| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
David Rivard
   |
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:17:00 -
[1]
Edited by: David Rivard on 14/06/2011 15:33:25
Edited by: David Rivard on 14/06/2011 15:20:00
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1527783
 Originally by: CCP Zinfandel
In this first version of the store, we don't yet have support for BPCs. Specifically, we can't tell the BPC how many runs it has on it. So we can't use that as a way to sell the Ishukone Watch Scorpion battleship. Right now our plan is to temporarily sell whole ships until this fall when we will switch to requiring a normal Scorpion as part of the price. BPCs would have worked too, if we could support that. The CSM felt that a short period of time selling the whole ship would not meaningfully hurt the EVE economy or Scorpion ship builders.
Give this thread a once over. There comes a time when elected representatives lose touch with their constituents and must be removed.
Vile Rat's incompetence is in action in this thread, but from the dev quotes, the entire CSM is responsible for letting CCP think it was even remotely ok with the players for these microtransaction ships to exist.
Vote to dissolve the CSM and start new elections.
Edit: Quote added.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:43:00 -
[2]
Since you must obviously be a major distributor of Scorpions (otherwise why so upset), why not just build Ravens for the 3-4 months from Incarna to Winter patch which will remove it again?
It is a paint job on a mediocre ship, and while it may just be CCPs way to lure us into accepting a foul Turbine type system, I sincerely doubt they have the deviousness to have even considered it ..
CCP = Baldrick.
Playerbase = Blackadder.
PS: use the thread(s) already spammed with the exact same topic.
|
Khamal Jolstien
Sick Tight
BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 15:58:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Since you must obviously be a major distributor of Scorpions (otherwise why so upset), why not just build Ravens for the 3-4 months from Incarna to Winter patch which will remove it again?
It is a paint job on a mediocre ship, and while it may just be CCPs way to lure us into accepting a foul Turbine type system, I sincerely doubt they have the deviousness to have even considered it ..
CCP = Baldrick.
Playerbase = Blackadder.
PS: use the thread(s) already spammed with the exact same topic.
I think what the OP is suggesting is a vote of "No Confidence". In which case I fully support it.
Originally by: McKinlay
When you get on the batphone and the only people left in the phone book are Aeternus and BLAST it might be time to hang up.
|
Captain Megadeath
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:05:00 -
[4]
NOT SUPPORTED
1 weeks trail =/= Support of MT
|
Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:47:00 -
[5]
A trial basis, on a single, cheap as **** battleship, up until the system can be fixed, does not constitute support for much of anything. Get Out.
|
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 00:41:00 -
[6]
Please see this post from CCP Zinfandel for the correct series of events.
tl;dr: CSM not quite as fail as it first appeared. 
|
Salomei
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 13:53:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Captain Megadeath
NOT SUPPORTED
1 weeks trail =/= Support of MT
It is a way to get a $-for-ships trial into the game to see how people('s wallets) respond. The "only a test" rhetoric is to pacify people like you into letting it slide.
So whether the CSM is allowing the "test" out of ignorance, sincerity or malice is immaterial. This approval demonstrates their inability to act in the interest of EVE players and thus warrants a no-confidence motion.
If CCP need time to complete the system, they can take that time and release the Sparkle Scorp exchange when it's finished.
---
PLEX and no further!
|
DeBingJos
Minmatar
Jukebox Warriors
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 14:01:00 -
[8]
I think the CSM is still against microtransactions.
They were just naive to believe the one week test with ships for $$$ was for technical reasons.
I too believe CCP wanted to see how the playerbase would react.
I still have confidence in the CSM. Lets hope they will forward our sentiment towards MT's to CCP. |
Rex Liberium
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 14:09:00 -
[9]
Supported.
Quoting myself
|
tika te
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 14:13:00 -
[10]
Edited by: tika te on 15/06/2011 14:15:49
it really would be a shame if the csm could do nothing to stop mt - as i see in the forums here (which my not be representative at all) about 80% of the playerbase are strictly against MT - even the conmetics-only-mt. the rest ist somwhere divided among "cosmetics-onyl-is-ok" and "don't-care" opinion. so why the hell isn't the csm strictly representing the players who voted for them and give a clear "NO" to ccp regarding mt??
during the last few years it seems ccp acually dont care about the eve players and their issues with the game at all. just check the forums and you'll find a large bunch of proposals/whinings/nice ideas being completely ignored by ccp even with dozens of players supporting it - not even a comment a la "we cant do that!"
so i'm starting to ask whats csm good for - except for free trip to iceland, having some nice smalltalk without results and signing a nda to have sth. to hide behind when there are some serious questions on the horizon. why? 'cos it seems csm is damned by ccp to only nod with the head when ccp serves them another bit of information what actuall WILL happen with eve
ps: sorry for bad english..
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |