| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ElvenLord
   |
Posted - 2010.01.03 18:30:00 -
[1]
The third issues meeting of CSM4,Sunday January 17th at 15:00 eve time
Issue submission deadline will be Friday January 15th 20:00 eve time (CSM Delegates must reply to this thread listing the ISSUE name and appropriate links to Assembly Hall thread and CSM wiki)
Items on the agenda:
1.
2
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
***
All CSM delegates and Alternates are invited to attend.
|
Z0D
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 18:31:00 -
[2]
*reserved*
Click below for my manifesto.
|
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 23:52:00 -
[3]
I have a dream...
|
Jenny Wimbishi
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 00:29:00 -
[4]
Okay, let's try this again:
Please examine the following game grind issues and put them forward for change.
Sorting Corporate Deliveries (as personal assets can be sorted by range). Also, fix the deliveries/assets columns to actually function properly, as Stoned pointed out.
Allow us to get rid of the market over/under percentage warning popup. If we can get rid of the criminal action popup, why must we suffer this thing with no recourse?
Repair the forgotten feature that is the TRUE COSMOS. Make COSMOS goods worth the nightmare effort of actually producing.
Thank you,
|
Awesome Possum
Imperium Signal Corps
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 01:34:00 -
[5]
Drone Implants / Rigs I'm looking at you Sokratez 
But really now, can you guys just put a vote on the table for just a general review of everything "Drones". They really need a complete overhaul.
My proposal, along with others, could simply be used as examples.. but good lord drones need a face lift.
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Biytor
Lone Star EVE Group
Veni Vidi Vici
|
Posted - 2010.01.09 18:07:00 -
[6]
Bring up the issue of the **** poor customer service...
Go back to general and look at the multi page multi post complants about the customer service over the past month. It's gotten to the point friends of mine won't even try the game out because the rep of CCP is so bad in the gaming world right now.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.09 21:23:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Awesome Possum
Drone Implants / Rigs I'm looking at you Sokratez
+1
and
Kill mails
+ add implants to pod mails
shield bonuses
|
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2010.01.10 04:00:00 -
[8]
Less than ten days away and... this is the response that's been attracted?
Sad. :(
And, of course, no update of the initial post to show what has actually made it to the agenda.
After this meeting can we get a short reprise of what's going to be brought to Iceland for direct review by CCP in (what, February)?
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.10 11:15:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mister Xerox
Less than ten days away and... this is the response that's been attracted?
Sad. :(
And, of course, no update of the initial post to show what has actually made it to the agenda.
After this meeting can we get a short reprise of what's going to be brought to Iceland for direct review by CCP in (what, February)?
final agenda only gets posted just before the meeting, and if you feel that there's a lack of response, go generate some ;)
|
Zothike
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.11 13:18:00 -
[10]
little feature : possibility to remote stack stuff in hangar (like repackaging)
A feature that will help CCP to lower Database charge (to fight lag monster) 2-3 years ago (dont remember exactly) they decided to limit the number of stack by station to 1000 to lower server charge, but it's still possible to have above 1000 (for example when you buy hangar cleanout they dont dont auto stack)
I have stations where i can't dock (hostiles) where i have more than 1800 items which would go easily at 900-1200 if i could stack them
initial thread in feature and idea discussion created by John Roe http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1040532
|
I SoStoned
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 04:54:00 -
[11]
So... is anything going to be brought up concerning the rather inept war declaration system we're currently forced to endure?
There have been many suggestions on the topic over the years (far too many to even begin to link); the current approach seems to be toward using a contract style system that allows for surrender terms or counter-offers from the targets.
Likewise war flag persistence on a pilot level to limit the rampant abuse of corp/alliance hopping.
|
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 11:52:00 -
[12]
Originally by: I SoStoned
So... is anything going to be brought up concerning the rather inept war declaration system we're currently forced to endure?
