# Dev blog: CSM Winter Summit Minutes & changes to election process **URL:** \ **Category:** Dev Blogs\ **Created:** [February 8, 2018, 9:31pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136 "2018-02-08T21:31:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Steve\_Ronuken](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/steve_ronuken/32/373894_2.png) [@Steve\_Ronuken](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Steve_Ronuken)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:45pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/223 "2018-02-11T16:45:40Z")
Depends on the structure, doesn’t it? I wasn’t meaning ‘any structure’. But a specific one. Which is fairly vulnerable. And doesn’t take a week to kill (which would make it pretty much pointless) And as I’ve seen in some others, _some_ war dec corps will only take fights they _know_ they’ll win. Docking up otherwise. They’re not inconvenienced by docking up, as all they’re there is for the PvP. unlike (generally) the target. (I’m not saying this applies to all. And I don’t conflate Merc corps and wardec corps) ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/224 "2018-02-11T16:46:21Z")
I think you’re assuming it will be a citadel. Like right now, aggressors dec targets much bigger than themselves knowing they can dock up when the going gets tough. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_Ronuken](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/steve_ronuken/32/373894_2.png) [@Steve\_Ronuken](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Steve_Ronuken)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:47pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/225 "2018-02-11T16:47:42Z")
Here’s the thing. Why would the defenders fight (with the current system)? What do they get out of it? If they’re not aiming for PvP, they get nothing they want, and give the attacker something that they want. (Now I wait for a comment about how Eve is a PvP game, and anyone else can just get out) ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Razpataz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lord_razpataz/32/266831_2.png) [@Lord\_Razpataz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lord_Razpataz)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/226 "2018-02-11T16:48:09Z")
> [@Steve\_Ronuken](#): > > Depends on the structure, doesn’t it? > [@Daichi\_Yamato](#): > > I think you’re assuming it will be a citadel. Yes I do, because a smaller or cheaper structure would just be a cost of doing wd’s. The big groups have enough iskies for 100+ wars every week, dont you think they would accept losing a small structure every now and then? ---
**Author:** ![Tipa\_Riot](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tipa_riot/32/443513_2.png) [@Tipa\_Riot](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tipa_Riot)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:49pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/227 "2018-02-11T16:49:30Z")
This brings nothing in regards to fun for the defender, it’s still an asymmetric war. Nullsec alt mercs vs. newbies and carebears, with nothing at stake for the aggressor. I say scrap wars completely and use a tweaked suspect / limited engagement mechanic on corp level for structure combat. With the main point that everyone can join the defender site without changing corps, just by shooting. The only defense highsec has against organized groups, is numbers. Hence, CCP brings sov warfare to highsec, then it should go the rest of the way and allow for easy third partying. This will give balance to the force. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Razpataz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lord_razpataz/32/266831_2.png) [@Lord\_Razpataz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lord_Razpataz)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/228 "2018-02-11T16:51:01Z")
Well, if you seriously wanna know my thoughts on wardecs, read [this](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FL0FW0aVAtr55tR84xGPB4zk0JJs6rjbvqppuJeIOyY). ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_Ronuken](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/steve_ronuken/32/373894_2.png) [@Steve\_Ronuken](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Steve_Ronuken)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:55pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/229 "2018-02-11T16:55:04Z")
Depends on the requirements. If there’s an escrow, for example, that’s another matter. If the attacker wins, they get it back. If they lose, they lose it. ---
**Author:** ![Tipa\_Riot](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tipa_riot/32/443513_2.png) [@Tipa\_Riot](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tipa_Riot)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/230 "2018-02-11T16:56:30Z")
I like the idea that the aggressor has to kill something to be able to extend the war, however this is easily exploited by just rotating corps. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Razpataz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lord_razpataz/32/266831_2.png) [@Lord\_Razpataz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lord_Razpataz)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 4:57pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/231 "2018-02-11T16:57:51Z")
Not if you cant, see the “Corp jumping” part. ---
**Author:** ![Tipa\_Riot](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tipa_riot/32/443513_2.png) [@Tipa\_Riot](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tipa_Riot)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:00pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/232 "2018-02-11T17:00:30Z")
Alts distributed across different corps. But I see Steve’s comment, what if the deccing party has to wager a minimum amount, which is paid out to the winner? ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Razpataz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lord_razpataz/32/266831_2.png) [@Lord\_Razpataz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lord_Razpataz)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/233 "2018-02-11T17:06:54Z")
I cant see why the wardeccers have to risk or pay more than they already do, their flying around in shiny pinjata’s, dumps a shitload of isk into wars, grab one and you have won the war. ---
**Author:** ![Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ralph_king-griffin/32/252855_2.png) [@Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ralph_King-Griffin)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:09pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/234 "2018-02-11T17:09:40Z")
I don’t think anyone is arguing against being able to decisively meet win/lose criteria, I’m certainly not in principle. I am against that criteria being: your ability to defend/kill a static structure. My other issue with it is that I have yet to see a proposal for one that I think is halfway decent. Don’t get me wrong now I’m glad this conversation is happening more and more but I’m really not into linking war too closely to structures, I’m explicitly not in null sec for this very reason ok so ye say “whooo , something in space i can target wheeeee” fine, in principal thats understandable given how much neutral alt-play comes with mercing these days. i get that i do. what raz and i are trying to point out is that the best way to defend these things will invariably be to plant a blob on them, or have one on stand by. if you cant field the sort of blob required you will not be inclined to try and rub shoulders with the sorts of lads that can because the will beat the ever living \*\*\*\* out of you. so you dont bother signing up for a ploughing from the estabelished lads at all, you join an alliance that has this setup already, or you grow to avoid getting battered, to sustain interest for your increased numbers you need to get more content (more wars), go to choke points and catch the through traffic. without some seriously tight knit and extremely patient and dedicated guys you have to do this because of the colossal level of work required to actively track and hunt . (and why were we having this conversation again?) ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:15pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/235 "2018-02-11T17:15:44Z")
> [@Yiole\_Gionglao](#): > > Please, tell how “people who like to run agent missions” is not a target group for “agent missions”, a specialyzed product in the EVE Online spectrum? Your argument analogous to saying the Big Mac is a specialized[1] product within the McDonald’s menu because it’s got 2 patties. Just because something is specialized _within EVE_ doesn’t mean it’s specialized _within the player’s options_. Mission running, ie: PvE task completion for rewards from NPC actors available to everyone, is literally the most common type of content in MMOs. It is the most common type of content in space RPGs. If the EVE player _just_ wants to run missions, they can do that in Rebel Galaxy, ST:O, or scores of other games. What’s more, they can do it _better_ than the currently-available crop of PvE missions CCP offers. _That_, not the rest of ‘the EVE Online spectrum’, is what CCP has to compete with when evaluating how they work on their PvE content. That is not a specialized product. Ignoring literally the rest of the industry in order to insist that the absolutely most mainstream part of EVE is a niche within a niche… which of us is twisting reality? > [@Yiole\_Gionglao](#): > > And please tlee how “they wil be mastered, ignored, yadda yadda yadda” means “CCP can’t add more of them because they would break them”. Well, first off, that’s not what I said. I said the **best case** is that they’ll quickly be just as optimized, farmed and ignored as the ‘good’ current ones are. But you never work based on ‘best case’, you work based on ‘likely case’ and even ‘worst case’ scenarios. The worst case is that in the process of adding new missions, someone makes an error in a table and breaks things horribly in poorly-documented code that nobody’s really been able to completely unravel for 10 years, so they can’t easily fix it. I personally believe that in the wake of the Z9PP-H error five years ago, CCP’s learned to put in better safety measures, and that one of them includes backing up their data. So I’m not _too_ worried about ‘worst case’, but it’s still part of the cost/benefit analysis. The **likely** case is that people will react as people normally do. Most people are resistant to change. They don’t _like_ new things unless those new things conform to very particular preferences. As a result, you’ll have a number of people who like the new missions. You’ll have a number of people who are completely ambivalent to the new missions. And you’ll have people who _dislike_ the new missions. As we’ve discussed, happy people, people who are getting what they seek, tend to simply enjoy what they’re getting. They don’t go out of their way to give props or speak up in support of things. So the response CCP will _see_ will be the people who _dislike_ the new missions complaining that CCP has made more missions that suck, more missions they prefer to skip, and are wasting their time. Where that’s dangerous is in the majority of people who’ll be ambivalent. They won’t have formed any strong opinions about the new missions. But if they’re hooked into the larger community, they’ll be hearing that the new missions suck. If they’re only hooked into their small group, they may wind up hearing that from someone in their group who doesn’t like them, or who’s hooked into these forums or reddit or wherever. Opinion’s a funny thing. If we hear something sucks before we experience it, we’re primed to believe it will suck. We go into the experience waiting for the suck, looking for Teh Suck. The human mind is a pattern-matching engine. It’s what the brain’s been for since our ancestors were fish: sort through experiences, find pattern, evaluate pattern. Is it food (good)? Is it danger (bad)? It’s why there’s a truth that’s repeated throughout law enforcement, journalism, sociology, programming, and engineering: if you go _looking_ for something wrong, you’ll find it, even if it’s not there. So when you go into the new missions looking for why everyone says it sucks… _most_ people will find something to decide ‘that sucks’. Very few people are _actually_ as open-minded as we like to think we are. It’s not because we’re _bad_ people, it’s because as primates, we communicate patterns, and we integrate that communication into our expectations. Garbage In, Garbage Out. If you work in product design, I’m sure you’re familiar with _all_ of this. There’ve been so damned many studies confirming all of this in both academia and marketing that it’s not even funny. The Illusory Truth Effect is real, and as a study published three years ago in the [Journal of Experimental Psychology](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022537177800121) _again_ confirmed, it’s stronger than experts once thought. So if the vocal feedback is ‘this change sucks’… and it _will_ be, because discontent is _always_ more likely to be voiced than contentment… you’ll have a reinforcement cycle that self-perpetuates: People hear the new stuff sucks, creating an expectation. They go and experience it _expecting_ it to suck, and so find reasons to confirm their pre-conditioned expectation. Expectations thus confirmed, they go and tell other people ‘it sucks’, adding their voice to the discontented chorus. People who are new to the conversation here _more_ people saying ‘it sucks’ and so become _more_ likely to believe it sucks than earlier groups were, even before they have direct first-hand experience. **That** is how the ‘likely case’ scenario plays out. And if that’s how it’s likely to play out when you tamper with something your devs openly admit they aren’t experienced with, and they aren’t good at (but they’re trying to learn!)… then you don’t have them learn on _that_. Let them work on other things and learn there while your ‘safety net’ product continues to provide a baseline of utility. And by the way, that whole ‘if you go looking for a pattern, you’ll find it, even if it’s not there’ thing? > [@Yiole\_Gionglao](#): > > CCP thinsk that they don’t need to do anything since mission runners are suckers and just love to suck it so why bother, but you’ve been cheating and twisting and spinnign reality for a false argument: There it is, in action. CCP depends on their customers for their paychecks. Most of the current developers came from _inside the game_. They’re not good at ‘level design’ because it’s something they hadn’t worked on. (again: this is stuff _they’ve said on stage at FF_) They aren’t sitting around saying ‘our customers suck hahahah’. If they _were_, then after last fall, the ones who are still there _definitely_ aren’t. If anything, what you’re viewing as cynicism is likely _fear_. They can’t _afford_ to screw up missioning, so even a 1% chance that they will is too much to risk. Notes: 1. Please, learn to spell that word. It is not spelled with a ‘y’. It appears you’re taking your lead from ‘analyzed’, but that word is a special-case because the root ‘analysis’ is spelled with a ‘y’. ‘Special’ is not. Taking it into the ‘-ize’ verb form doesn’t change that. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:19pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/236 "2018-02-11T17:19:01Z")
> [@Steve\_Ronuken](#): > > If there’s an escrow, for example, that’s another matter. If the attacker wins, they get it back. If they lose, they lose it. Define ‘win’ and ‘lose’. I mean, the whole ‘war decs become escrow’ is a lot better than ‘require structures’, IMO. If you’re a high sec corp that likes to war dec small newbie miner corps, you have to put 100M per defender in the kitty, and you only get it back if _they surrender_… or maybe if their corp drops below 10% membership at the time of the dec. Otherwise, ante up again every week… or they get the pot. ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:27pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/237 "2018-02-11T17:27:14Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > Define ‘win’ and ‘lose’. I mean, the whole ‘war decs become escrow’ is a lot better than ‘require structures’, IMO. If you’re a high sec corp that likes to war dec small newbie miner corps, you have to put 100M per defender in the kitty, and you only get it back if they surrender… or maybe if their corp drops below 10% membership at the time of the dec. Otherwise, ante up again every week… or they get the pot. Now that Is just bad game design. You are effectively paying them not to login by guarenteeing them a “win” by not undocking. I’m not against making the aggressor put more on the line that can be taken (or better yet, just destroyed) by the defender, but they, or their allies, actually have to do something. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:29pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/238 "2018-02-11T17:29:57Z")
> [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > You are effectively paying them not to login by guarenteeing them a “win” by not undocking. Well, here’s the thing: Yes, it incentivizes not logging in for people who don’t want to fight. As things are, those people currently… don’t log in. Right now, after 1-2 weeks of not being logged in… they’re developing new habits and spending their time doing other things they enjoy, with no incentive to disrupt those new habits to come back to EVE. This, at least, gives them a reason to come back and start undocking again. ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Pedro](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/black_pedro/32/257285_2.png) [@Black\_Pedro](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Black_Pedro)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/239 "2018-02-11T17:35:00Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > Well, here’s the thing: > > Yes, it incentivizes not logging in for people who don’t want to fight. As things are, those people currently… don’t log in. > > Right now, after 1-2 weeks of not being logged in… they’re developing new habits and spending their time doing other things they enjoy, with no incentive to disrupt those new habits to come back to EVE. This, at least, gives them a reason to come back and start undocking again. Nah. Give them, or a powerful ally, a chance to inflict some damage and humiliation on the aggressor sure, but don’t give them a “win” for not playing the game. Better to just make a war-immune social or other lower tier corp to let them putter around in and not play the real game then incentivize people who might try to defend or even go on the attack not to by giving them free ISK. ---
**Author:** ![Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ralph_king-griffin/32/252855_2.png) [@Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ralph_King-Griffin)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/240 "2018-02-11T17:35:47Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > As things are, those people currently… don’t log in As things are they also , Go skinny dipping in wholes and null, Move to low Avoid the hubs Jump corp Dec Dodge (drop and reform) Just sit in npc for a week _And_ don’t login. I’ve run the locates and stalked the players, there’s a spread of response ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 5:45pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/241 "2018-02-11T17:45:54Z")
> [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > Nah. Give them, or a powerful ally, a chance to inflict some damage and humiliation on the aggressor sure, but don’t give them a “win” for not playing the game. The ones who don’t _want_ to PvP aren’t going to go ‘ooh, we can inflict damage’. They already _can_. war dec corp pilots, especially the corps that like to pick on miners with no real record to pad their killboards, still fly around solo. They think they’re safe, because their victims won’t fight back. 5 miners in frigates can give those solo flyers a really _bad_ day… but the ones who’ll do that? _They’re already doing that_. The people who just dock up are the ones who don’t want to go shooting people. And they tend to be the groups that don’t have a lot of contacts in-game among the pirate-hunters or defensive merc groups. They just go do something _else_ where people aren’t picking on them. > [@Black\_Pedro](#): > > Better to just make a war-immune social or other lower tier corp to let them putter around in and not play the real game A)You mean like the NPC corps they start off in? Already there. B)‘Play the real game’. Wow. Way to be dismissive of someone else’s play-style. Should I start declaring that high-sec gankers, bumpers, etc should maybe come out to learn to play the ‘real game’ in 3000+ pilot fights? (Hint: no, because there is no ‘real game’, there’s only the game _you_ enjoy playing. And their choice on how they want to play is as legitimate as yours or mine.) > [@Ralph\_King-Griffin](#): > > I’ve run the locates and stalked the players, there’s a spread of response Yup. And the ones who find other ways to deal with it… _still will_. But the ones who just don’t login and give up on EVE… at least the escrow idea would give them a reason to come back. ---
**Author:** ![Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ralph_king-griffin/32/252855_2.png) [@Ralph\_King-Griffin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ralph_King-Griffin)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 6:11pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136/242 "2018-02-11T18:11:57Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > A)You mean like the NPC corps they start off in? Already there. yeah but those are crap and we all know it iv had thoughts on this one before , have a gander if you fancy, imo it would cut down on jailbait corps getting ploughed > **[Remove the NPC Corp Restrictions on Player Movement - Player Features and...](https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/message/6666507/)** > > EVE allows you to discover, explore and dominate an amazing science fiction universe while you fight, trade, form corporations and alliances with other players. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136.md?page=11) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/dev-blog-csm-winter-summit-minutes-changes-to-election-process/56136.md?page=13)