What exactly is your playstyle? You don’t seem that active, honestly.
Wow, you too are really stretching it.
Gaming the system (also gaming or bending the rules, rigging, abusing, milking, playing, cheating, working, or breaking the system) can be defined as using the rules and procedures that are meant to protect a system to instead, manipulate the system for a desired outcome.
So you’ve been manipulating / exploiting the system to benefit your own interests. Yeah, it’s definitely broken.
2 Likes
How expensive would it have to be to make up for the lack of a bonus to repair amount? It’s going to have more durability, but I don’t really see it being durable enough to make up for having lower repair capabilities unless it’s intended as a difficult-to-headshot anchor. Granted, I’m probably a lot less likely to get primaried than you because you’re closer to the front of the alphabet and because I’m some nobody who managed to get into a more selective corp than is normal for his alliance rather than an alliance director or other particularly high-up figure (and, since nearly all of my flying logi is with Rekking Crew rather than in my alliance’s big blob fleets, Legacy FCs seem a lot more interested in calling targets with the 5TEAK ticker than any other corp, giving me another layer of safety even though I don’t think I’ve ever seen one of them in the logi channel with me).
The Basilisk/Guardian is generally the squishiest ship in any fleet where I’m flying it except for the Huginns which are in Gila and Rattlesnake fleets, but the ones that I’ve lost have been against fleets that had enough alpha that it probably wouldn’t take much longer to kill a more durable ship (and yesterday, I had the additional complications of having to alt-tab to try to restart comms which had crashed so I could hear what was going on and try getting back to anchoring properly).
For me, it’s not really the rep amount it’s lacking, it’s the ability to use command bursts. Normally, I fly T3C logi so I can give the Rapid Repair / Active Shielding boosts. The Iki loses that completely… but reps 50% more than the Legion, while getting up to a million EHP with heat when the ADC’s on.
As for ‘expensive’…
uhm… 2.5b? So about 600m more than my Legion fit. 
There, I sent you a fit via evemail.
Okay, I read the thread and try to keep the the concepts being presented in categories.
(I think there is software that does this sort of thing but I don’t have that so it is just my dusty old skills.)
One idea coming out is that we should ‘End the CSM’ because
a) it has no power and is useless
or
b) It is too powerful and run by the Goons.
The counter arguments are that (a) and (b) don’t play well together and that people who have served in the CSM think that it has some value (they would, being part of the problem)
The biggest fallacies involve how the CSM works (or doesn’t) and what power they actually hold.
-
There were (when I was there) very few times that we (the CSM) voted. Any time someone proclaimed ‘we need to present a united front’ I said ‘fine, convince me’ If they could not then the front was not united.
-
We do not have to take every idea that is given to us, by the players, to CCP. Some of you are quite stupid and self centered and it shows. Give us a good idea for changes and hell yes we will champion them.
-
The summit is good and important but the CSM is talking to CCP almost all year long. (It gets very quiet when summer comes and the Icelandic folks venture outside.)
-
It is doubtful that your complaints to end the CSM will work but you are welcome to try.
Me? If I see things that need fixing then I step up to try and help. That is why I am in Rookie Help Chat, that is why I have run so often for CSM (and won a few times). It is also why I venture an opinion in the forums now and again.
Trying to help.
so
What can YOU do to help? Would disbanding the CSM suddenly make the game better? Are you active in the little things thread or in other places where the devs might take an idea of yours and run with it?
Do you do more than complain?
The summit is not a vacation to Iceland. It is and almost always has been work. As has the prep and the followup been.
You may now return to your argument.
m
3 Likes
In the context in which we are using the phrase, it means “working within the rules of the existing system to maximize positive outcomes for a specific group.” The outcome isn’t “to make CCP do what we want,” either. It’s “to elect as many people as we can.”
That’s what the big blocs are trying to do, and honestly, at best, the non-Goons big bloc ballots can guarantee one win, and the Goons big bloc ballot can guarantee at most 3. The best case scenario for them is they get a slate of CSM members they can live with.
Nobody with a brain expects any specific in-game outcomes from a CSM election, especially the guys putting these ballots together. It’s strictly about winning the election. What happens after that is anybody’s guess.
I was more asking along the lines of funding your game play. Is Logi still 100% SRP?
I played logi, both capital and subcap (which as you say, took a big hit recently) funded by mining and manufacturing.
