| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cryten Jones
Advantage Inc
The Matari Consortium
10
   |
Posted - 2011.12.21 22:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
Any ETA ?
-CJ
|
Lord Zim
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
323
|
Posted - 2011.12.21 22:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Every time someone signs a post, CCP delays the minutes. |
Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
638
|
Posted - 2011.12.27 08:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
CSM's fault this time, we're being lazy getting our minutes in (myself included). I finished most of my section up this weekend and should have it in for review by this evening. Sorry guys, they'll be done soon! |
Cryten Jones
Advantage Inc
The Matari Consortium
31
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 14:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Any news guys ?
Thanks |
CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
431
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 14:09:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vile rat wrote:A dog ate my homework
|
The Mittani
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
2681
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 14:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
it's all in ccp's hands now
The Office of the Chairman: A Thread for Constituent Issues |
Cryten Jones
Advantage Inc
The Matari Consortium
31
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 14:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:it's all in ccp's hands now
So just after fanfest then :-)
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
495
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 18:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
It was almost done today, but CCP needs to get dev approval of a couple of the sessions. I would expect them next week.
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
What does CSM 6 do? |
Cryten Jones
Advantage Inc
The Matari Consortium
31
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 00:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Thanks for the updates guys, sad I know but I do enjoy reading them. |
Seleene
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
385
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 16:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Dev Blog is out now.
Enjoy.
Seleene's Sandbox - My Blog, where I say stuff.
Follow Seleene on Twitter |
|
|
Prince Kobol
158
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
Very disappointed with CCP Screegs.
The one thing that a authenticator would do is provide a major obstacle against botters and RMT Sellers.
At the moment you can create a 100% untraceable Account in Eve.
I know of no other game where this is possible.
Before people say how...
1. Create a false email account using many of the free email services available.
2. Sign up with a VM Hosting Company (in order to hide your true IP address)
3. Run a simple script which configures your machine to use a free proxy service
4. Create Eve Account using false email account and run Eve via VM Hosting Company
5. Use PLEX to activate account
6. Untraceable Account.
I can not understand why he is against the use of an authenticator other then he has a vested interested in those who RMT continuing to do so.
That or he is an idiot. |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
324
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 18:54:00 -
[12] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:5. Use PLEX to activate account
Where are you going to get the PLEX from? |
Prince Kobol
159
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 19:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:Prince Kobol wrote:5. Use PLEX to activate account Where are you going to get the PLEX from?
Really...
Main buys PLEX... flies into empty space.. jettisons PLEX - untraceable character picks PLEX up.
Unless of course CCP monitor every single PLEX in the game which if they did every single person who purchases isk on a website would be caught as the RMT sellers don't give isk, they give PLEX now and have done for sometime as its much harder to trace then massive transfers of isk from 1 day old characters to who ever
There are a couple of other ways as well but I will let you try and figure them out  |
Caellach Marellus
Nephtys Ventures inc
387
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 21:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
Quote:One CSM stated a point in favor of removing learning implants, as that would be a nerf to highsec income, and he is always in favor of those where possible.
Other members of the CSM were quick to object to that suggestion.
Because it's going to get misquoted so many times and taken out of context.
Good read, looking forward to the followups from many points. The various UI changes made me drool, and the proposed changes to Incursions are certainly along the right track.
The section about Nullsec Sov wars and Lowsec Fac War seemed a bit confusing to read. I assume they're not going to merge the two as that would be horrific. Was there no questions raised about stopping nullsec empires from dominating F-War as well? |
Red Templar
Raging Ducks
Goonswarm Federation
119
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 08:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
I managed to read all 44 pages. OMG!
Anyway, quite a good read. A lot of things were said that i agree with, a lot of things that made me excited. My faith in CCP is stronger than ever with this.
Looking forward to next CSM elections. CSM6 rocked and hopefully next one will keep up the good work!
For Love. For Peace. For Honor.
For None of the Above.
For Pony! |
Cryten Jones
Advantage Inc
The Matari Consortium
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 12:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
I found it interesting that loosing assets to a station destruction is viewed to be different from loosing assets to gankers.
Seems to be a little double standards to me :-) What this says is that it's fine for 50 stronger players to destroy what could be a smaller groups majority of assets in a mining belt or hi sec gate camp but a well coordinated attack by a large force on a peers assets should be treated differently.
Personally I would imagine that an invading force would rather take the station over than destroy it in the majority of cases given the cost of creating it in the first place however should they choose to blow the thing up the inhabitants should be fighting tooth an nail to save their stuff. If they can't they need to be evacuating.
Think running the Hoth blockade in Empire Strikes Back here.
I would add that station defences need to be created though to make this 'running the blockade' possible.
Anyway, I get that people could loose a lot but the issue here is that any mechanic that 'saves' assets from a station would be contrary to the rest of eve and the hostile nature of the game. A hi-sec ganker or POS bashing gang do not stay their hand if they think that they are going to ruin another players game, actually they probably laugh all the harder.
Just saying that there should be a level playing field when it comes to loss.
-CJ
|
Zyrbalax III
Goldcrest Enterprises
38
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 20:36:00 -
[17] - Quote
Cryten Jones wrote:I found it interesting that loosing assets to a station destruction is viewed to be different from loosing assets to gankers.
Seems to be a little double standards to me :-) What this says is that it's fine for 50 stronger players to destroy what could be a smaller groups majority of assets in a mining belt or hi sec gate camp but a well coordinated attack by a large force on a peers assets should be treated differently.
Personally I would imagine that an invading force would rather take the station over than destroy it in the majority of cases given the cost of creating it in the first place however should they choose to blow the thing up the inhabitants should be fighting tooth an nail to save their stuff. If they can't they need to be evacuating.
Anyway, I get that people could loose a lot but the issue here is that any mechanic that 'saves' assets from a station would be contrary to the rest of eve and the hostile nature of the game. A hi-sec ganker or POS bashing gang do not stay their hand if they think that they are going to ruin another players game, actually they probably laugh all the harder.
Just saying that there should be a level playing field when it comes to loss.
-CJ
Fully agree. Any nullbear that has ***ALL*** his assets in one destructible outpost is a dumb f**k that deserves to lose it all. Eve is supposed to be a harsh mistress; suck it up. Assets destroyed with an outpost would make for more incentive to fight to save the outpost. More conflict = win. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |