Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:18:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama No vote= no opinion= Deal with the results = Be more active if you wanna express your will.
I voted on all my account and I still think this is the best joke ever.
Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:25:00 -
[32]
So much for crowdsourcing (and the CSM) being a reliable reflection of player needs, desires and demands. --------
|
ITTigerClawIK
Amarr Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:25:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow Linky to full results
Top 10 1. Docking games fix (CSM) 2. Corporation and Alliance tool overhaul (CSM) 3. Overhaul of roles and grantable roles system (CSM) 4. War-dec mechanics (CSM) 5. Remote repping and aggression (CSM) 6. Add the feature of switching characters without relogging. (CSM) 7. Black Ops Improvements (CSM) 8. Assault Frigates 4th Bonus (CSM) 9. History of who added/kick character from Corporation 10. More Control Over Medals (CSM)
1. YES, YES a million times YES 2. Remember bringing this up a year or so ago, cant find my post now though >_> but very much needed 3. same as above 4. very much like to see up there 5. Yes please fix ^_^ 6. easier logoffskis anyone? 7. liking idea of making them anti-capital ships, but we shall see what comes up. 8. was happy with AB Bonus that was suggested and put on SISI ages ago. 9. i can see why this would be usefull but dont see how its in the top 10. 10. .......What? Why is this here????
Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy Personal information removed from sig. Zymurgist |
Nifter Telfo
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 17:27:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Nifter Telfo on 01/08/2011 17:37:27 Edited by: Nifter Telfo on 01/08/2011 17:27:46 Weapon balance wasn't an option to be picked. Even if it was, it wouldn't have reached top 10 as it is in the other races best interest to vote them down to keep superiority. |
Ruze Ahkor'Murkon
Amarr No Applicable Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:05:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow Linky to full results
Top 10 1. Docking games fix (CSM) 2. Corporation and Alliance tool overhaul (CSM) 3. Overhaul of roles and grantable roles system (CSM) 4. War-dec mechanics (CSM) 5. Remote repping and aggression (CSM) 6. Add the feature of switching characters without relogging. (CSM) 7. Black Ops Improvements (CSM) 8. Assault Frigates 4th Bonus (CSM) 9. History of who added/kick character from Corporation 10. More Control Over Medals (CSM)
I did vote. I am an empire player who gave up 0.0 a long time ago. I voted the things that most effect my gameplay, and notified my corporation to do the same. The only thing I suggested they fix, was war-dec's. Everything else was left to them.
That said, I personally voted for item 1, 2, 3, 4, and 9, and wished I would have seen 5 because I would have voted for it, too.
These are the things most important to ME. I could care less that black ops don't work, and AF's are the low end of my give a **** list. Faction warfare? Not for me. Nulsec clone wars and POS's? Been there, and **** that.
So, as with any voting system, it's inherently flawed. No different then electing the CSM's, in my opinion.
Posts by Ruze Ahkor'Murkon and Ruze |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:20:00 -
[36]
Yep... there are few items which I personally didn't vote, but would think should have made top 10 if people who have been driving these changes had actually bothered to stand up and vote...
Stuff like Modular Starbase (CSM) (includes Funky POS recommendation (CSM)) (rank 12) Bountyhunting Improvements (CSM) (rank 17) T3 Refitting inside Wspace (CSM) (rank 20)
I am rather surprised that these "didn't make it" higher. --- This is one of the moments where we look at what CCP does and less of what they say. Innovation takes time to set in and the predictable reaction is always to resist change |
Nimrod Nemesis
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:24:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Takamori Maruyama No vote= no opinion= Deal with the results = Be more active if you wanna express your will.
|
Haradriel Tian
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 18:27:00 -
[38]
just shows that people playing the game didnt get the memo to go and vote.
While CSM members let their corps know, WHAT they are supposed to vote for on the list CCP gave them to rig the vote.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 19:20:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow Perhaps next time we have more voters to carry their share to the pile. At least this time the crowsourcing was announced both in game and in eveonline frontpage. Not too many actually have bothered to vote still.
Originally by: Haradriel Tian Edited by: Haradriel Tian on 01/08/2011 18:29:56 Edited by: Haradriel Tian on 01/08/2011 18:29:03 just shows that people playing the game didnt get the memo to go and vote.
While CSM members let their corps know, WHAT they are supposed to vote for on the list CCP gave them to rig the vote.
I mean who knew about this other then those, IN THE KNOW. CCP doesnt really go out of its way other then a random forum posting. Leaving out all the other players that dont bother with the forums because of trolls.
Now if you happened to miss both "in game advertisement" and "front page of eveonline dot com advertisement", it doesn't mean that they weren't there. --- This is one of the moments where we look at what CCP does and less of what they say. Innovation takes time to set in and the predictable reaction is always to resist change |
Mendolus
Aurelius Federation Eternal Evocations
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 19:28:00 -
[40]
Originally by: mkint
Um... you've never seen the kinds of survey questions CCP puts out... "we are A) awesome B) radical or C) kickass." The questions they ask all come from the attitude "we're right, you're wrong, and if you don't like it, get out of the game we never actually play."
