CSM isn’t there to provide the Devs with development options - they have heard everything before and they’ve thought of everything before. There is literally nothing we can tell them that somebody hasn’t brought up to them, either on previous CSMs, other players, or internally.
What the CSM can do is pound into them that FW needs to be fixed and resources need to be provided to it, because it’s their turn. We were able to get war decs fixed and we didn’t do it by going in and laying out a perfect plan that they simply went and programmed. Previous CSMs and CSM 13 pounded into their heads that they needed to fix this, it was causing new players to quit, and the constant drumbeat got them to look into the data, recognize we were right, and then allocate the resources to fix the problem. They didn’t need us telling them how to do it, they went their own way and the final product was theirs.
Most of what the CSM does is stuff you guys never find out about because it’s stopping CCP from doing dumb things or making dumb changes that everybody would hate. But that stuff doesn’t make the minutes because there’s no reason to cause an uproar about proposed things that never ended up happening. That’s where the CSM has the most value.
Again will disagree. Local is helpful especially to smaller entities. This is a discussion that was had in the previous BO threads, but I honestly dont recall you or any of the other CSM ever being on those 2 threads. But basically, big entities such as Goons, Initiative, Brave and co, they could well handle the BO because of their size and umbrella. Smaller entities could not and cant operate without intel. Smaller entities dont have the manpower to be guarding gates and scouting all over the place. And guess what? Smaller entities were one of the first victims of your so called “good WH system”
I read what folks were writing, but I had nothing to contribute, so I stayed out.
You’re arguing whether BO was a good thing and I think we both agree that it was a bad thing, and it didn’t work. Where we differ is that I believed that doing something like that would be an interesting experiment to see what the reaction was, and I still think it was not some insane idea that should never have been tried. It was tried, it didn’t work, so it went away. We should be happy that CCP is willing to do that kind of thing and encourage more of it, not less.
And while I recognize that BO impacted smaller groups, Olmeca put a bunch of data together that led him to the conclusion that it impacted the big groups more, which was the goal. As always, the smaller groups ended up being collateral damage.
They can’t stop everything, and BO was one of those things that likely wouldn’t have been told to them in advance because the potential for leaks and abuse of such a massive change would be too high.
Hell to the hell no to encourage those idiots. There are other things for them to do than screw around with null sec operations and the gaming time of countless of pilots…But HELL NO TO SCREWING WITH LOCAL AND SCREWING WITH NULL SEC OPS!!! Insane idea, you are damn right and heads should roll for this bs.
As far as Olmeca, whatever data he gathered does not matter and that idiot needs to stay away from any null sec opinions or decisions. Bottom line is that big entities were impacted minimally, while smaller ones got the boot and became collateral damage of CCP idiocy and some pêople kissing CCP behind
Oh and by the way, thanks to this idiocy, we have lost countless of players, many smaller entities shut down or simply merged with bigger ones, and the game has become an even bigger donut. Now whether we will recover from this ■■■■ will depend on CSM standing up for players and CCP not doing anything else dumb, especially something dumb that impacts smaller entities and other solo pilots…
CCP Quant said roughly 3-4 years ago that around 75 % of the active players were in HS; those numbers may have changed, but no where to the point of saying NS has the highest population.
Ok, hold on a bit, cause this must be taken care of once and for all (again).
Let’s tackle this perfect intel tool fallacy:
Local is not the perfect intel tool. It could be when what’s incoming has the intention of gaining from it, as who ever comes in also knows who’s there and since his intentions are already playing, he has the advantage.
So, this simultaneous “knowledge” of each other must also consider the prior moment, which implies that both parts have something in mind.
Think about it.
The group size is irrelevant to the wrong appreciation of local as perfect intel tool. Maybe if you place an individual a few jumps out of some activity and he detects a presence that might be hostile or not, still the incoming threat intention happened prior to the moment he is detected. It can be 10 systems wide or at a single HS NS gate jump, it doesn’t matter.
Bots must be attended directly on the accounts at fault. Applying a generic, indiscriminately spread punishment is way, way worse than whatever fault a bothandler fell into, because all the rest are innocent.
I can hardly see BO as anything to do in terms of “desire to change things for folks who believed they’d slved the game in nullsec” when considering whatever built in NS is according to established rules and mechanics. At minimum, it’s a contradiction.
BO did not hit any points. It stopped all points for everyone. There was just some fatter wallets, donutbrellas and stubborn peeps like me. But the essence of it’s direct and collateral action was in a collision course with everything, meaning it was just a question of time for BO to scorch it all, percolating to every single stance of EVE.
It has nothing to do with liking it or not. As I just explained, there can be points of view, which can be biased or at least tendentious and there are facts, which are irrefutable.
Being reasonable is quite an invitation, please do.
Here is the exact text CCP Larrikin posted on reddit
" In this particular case, the CSM objected to CCP using Most Time as a way of measuring where someone where someone ‘lived’. And they’re right. It has problems. There are edge cases that will mis-classify a player as something they are not. A large part of the problem is that we can’t measure player intentions. e.g. Running missions in High-sec to fund your Null-Sec roaming.
Aryth suggested that we ignore Jita when using the Most Time segmentation, and that idea has merit.
Ultimately, we don’t use a single method to assign you as a player to a single security band. We use many methods such as: most time; any time; aggregate character minutes; ISK earnt; ISK lost; etc. to try and build up a comprehensive picture.
June 2019 (monthly mean of daily pct):
Location
Most Time
Any Time
High-Sec
~59%
~77%
Low-Sec
~5%
~21%
Null-Sec
~29%
~36%
Wormholes
~5%
~11%
Most Time : The player spent the majority of their non-afk time in that area of space, across all their characters and accounts.
Any Time : Players that spent any time at all in that area of space, across all of their characters and accounts.
Final Note : I’m well aware those percentages don’t add up to 100%. I’ve carelessly dropped decimal places, and excluded some locations (such as Abyssal space). Also Any Time should by definition be more than 100%!"
Not very difficult for CCP to actually post that info directly on here, is it?
Hold on… that’s a bit off. Or incomplete… I don’t want to ask NDA cloaked stuff but… who is paying real money out of that 64%?
I think someone said “paying” somewhere. I just don’t see any relation between that 64% and real money, which I guess is the point.
