Be warned, this man is known for allowing your country to be savaged by an onslaught of German tanks, but otherwise he’s an alright guy I guess
A goon CSM candidate into a thread at sundown with his eyes low and his head down
the bartender says “ay! whats the matter. you seem troubled”
The candidate responds with “you see this spreadsheet I made with my own hands, but they don’t call me the spreadsheet maker”
“And this chart that shows why dreadnaughts are expensive, do they call me the chart man? no.”
“But you feed 40 divisions in north Africa once…”
My favourite candidate.
This candidate’s map-painting skills receive the endorsement of a renowned expert in encirclement?
Quite the opposite in fact, I am an expert in getting my divs encircled.
@Angry_Mustache would you back any idea mentioned below as CSM member?
- Insane idea - pay with PLEX in NES for extra dev time
- Quafe+ is from "biomass" (...or corpse reprocessing)
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - Better Visibility Of Other Players’ PI Networks
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - 13 requests for Stack Split enhancment since Jun’18
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - PI KB-shortcuts for toggling between groups of structures
#1 that’s not how businesses work.
#2 it will probably be added to an LP store if they do add it
#3/#5 - CCP shanghai announced that their team is implementing PI templates, which makes these 2 not necessary.
#4 not sure what the exact suggestion is, it returns a search.
Thank you for your replies
not yet, you will see…
waa? corpse reprocessing would yield LP? any corpse or just FW pilots’? EverMarks?!
i thought such info is guarded by NDA?
any timeline for release? will this improve PI networks visibility in zoom out or add kb-shortcuts to PI?
isn’t this also NDA’ed?
No 4 is forum search link in CCP’s QoL thread, you should see 13 (but out only 8 are relevant here) posts from that thread asking for enhancments to Stack Split functionality:
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #382 by Ageanal_Olerie
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #840 by Hyperion_Kado
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #1033 by darkestkhan_Eriker
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #1259 by Julien_Brellier
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #1846 by Phaedriel
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #2028 by Tonto_Auri
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #2251 by Pink_Kondur
- Little things / Small QoL suggestions - #2999 by Tl-lOR_Gods
fyi, other candidates (besides two of them) had no issue with that search results meaning …I taunt you a little, just ignore it…
I enjoyed working with Angry - his level of understanding of industry and effort he put on made him a valuable member of CSM17. I believe he’s got the general health of the game in mind and not just one sector of Space!
- What do CCP do that is correct?
- What do CCP do that is incorrect?
- What do you wish existed in-game that doesn’t?
- What exists in-game that you wish didn’t?
- What exists in-game that you think ought to continue to exist?
- What doesn’t exist in-game that you hope never comes into existence?
- How would you improve PI?
- How would you improve the entire corporation UI?
These questions are way too broad and not really answerable in anything besides the most general, meaningless terms.
It’s a shame that you feel that @Angry_Mustache and I understand. However, I was really looking forward to your replies. The question 3-6 are a special type of question that force you to reconsider your perspective on a topic. They’re essentially asking for an example of a
- A false positive
- A false negative
- A true positive
- A true negative
or in other terms
- There was a problem and CCP did not identify that problem
- There was not a problem and CCP identified there was a problem
- There was a problem and CCP identified that problem
- There was not a problem and CCP did not identify a problem
You might find questions like that easier to identify in context. For example how is this true of capital ship balance. Or how is this true of Market Fees and Taxes.
A part of the reason that I was looking forward to your responses in particular is because you have suggested in the past that CCP need to conduct a more thorough system analysis on changes.
Having said that, and in your defence, if you’re the type of person that prefers to focus on provable factual evidence over say personal or shared values it can be difficult to know where to begin to answer questions such as these where no specific topic is identified.
I’ll posit that if you were being entirely accurate you would say these questions are way to broad for me to answer and are not answerable by me in anything but the most general terms and I would find that meaningless.
Which would be a true representation of how you perceive the situation since the variety of responses given by other candidates does constitute provable evidence that the questions can be answered in specific and meaningful terms.
In my defence there are a lot of candidates and I really don’t know any of them except The Oz, Yourself, Mark and Mike. I wanted to see who I should vote for and by using broad terms I am able to throw a wider net. If you read through the responses given by each candidate you appear to get a reasonable understanding of what is important to that person. Given how much you’ve already spoken about Eve I wasn’t going to ask these question of you or Oz or Mark or Mike but then someone mentioned that I had missed some candidates… which I could see that they thought was unfair. So I asked.
They are attempting to get a read on your character to see if you have a good head on your shoulders. Similar to real-life politics, politicians are asked simple questions that have easy answers and give people a view into a candidate’s beliefs. These questions can usually create division among people, those who agree that x is good and y is wrong. If you side with x, you will upset y. CSM is supposed to represent player interests.
At least, that is what I believe. From my perspective, your priority appears to be political power, not wanting to express opinions that may affect voting turnout. If you were to answer 7, for example (How to improve PI), and your answer upset those who like how PI is, you would lose votes.
CSM should improve the game through their knowledge, experience, and open minds. From my perspective, you treat questions as political, and CSM is not supposed to be political. It should be an advisory panel that helps guide the game in its best interests.
TLDR: I caution other voters to question the motives of who they vote for.
Will you stop RMT and Gambling operations being run off TOR and other means via assistance from PONYNET and the people above you?
Now that I’ve read your response and compilation of answers from other CSM candidates as well, the response you suggested “these questions are way to broad for me to answer” is the much better response than the one I gave. That said, asking question 1/2 to a sitting CSM is going to be iffy because I think I speak for most of us that the “true answer” would break NDA, so you get some wishy-washy deflection answer.
That said, I will admit that as I was reading through the initial questions list, the thought that came to me was “we can’t really affect any of this” and sentiment went negative. Only Questions 6-8 are things that the CSM can contribute to at a significant level and with examples.
6 - I am strongly against “Gold ammo” as is everyone else. The recent situation with the special booster sale was an example of community and community rep feedback affecting company decisions in a concrete way.
7 - In an ideal world I would just port over the Echoes PI system. Lacking that, templates and one button refresh. The suggestion about PI size reduction and removal of P1 goods from use was already implemented.
8 - Not my area of expertise, although from what little I have used of corp UI it does suck.
I think @Harper_J_Sheen put it best with their comment:
I already had a pretty good read on your character from the interviews that you gave. After watching them, I thought, ‘Finally, somebody who sticks to the facts’.
Yeah that’s the impression that I get, that the CSM is for the most part, a focus group, no disrespect intended. However, watching your presentations last year I reconsidered my perspective. What you presented, and how you presented it was hard to ignore. Perhaps the CSM is a focus group, but you can have sub-optimal focus groups and you can have exceptional focus groups. And if a focus group is what we’ve got, then it’s in our communities best interest to stack that group with the most sensible, hard working and understanding community members we can find. People who have an extremely practicable and concrete approach to the situation they have volunteered themselves to be in. That’s why I voted for you last year and that’s why I’ll vote for you again.
I’m not a fan of null-bloc representation. They don’t represent my interests at all, I’m a solo player, who likes dungeon content, and the NPE. (Things that null bloc influencers couldn’t care less about but that I suspect they’re F1 monkeys might benefit from).
With regards to my own candidate choices I don’t care what corporation or alliance a candidate is in. Essentially what I’m trying to determine is whether a candidate can identify the strengths and weaknesses of another persons argument. I’m assessing their debating and communication skills. Can they validate another persons point of view and then put forward a reasonable counter argument that persuades that person to reconsider their position on a matter. That’s what your analytics did, they showed the situation as it was, and they inadvertently validated CCP’s past approach. Then you presented the outcomes, you demonstrated how those outcomes were flawed and you offered an alternative that was fair and balanced. You began with a top down approach and offered a bottom up solution. That impressed me.
To my understanding anyone who thinks that they’re going to go in there and shove some idea down CCP’s throat until they listen is by default an idiot. That seems like a super effective way to get yourself ignored. A candidate needs to understand their limitations and be able to comfortably work within those parameters, they need to identify where they have points of leverage, and then they need to leverage the ■■■■ out of those opportunities. Any player that convinces me that they’re capable of that gets my vote AND last year, you were the number one person on my list with respect to that criteria.
This year I’m impressed with @Stitch_Kaneland, somewhat with @Drake_Iddon (Both whom have had their suggestions adopted by CCP in the past), I’m impressed with @The_Oz accomplishments in game and within the community. I think it would be difficult to get to where the oz has gotten without some ability to discriminate between what’s true of a situation and what is not.
I think @Mark_Resurrectus is an important counter balance to null bloc interests and is an experienced candidate. He represents a competing style of play and he doesn’t hesitate to disagree with @Brisc_Rubal. Brisc is a great guy and he’s so privilege in-game I sometimes wonder whether he’s out of touch with what’s important to a player like myself.
The rest of my picks are really just a reflection of whose ideas I like the most.
So practical, so efficient.