Doesn't mean they could not improve the quality and objectiveness of the surveys right?
Also, why do you play this game if that is how you feel? Honest question, just curious.
|
|
Bienator II
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 19:48:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Idonis Callor No Hybrid Fix?!?! population i am disappoint.
this was intended since CCP fixes mostly unwanted things. By keeping this item off-list the probability for a fix dramatically increased.
|
Max Keitt Keitt
Amarr Viziam
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 19:54:00 -
[42]
Fix hybrids. ~+=+~ TQ Power Supplies Learning to PVP |
Dretzle Omega
Caldari Global Economy Experts
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 19:55:00 -
[43]
76 675 0 1,847.57 0.00 14.83% More Control Over Medals (CSM) 35 787 3 1,832.17 2.77 17.29% Drone improvements (CSM)
So, second column is votes for, third votes against, 4th column is the derived score and 5th the %popular.
How the heck did More Control Over Medals get a better rating than Drone improvements? Meesa thinks this polling system needs an overhaul. Surely it was because More Control Over Medals got no negatives, even though it got a hundred less votes. Negatives are weighted far too heavily, then, where 3 negatives override 112 positive votes. |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:02:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Grey Stormshadow on 01/08/2011 20:04:55
Originally by: Dretzle Omega 76 675 0 1,847.57 0.00 14.83% More Control Over Medals (CSM) 35 787 3 1,832.17 2.77 17.29% Drone improvements (CSM)
So, second column is votes for, third votes against, 4th column is the derived score and 5th the %popular.
How the heck did More Control Over Medals get a better rating than Drone improvements? Meesa thinks this polling system needs an overhaul. Surely it was because More Control Over Medals got no negatives, even though it got a hundred less votes. Negatives are weighted far too heavily, then, where 3 negatives override 112 positive votes.
It is the score... not positive or negative votes. People did vote different amount of items and the 20 poins were distributed to the items evenly. However max score for 1 item was 3 points/voter... and as you see, the scores are really close to each other.
3 negative votes could reduce maximum of 9 points from some item. --- This is one of the moments where we look at what CCP does and less of what they say. Innovation takes time to set in and the predictable reaction is always to resist change |
Marqo D'Maryn
Octopus Rapid Shipping and Mercantile
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:18:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Marqo D''Maryn on 01/08/2011 20:21:03 Edited by: Marqo D''Maryn on 01/08/2011 20:20:08 Well, I'm not too surprised to see something like medals in the top 10. It's a statistical function of the polling method.
I think medals rated so high because while it's not that important to many, those that did vote for it were pretty much in favour of the solution. [edit - two others above me pretty much said the same thing while I was typing this :) ]
Other issues with a higher percentage of No votes dropped down the list.
The top 10 as it stands represents a fair sample of *solutions* that voters agreed on. Not issues. ----- Adepto Aurum Amoreque Abire |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:27:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Marqo D'Maryn Edited by: Marqo D''Maryn on 01/08/2011 20:21:03 Edited by: Marqo D''Maryn on 01/08/2011 20:20:08 Well, I'm not too surprised to see something like medals in the top 10. It's a statistical function of the polling method.
I think medals rated so high because while it's not that important to many, those that did vote for it were pretty much in favour of the solution. [edit - two others above me pretty much said the same thing while I was typing this :) ]
Other issues with a higher percentage of No votes dropped down the list.
The top 10 as it stands represents a fair sample of *solutions* that voters agreed on. Not issues.
Well if u voted for...
6 items, u gave 3,00 points to each. 7 items, u gave 2,86 points to each. 10 items, u gave 2,00 points to each.
And if you voted for 7 items and against...
3 items, u gave 2,00 points to 7 items and removed 2 points from 3 items. 7 items, u gave 1,43 points to 7 items and removed 1,43 points from 7 items.
This all totals to 20 points. Negative votes did nerf your positive votes so they are not to blame. --- This is one of the moments where we look at what CCP does and less of what they say. Innovation takes time to set in and the predictable reaction is always to resist change |
Hamatitio
Caldari EON Solutions The Laughing Men
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:48:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Hamatitio on 01/08/2011 20:54:45 ****ing medals?
Edit, am I blind or do i see absolutely nothing related to hybrids on the full list?
Originally by: Forrest Gump
And that's all I got to say 'bout that.
|
Marqo D'Maryn
Octopus Rapid Shipping and Mercantile
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 20:53:00 -
[48]
Ya, but the point is that it was the proposed *solutions* that were effectively being voted on, not the importance of the issue.
If the solution was unpopular, it would attract a lot of negative votes and the final ranking would not reflect the importance of the issue. As it stands, I don't think there is any way to distinguish between "I voted against this because it's not an important issue and I don't want it looked at" and "I voted against this because the proposed solution is bad".