“Giving up” wasn’t a choice I made lightly, it was more forced on me because i just don’t have the time to put in the extra hours it would take to continue with the “scarcity period” in place.
I was never “space rich”, I made enough each month to allow me to play the next month with a bit of a reserve for (PVP) ship replacement. So when the blanket nerfs to mining hit I was forced to re-evaluate. I found that going from 20 to 25 hours a week to 50+ hours per week to make roughly the same income, then trying to fit in fleets etc just wasn’t something i could manage.
Yes my decision to let subs lapse was pretty hard. I don’t belong to a mega group, by choice I belong to a smaller nulsec group that is not blue to any of the blocs.
Life without the ability to make isk isn’t easy when you’ve spent 15 odd years refining how you play the game for maximum personal pleasure and sustainability.
NB; Arrendis; I just watched The Meta Show from April 13 - Interesting how your leader doesn’t share the Imperiums CSM views of the overall roadmap.
I’ve never said the changes weren’t good for the game, just that they were released way too early and definately in the wrong order (don’t believe me - Listen to Mittens little chat about how the Imperium will use its supers now in 13/4 The Meta Show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-3lZXBSnUg. CCP wanted to see big ships go boom and an increase in destruction that would help remove excess isk from the game but all they did was make them stay docked)
There were more important issues should have been addressed first - But then as was mentioned in The Meta Show, sadly we are looking at at least 2 years of the current nerf it development because addressing the underlying issues, like Sov and Citadel mechanics is not something CCP can do in the near future.
Funny really that everything CCP is doing now falls down because they don’t know how to fix the 2 biggest issues in the game.
Would seem CCP simply wasted the last few years while no real development was to be seen instead of planning for the future…
CCP want feedback from everyday players they should look outside the CSM
It’s pretty obvious CCP is still happy to stumble along breaking more than they fix with the same old empty catch cry of “we have a plan”.
Then help by encouraging CCP to talk to everyday players about how blanket changes affect them - The Imperium sorry The CSM don’t face the same struggles many others do so would have a biased view through lack of knowledge.
2 Likes
Damn you just keep throwing out excellent reasons to just do away with the CSM
3 Likes
multi-billion-ISK subcap logi are not SRP’d, no.
Mittens has his own opinions. I know, it’s shocking, different human beings have different thoughts!
Yeah, I think I already said that making the things null blocks can’t afford to lose easier to kill just means we’re more protective of them. But hey, good job catching up there.
It ain’t Sov, but…
The biggest problem with the CSM isn’t where they are from in EVE, nor the group they are in. It even isn’t their preferred playstyle. We all want passionate and knowledgeable people on the CSM, no matter their background, to be what CCP is asking them to be: A body of players who distill and present ideas from the ENTIRE player base and help prevent CCP from stumbling too bad with the in house development.
The biggest problem is that most of the CSM has had a habit of treating the CSM as a part of the game itself instead of its intended use as an advisory board/ focus group to a real life product. The largest blocs keep using the same self serving tactics, methods, and mind set (corp over any others) in helping guide the game the direction which serves their group the best; all with a sneering disdain for others outside their group or playstyle. CCP asked for a group of players wanting to listen and get feedback from ALL the customers of CCP’s product and present those ideas at the same time as they advised CCP on value/effectiveness of the company’s own development ideas. What they got instead was a group of individuals who collectively consider the CSM as merely an extension of the game and, therefore, it should be treated and manipulated the same way as any other in game asset.
Before Brisc, Steve, or Mike or any other past (or even current) CSM member has an aneurysm, these criticisms aren’t directed at you. They ARE directed at the collective body, however, and any defense of some of the worse actions and attitudes on the part of the CSM as “being part of the game” makes that defender part of the problem that needs to be fixed. You should be able to keep your own group’s aggressive self serving and centered view, a concept which richly rewards you IN EVE, out of the CSM.
You fix that and you fix the problem.
3 Likes
And yet, Olmeca—whom I would not describe as a cheerleader for the null blocs—openly said that no, none of the CSM members he’s worked with do that, and that they all take their responsibilities seriously and try to look at what’s best for the whole game.
It’s almost like ‘everybody knows’ things they decide on without an ounce of actual proof, just confirmation biases that kick in every time CCP does something they don’t like.
I’ve read the CSM meeting notes several times, both past and present.
If you cannot see the sneering disdain and absolute near laser focus on mainly NS, you are reading a whole different set of notes.
Reread the latest meeting notes; just how many times did any substantial talk arise about .5 and up sec content? Other areas?
Just like cult members unable to see that they are in a cult, the CSM and those that support the current form and style of the process cannot see where it has been corrupted.
Well, those who benefit from a system rarely want to change it so others may share. Instead, they deflect and accuse of bias, while ignoring their own.
And flipping The Judge to turn traitor at a CSM meeting? Whether in the meeting or gathering out of it in Iceland, shows the mindset of those on the CSM. All parts or people , inside or out, are to be considered in play when it comes to EVE. Perhaps it is too much to ask of those playing the game to be decent people, following social norms and responsibilities.
2 Likes
Most of what is discussed at summits and in meetings is CCP telling the CSM things, and those things are not going be reflected in the minutes because it’s all NDA. Almost all the stuff they show is not nullcentric - they rarely add things or make changes that literally only impact nuillsec. Even based on what’s in the minutes, I don’t think its defensible to say that there’s “sneering disdain” and “absolute near laser focus on mainly nullsec.”
The last minutes weren’t transcripts, but just looking at the headings - Q2 roadmap, CCP TV, CCP communications, corp recruitment, DDOS Retrospective, LEadership AMA, EVE UI/UX, EVE Portal, EVE Tournaments, FW and Lowsec, EVE Industry, PVE Risks vs. Rewards, Live Events, Login Incentives, New Player Experience, Resources and Industry, RApid Content Delivery, Wormholes - that’s 18 of the 22 topics discussed and none of them are nullsec centric. The only topics this CSM that could arguably be nullsec focused alone were conflict drivers, military organizations, non-consensual PvP, and ship balancing, and even those that’s a stretch.
We don’t see where it’s been corrupted because it hasn’t been corrupted. The idea that the most organized players get elected more often is not corruption. It’s the nature of every elected body.
Would it have been less disagreeable to you if he’d been flipped at EVE Vegas? The BoB barbeque in 2004? Fanfest? When you get a bunch of players together, they’re going to talk about the game. But you’re acting like major deals and mergers don’t happen at random business meetings and conventions, which is nuts. That’s the whole reason these events happen.
There’s nothing indecent with the folks on the CSM playing the game.
Sounds like you’re reading a lot into something that is not a transcript. It’s someone from CCP going back and summarizing heavily redacted versions of discussions.
Really, don’t try to read tone into it. It doesn’t work.
Nope. Didn’t happen at a CSM meeting. Happened later, off the clock.
1 Like
CCP finally bit the bullet and decided that if you take a break and the structure your assets are in is lost (something you have no control over) you have nothing to come back to.
In the update, structures will transition from Low Power to the new Abandoned state if they have not consumed any fuel from service modules for 7 days.
No Asset Safety - Items will not be put into asset safety when the structure is destroyed
It seems I won’t be returning - That option is being removed.
Aside from all but ensuring I don’t return to the game, this is just another half assed example of CCP development - This will hit small/er groups far harder than it will empire builders.
Arrendis, I guess you were wrong about Rattati - Seems our new producer loves one size fits all development and wants to see all small/er groups and individuals who for whatever reason can’t move assets to go away permanently.,.
There is no place in Eve for you if circumstances dictate you can’t login to the game.
2 Likes
Can you name a small group that’s currently looking at over 200 unfueled structures? Just, you know, out of curiosity.
Submit a petition through the website. You know, the one that you access the same way you’re accessing this.
Why would it need to be 200? I have 2. One has the bulk of my assets, the other has my pvp related assets plus my supers and titan logged off next to it.
Or are you saying your group has over 200 low power structures that stand little chance of being affected by this change simply due to the fact if you don’t take a large fleet of at least dreads you don’t kill a structure even in the abandoned state due to damage caps and The Imperiums ability to throw massive defense fleets up all but adds up to “CCP designed safety for the blocs”
Little guy cops it in the ass again - big groups get a pass.
2 Likes
Nah, I’m saying I haven’t counted how many structures we own out the butt-end of nowhere that won’t get fueled or updated, but aren’t anywhere near our dread caches.
Thanks Bob but I actually took it as a compliment that I tend to not be the norm.
m
You mean the ones that don’t really matter, serve no logical purpose and are only still there because pulling them down is a pain?
Move some dreads into place. If they are on or near your borders you may get to splat some unfortunates who try to use the new mechanics coming soon
1 Like