I believe that in a game that centres on warring industrial corporations in-space that the corporation UI really ought to be at the nexus of that experience. And that it should be meaningful to players at every level of responsibility. At its core the corp Ui is a communications and management tool and many of the practical day-to-day responsibilities such as updating fleet doctrines, personnel assignments, and resource logistics would be better served if they were accessible through this feature. Role assignment ought to really be a two-way mechanic where players can apply for roles and their in-game contribution be assessed as worthy of that title etc. by the corporations management. As it stands the corporation CEO’s have to rely on ‘clues’ to guess at how to manage their members and their members privileges. This information, which is somewhat reflective of the personalisation that CCP has been driving toward, should be front and centre to a player as it is more relevant than the date they were born, their NPC alignment, or their corp history. The projects feature has demonstrated that it’s possible to track and publish these metrics. And accessibility lists allow us to moderate what we’re willing to allow each other to see. so statistics about myself which I wish to keep secret could be kept secret, perhaps at the expense of a promotion etc. and other information relevant to an in-game title promotion would be made available and visible to relevant parties to action at their discretion. Whichever corporations accomplish this more effectively will naturally surpass those that do not.
Bottom line, as a player and member of an organisation that I’ve put effort into selecting to join, I want to know where I stand NOW and where I can go NEXT. And my CEO wants to know who’s available for what and when and they want to be able to manage experiences, such as fleet operations, resource harvesting expeditions, refuelling, industry resupply etc, quickly and easily by assigning responsibilities to players that have demonstrated capability. It’s called self-monitoring, allow users to track the changes they want to make.
Corporations in-space that had the capability to run like actual real-life corporations would be fantastic. Both in their failure to do so and in their success.
Thanks again for your reply and good luck.
I don’t think I’m out of touch. I think most players want the same things, and what’s good for a solo player like you isn’t going to be completely outside of what’s good for someone in a null bloc, for instance. Folks seem to forget that the big null groups are so big that they encompass just about every kind of playstyle there is. There are tons of folks in KF, for example, who love solo PvP and do that much of the time.
I give Mark credit for standing up to me, even though he’s always wrong.
I think you’re awesome @Brisc_Rubal you should know that. I mean you’ve taken a break from your vacation to to reply to me, how could I not be impressed by that.
Part of what I love about you Brisc is how seriously you value the privilege that is your position, your presentation and persona, and your responsibilities as a caretaker of this amazing game. Your commitment is flawless.
I would ask you, how can you not be biased by your depth of experience? I would ask how it’s possible to be aware of everything that you’ve become aware of, that you unconsciously take for granted and believe is true.
I wonder, if it turned out somehow that I was right and you were somehow out-of-touch, would you be ok with that? Could you be ok with that?
If it’s any consolation, if you were eligible to run you would certainly be on my ballot as you have been in years past. It’s important to me to include as diverse a range of representation as possible and it’s especially important to include the most experienced players there are. Only a fool would ignore the voice of experience.
This has been my experience: and the ‘advice’ that I have received with regards to it:
The number one rule of EVE is:
Be able to afford a loss. Never fly something (or with something in the cargo) you can’t afford to lose.
Well as a starting player I could not afford to loose anything. So the logical conclusion is not to fly…
The next piece of advice that I received was join a corporation however the second rule of EVE is:
Everyone can scam.
So why would I join a corp… that’s an especially poignant concern when you consider the third rule:
Experience matters, not ISK or Skills
Of which I had none… by comparison to none players running corps have plenty…
Now, you likely have an answer to all these problems, but I don’t want to be told the answer… I want to figure it out for myself, that’s the fun of the game… I want to have the experience that the players who first ever played EVE had. I want the experience of finding out for myself, of crossing the Great Plains and discovering the New World on my own.
When EVE first began there was a level playing field that no longer exists at all in any form. The game is so mini-maxed now, so solved, that is has become, for all intents and purposes, completely stagnant and so much so that wars have to be artificially forced into existence. To my way of thinking anything that maintains that status quo is a problem. That includes Asiblexes and force projection.
The priorities of players who are in that end-game and the way that they view newer players and the priorities of newer players and the adventure that they buy into when they first begin to play couldn’t be any further apart. Big corps want you skilled up as quickly as possible and to become a linesman, now that’s an unfair characterisation and an exaggeration, but the processes they’ve implemented, such as ship reimbursement reflect those priorities… And so they should, big corporations have an obligation to live, to self-sustain.
