EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-09-22 23:05
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-29 15:11
  • Number of Posts: 126
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 159


Security Status -0.8
  • Pentag Blade Member since
  • Curatores Veritatis Alliance Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • CSM Weekly Review & Attendance Sheet in Council of Stellar Management

    Weeks 37-39 Up!

    Will be returning to a fortnightly schedule at this point.

  • Silly question about CSM summit in Iceland in Council of Stellar Management

    Steve Ronuken wrote:
    Knitram Relik wrote:
    Thanks for the detailed info. Obviously it's more work than play for the CSM. It's good to know that CCP pays for most of the expenses. I assume that if a CSM wanted to bring a guest that flight and extra cost would be on the CSM. I'm not planning on running for CSM anytime soon. I'm just more interested in it from an academic standpoint.


    Depending on the room, you can probably share with one person. (Every room I've been in was a double)

    Some of us end up using that second bed for wasted devs.

  • ☼ Sullen Decimus for CSM XII ☼ in Council of Stellar Management

    I cannot vouch for Sullen's efficacy as a CSM member enough. He has been a consistent hard worker, running discussions with industrialists on Capital Industrials from before we even knew they were going to be re-balanced as he saw problems with them and wanted a head-start on it. He's always been approachable, reasoned, and willing to converse on any point. I will be putting him high on my own ballot, and would recommend that you do as well.

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    For those of you who are interested in how I see the CSM, I made a video here which I think sums it up nicely.

  • Suitonia for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    Given your own aptitude and interest in balance as a candidate on the CSM, do you feel there are any other candidates who you feel serve the same areas or would compliment your efforts on the CSM? MrHyde last year had a large amount of his vote go to Exhausted (i.e not counted) after he was elected, and I feel that CSM 12 could do more with the raw mechanical knowledge that he and Gorski provided in CSM 11.

  • NDA and in game advantages to csm members. in Council of Stellar Management

    Tetsel wrote:

    Considering how CSM have low impact on Eve online evolution, I think CSM should be shutdown just because of that particular advantage CSM players have (cause we all know they are not leaking AT ALL)

    To the highlighted piece I would like to apply the adage which underpins the concept of rationality as a philosophy, simply as it is so appropriate in the circumstances - "What do you think you know, and how do you think you know it?"

    I would argue that the CSM has, in fact had a significant impact on the evolution of EvE Online, and whilst the best examples will likely only be heard about in 6 years when my NDA runs out, I can still point to ways in which the CSM has had a significant impact on the development of EvE Online in even the past term - without the fire and brimstone brought on by CSM 8 following the Summer of Rage;

    Alpha Clones Multiboxing - This was something that was brought into focus by the CSM during our initial talks with CCP, and as one can see from their initial devblog, they weren't certain as to how limited multiboxing would have to be for them. And, as my own article at the time attests, 1 Alpha + 1 Omega was a fairly common thing being bandied about. However, the CSM talked to CCP about their concerns that this would make multiboxing an Alpha the optimal - and therefore only - way to play, and highlighted specific areas where it would cause significant disruption to existing gameplay (Lowsec griffin alts, Hisec ganking) that would only benefit an older, more experienced player.

    The NPE - This was worked on as a collaboration from the very first drafts being shown to us at the first summit, followed up by in depth discussions and constant work to raise concerns and prevent 'bad habits' from creeping in. Since its release we've worked with the team to identify and raise points where the NPE is failing, or not teaching a lesson that is important, and generally gather as much feedback to them as possible - leading to a number of small iterative changes.

    Engineering Citadels (And Structures in general) - This is something I, personally didn't even input in, as I am not an expert in the field and felt my other compatriots could better explain the problems. But they pushed CCP to constantly iterate on the structure system, and fix many problem areas with it, such as the lack of insurance in citadels, or tethering not working to repair certain items, or cap not regenerating alá stations. In addition to that, they have worked tirelessly to bring the painpoints of EC's vs existing manufacturing facillities to CCP, with especial attention to smaller producers, as they're not easy for CCP to contact, nor are they particularly visible in CCP's overall stats. (P.s. poke Sullen Decimus & Steve Ronuken with feedback there).

    Pushing for more Balance Changes - This is something that's had relatively few tangible results so far, but this CSM has been in constant talks with CCP about what they (and their constituents) feel is a very slow rate of motion in terms of addressing problem ships in the meta, or reworking broken mechanics. But, the conversation was started with CCP, and I hope it continues into CSM 12, as we have reached the point of changing a few minds, especially given the current imbalance between the races of Alphas.

