Here is a CSM Update for Week 8
Please let me know if you have questions or concerns.
High sec mining is too safe and ganking is too hard.
You can gank Ventures in Atrons, Retrievers with a single Catalyst. A Hulk with 3 catas. A single Thrasher wrecks T1 industrials, T2 industrials and shiny frigates. A Rupture takes care of some more tanky things and a few Tornados make short work of DST. What is too hard about ganking? I never understood this particular claim.
How do I decide on what ideas and changes to support with the infinitesimal influence I have?
You club any change out of some devâs, CSMâs and playerâs mind that is clearly going to yield unbalanced experiences. Supers and capitals should have never turned into ships that require this kind of active gameplay without properly curtailing their capabilities. Rorquals should have never been possible to multibox the way they are being multiboxed today. Very often it is very easy to see what to support and what to burn with white phosphorus fire. Wait and see while people get accustomed to their crappy OP toys is the worst of all possible design approaches.
2 Likes
Thanks for the update.
If I would offer any request to you pre summit, it would be to try and convince CCP to REALLY listen to any advice that the CSM offers themâŚespecially when it runs counter to the narrative/view that the devs currently have. I cannot count how many times either the CSM, players, even myself have communicated with CCP in some fashion and cautioned them on some gameplay that was either broken or could be gamed in the future only, only to be dismissed with âwe donât see ( a need for) itâ. It is only months or years later when needed changes are made, usually with an admission by CCP that âwe were surprised to discoverâŚâ.
Perhaps a pre summit CSM group agreement to hyperfocus on just getting CCP to listen to the groupâs years of in game experience and play would pay dividends.
1 Like
Thanks for the update. Ill add my 2 cents, consider what needs to ve changed by CCP, and what things need to be changed by the players. 1 example i can give is when some people where askibg how to get more players into WH space. I dont think CCP needs to chanhe anything to make WHs easier, but when players find an anchoring structure and the owners cant defend it they lose the structure and many times thier will to attempt it again. This is a change players need to make to allow other groups to get in and increase the number of players in WH, blow up their ships still if you catch them, but give them a chance at starting a base up.
1 Like
These CSM Update threads are all fine and great but whereâs the interaction?
You didnât even reply to any of the suggestions in the last thread.
What would you like me to reply?
Not sure why you would ask that question. Guess at the very least you could have just said âThanks for posting, Iâll be sure to pass it along to CCP.â
Anyway, when I say Interaction, Iâm talking about posting replies that are true and earnest, replies that show the players youâve actually read and put some thought into their suggestions and concerns.
1 Like
I think the NDA restrictions on the CSM need to be loosened for the CSM to be effective. It just really seems at this point that the CSM is in chains placed by CCP.
After what happened with me, I am not at all surprised to see a reduced level of interaction here.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.