A couple years ago Hilmar told the story of his early experience, about how he borrowed a ship and then lost said ship and panicked, he was left with a moral conundrum; Do I simply code a new one into the game or do I stay true to it’s foundations and work within the game to replace it? This was possibly the most important decision that the games lead developer ever made because it determined his attitude toward eve and what makes it great, loss, friendship, discovery, risk, triumph.
I’ve flown ■■■■ fits because up until now I’ve been able to, but after x years of playing I’m finally having to figure out how all that works. The fun of that is finding that out for myself.
The problems that I’m experiencing are how difficult the interface makes that and how reliant a player is on third party software. Why do I have to use PYFA? Why do I have to leave the game to play the game?
The changes that I want to see implemented are the integration of the information gathering tools that experienced players have access to and control over implemented into the game. They didn’t face the same degree of organised resistance that newer players face today. Thats a fact. And they’re completely unaware of how their solutions to said advantages remove what is essentially the most fun part, developing personal mastery and autonomy through the process of exploration and self-discovery.
The last thing I want is to be told the answer, I pay a subscription so that I can have access to the puzzle, when I get told the answer that ruins the point of the subscription.
It’s a paradoxical position, on the one hand I want to find out for myself, on the other hand I want access to the tools that everyone relies upon to be implemented into the game. However it’s. important to recognise that I’m not asking for the solutions to be integrated, I’m asking for the tools that allow you to explore and develop said solutions. Keeping in mind that I’m not facing the disorganised chaos of Eve’s early years, I’m facing a solved meta full of bots and systems like sky-net that alert other players immediately to my presence…
Can you relate to that?
One of the things I’ve tried my best to do is talk to new players, and now being in KF I get to do this far more often than I did in the past, and I think that helps keep me grounded. Having spent as much time as I did as a linemember, I do and did my best to accept that I don’t know everything and that I need to talk to people who do things I don’t do to get a full picture.
Sure you can - you can always get a rookie ship for free, and the NPE hands out a lot of free ships. Run a couple missions or a couple very low level abyssals and you’ll start making enough isk that you won’t need to worry about losing a frigate or something small.
This is a game about risk, and that means not just taking risks in space, but taking risks in trusting folks. There are some groups like Karmafleet where scamming - especially scamming new players - is not tolerated. It is hard for a newbro to know this, of course, which is one of the reasons why I wish CCP would do a bit better job with the corp finder.
Sure, but that’s remedied by playing the game and learning. And getting taught, etc. Finding a group to fit into, figuring out how to make isk that you enjoy doing, etc.
You want to have the experience yourself - sure, I get it. But you also have to accept you’re starting a game that’s 20 years old. There are going to be some things that you’ll be behind the curve on. But the other benefit is the game keeps changing and new things are being introduced all the time that nobody has a leg up on you on, and you can learn and adapt to just as fast as any of the vets.
There’s also a benefit to not having twenty years worth of obsolete stuff in your head, lol.
This is a video game - let’s be real, all the wars are artificially forced into existence. The vast majority of wars happen because of personalities, not over resources or any of the stuff- and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s the nature of theg ame.
I can’t speak for every big corp but I can speak for mine - our concern isn’t that you get skilled up as quickly as possible. Our concern is that you are having fun playing the game and enjoy your time with us. That’s in our best interests long term and short term. We’ve got 2k real people in KF and if those folks aren’t having fun and playing the game, then we’re not doing our jobs. Whether those folks are all in titans and supers and can fly every single doctrine ship is secondary to whether they’re having fun.
This is a double-edged sword. You don’t NEED Pyfa - the in-game fitting tool is pretty good for most things unless you’re doing super high-level min-maxing and fit tuning. I have it, but I almost never use it. The other third party tools are designed to help make the game better. I would prefer that more of them are in the client, but as long as they’re free, it’s something that makes the game richer rather than a problem, in my view.
Like what? Most of the stuff I use on a daily basis are all in-game things, like intel-channels that are only as good as the people in them updating them.
This is true. At the same time, newer players have a far easier time getting into the game than those of us who started a long time ago - not only is the NPE pretty good now, there are a ton of resources for newer players that didn’t exist where I started. So while getting into PvP is likely sticking your head into a woodchipper for a new player, it’s one that I think is a bit more manageable than it was back in 06 when I started.
Sure. And I agree with a good portion of what you’ve said. I wouldn’t worry, however, about things like skynet and the like because that stuff is illegal and the folks using it are doing so at the risk of getting banned. I wish CCP was better at catching them, but a cheater is a cheater. If you’re concerned you can’t catch up to the folks cheating, I feel the exact same way.