Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2366
|
Posted - 2012.12.24 15:05:00 -
[61] - Quote
Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
650
|
Posted - 2012.12.25 17:38:00 -
[62] - Quote
Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend.
Care to elaborate on why it was cancelled? That was probably in the top 3 of problems most people would have had.
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2367
|
Posted - 2012.12.25 22:42:00 -
[63] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote:Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend. Care to elaborate on why it was cancelled? That was probably in the top 3 of problems most people would have had.
It was cancelled because CCP didn't have much to share with us. I agree that corp management is bad, but I happen to think CCP isn't ever going to get it right, and I think the only good solution is via CREST, where players can get it right. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Raid'En
Devil's Depot
181
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 01:05:00 -
[64] - Quote
"Trebor" wrote:[...] because the CSM is committed to getting a good portion of the Meeting Minutes published to the community before the end of the year [...] is this statement still valid, or were you too optimistic ? |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1055
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 03:29:00 -
[65] - Quote
Could you please also add in another post with the dates that people completed their sections of the minutes, when they are submitted to CCP for review and when they are returned for further alteration or as marked ready for release. This way we can accurately know where the delays are occurring.
Thanks. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3450
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 06:20:00 -
[66] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Could you please also add in another post with the dates that people completed their sections of the minutes, when they are submitted to CCP for review and when they are returned for further alteration or as marked ready for release. This way we can accurately know where the delays are occurring.
Thanks.
All the sessions completed so far have been submitted to CCP for approval, they are being sent off as they are completed. You're welcome to keep track of when Two Step updates the post and you'll know who's getting what done and when. When we have enough back for an initial release of the minutes, we will. We will not be releasing individual sections out of context, and without certain key sections that set up others.
Everyone is well aware of your need to HOLD THE CSM RESPONSIBLE but do keep in mind that this is the holidays for both the CSM and CCP. Family comes first. That being said, we're still aiming to have these complete (the CSM's side at least) by New Years.
Chillax. Drink some 'nog. We got 'dis. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1055
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 10:04:00 -
[67] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: All the sessions completed so far have been submitted to CCP for approval, they are being sent off as they are completed. You're welcome to keep track of when Two Step updates the post and you'll know who's getting what done and when. When we have enough back for an initial release of the minutes, we will. We will not be releasing individual sections out of context, and without certain key sections that set up others.
Everyone is well aware of your need to HOLD THE CSM RESPONSIBLE but do keep in mind that this is the holidays for both the CSM and CCP. Family comes first. That being said, we're still aiming to have these complete (the CSM's side at least) by New Years.
Chillax. Drink some 'nog. We got 'dis.
Oh I am very aware that it is the holidays, it was not so much as a question of HOLDING THE CSM RESPONSIBLE but holding the right people responsible. If it all has the words "First draft Completed" on it but we still have to wait 2 months, it is nice to know that the hold up is on CCPs end. And yes family should always come first which is why I like others were surprised by
Trebor wrote: [...] because the CSM is committed to getting a good portion of the Meeting Minutes published to the community before the end of the year [...]
Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend.
Nor do I expect the release on individual sections as per the last set of minutes you produced were all interwoven.
I have a funny feeling the axe I will be grinding will be more to do with
Quote: The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP. This requires active engagement with the player community to master EVE issue awareness, understanding, and evaluation in the context of the GÇ£greatest good for the greater player baseGÇ¥. The scope of issues is restricted only to EVE, its ongoing development, and limited meta (out-of-game) issues which have direct relevance to the EVE universe. It is important to keep in mind that the CSM will not have formal powers within CCP, they will have a voice inside CCP.
and the statement
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Two step, Aleks, Trebor, myself, all represent players outside 0.0 and were heavily involved in the document we submitted to CCP before the summit, which is remarkably similar to their own approach they will be sharing with the public very soon.
No one's buying the whiny, dishonest bullshit. You do the community a disservice by keeping this nonsense up. As it more looks like some members of the CSM are representing CCPs interests to the players and not the other way around.
But either way around I look forward to the minutes, yes I will perfectly well admit I am hard on the members of the CSM I perceive as aiding a minority rather than the majority of the games players.
As it is "The purpose of the CSM is to represent society interests to CCP.", I see nothing in the statement about people who vote or those who did not but the community as a whole.
Anyway sermon finished, thank you for your hard work over these holidays in attempting to get these minutes to us early enough to be of use before the commencement of the CSM 8 process.
And happy holidays to all. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
56
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 13:39:00 -
[68] - Quote
Two step wrote:Rengerel en Distel wrote:Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend. Care to elaborate on why it was cancelled? That was probably in the top 3 of problems most people would have had. It was cancelled because CCP didn't have much to share with us. I agree that corp management is bad, but I happen to think CCP isn't ever going to get it right, and I think the only good solution is via CREST, where players can get it right.
These summits arn't a oneway information exchange from CCP to the CSM/players are they? Corporation management has been an issue for years; and over these years there has been plenty of discussion what should be changed and what should be kept. Even ties in with the some of the illusive POS revamps. Surely the CSM can present these issues to CCP without being waved away with a generic 'yeah we know they're bad but we havnt got anything down on it yet'?
Before you know it, CCP has the wrong idea how to eventually "fix" corp management and then we can pick up the broken pieces later on.
Would a decent brainstorm or at least some listing of causes and effects of current corp management have been a proper way of dealing with the "nothing to share" issue?
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3451
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 14:54:00 -
[69] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: As it more looks like some members of the CSM are representing CCPs interests to the players and not the other way around.
Only to those that are being completely dense.
Remember, we submitted our development strategy document because we were concerned about a perceived lack of focus/direction in 2013, and a lack of proper balance being given to the diverse amount of player types and player interests that exist within the EVE community. The TL, DR was that they needed to come up with a system that allows them to build expansions that serve veterans AND noobies, carebears AND PvPers. Expansions needed to solve problems, and needed to have things that appeal to everyone.
The offer we made to CCP was that weGÇÖd submit our version of a development document first, to let them know what we believe, and that theyGÇÖd than show us their own thoughts in return. After CCP Ripley disseminated our document throughout the company (upper management as well as down the chain to the line developers) we were presented with CCPGÇÖs own approach at the summit.
To be good and proper GÇ£yes menGÇ¥, as you are suggesting, these events would have had to have happened in reverse order. The fact that they didnGÇÖt, and yet our development strategies still ended up remarkably similar in purpose and value, shows that CCP is indeed listening to the playersGÇÖ representatives these days after all.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra Gallente Federation
292
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 17:01:00 -
[70] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: As it more looks like some members of the CSM are representing CCPs interests to the players and not the other way around.
Only to those that are being completely dense. Remember, we submitted our development strategy document because we were concerned about a perceived lack of focus/direction in 2013, and a lack of proper balance being given to the diverse amount of player types and player interests that exist within the EVE community. The TL, DR was that they needed to come up with a system that allows them to build expansions that serve veterans AND noobies, carebears AND PvPers. Expansions needed to solve problems, and needed to have things that appeal to everyone. The offer we made to CCP was that weGÇÖd submit our version of a development document first, to let them know what we believe, and that theyGÇÖd than show us their own thoughts in return. After CCP Ripley disseminated our document throughout the company (upper management as well as down the chain to the line developers) we were presented with CCPGÇÖs own approach at the summit. To be good and proper GÇ£yes menGÇ¥, as you are suggesting, these events would have had to have happened in reverse order. The fact that they didnGÇÖt, and yet our development strategies still ended up remarkably similar in purpose and value, shows that CCP is indeed listening to the playersGÇÖ representatives these days after all. About sums it up.
"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
|
|
Raid'En
Devil's Depot
181
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 18:27:00 -
[71] - Quote
If CCP wants you to deliver on *48h*, then they should do the same. I won't forget that if they don't release it in time :P |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3454
|
Posted - 2012.12.27 18:55:00 -
[72] - Quote
Raid'En wrote:If CCP wants you to deliver on *48h*, then they should do the same. I won't forget that if they don't release it in time :P
To be fair, the 48h meme started with CSM7 holding itself to that standard as part of the stakeholder process to prove to CCP we can be a valuable, practical member of a scrum team without slowing them down. It was never something CCP asked of us, though we've made good on that commitment. Keeping in mind that many CCPers are home for the holidays, we are trying to cash in on some of that goodwill and are hoping for a speedy turnaround from them as well, since we've proven we can provide it whenever THEY need it. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2417
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 00:49:00 -
[73] - Quote
Updated first post, we are now down to 6 sessions, 2 of which were supposed to be done by CCP, so the CSM is holding up our side of the bargain pretty well. Most CCPers are still away for the holidays, but all the sessions marked "First Draft Done" have been submitted to them for approval. Right now, none have been approved. Note that the CSM also needs to go through the drafts to make sure Trebor didn't slip in some hilarious misquotes of Hans and that sort of thing.
Liner Xiandra wrote:Two step wrote:Rengerel en Distel wrote:Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend. Care to elaborate on why it was cancelled? That was probably in the top 3 of problems most people would have had. It was cancelled because CCP didn't have much to share with us. I agree that corp management is bad, but I happen to think CCP isn't ever going to get it right, and I think the only good solution is via CREST, where players can get it right. These summits arn't a oneway information exchange from CCP to the CSM/players are they? Corporation management has been an issue for years; and over these years there has been plenty of discussion what should be changed and what should be kept. Even ties in with the some of the illusive POS revamps. Surely the CSM can present these issues to CCP without being waved away with a generic 'yeah we know they're bad but we havnt got anything down on it yet'? Before you know it, CCP has the wrong idea how to eventually "fix" corp management and then we can pick up the broken pieces later on. Would a decent brainstorm or at least some listing of causes and effects of current corp management have been a proper way of dealing with the "nothing to share" issue?
We had a corp management session last time, we already told them all the things that are terrible about it. There is no point to talking to them about it unless they have decided to dedicate resources to fixing it. Convincing them of that is just as much your job as it is my job. The CSM summit is literally packed full of sessions, we had to do some of them over lunch, and I would much rather spend my time talking about things CCP is already planning on doing. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1164
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 02:48:00 -
[74] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: As it more looks like some members of the CSM are representing CCPs interests to the players and not the other way around.
Only to those that are being completely dense. Remember, we submitted our development strategy document because we were concerned about a perceived lack of focus/direction in 2013, and a lack of proper balance being given to the diverse amount of player types and player interests that exist within the EVE community. The TL, DR was that they needed to come up with a system that allows them to build expansions that serve veterans AND noobies, carebears AND PvPers. Expansions needed to solve problems, and needed to have things that appeal to everyone. The offer we made to CCP was that weGÇÖd submit our version of a development document first, to let them know what we believe, and that theyGÇÖd than show us their own thoughts in return. After CCP Ripley disseminated our document throughout the company (upper management as well as down the chain to the line developers) we were presented with CCPGÇÖs own approach at the summit. To be good and proper GÇ£yes menGÇ¥, as you are suggesting, these events would have had to have happened in reverse order. The fact that they didnGÇÖt, and yet our development strategies still ended up remarkably similar in purpose and value, shows that CCP is indeed listening to the playersGÇÖ representatives these days after all. So what you are saying is that with 6 months of talks with Devs on skype you had no idea about their thoughts on Null. And that CCP must suddenly be listening as you came up with almost identical ideas
Which leads to the next question. Has Dr.Eyjog seen these proposals and what does he think?
I am aware of the old adage of ask 2 economists to answer a question and you will get 5 answers but his thoughts would be very valuable, actually more valuable than anyone in the CSM or at CCPs thoughts. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2417
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 02:59:00 -
[75] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: So what you are saying is that with 6 months of talks with Devs on skype you had no idea about their thoughts on Null. And that CCP must suddenly be listening as you came up with almost identical ideas
Which leads to the next question. Has Dr.Eyjog seen these proposals and what does he think?
I am aware of the old adage of ask 2 economists to answer a question and you will get 5 answers but his thoughts would be very valuable, actually more valuable than anyone in the CSM or at CCPs thoughts.
Firstly, not all devs are on Skype with us. Secondly, face to face communications is very important, and can communicate a lot more and of a much higher quality than semi-realtime chat. Thirdly, why on earth would you conclude we had no idea what they thought about nullsec from what Hans said?
On Dr. Eyoj, running stuff like new expansion plans past him is for CCP to do internally. My opinion is that they don't often consult him before they do stuff, but you would have to ask him about that.
I am also very confused why on Earth you think an economist would be good at game design. I had a very interesting exchange with him during the economy session that I think should shed some light on what the differences between RL econ and EVE econ are. I will make sure it is in the minutes, and I am sure we can have a fascinating thread about it on here afterwards. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
763
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 03:15:00 -
[76] - Quote
Two step wrote:Updated first post, we are now down to 6 sessions, 2 of which were supposed to be done by CCP, so the CSM is holding up our side of the bargain pretty well. Most CCPers are still away for the holidays, but all the sessions marked "First Draft Done" have been submitted to them for approval. Right now, none have been approved. Note that the CSM also needs to go through the drafts to make sure Trebor didn't slip in some hilarious misquotes of Hans and that sort of thing. Liner Xiandra wrote:Two step wrote:Rengerel en Distel wrote:Two step wrote:Updated first post, added the part 2 sessions for nullsec and dust, and mentioned that the corp management session was cancelled.
We are closing in on getting them all done. I expect that all the sessions should be done by the weekend. Care to elaborate on why it was cancelled? That was probably in the top 3 of problems most people would have had. It was cancelled because CCP didn't have much to share with us. I agree that corp management is bad, but I happen to think CCP isn't ever going to get it right, and I think the only good solution is via CREST, where players can get it right. These summits arn't a oneway information exchange from CCP to the CSM/players are they? Corporation management has been an issue for years; and over these years there has been plenty of discussion what should be changed and what should be kept. Even ties in with the some of the illusive POS revamps. Surely the CSM can present these issues to CCP without being waved away with a generic 'yeah we know they're bad but we havnt got anything down on it yet'? Before you know it, CCP has the wrong idea how to eventually "fix" corp management and then we can pick up the broken pieces later on. Would a decent brainstorm or at least some listing of causes and effects of current corp management have been a proper way of dealing with the "nothing to share" issue? We had a corp management session last time, we already told them all the things that are terrible about it. There is no point to talking to them about it unless they have decided to dedicate resources to fixing it. Convincing them of that is just as much your job as it is my job. The CSM summit is literally packed full of sessions, we had to do some of them over lunch, and I would much rather spend my time talking about things CCP is already planning on doing.
So what you're saying is that they have no plan on working on Corp Management? I think a lot of us had the idea that corp management was one of the top plans for the spring expansion.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3471
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 03:23:00 -
[77] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: So what you are saying is that with 6 months of talks with Devs on skype you had no idea about their thoughts on Null. And that CCP must suddenly be listening as you came up with almost identical ideas
Which leads to the next question. Has Dr.Eyjog seen these proposals and what does he think?
Completely missing the point. facepalms
The document was about development strategy - not a specific set of game design proposals. That is why we included three -examples- and not "CCP: Here's what you need to work on next to fix the game good, thanks."
