My thoughts on this are pretty much like a real life scenario, We do stuff in real life to earn money (main wallet) and sometimes we need to save for somethign expensive (say a car) so we may create a seperate account and put money from our main account to that savings account until we have the money we need in order to purchase the car/thing.
In game for example I want to by a set of implants for one of my characters, I think those implants are just under 2b isk, i dont have that liquid ISK and so I would like another wallet (that I could name) so i can move ISK into over a period of time as i do things in game (Missions, sell loot, Industry etc) in order to save for that set of implants.
Make a coup, get the roles. Yeah, I wasn’t thinking about this situation. Personally I never experienced that issue. I have my main wallet, and surplus ISK on a banker char.
We’ve vehemently disagreed on things in the past (more on that in a moment) but I feel I can trust you to be effective at communicating and getting things done, to be honest about your thoughts and opinions on game mechanics, and that you are willing to defer to others who know more about a certain area or topic. You will probably have a place on my ballot this year (albeit not at the top, that spot is reserved for Phant )
However I wanted to ask you - and I don’t want this to come across as hostile - a genuine follow up question to an issue we disagreed over in the past:
Nearly a year ago the Forsaken Fortress update introduced Abandoned structures and a flurry of activity as people rushed to kill these abandoned loot pinatas and collect the goodies within. At the time I was very cynical and negative of this change, viewing it as a quick and easy wealth redistribution by CCP that was disproportionately punishing to players who were currently on break from the game. You held a different opinion.
Have the CSM been provided with any metrics relating to the numbers of citadels that became Abandoned and destroyed following this change and after the initial surge of destruction, or any metrics regarding how this change affected retention of players who came back after losing assets as a result?
I’If the answer is ‘yes’ to those questions I’m sure you won’t be able to share specifics regarding those metrics - but has your opinion changed on the impact of that patch, or do you still feel the same as you did last year?
Do you consider this year to have been a sucessfull one? After a year off so many negative changes to the player economy, do you feel you have acchieved anything in the CSM? If you are wondering what I mean. I think it s called not enough carrots by Dunk. I also include the Edencom and Pochven debacle, where the cataclismic story ended in introducing useless things a whole Ship race and Region that the playerbase did not ask for and is not using, not to mention that anyone supporting Edencom got completely shafted. What is your stance on the Industrie changes? CCP has started to use a sledge hammer aproach to updates, like Marauders, where they nerf or buff in significant manner and then are willing to tune it down after they ve seen the impact, or do you support a more subbtle change like the ongoing nerfs to the Munnin and HAC s in general?
Off the top of my head, I can’t recall us being shared that data, but it’s something that I should probably ask about and see if we can get an update on that.
My views have really not changed. I know the abandoned structure thing has created a lot of exciting content in the game - everybody in fleet gets really excited when we find an abandoned structure (we found one a couple nights ago in Catch, and it was like Christmas) and that’s what I expected would happen. As for the downside, I think I’ve seen one or two reddit posts from people coming back who lost stuff - those of course became threadnoughts - but I think the fears of the people that this would be a huge issue for returning players hasn’t materialized. That IS a question that I asked for data on, but obviously that data is hard to capture as you can’t really determine if someone didn’t come back because their stuff was killed.
Honestly, I have mixed feelings about this year. I think the lack of in-person summits has really made it harder for this CSM to have as strong an impact as past CSMs have. At the same time, looking back on all the things we were involved in and had a chance to influence, I think there are plenty of examples of where our feedback had value.
Personally, I do. I checked off a lot of player requests from my list, and I got two of my pet projects completed, with the Red Dot toggle and the jump gates navigation changes.
We’ve been working hard to get changes made to the EDENCOMM ship line to make those easier to source and more useful, and some of the balance changes we’ve seen introduced since they came out have helped, but more needs to be done. Pochven was something that we were all extremely critical of and it reinforced some of the player views of CCP bad habits (introducing new content, half finishing it and then leaving it half finished). At the same time, we have three CSM candidates already this cycle who are running to represent Pochven players so it seems to me that the views that Pochven is broken and empty of content may not be 100% accurate.
I am not a fan of scarcity and I’m not really a fan of these industry changes. I think doing one or the other would have been fine but the two together seems like overkill.
I don’t think there’s a one-size-fit’s-all approach, honestly. I thought the marauder buffs are good example of that - those ships have been in a bad place (arguably) for a while so I don’t mind them getting a big buff that needs to get toned down later. On the HACs, where those changes have such a big impact on so many fleet doctrines, I think I prefer the multiple-but-smaller changes over time approach so there’s no massive disruption in everything. The biggest problem with the HAC meta, in my opinion, is it’s boring. So I don’t want massive changes there that could upend it tomorrow, since it is pretty balanced, even if it’s so balanced it’s boring and you get a handful of HACs that are everywhere.
Brisc has always responded when directly asked questions or when contacting him about an issue. He may not agree with you, but he always seems to give you an honest hearing out and, more importantly, if he does agree he presents to both CCP and the CSM. Combined with Mike, HS has at least a foot in the door for the oportunity to air concerns to CCP. He does make a habit of confusing the P-51 with the P-40 Warhawk, but since growing a distinguished beard, he has at least looked respectable.
My current main concern is that my feeling that after viewing several CCP Dev interviews and discussions, is that the CSM`s opinion and expertise has been shifter further down the development ladder by the devs, i.e., the CSM imput is only at the tail end of the process compared to a more “in the middle” location as before. This has caused more dev resources to become invested in a project prior to CSM involvement and mistakes/dev errors may be come either too ingrained to remove or the new gameplay becomes relatively unused by the players ( like Resource Wars). I would like Brisc’s opinion on if the current Covid -19 meeting arraingment has helped, hurt, or had no effect on their effectiveness to help guide CCP devs in making good gameplay.
In the end, candidates who repond to players’ concerns, like Brisc, will continue to get my support.
Whats your view on re introducing passive moons in lowsec and npc nullsec?
Or in general whats your view on conflict drivers and passive alliance income for medium groups.
I have that on my list, but given the way CCP has been handling mineral redistribution, I don’t expect it’s likely to happen. What I’ve also proposed is that athanors can mine in addition to pulling the rocks for other ships to mine, but that material goes into an ore bay that can only be pulled out like once a week and drops when the thing is blown up. I think that would be an interesting way to marry the two concepts.
This, along with #3, would seriously allow FW pilots to matter, and give the null empires reason to turn an eye that way, too. Securing trade routes, even potentially securing low-sec routes deep into null regions so friendly logistics can move w/out bubbles, could be a major strategic consideration.
And hey, Provibloc might even be able to get their crap together if they had the chance to actually make Provi part of the Empire… if defended.
Yeah, I wasn’t thinking about this situation. Personally I never experienced that issue. I have my main wallet, and surplus ISK on a banker char.
