role of the forums and the chats/summits confused, focusing on details when he's in attendance and being too general on the forums. I'm afraid under him, the process would slow down too much. His populist policies, coupled with his voter-bounty system reveal a candidate who is running in bad faith.

I was also dissatisfied with his wholesale dismissal of GOON candidates; to put it bluntly, he likes them when you call him out, but he marginalizes them when nobody's looking. Objectively, GOON is a major element in the game, and yes, they have a stake in what happens in 0.0. I think it's a good idea to have them involved in the same way CONCORD was involved with Drone Region players when it came to naming them. Lets all work together to make a game we all enjoy!

Mittani has a lot to say about the games mechanics, but also has legitimate concerns with the CSM process. He's got experience in just about every facet of Eve life short of the CSM, and he shows good people-handling skills. Some might disagree, but I don't think the CSM has anything to lose with him on board.

My personal first pick is Seleene. Second place? Mittani. Trebor gets the third spot. I also want to see Helen on again. And this will be exactly how it won't play out.

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:33:00 - [113]
 

I still owe a few answers in this thread and I promise to reply as soon as I can once RL slows down a bit and I can sit in a chair longer than 10 mins! Wink

In the meantime, I just wanted to say that a lot of folks seem to think I'm going to get a seat no matter what but I'm taking nothing for granted, certainly not with the field of heavy weights in this election. As a first time candidate, I'm having to pull in new votes or sway old voters to me so thank you to everyone supporting me so far!

CCP's Twitter feed announced earlier, "OVER NINE THOUSAND capsuleers have already registered their vote in the ongoing CSM elections; make sure your voice is also heard! After the same duration last election, only 2,305 had been cast. Vote now!"

This is exciting! I just wish there were 'exit polls' for all of this. The 30th is a long time to wait for results! Smile

VOTE VOTE VOTE!!

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:37:00 - [114]
 

It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens if the % of voting accounts reaches, say, 25%. It'll be much harder for certain people to dismiss the CSM with that kind of mandate.

Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:54:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: Seleene on 09/03/2011 22:34:22
Originally by: Malcanis
It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens if the % of voting accounts reaches, say, 25%. It'll be much harder for certain people to dismiss the CSM with that kind of mandate.


This is EXACTLY what I am hoping to see. No matter who gets elected, if a large enough percentage of the EVE player base votes then CSM 6 will have a truly representative mandate.

New CCP Tweet:

15k pilots/4.3% of eligible pilots already voted for the #csm6 elections, up from 1.3%/4k votes at the same point last election

tomd741
Best Path Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.09 23:17:00 - [116]
 

You have my vote. You know what teh real truth is because you have dealt with game design, you truly represent the peopel of Eve and everything I hear about you , even from your enemies, is good.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.03.09 23:28:00 - [117]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 09/03/2011 23:29:24
Originally by: Seleene

Quote:
and on a bigger subject ; the dead horse about POS themselves... everyone agree that it would be very hard to do, but what would be your opinion on what do to about POS?


I'd like to see the current starbases be relegated to a purely military role and actual "Personal Owned Structures" be introduced.

The AFK cloaking thing is annoying as hell and could 'easily' be solved by requiring cloaks to use fuel (like LO) in order to operate. Fuel usage could be a simple calculation based on mass and ships that are supposed to cloak would obviously be more fuel efficient. The only real problem with this is that any mechanic like that would require a 'cycle time' like guns or anything else that consumes "ammo", which cloaks do not have. I'm sure it could be programmed to work like this but for whatever reason this issue remains untouched.



POS: a great thing for a industrial expansion would be to add the capability to rent the research (and maybe even production) slots to the general public.

It would be a big projrct but we can always hope.

Cloaks: fuel as depicted has a problem. In the past I was capable to navigate 0.0 gatecamps in a cloaked BS. I had to spend more than 1 hour moving around carefully to get out of the bubble and far away to be safe warping.

If you add a fuel requirement based on mass for cloaks it would became impossible or the fuel requirement would be so low that it will not make a difference for AFK cloakers.

BTW: 4 votes for you already sent.

Raz Intaki
Posted - 2011.03.10 00:07:00 - [118]
 

A vote for Seleene is a vote for a vibrant fun EvE universe.

Helen Cool

Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.10 01:31:00 - [119]
 

Vote for Seleene!

Eva Blonde
Posted - 2011.03.10 02:48:00 - [120]
 

Edited by: Eva Blonde on 10/03/2011 02:48:38
+1



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

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