Though I would hope that issues that received a lot of negative votes (as opposed to no votes) should be re-examined for alterative solutions. ----- Adepto Aurum Amoreque Abire |
Victoria Wolfe
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:02:00 -
[49]
I'm also a little surprised about #10. Medals seem like a pretty insignificant part of the game, right down there with Certificates. There must be more important things to focus on. ___
"Speak for yourself sir, I intend to live forever" - Commander William Riker |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:06:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Victoria Wolfe I'm also a little surprised about #10. Medals seem like a pretty insignificant part of the game, right down there with Certificates. There must be more important things to focus on.
So...
What did you vote for instead?
|
|
Barbie D0ll
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:06:00 -
[51]
Originally by: "" 10. More Control Over Medals (CSM)
what the ****? why would ANYONE want to bother with this **** when there are more important things to do?
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:07:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Idonis Callor No Hybrid Fix?!?! population i am disappoint.
It was never on the list, since apparently CCP doesnt give a **** about the gun used on the most amount of ships in the game.
|
Meryl SinGarda
Caldari Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:09:00 -
[53]
Sounds about right, I guess. Taking a guess, this is for a team completely separate from the Incarna team? Fly safe, Die hard |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:12:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Marqo D'Maryn Ya, but the point is that it was the proposed *solutions* that were effectively being voted on, not the importance of the issue.
If the solution was unpopular, it would attract a lot of negative votes and the final ranking would not reflect the importance of the issue. As it stands, I don't think there is any way to distinguish between "I voted against this because it's not an important issue and I don't want it looked at" and "I voted against this because the proposed solution is bad".
Though I would hope that issues that received a lot of negative votes (as opposed to no votes) should be re-examined for alterative solutions.
Yep this is very true and people who voted against something, should prolly at least think about going and leaving message to that items thread explaining why it deserved negative vote. That is pretty much only way the things can change as no one can read their minds.
Assembly hall is open forum and every post counts. At the moment CCP is mostly high from NeX and incarna, so CSM really is all we got. Lets try and have some faith that they actually can force CCP to do at least something worth doing. It would be sad that the "something" would not be what players wanted just because some guy with solution was too lazy to write about it. |
Calistai Huranu
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:25:00 -
[55]
As to No.10.. The Medal thing, gonna guess we have a whole bunch of players with reading comprehension issues who typed 76, when they really meant 75. Either that or it's a Troll.
|
Tuggboat
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:30:00 -
[56]
well the CSM doesn't have null sec mechanics on its big to do list does it?
You really wouldn't know how much the corp interface forces game play. Security is a real problem so that plugging holes and designing a corp that's good for the players and safe for the corp is really hard. YOU just can't do what a lot of players would like you to do, IF you do, and you haven't implemented it before and designed a title or role it can take months if your only a rusty programmer. Not being able to let others grant low security roles is an extra burden on directors also. its so arcane if you haven't used it for several months. The logic is somewhere between the C case statment (though I have been corrected on that exact statement before)and pythons class definitions or some other esoteric logic. I can only hope to figure out which someday. If i knew how it was written I might understand it. It's worse than overview logic though it is a bit similar. The larger your corp the more you need it. I'm real glad its near the top with other CEO tools. Corps and good leadership are what really hampers this game and I think the nonintuitive tools filter out otherwise good ceos. I'm not with the idea that a programmer makes the best leader of people cause its a different kind of thinking. Ones social and the other is almost anti-social/isolationist kinda work.
Didn't vote for that docking game fix even though its kinda unbalanced. I figured it was good for beginner kills and lets them think they are hot stuff for a while cause they know a trick :)
I'd like more blackops action, I voted for one of them but not that one.
Disappointed about medals too but i could see them being used in corp to qualify people for sensitive positions that require more player skill instead of skill points but wouldn't it be nice to say award everone that can do logi a logi medal and then later sort them out to send emails for ctas and such? I think it could be used like that to help corp alliance organization if used like that. Not into the chest full of medals unless you can display em on your chest with a new monocle.
|
Bienator II
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 21:33:00 -
[57]
this could be fixed by adding two additional lists:
most wanted and most disliked items. The current list would be just a aggregation of the two new lists.
|
Tuggboat
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.08.01 22:27:00 -
[58]
They explained the weighting, even so I wasted a few points by not using one to vote against.. The GD forum isn't where you make proposals and gather support, I mean its ok to gauge some stuff but we have a place for csm work. This forum rolls much to fast with new threads to glean info from reliably.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2011.08.02 00:14:00 -
[59]
You guys need to read this post to understand why the top 10 turn out the way they did.
Hint: alliance block voting significantly altered the picture.
P.S. WTF did eve forums suddenly became so slow?? ... Return the Old Hangar Back... for Immersion.
|
Selinate
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.08.02 00:16:00 -
[60]
Nothing about lasers being fixed? I'm disappointed.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |