[Official] CSM 17 Meeting Summary - Onboarding and the first quarter

Greetings Capsuleers!

CSM 17 is well underway, and they’ve had roughly 20 hours of meetings since being elected! I’d like to shed some light on to what the CSM has been up to. Before we start, I wanted to touch on attendance. Despite needing to accommodate a bevvy of international schedules, the lowest attendance record is 80%, and there’s no single member who has missed more than 3 meetings. Very proud of our incredibly active CSM. But let’s get to it!

June & July

CSM 17 saw seven new members on the council, so the summer started with onboarding and transitioning. With so many new members, it was vital to give the transitioning phase plenty of time and opportunity to ensure the knowledge share between CSMs stayed intact. Beyond transitioning, the next area of focus was planning and prioritization for CSM 17s first quarter goals.

Our first joint meeting was to discuss Factional Warfare plans, and a high-level look at what was planned for Q4 and beyond. CSM 17 also met with Game Design Director CCP Muppethunter to discuss game design decisions and priorities for the future. July closed out with an introduction and chat with Sr Player Researcher CCP Scorpiostar, mostly focused on the AIR Career Portal and future research goals.


August rolls in with a storm of meetings regarding the EVE Ecosystem. There was a focus on the DBS, risk and reward dynamics, and income generation on various activities such as Abyssal space, incursions, Pochven, and more. The CSM then met with CCP Estimate to talk about the MER 2.0 project to discuss what information was too much to disclose, what information players may want to have that they don’t already, and the timing of release.

Moving on from that was discussion about the new ships, their place in the meta, and overall balance chats. The CSM had concerns that these ships would be only available to FW participants, and the developers were ready to explain that the events would slightly benefit FW participants but that it would be open to everyone. And finally, our last meeting in August the CSM met with CCP Senior Leadership CCP Bergur and CCP Rattati to discuss what was coming in November, as well as the high-level roadmap and plans for 2023.


Messaging and more introductions were the first topics in September with a meeting between the CSM and EVE’s Brand Director, CCP Krazzyr, and Brand Manager CCP Emerald. The CSM assisted in hardening the messaging around the Uprising announcement, and discussed the strategy associated therein. The next series of meetings were again involving Industry and the ecosystem with CCP Psych and CCP Rattati, where the CSM discussed some of their goals for the future.

The month ended out on an administrative note where the CSM requested future meetings and areas of interest. Finally, we confirmed the availability and dates for the CSM 17 summit.


Although we’re just mid-way through October, we’ve still had just about five hours of meetings. The first was a series of CSM presentations to CCP regarding Industry and Ecosystem ideas, which sparked robust discussion over the topic. The Photon UI team and Team Engine then met with the CSM to go over the future vision of Photon UI, as well as going over any concerns about moving Photon to opt-out. The Engine Team then went over some changes from the EVE Evolved patch released earlier this week, including memory optimizations for large fleet fights, and chatted about future tech investments into EVE Online.

Yesterday the CSM had a chat with Commerce and Monetization, specifically focused on the heraldry rollout and the for-players-by-veterans program.

We have a flurry of meetings lined up before and after the expansion, leading up to our week-long summit in early February 2023. We will be posting more information about the Summit where you, the players, can arm your CSM representatives with topic requests and any other pertinent information. While not in meetings, the CSM make themselves available for a myriad of discussions in real-time directly with CCP.

CSM 17 has done a remarkable job through their term so far in terms of contribution, cooperation, and attendance. I’m looking forward to an incredibly productive Summit and rest of their term!


I’m sure the CSM is an important feedback mechanism for CCP and the individual members are doing a great job.

However, of all the communication that the community has been begging for, this isn’t it. Not criticism of you CCP Swift, just criticism of the on going lack of content; and no realisation of anything said before Fanfest or during.

What is being done to fix the current game?


Thanks for putting this together, CCP Swift.


Thank you for this summary!

I’d like to see more examples of unfeasible suggestions - in general terms - and CCP explanations of why the suggestion was ‘very unlikely’ to be implemented.

When do we get meeting minutes?

We will have a summit this year, so there should be meeting minutes after that.


The transparency is appreciated. Posting them on the official forums is also appreciated.


so EVE Ecosystem… where did blue ice go???

1 Like

Thanks for posting this, Swift!

1 Like

Can you please push for a publication of discussion topics (or some of them) PRIOR to the summit taking place so we (the muddy peasants) have something to talk about and ask for?



Of course. They’ve done it before, as I recall, so they should do it this time.

They have, I have receipts if needed.


Was there also talk on specific topics? Such as setting minimum bounty risk to 100% or increasing CRAB beacon payouts? It somehow feels like the income for these activities is quite low compared to the risk they involve.

I heard that Crabs give like 250 mil/h, which is the same as blitzing burners for SOE in Lanngisi or doing T5 Abyssals in a Cruiser.

Also, what is CSM state on Isk generation in general? Should Null activities give more income (similar to L4 missions/T6 Abyss) or should hi sec activities be nerfed to current null income level?

1 Like

Yes, we’ve talked about fixing the BRM by setting the minimum to 100%, and we got them to increase the CRAB beacon payouts right after they came out, although it probably would be a good idea to do it again.

ISK generation in null is bad, better in FW, fine in highsec and wormholes. I don’t support any nerfs, what I would prefer is to see income generation buffed in the areas where it is lagging behind, and I’ve said this to CCP over and over again. The game can’t take any nerfs right now, in my opinion, so the best thing to do is buff areas that need it.


Would we be able to get any metrics from a productivity basis? While there’s likely a lot of information that should stay within the CSM (per the NDAs and whatnot), as well as draft ideas that are certainly not ready to be shared or promised, we should be able to get something a bit more helpful than a cumulative list of meeting duration – # topics planned (i’d assume at least a few big ticket items would be published in advance to guide the meeting, as well as some time for CSM to provide some initial thoughts to facilitate the discussion) and of those, # of items covered, and # outside topic items brought up (and from source – forums, or in-game, from reddit, etc.) for discussion.

Though I expect in this modern day of zoom calls and skype meetings, 10-15 mins out of the hour average to get everybody in, resolve tech issues, and then finally get started is par the course.

Where is the content when 100 people farm in the super safe in the span of 20 nullsec systems IN TOTAL while well over 500 systems are 100% dead empty, well, unless you count cloaked up intel alts?

All of NS is whining about farm farm farm, yet they reside within 5 jumps of a 150%+ bounty system – because it’s “”“not safe enough”“” to afk/rat for hours in a carrier. The goal with the bounty system was to spread out folks in Null, and make nullsec systems actually used outside of a very small number.

Apparently making site spawn rate in NS similar to HS so ratters have move around in the same way HS does a bridge too far, as well as dropping the maximum number of sites in a system down to around HS such that ratters have to either fight each other for the sites, share, or spread out — Yes, the dynamic bounty system is imperfect, but when NS decides to say “FU” give us our things back and we don’t want to spread out… well now, let’s talk about that as a larger problem to be addressed.

On productivity, we start our meetings on time and usually run over, sometimes significantly. We’ve had no tech issue breaks. We’re all pretty good at the virtual stuff.

We’re usually meeting with one team, and its about half listening and half CSM sharing feedback (with ten members, you’ve got to get your feedback in concisely). Some sessions are led by CCP some topics are led by CSM for topics. Occasionally if its in the CCP person’s wheel house we can go back to a previous meeting subject or tangent, but its usually focused on one topic. CSM pull topics from a variety of sources.


This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.