    I doubt any of this would change your mind, and perhaps the minimal advantage you highlighted there is greater than the value you assign to any of the work we do, and quite honestly I would love it if we could stop people from planning on the CSM as well, but I feel like the advantages we are able to give to the community outweigh that, at least from my own personal experience and beliefs.

  • NDA and in game advantages to csm members. in Council of Stellar Management

    Tetsel wrote:
    Jin'taan wrote:
    Tipa Riot wrote:
    You just proved the OP's point. CSM members are ready and allowed to act with plans long prepared at second first. Also, big power blocks send their representatives to CSM in order to claim an advantage, assuming else would be naive.

    Yes, planning is allowed, but speculation is not. Equally, plans based around NDA information could not be shared, and any large post-reveal, alliance level action that had been pre-organised would be heavily frowned upon by CCP.

    Thx for confirming CSM should be shutdown, they have first hand intel we don't have, even if they don't share it with allymate (lol), they are ready.

    If, prior to a patch - where CCP releases information on what they will be patching as with the Rorqual, or moon mining - and you do not simply plan for every major possibility, leaving execution down to quick reading of the devblog and going on a predetermined course of action, you are doing speculation wrong as a market player.

  • NDA and in game advantages to csm members. in Council of Stellar Management

    Cearain wrote:
    Jin'taan I'm not sure I follow your point from CSM 5. No there were not many null sec entities on that csm. But there really wasn't much that impacted null sec either.

    CSM 5 was where they literally tried to remove Jump Bridges from the game IIRC. Perhaps I am thinking of CSM 4, but I am almost certain that was why CSM 6 was so incredibly Nullsec dominated.

    Cearain wrote:
    Do I think CSM gets a very unfair inside scoop that they use to their advantage? Yes CCP has kicked people for this, and CSM members have even admitted they took advantage. A current csm openly said he ran specifically so he could see ccps long range plans and plan accordingly for his coalition.


    "What happens when you put the long term planner on the CSM and seeing the long term plans. Good things for us that's what."

    So I think the days of naively believing no one takes advantage should be long gone.

    That is a fair concern, and I wish there was some way to police that.

  • NDA and in game advantages to csm members. in Council of Stellar Management

    Tipa Riot wrote:
    You just proved the OP's point. CSM members are ready and allowed to act with plans long prepared at second first. Also, big power blocks send their representatives to CSM in order to claim an advantage, assuming else would be naive.

    Yes, planning is allowed, but speculation is not. Equally, plans based around NDA information could not be shared, and any large post-reveal, alliance level action that had been pre-organised would be heavily frowned upon by CCP.

    The primary reason big blocs send representatives - who very often burn out in the experience - is to ensure that the CSM isn't used as a blunt force object to push through things that are overwhelmingly harmful to nullsec. See CSM 5 for an example of when this wasn't a case, and the sudden rush from nullsec blocs to involve themselves in the CSM.

    I would suggest if you take exception to this however, to vote in the election for as many non-bloc candidates as you can, and rally support for them.

    (Also, I can tell you that I, personally, have nothing to do with our leadership. My primary reason for running is that I felt like NRDS and NPSI gameplay needed to be represented to CCP to ensure that NBSI wasn't simply presumed to be the be-all end-all of engagement doctrine.)

  • NDA and in game advantages to csm members. in Council of Stellar Management

    Cearain wrote:

    I wonder how anyone on csm can participate at all on any alliance level decisions if that is the case.

    You say nothing, and if anyone asks, you say "NDA". That's pretty much the blanket statement and execution from CCP on this regard. There are exceptions where - for example with regards to moon mining - one member is already so heavily involved in the market, them leaving said market would massively disrupt it. As such, they are told to freeze prices at the state they were in prior to any NDA discussion, and only allowed to react when the information is revealed to the general public.

    And, having talked to CCP's Security, the amount they can see and watch of you and your friends is terrifying.

  • Zkill guide to Running for CSM 12 by rhiload in Council of Stellar Management

    >TFW people aren't just voting Capri + Suitonia + Rhiload and instead are wholly focused on their personal favourites because what is STV?

  • The Judge for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    Aram Kachaturian wrote:

    CSM members circlejerking.

    TIL speaking from experience in working with someone is circle jerking.

  • Scope News: Numerous staff quarantined in space elevator in Muttokon. in EVE Communication Center

    Perhaps it would be more wise to look at who may be aboard, or present in Muttokon itself? The pretense of a medical emergency to shut down transport is not a new tactic.

  • The Judge for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    The Judge has been a constant and consistent force within the CSM, for both productivity, and also for outside communication. His attendance at meetings is an indicator of the lengths he's willing to go, and how dedicated he is to the CSM. I cannot recommend him for those who look for communication and responsibility in their CSM members enough, and he will be high on my ballot.

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    Erebus 'TheChin' Sundance wrote:
    Jin'taan wrote:
    This includes two roundtables on Hisec Ganking from both the aggressor and defenders side (the recordings of which were kept confidential upon the wishes of both parties)

    Confidentiality still standing, I'm curious if the conversation went something like this...

    Aggressors: "We should be able to because we want to, buying people is fun and makes us happy! CCP need to give bullies more reward for their efforts"

    Defenders: "Help, we don't understand why anyone would want to be a bully"

    Was their any resolution from the round tables?

    This was the reason I actively seperated them, actually, I was able to draw things that both parties agreed on. Specifically that perma-bumping was overall not a great mechanic, and that a timer for it would be (as much as the exact time would be debated) overall a positive gameplay experience change, even if they disagreed with the philosophy behind it.

    Both sides also understood that there was an issue with information availability, with Gankers feeling that if there were more of a general understanding of how it worked as an activity, people wouldn't be as heavily negative towards it. Gankees and anti-gankers also felt that this information assymetry lead directly to a feeling of dissatisfaction that also was unfairly weighted towards newer players.

    One specific change brought by both sides that I felt was worth escalating to Team Genesis was a one time warning for newer players undocking with a large amount of worth in assets in a T1 Industrial, as it's not immediately apparent that one can be killed in hisec. It would be simple to do, and help prevent a lot of 'bad feeling'.

    I gleaned a lot more from this, but these roundtables in general are a way of me representing the interests of people who I think aren't brought to the table effectively on the CSM, especially when I see a possibility of said interests being addressed by CCP. See the PvE Townhall in the conclusion stages of the Shadow of the Serpent event for another example of ensuring that my own views are not unrepresentative of the playerbase before talking directly with CCP.

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    Reserved for Q&A/Endorsements.

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    What Do I Know?

    In addition to this track record of communication and work within the CSM, I also bring my own areas of subject expertise to the table. I have a solid understanding of both Fleet Command and the larger picture of warfare in New Eden, as can be seen in various formats in my non-CSM related writings on Crossing Zebras, and in the video content I produce on my personal channel. I’m also familiar with solo PvP, specifically in Faction Warfare space, as can be seen in my solo PvP movies. I also use things other than frigates in nullsec solo PvP.

    I also have a broad range of experiences that I bring to the table, having tried out the vast majority of careers in EvE before settling down in my current position in Providence as an FC, running the gamut from mining, reaction farming, Incursion FCing & PI work, all in varying spaces.

    How To Contact Me

    If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here. However, if you want to talk to me more extensively or privately, I am available on a wide range of social media;

    @JintaanEVE on Twitter
    @jintaan on Tweetfleet Slack
    Jin’taan//Sanctity [CVA]#9801 on Discord
    jintaaneve@gmail.com is my email
    /u/jintaan on Reddit
    And, of course, you can directly mail me in game.

    Thank you for your time, and more importantly, thank you for your interest in the CSM.

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    Hello all,

    I am writing today to announce my decision to run again for CSM, having arrived home from the last Summit happy that I've done as I set out to do there. I feel as though I have both achieved and learnt a lot within CSM XI, and hope that you will consider me for re-election, so that I can continue to work with CCP as a representative of the community.

    What Are My Goals?

    My goals are – probably to no surprise to those who know me – nothing to do with specific changes. I don’t see that as a major part of the duties of the CSM, and I’ve attempted to correct that belief where I can. It is in my view, the job of the CSM to first and foremost investigate what the fundamental problems are, then to present this to CCP.

    But, what I wish to do within my second term is much the same as I have already done;

    - Promote iteration on stagnant features
    - Provide consistent, neutral communication & transparency from the CSM
    - Ensure that as many points of view are brought to the table in discussions
    - Argue for an increase in balancing velocity
    - Continue to drive the CSM-CCP relationship in a positive direction

    And, if you vote for me, these are the things I will continue to work on.

    What Have I Done?