The three examples were interchangeable, modifiable, and could be replaced completely, that wasn't the point of the document. The document was about learning from the lessons of Incarna and subsequent expansions - it was about CCP not chasing Jesus Features, and not ignoring the need for new content in favor of purely iterative releases. It was about balance. It was about diversity in player needs. It was about sustainability in their long-term release plans.
If you took that as "CCP you need to fix mineral compression" or "CCP you need to do ring mining next" you've completely missed the point of our document. It was about how to build expansions, not which things to put in the next expansion. Likewise, the discussion at the summit was about how to build expansions, not which things will be put in the next expansion. We'll be figuring that out in January. Why do you think we're racing to get the minutes out?
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3471
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 03:28:00 -
[78] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote: So what you're saying is that they have no plan on working on Corp Management? I think a lot of us had the idea that corp management was one of the top plans for the spring expansion.
Not sure where you got that idea, but there is no "top plan for spring expansion" yet. (see above). There's nothing ruling out Corp Management from being worked on (or any other feature people are worried about), the release planning just hasn't occurred yet. Like Two step already said, CCP knows there's a ton of problems with corp management, and what they are, there weren't suddenly a bunch of new ones to rehash this summit. I agree that the other sessions we had were a much more productive use of our time instead.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1190
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 07:14:00 -
[79] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So what you are saying is that with 6 months of talks with Devs on skype you had no idea about their thoughts on Null. And that CCP must suddenly be listening as you came up with almost identical ideas
Which leads to the next question. Has Dr.Eyjog seen these proposals and what does he think?
Completely missing the point. facepalmsThe document was about development strategy - not a specific set of game design proposals. That is why we included three -examples- and not "CCP: Here's what you need to work on next to fix the game good, thanks." The three examples were interchangeable, modifiable, and could be replaced completely, that wasn't the point of the document. The document was about learning from the lessons of Incarna and subsequent expansions - it was about CCP not chasing Jesus Features, and not ignoring the need for new content in favor of purely iterative releases. It was about balance. It was about diversity in player needs. It was about sustainability in their long-term release plans. If you took that as "CCP you need to fix mineral compression" or "CCP you need to do ring mining next" you've completely missed the point of our document. It was about how to build expansions, not which things to put in the next expansion. Likewise, the discussion at the summit was about how to build expansions, not which things will be put in the next expansion. We'll be figuring that out in January. Why do you think we're racing to get the minutes out? Thank you for your frankness
The confusion seems to be in the fact that some members of the CSM are stating that those ARE the ideas that the CSM is putting forwards and that they are exactly the same as what CCP is following.
If they are merely example guides with no relevant filling per say then that is a good thing. As a pure template document it is a good one.
But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think?
And thank you for working so hard on the minutes. I like many others look forward to them. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3472
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 07:59:00 -
[80] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: The confusion seems to be in the fact that some members of the CSM are stating that those ARE the ideas that the CSM is putting forwards and that they are exactly the same as what CCP is following.
If they are merely example guides with no relevant filling per say then that is a good thing. As a pure template document it is a good one.
We've explained the purpose of the document clearly from the beginning, the very first time someone like yourself started nitpicking over specific content in the examples. * The confusion is only because you've not been paying attention.
Frying Doom wrote: But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think?
There is no "CCP's proposal for Null". I've explained many times now there is no locked-in agenda for any specific feature to be tackled in 2013 yet. What the hell are you talking about?
Frying Doom wrote: And thank you for working so hard on the minutes. I like many others look forward to them.
You're welcome.
* If a CSM member is actually saying that CCP has a specific plan for 0.0, or that it matches our ideas exactly, please cite your source so I can smack them upside the head. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1191
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 08:48:00 -
[81] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: The confusion seems to be in the fact that some members of the CSM are stating that those ARE the ideas that the CSM is putting forwards and that they are exactly the same as what CCP is following.
If they are merely example guides with no relevant filling per say then that is a good thing. As a pure template document it is a good one. We've explained the purpose of the document clearly from the beginning, the very first time someone like yourself started nitpicking over specific content in the examples. * The confusion is only because you've not been paying attention. Frying Doom wrote: But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think? There is no "CCP's proposal for Null". I've explained many times now there is no locked-in agenda for any specific feature to be tackled in 2013 yet. What the hell are you talking about? Frying Doom wrote: And thank you for working so hard on the minutes. I like many others look forward to them. You're welcome. * If a CSM member is actually saying that CCP has a specific plan for 0.0, or that it matches our ideas exactly, please cite your source so I can smack them upside the head.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:...who aren't all from 0.0. Two step, Aleks, Trebor, myself, all represent players outside 0.0 and were heavily involved in the document we submitted to CCP before the summit, which is remarkably similar to their own approach they will be sharing with the public very soon. So I must have misinterpreted this.
So what your saying is that even though your ideas for Null in the template document that was only about how to build an expansion and not to be in any way shape or form for the content of those examples, even though one was marked Critical Issue: 0.0 and Sovereignty and even though you have stated that CCPs ideas are remarkably similar, there is in fact no "CCP's proposal for Null".
And I wonder why I am getting confused here. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1191
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 09:04:00 -
[82] - Quote
Two step wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So what you are saying is that with 6 months of talks with Devs on skype you had no idea about their thoughts on Null. And that CCP must suddenly be listening as you came up with almost identical ideas
Which leads to the next question. Has Dr.Eyjog seen these proposals and what does he think?
I am aware of the old adage of ask 2 economists to answer a question and you will get 5 answers but his thoughts would be very valuable, actually more valuable than anyone in the CSM or at CCPs thoughts.
Firstly, not all devs are on Skype with us. Secondly, face to face communications is very important, and can communicate a lot more and of a much higher quality than semi-realtime chat. Thirdly, why on earth would you conclude we had no idea what they thought about nullsec from what Hans said? On Dr. Eyoj, running stuff like new expansion plans past him is for CCP to do internally. My opinion is that they don't often consult him before they do stuff, but you would have to ask him about that. I am also very confused why on Earth you think an economist would be good at game design. I had a very interesting exchange with him during the economy session that I think should shed some light on what the differences between RL econ and EVE econ are. I will make sure it is in the minutes, and I am sure we can have a fascinating thread about it on here afterwards. An economist is not good at game design but one would hope they are good at economics.
And any alteration to the ore distribution or manufacturing within Null of Hi-sec will have very economic effects. So while Dr. Eyoj may not know programming he does seem to have a very good grasp of the EvE economy
And we are talking about economics.
But then apparently nothing substantial has been discussed in the last months other than the how the expansions should be layered. Not that this by its self is not important. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3472
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 09:06:00 -
[83] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: So I must have misinterpreted this.
So what your saying is that even though your ideas for Null in the template document that was only about how to build an expansion and not to be in any way shape or form for the content of those examples, even though one was marked Critical Issue: 0.0 and Sovereignty and even though you have stated that CCPs ideas are remarkably similar, there is in fact no "CCP's proposal for Null".
And I wonder why I am getting confused here.
I've said our document was primarily about how to build an expansion. In that respect, CCP's approach they shared with us at the summit turned out to reflect what we had given them. Not regarding 0.0 specifics, but regarding expansion building in general.
I did not say the 0.0-related content in the examples wasn't of interest to the CSM, however. It is. I only said there was no reason to take it as the final word on the issue, and reminded you that the primary purpose of the document was never about telling CCP how to fix 0.0 exactly. It was simply a starting point for discussion.
Once again, CCP has not responded with any proposals yet of their own regarding the upcoming expansions, because that is a matter to be dealt with in January. We did however have a productive pair of sessions on 0.0 at the Summit, the contents of which will be documented in the minutes.
Are we clear now? Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1210
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 10:05:00 -
[84] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Frying Doom wrote: So I must have misinterpreted this.
So what your saying is that even though your ideas for Null in the template document that was only about how to build an expansion and not to be in any way shape or form for the content of those examples, even though one was marked Critical Issue: 0.0 and Sovereignty and even though you have stated that CCPs ideas are remarkably similar, there is in fact no "CCP's proposal for Null".
And I wonder why I am getting confused here. I've said our document was primarily about how to build an expansion. In that respect, CCP's approach they shared with us at the summit turned out to reflect what we had given them. Not regarding 0.0 specifics, but regarding expansion building in general. I did not say the 0.0-related content in the examples wasn't of interest to the CSM, however. It is. I only said there was no reason to take it as the final word on the issue, and reminded you that the primary purpose of the document was never about telling CCP how to fix 0.0 exactly. It was simply a starting point for discussion. Once again, CCP has not responded with any proposals yet of their own regarding the upcoming expansions, because that is a matter to be dealt with in January. We did however have a productive pair of sessions on 0.0 at the Summit, the contents of which will be documented in the minutes. Are we clear now? As I said I look forward to the minutes with more and more want
Ok so simple question then is the details noted in that document on Null, the CSMs perspective of what should be done to fix it? Or more specifically the creators of that documents beliefs? As I personally do not start a discussion with a point of view other than that I believe to be correct. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
794
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 12:55:00 -
[85] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Are we clear now?
Spoiler Alert: This will never happen. "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1212
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 13:24:00 -
[86] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Are we clear now? Spoiler Alert: This will never happen. Well maybe you can make it nice and clear for me as to what the CSM or more specifically the authors of that document believe should happen in Null.
Honestly its not that hard a question
Where do the individual members stand as to what should be done with Null sec?
Is it what they wrote or not? Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
619
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 13:30:00 -
[87] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think? No, they snuck the plans past the man's desk and consulted an economic Ouija board instead
T-H-E-R-E-I-S-N-O-N-E-E-D-T-O-A-D-D-R-E-S-S-T-E-C-H-N-E-T-I-U-M-GOOD BYE
the spirits speak |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1212
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 13:41:00 -
[88] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Frying Doom wrote:But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think? No, they snuck the plans past the man's desk and consulted an economic Ouija board instead T-H-E-R-E-I-S-N-O-N-E-E-D-T-O-A-D-D-R-E-S-S-T-E-C-H-N-E-T-I-U-M-GOOD BYE the spirits speak That thinking is also showing about as much life as the spirit.
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
5883
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 13:56:00 -
[89] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Frying Doom wrote:But that still leaves the fact that CCPs concept of Null is apparently what CCP is proposing so I must once again ask Has Dr.Eyjog seen CCPs proposal for Null and what does he think? No, they snuck the plans past the man's desk and consulted an economic Ouija board instead T-H-E-R-E-I-S-N-O-N-E-E-D-T-O-A-D-D-R-E-S-S-T-E-C-H-N-E-T-I-U-M-GOOD BYE the spirits speak That thinking is also showing about as much life as the spirit.
Time to cash in some of our forum posting LP for a faction sense of humour booster MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3476
|
Posted - 2012.12.28 14:20:00 -
[90] - Quote
Snow Axe wrote:Spoiler Alert: This will never happen.
You've forgotten about what a hopeless optimist I can be so easily? Nah, I kid, I kid. I really just enjoy the challenge of trying to reason with a brick. Keeps me sharp, like a grindstone.
Frying Doom wrote: Well maybe you can make it nice and clear for me as to what the CSM or more specifically the authors of that document believe should happen in Null.
Honestly its not that hard a question
It's not that hard a question, but you've chosen to be deliberately obtuse and ask everything BUT that question.
Frying Doom wrote:Where do the individual members stand as to what should be done with Null sec?
It's in the minutes, bro.
Frying Doom wrote: Is it what they wrote or not?
Can you identify and cite the portion of the document that says, "This is what each of the individual CSM members believe about 0.0" If not, you've answered your own question. Try it! It'll be a good exercise for you. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |