Originally by: Windjammer

---

Originally by: van Uber

---

According to CCP Chronotis in the "correct rocket explosion speed"-thread over at Test Server Feedback, balancing issues usually gets done in the summer. Why is that? Why is not balance a prioroty all year?

---

Be fair. He didn't say all balancing usually gets done in the summer. He said this particular balancing would be done this summer and that we could expect word sometime in September.

Windjammer

---

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

---

Historically, we tend to do most of our game balancing work during the summer generally as things are quieter then for the teams, especially design. Internally we have done some work on assault frigates and rockets with discussion on EAF and Black ops or tech II ammo closely following it to give an indicator of our balancing backlog.

---

Originally by: Noun Verber

---

I've noticed that the CCP version of 'by design' is different to the general usage of the term.

General usage is 'we want it like that' but the CCP version has a slight modification: 'we wanted it like that when we made it'. By design means working as intended but whether the intention was wrong or needs reviewing is another issue, which probably needs a different process at CCP.

---

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

Well IÆve been having a less active summer with Eve than some in the past myself, but felt I should write a few words too. I think the most striking thing about this thread is the degree to which a good majority of the player base responding seems absolutely united behind the principle of excellence and completing current content as espoused by the current CSM team in Iceland and recounted in the minutes.

This leads CCP to a pretty hard decision to make: either the CSM concept (and player feedback in general) is something that can be considered a mistake and surplus to the professional business development environment (Scrums and Agile methodology etc etc.) or, the big important guys at the company probably need to sit down and listen to the feedback they are being given here by all sides. And itÆs productive and positive feedback!

CSM members have posted very well here expressing a clear and attractive business case for committing development teams to working through the backlog of abandoned content and fixing stuff we all like but want improved. Eve online is a great game and it needed to be to keep us all subscribing all these years but there does come a time when credibility is stretched to breaking point and weÆre shown a blanket ônoö to the CSM backlog of issues, and asked to be patient for 18 months before our current content can be fixed and improved while waiting for new content that weÆre promised will be handled differently on release.

And thatÆs the big issue here. ItÆs not rocket-balancing and rubbish hybrid performance. ItÆs Empyrean Age and the abandoned Faction Warfare. ItÆs Apocrypha and the missing 5th subsystems. ItÆs Dominion and unfinished treaties and alliance content, and its Tyrranis and planetary colonies without people, morale, tax rates, political ideologies or any form of cooperative or collaborative interaction on these shiny new planets.

I think the Eve player base is losing faith in CCPÆs commitment to excellence because content is being left unfinished and half-done. ItÆs not complicated really, if you buy a computer game off steam and it promises to give you 20 levels of first-person shooter action with class-based multiplayer and online ranking systems and you fork over your money to discover its 10 levels of single player only content then you feel justifiably robbed.

And 18 months without a proper commitment to finish existing content is a VERY long time. IÆve got 4 accounts on the go currently. ThatÆs what, 40 quid a month, so in 18 months time IÆll have contributed ú720 towards the development effort. And thatÆs quite a lot of money for a computer game!

IÆve got to put my hands up also and say that though I can see possibilities with Incarna IF it is done right. IÆm not currently holding my breath because I think past experience is now showing that CCP does not finish expansions correctly. And I think it will be very disappointing to see a beautiful new 3d full body avatar engine implemented only to see it suffer from feature chop and delivered as primarily eye-candy without substance.

Dust, I think itÆs deeply problematic concept because of the difficulty of writing for the console market but I was willing to put aside my scepticism after the success of the Apocrypha launch û up to the point it became obvious that even that got abandoned and tech3 was going the way of Faction Warfare all the way to abandoned featureville on the no-dev-time express.

---

Originally by: CCP Tuxford

---

my bad.

Rest assured I'm being ridiculed by my co-workers.

---

Originally by: Genya Arikaido

---

It just occurred to me...

I applied to CCP for a programming position in early 2009. The whole process went well, if much slower than the usual. I completed the programming "test", had first round interview with CCP Explorer here...

...but then I made it rather clear I wanted to be working on Iceland, working on EVE. I didn't want to work in Atlanta or China on WoD/Dust. After that general statement, I was rather quickly turned down last fall.

So...new hires aren't even being applied to EVE it seems, just veteran coders or a "bare bones" maintenance group?

---

Originally by: CCP Explorer

---

Originally by: Noun Verber

---

I've noticed that the CCP version of 'by design' is different to the general usage of the term.

General usage is 'we want it like that' but the CCP version has a slight modification: 'we wanted it like that when we made it'. By design means working as intended but whether the intention was wrong or needs reviewing is another issue, which probably needs a different process at CCP.

---

This is a very correct observation, "by design" only means that the feature is behaving in accordance with the latest design documents and does not preclude that those documents might be reviewed.

---

Originally by: CCP Explorer

---

Originally by: Noun Verber

---

I've noticed that the CCP version of 'by design' is different to the general usage of the term.

General usage is 'we want it like that' but the CCP version has a slight modification: 'we wanted it like that when we made it'. By design means working as intended but whether the intention was wrong or needs reviewing is another issue, which probably needs a different process at CCP.

---

This is a very correct observation, "by design" only means that the feature is behaving in accordance with the latest design documents and does not preclude that those documents might be reviewed.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

I should apologize to Chronitis. I didn't mean for him to come off looking like an epic jackass for not fixing roflkets sooner. Its entirely possible that line should belong to Zulupark or some other producer/manager.

---

Originally by: Kahn Waldemar

---

Unfortunately I feel, that I have no other choice but to vote in this way.

Subscription successfully cancelled

---

Originally by: Uicjhorra

---

Originally by: Kahn Waldemar

---

Unfortunately I feel, that I have no other choice but to vote in this way.

Subscription successfully cancelled

---

There is one thing that really shows how serious this whole thing is getting - nobody was joking around asking "Can I haz your stuffs?". I dont have a subscription to cancel because i pay with PLEX, but if it goes in the direction it is going now - the market will have one potential PLEX buyer less.

---

Originally by: PropheticWarrior

---

Having played some MMOs where you hear nothing from a seemingly apathetic company, I'm grateful for information. I personally have reservations about linking Dust to Eve but I'll wait and see. As for Incarna, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing that in the near future. Hopefully 2010? Maybe?

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

3 accounts canceled. A month or so of casual ratting and talking with friends (just like the last 2 months, because it's all the game will support) and that's it. I'll be back if and when CCP start showing an interest in what their long term customers want. Right now, it looks like they dont even know how. I suppose I'm being naive for still hoping this might happen.

---

Originally by: Jim Luc

---

They've said they're working on fixing 0.0 fleet lag, and to me it's the biggest "fix" that is needed.

---

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

---

We as developers have a responsibility to make sure we select a solid set of features this release. Yes, the CSM wanted an iteration of faction warfare, which we chose not to do this time around. I think it makes sense for us to do part iteration, part new features, which our lineup certainly reflects. We have my team making a new feature and a team iterating on PI and a team iterating on EVEgate. Could one of those teams have iterated on faction warfare? Certainly, but then you could have a crowd here justifiably questioning why we don't iterate on planetary interaction or EVEgate. At the end of the day, we need to pick our features and we can only pick so many.

I'd love to look at POSs, faction warfare, sov, empire warfare, assault frigates etc, but the issue isn't lazyness or lack of commitment, only that the list is long and we don't have unlimited teams. The meeting minutes are a failure on our part to communicate, something we can hopefully improve as well.

---