There have been many suggestions on the topic over the years (far too many to even begin to link); the current approach seems to be toward using a contract style system that allows for surrender terms or counter-offers from the targets.
Likewise war flag persistence on a pilot level to limit the rampant abuse of corp/alliance hopping.
We can't raise a vague proposal about wardecs and just point CCP at "too many threads to link" 
If you want to put together a consolidated proposal in the assembly forum then we'll look at it and put it on the agenda. If you are waiting for one of us to do it for you then you'll have to wait a bit longer till the initial rush of already raised proposals have been dealt with...
|
Eternal Bellend
L33T Death's Head Carebear K1LL3R5
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 20:47:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Eternal Bellend on 12/01/2010 20:49:12
I know I am not a CSM person but can someone on the CSM please take up this issue.
Remove the Gallente experimental storylines where PVE missions runners are forced to FW PVP and go into camped low sec systems.
I have given my views in other threads:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1238486&page=2#59
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1228466&page=4
and repeat these views here as it was so ill conceived of CCP to inflict these **** poor missions on Gallente players without testing and shows how little CCP understand mission runners and PVE.
The question I have is how did these poorly thought through, no impact considered on Gallente PVE players, half arsed, PVE players forced to do FW PVP missions EVER get implemented on Tranquillity? Did CCP all **** their brains out over Xmas? Too many drugs, CCP making too much money so decided to **** off a large part of your customer base?
1)To quote CCP Big Dumb Object "We coordinated closely with CCP TonyG, CCP Ginger, and the rest of the EVE Storyline Board for specific PvE content."
But did you consult with players representative like the CSM at all, who I am sure would have said what a dumb idea it is?
If you did not consult with player reps why not? Why was it just launched unannounced as part of Dominion? This is the worst decision since you got rid of 90 day game cards quoting some marketing "in line with other MMOs" bull**** when it was just to make more money.
CCP are you really so incapable of learning from your mistakes? My main has been in since 2003 and yep I think you are.
2) CCP staff in this quoted or another thread mentioned that the Eve Storyline Board are based in Atlanta. Send a senior CCP manager from Iceland their now and check what drugs they are on or who has stolen their brains and common sense. Have these people been recruited from SOE and the gang who did the SWG NPE expansion? They seem to have about the same understanding of game play and customer experience.
3) Why has this not been tried on Singularity (you know the test server) first?
4) Why have only the Gallente PVEers been subjected to this asinine idea and not the more played Caldari for example?
5) Why do you think that this will make PVE players leap into PVP? Is it not more likely that they will just grind for one or two corp in mission hubs and not bother with storylines and faction standing at all?
6) How many petitions have you received about these experimental missions? How many players have stopped doing Gallente storylines and other missions because of this idiotic experiment?
7) This character is an alt who I was grinding faction for to get into FW. I am a PVEer who wanted to get into PVP and other parts of the game. These new storyline mean that I will not do this and will just grind missions on my Minmatar alt.
Why do you want to create road blocks and barriers to new things rather than new routes?
In the mission and complexes forum you are asking for feedback on the PVE experience. The missions thread a few months back went on for pages with brilliant ideas and suggestions.
YOU CLEARLY DID NOT READ ANY OF THIS, TAKE THEM ON BOARD OR GIVE A DAMN WHAT PVE'ERS THINK IF YOU WERE THEN SO STUPID AS TO IMPLEMENT THESE GALLENTE EXPERIMENTAL FORCED FW PVP STORYLINES.
I enjoy this game but your attitude to your customers forever leaves me in despair. You just keep trumping yourselves with one
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.13 22:23:00 -
[14]
Yo Eternal..
I'm not into FW or missions but it seems clear that that one example is rather odd and unsuitable for new players. I would however ask of you that you formulate your proposal more clearly than you have currently.
|
Eternal Bellend
L33T Death's Head Carebear K1LL3R5
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 14:35:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Yo Eternal..
I'm not into FW or missions but it seems clear that that one example is rather odd and unsuitable for new players. I would however ask of you that you formulate your proposal more clearly than you have currently.
OK These new experimental storyline missions are very badly designed for all sorts of reasons:
a) Force you to go many jumps into low sec (yep PVE ship through PVP pirate space)
b) Are FW warfare linked so take you to systems with FW pilots waiting for you as well as the pirates
c) Take people to the same few systems (because of the FW storyline link) so those gates are player pirate camped as they wait for the missions runners to appear to give easy targets
d) Are way above the agent level you are running for e.g. the level 2 storylines are harder than level 4 missions
e) Give a crappy reward of an implant that is worth about 100k ISK
These experimental missions were introduced as a surprise in Dominion, with it appears little thought or understanding of the mission runner player base by the EVE Storyline Board in Atlanta with NO TESTING on Singularity. In the Dev Blog words they were really excited about these missions which shows what idiots some of the CCP developers and PVE content writers have become and how little they understand or care about the PVE player base.
BTW these storylines are going to all players so you find that you have run 16 mining or courier missions to be rewarded with one of these UBER PVP combat missions as a storyline to get faction standing. So think about that - you are a PVE industrialist\miner non-combat pilot and you get given one of these storylines and may be given another after another 16 missions. So non-combat pilots grinding faction are being given these uber forced FW and PVP many jumps into lo sec missions.
My proposal has three parts:
1) Remove these experimental storyline missions. They were an untested very bad idea or at least give people the choice of one of these or an ordinary storyline mission. Give us, the paying customer, the choice of being a lab rat or not.
2) Investigate why CCP thought it was such a good idea to put this rushed content through as an add on to Dominion. Why was the impact on PVE players not properly thought through and the CSM should raise questions about the competence of those CCP developers tasked with PVE content if this is the best they can come up with. The paucity of the design of this game content raises serious questions about all involved and CCP's commitment to the PVE player.
3) CCP should properly test all content and especially PVE content beforehand. CSM Zastrow has written in another thread about how CCP seem reluctant to use the CSM as a focus group to concept test content at its very early stages. Thanks to the Interwebs this form of idea testing is not difficult, use internet meeting tools and survey tools - many of these are FREE. Then once implemented experimental stuff should not just be forced down people's throats, we should have a choice whether to take part in this experiment (hence the offer two storyline missions idea). At the moment Gallente missions runners, especially those grinding for faction, feel like victims of poor game design.
I am all for more content and experimentation with customer feedback but the way that this has been done smacks of rank amateurism by people with no understanding of the PVE playerbase.
|
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 14:57:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Eternal Bellend
<stuff>
This thread is not the correct place to post proposals. You can post a link to the proposal in the Assembly forum (which I see you already have) and we'll look at it.
However what you posted above is different to what you proposed. Please either edit the original thread or confirm the linked proposal is what you want the CSM to look at (it helps us if all the discussion is in one place).
|
Eternal Bellend
L33T Death's Head Carebear K1LL3R5
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 15:29:00 -
[17]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Eternal Bellend
<stuff>
This thread is not the correct place to post proposals. You can post a link to the proposal in the Assembly forum (which I see you already have) and we'll look at it.
However what you posted above is different to what you proposed. Please either edit the original thread or confirm the linked proposal is what you want the CSM to look at (it helps us if all the discussion is in one place).
I have updated by proposal in the assembly hall, the first post in that thread. If you could go with that please. Thank you.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 23:25:00 -
[18]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Eternal Bellend
<stuff>
This thread is not the correct place to post proposals. You can post a link to the proposal in the Assembly forum (which I see you already have) and we'll look at it.
However what you posted above is different to what you proposed. Please either edit the original thread or confirm the linked proposal is what you want the CSM to look at (it helps us if all the discussion is in one place).