    The strongest of arguments come with evidence, so I would like to simply share what I have done in CSM 11 towards these goals,

    I have taken attendance (with the aid of The Judge) on almost every CSM meeting that occurred during CSM 11’s term, to ensure that people are able to see what their representatives are doing, and hold them accountable. It should be noted that this is not the be-all end-all of metrics, but it is a step towards transparency in the CSM.

    Alongside this, I have consistently produced a fortnightly CSM update, which has evolved as time has gone on from a very basic stating of discussion topics, to a more fleshed out attempt to archive what we are doing as best as possible within the NDA, providing a catalyst for community discussion with us on various topics of interest.

    I also direct – along with other members of the CSM – the Quarterly Review, wherein every member of the CSM is given a platform to answer various questions and ensure that they are kept in touch with the community.

    I have over the course of my term, also put together a series of roundtables addressing topics that I felt the CSM simply lacked – at the current time – the knowledge to fairly portray to CCP. This includes two roundtables on Hisec Ganking from both the aggressor and defenders side (the recordings of which were kept confidential upon the wishes of both parties), Wardecs (co-led by Toxic Yaken) and the New Player Experience. In addition to this I also ran a PvE Townhall, and participated in Noobman’s excellent Wormhole Townhall. I also suggested, ran and provided a final consensus from a Nullsec Content Creators Focus Group.

    I have also been able to write and podcast extensively, taking a less neutral tack when discussing my own opinions on upcoming changes or problem areas within the game. A good example of this would be my “Safeties off, Gloves off” article, which I believe had an impact on the overall implementation of Alpha Clones, seeing as it highlighted the issues with the ‘X Omega + 1 Alpha’ argument that the community was making at the time in the context of Hisec Ganking.

    I was heavily supportive of Hyde’s stance on Balance Frequency, and – as shown in the 1st CSM summit notes – was heavily involved in the discussion around not balance particulars, but CCP’s incredibly slow rate in dealing with problem ships within the meta, which leads to what I term a calcification of the meta, where something is so strong for so long, that every counter is explored, known, and solved. After this point, the meta grows stale, and quite frankly, boring.

    I consider the rewrite to the whitepaper involving CSM 11, as opposed to CSM 10 who were mostly excluded from the proceedings, a key indicator of the trust and co-operation that we were able to bring to CCP-CSM relations this year. And all of CSM 11 were crucial in achieving that, so I cannot take much credit here, but I’d like to note it at least.

    Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to say what things I’ve worked to highlight to CCP in terms of stagnant features, due to my own squeamishness at the edges of the NDA, and the sad reality that simply nothing may come of my efforts, as it may not be something CCP are able to fit into their schedule, or justify addressing from a business perspective. However, I would hope that my fellow CSM 11 members will be able to vouch for me addressing a wide range of topics with the intent of starting meaningful conversations with CCP on them.

  • Questions for CSM 11 Live stream (Jan 29) in Council of Stellar Management

    I'd like to take a moment to remind y'all that A) the NDA exists, so we can't just say "this is coming, this will be changed." & B) We're not CCP. We can't actually make changes directly. Our job is to convince CCP that they need to.

    You are far more likely to get an interesting discussion if you ask our thoughts regarding a subject, or asking us to discuss it.

  • Time for the CSM to be Old Yellered in Council of Stellar Management

    March rabbit wrote:
    Jin'taan wrote:
    EDIT: That said, I am looking for more ways to communicate. Would having a list of what - actively - all members of the CSM do in the game help? Would it be easier if I provided the weekly updates in audio format? Video format?

    Maybe i'm completely off the way....

    But maybe make a spreadsheet for every big 'expansion' (like already mentioned ECs):
    There was discussion
    - their initial idea was: ......
    - we raised concerns about: ....
    (result we already know by what was actually implemented)

    list of every CSM member with their comments:
    - what did i like in this
    - what did i dislike and advocated for

    Having these in one place will help to those players who don't spend their time browsing lots of external resources. It will give information for next voting: whos position this player supports and whos not.

    I don't think having this posted AFTER expansion will have anything with NDA. But it will really solve "95% of what we talk with CCP about will never go public because of NDA".

    I do something akin to this in my weekly reviews here, however it talks more about things going forwards, with the exception of my Quarterly Reviews, which come very close to what you talk about :)

    The real issue here however, is that not every CSM member is willing or able to (time wise) to communicate at that level constantly with the public. If you want to see that, I'd suggest voting for those who are willing and able to communicate, and put it first in their agenda. Ask candidates if they'd be willing to do this, etc.