I want this topic to be brouth up as well
1. Missions are designed BADLY.
2. They were rushed with no testing and just dumped on TQ
3. They only hit gallente agents ( This one is my favorite )
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1248644
|
Song Li
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 23:30:00 -
[19]
Topics for Agenda:
T3 Refitting inside Wspace Thread | Wiki
|
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 00:07:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Song Li
Topics for Agenda:
T3 Refitting inside Wspace Thread | Wiki
It cannot be put on the agenda for this meeting because the thread will only have been up for 5 days (even though I support it!).
Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2
I want this topic to be brouth up as well
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1248644
The thread will not have been up for 7 full days before hand. It is only out by a matter of hours though...
|
Song Li
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 00:13:00 -
[21]
Originally by: TeaDaze
Originally by: Song Li
Topics for Agenda:
T3 Refitting inside Wspace Thread | Wiki
It cannot be put on the agenda for this meeting because the thread will only have been up for 5 days (even though I support it!).
I have no idea what you're talking about. That quote is out of context! I see no listing at all.
<.<
>.>
|
Lord Tatham
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 11:39:00 -
[22]
Dear CSM,
I just found this post after wondering what had happened to the CSM after noticing the sticky 'New Dev Blog: the CSM- in hindsight and for the future'.
I then read one of TeaDaze's minutes to see the only post of note was someone having a good moan.
I bet this is an old record but I think more needs to be done to attract attention to the CSM. Something needs to be added in game.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 18:16:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 16/01/2010 18:18:06
for next meeting
also; the wiki links that were changed:
killmails: http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Fix_kill_mails_(CSM)
shield bonuses: http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Fix_kill_mails_(CSM)
Want to test a supercap on SISI but don't have one? |
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 20:21:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Sokratesz
for next meeting
I hope by next meeing you mean the one on the 24th?
Originally by: Sokratesz
shield bonuses: http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Fix_kill_mails_(CSM)
That is the killmail link again
I'm going to upload the updated proposal for account security / lock characters tonight.
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 20:59:00 -
[25]
yeah 24th..and..wtf?
Want to test a supercap on SISI but don't have one? |
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 21:01:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Drone Implants / Rigs I'm looking at you Sokratez
But really now, can you guys just put a vote on the table for just a general review of everything "Drones". They really need a complete overhaul.
My proposal, along with others, could simply be used as examples.. but good lord drones need a face lift.
and please dont forget that one.
Want to test a supercap on SISI but don't have one? |
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 23:30:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Sokratesz
yeah 24th..and..wtf?
You have the same wiki link twice, once next to killmails and once next to shield bonus - check your post
|
ElvenLord
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 00:23:00 -
[28]
there is no 24th :P thats the issues list meeting for Iceland, make the wiki before the meeting and we can discuss it on 17th @Sok
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 01:26:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Sokratesz on 17/01/2010 01:26:37
lolwut
http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Shield_gang_bonuses_should_be_applied_just_like_armour_ones_(CSM)
and i will erm try to make it today after i have soem sleep k/
Want to test a supercap on SISI but don't have one? |
TeaDaze
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 02:21:00 -
[30]
Edited by: TeaDaze on 17/01/2010 02:21:20
Originally by: ElvenLord
there is no 24th :P thats the issues list meeting for Iceland, make the wiki before the meeting and we can discuss it on 17th @Sok
If the forum thread hasn't been up for 7 days before a meeting it cannot go on the agenda. I quote from page 17 and 18 of the CSM Implementation (I've bolded the specific part)
Quote:
When a topic is introduced, a seven-day counter begins. During this time, the topic is open for all individuals to deliberate. Should, after seven full days, 25% of the total participants in the last general election support a topic, the CSM is obligated to allocate time for that issue in their next meeting, the results of which will be posted in the public meeting notes.
The time limit of seven days applies to both Representatives and voters, meaning that a Representative cannot bring a topic up at a Council meeting without having it go through deliberation on the public forum.
A 25% support is however not required for a Representative to bring up a topic to the Council.
I suggest the meeting on the 24th be used as a pick up meeting for topics raised in the last few days and then prioritization of accepted topics.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |