EVE Search - CSM - Time to clean out the stink

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CSM - Time to clean out the stink

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:14:00 - [1] Edited by: Le Skunk on 03/08/2008 20:16:32 Edited by: Le Skunk on 03/08/2008 20:15:46 1. The "nano-nerf" implications as per dev blog - Popular Issue CSM voted 4-4 not to escalate or make any kind of collective statement on the current speed patch on SISI. 2. Musical Instruments in Ambulation - Bane CSM voted to escalate this proposal. So we get "musical instruments" put forward, and not the biggest protest the CSM has seen (nano objection) YOU COULDNT MAKE IT UP! Musical instruments? What is this shit! Can you have blue aliens with big noses playing the saxaphone please! Resign all of you! - your stinking up the place SKUNK
Terianna Eri Amarr Scrutari	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:15:00 - [2] Originally by: Le Skunk in before the content? __________________________________ Originally by: Arthur Frayn How much to ruin all your holes, luv?
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:17:00 - [3] It is pretty embarrassing granted. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
The Wounded Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:18:00 - [4] Edited by: The Wounded on 03/08/2008 20:18:26 IBTL Next time just reply in one of the 50 other CSM bashing posts ow and DUH theres goons in it, what ya expect?
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:18:00 - [5] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change....
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:20:00 - [6] A divisive and contentious topic doesn't make it out of committee, while a silly and fluff topic does. This is not news, nor is it even slightly peculiar.
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:21:00 - [7] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:22:00 - [8] Oh hey you'll get no argument from me that the CMS is flawed.
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:22:00 - [9] Originally by: Jimer Lins A divisive and contentious topic doesn't make it out of committee, while a silly and fluff topic does. This is not news, nor is it even slightly peculiar. This. Anybody surprised by that must be living under a rock. Meanwhile, I CBA to plow through the chatlog. Can we get a vote breakdown on that one? ___________________________________________
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:22:00 - [10] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK And Player support for NOT putting forth an expression of "severe malcontent"?

Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:24:00 - [11] Hmm. Maybe it was something about how CSM's are directly involved with every balance issue, but are trying to focus on where to take the game in the future? Sorry, but I don't think the CSM's are going to be the ones who get the balance changes that the EvE dev team put forth, thrown out. I know it's a real nutcracker, but that's not what they are there for, as far as I'm aware. I could be wrong. Or I could be right. But what good do you expect to be had with pushing the nano-nerf argument in front of the devs faces ... as if it already wasnt, that is. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:26:00 - [12] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK It is a bit pathetic. Especially since we specifically agreed in the CSM we'd let the big issues from the assembly hall make the agenda. For the CSM to be relevant to the players it needs to look out for the interests of players and I have to say a big sorry to everyone who expected something better of us on the speed-issue. Its very disappointing to me personally to have us ducking out on a huge issue like the speed changes and sovereignty and generally only being able to escalate little things like instruments and fixes. All I can personally promise is that I'll be on the test server this week and I'd advise as many people who care about the speed issue to do the same and lets look at sending in some detailed feedback documentation to CCP on the issue. Even if the CSM as a body isn't interested in this stuff I'll undertake to send this stuff personally and try my best to get the issue heard somehow. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:26:00 - [13] Originally by: Jimer Lins Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK And Player support for NOT putting forth an expression of "severe malcontent"? 590. So under half and therefore irrelevant. SKUNK
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:27:00 - [14] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:27:41 Originally by: Le Skunk Player supports for in game trombones : 36 True fact: I was a tromboner from fifth through twelfth grade. Other true fact: nano mechanics needed a change Therefore: internet trombones > nanoships
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:27:00 - [15] "We want the devs to know how horribly bad their idea of this game is and that the new nerf is hated by the entire community?" I wonder ... how do the devs say 'they don't care' in a nice way? "The greatest offense is no defense."
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:29:00 - [16] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK It is a bit pathetic. Especially since we specifically agreed in the CSM we'd let the big issues from the assembly hall make the agenda. For the CSM to be relevant to the players it needs to look out for the interests of players and I have to say a big sorry to everyone who expected something better of us on the speed-issue. Its very disappointing to me personally to have us ducking out on a huge issue like the speed changes and sovereignty and generally only being able to escalate little things like instruments and fixes. All I can personally promise is that I'll be on the test server this week and I'd advise as many people who care about the speed issue to do the same and lets look at sending in some detailed feedback documentation to CCP on the issue. Even if the CSM as a body isn't interested in this stuff I'll undertake to send this stuff personally and try my best to get the issue heard somehow. I think the CSM had a damn good opportuinity to prove its worth on this issue. Even if CCP ingnored you (which they no doubt would have done) you had an opportunity to express the obvious disquiet felt by large sections of the eve playing community. By NOT expressing it, CCP will now have carte blacnhe to do what they want, and if criticised, will simply say "Well the CSM didnt mention it. And they are your go between. " SKUNK
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:30:00 - [17] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:27:41 Originally by: Le Skunk Player supports for in game trombones : 36 True fact: I was a tromboner from fifth through twelfth grade. Other true fact: nano mechanics needed a change Therefore: internet trombones > nanoships Sorry you are in the minority with this opinion. And its a democraticaly elected CSM. So im afraid you must pipe down. SKUNK
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:34:00 - [18] Just to pipe in, though many of the apparent forum warriors probably won't agree with me, I am one of the people more interested in seeing the CSM bring up musical instruments to the developers than bring up another nano complaint. My mindset is that A) the change IS coming, B) the speed fix is already being worked on and is in testing, C) players who want to have an effect will do so through testing, D) there are a thousand back-handed plays by players trying to insult, coerce and intimidate (through use of 'vetos' and 'votes' and calling on CSMs) the managers of a company into changing how they produce their (the company, mind you) product. Hey, I'm almost CERTAIN that the developers know the nano-nerf is going to hurt a lifestyle in EvE. But if they don't care, as in it doesn't fit the developers perception of how EvE should play, OR if it harms the code and causes undue stress, what good would it do to cry to your hearts content, only to have the CSM's not be listend to any more than the selfish players? "The greatest offense is no defense."
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:35:00 - [19] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK It is a bit pathetic. Especially since we specifically agreed in the CSM we'd let the big issues from the assembly hall make the agenda. For the CSM to be relevant to the players it needs to look out for the interests of players and I have to say a big sorry to everyone who expected something better of us on the speed-issue. Its very disappointing to me personally to have us ducking out on a huge issue like the speed changes and sovereignty and generally only being able to escalate little things like instruments and fixes. All I can personally promise is that I'll be on the test server this week and I'd advise as many people who care about the speed issue to do the same and lets look at sending in some detailed feedback documentation to CCP on the issue. Even if the CSM as a body isn't interested in this stuff I'll undertake to send this stuff personally and try my best to get the issue heard somehow. I think the CSM had a damn good opportuinity to prove its worth on this issue. Even if CCP ingnored you (which they no doubt would have done) you had an opportunity to express the obvious disquiet felt by large sections of the eve playing community. By NOT expressing it, CCP will now have carte blacnhe to do what they want, and if criticised, will simply say "Well the CSM didnt mention it. And they are your go between. " SKUNK I agree with you. We failed mightily and if anbody wants to call me a useless so and so on this issue go ahead, failing to get a CSM statement on this speed nerf I kinda feel like one Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:35:00 - [20] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Jimer Lins Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK And Player support for NOT putting forth an expression of "severe malcontent"? 590. So under half and therefore irrelevant. SKUNK Irrelevant? No, being in the minority doesn't make one irrelevant. c.f. "tyranny of the majority". Anyway, from my reading in other threads, it seems that there was some contention on whether there was anything to actually escalate, given how little information is available and that the Sisi changes are still in their early stages. Still, a 4/4 split on a contentious issue with lots of implications... not surprsing at all. Welcome to politics; it's the same in EVE as it is anywhere else.

Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:36:00 - [21] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:27:41 Originally by: Le Skunk Player supports for in game trombones : 36 True fact: I was a tromboner from fifth through twelfth grade. Other true fact: nano mechanics needed a change Therefore: internet trombones > nanoships Sorry you are in the minority with this opinion. And its a democraticaly elected CSM. So im afraid you must pipe down. SKUNK By the way, WHERE are these votes happening? I know quite a few people who would be interested in putting their say in, ESPECIALLY considering the voting right now seems to be powerplayed by the l33t forum ****'s. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:37:00 - [22] Originally by: Jade Constantine I agree with you. We failed mightily and if anbody wants to call me a useless so and so on this issue go ahead, failing to get a CSM statement on this speed nerf I kinda feel like one Stop doing that your making me feel guilty! SKUNK
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:39:00 - [23] The fact that CCP didn't want ultra high speed should have been obvious when they nerfed the use of multiple MWD's. I hadn't even heard of this game when they did that, so there's a long-established precedent for speed limits.
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:40:00 - [24] However else would we be able to play the miniature violin? Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As
Tzar'rim Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:41:00 - [25] If you would have read it, the consensus was that since it is still in the testing stages and NOT on TQ it's not something the CSM can comment on. All they can do is bring it to the attention of CCP that people are worried (doh) but without (f)actual changes they can not do anything at this point. Remember, the CSM doesn't change things, all they can do is raise issues. Since it's not on TQ yet it can not be an issue.
Frug Repo Industries R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:41:00 - [26] Originally by: Danton Marcellus However else would we be able to play the miniature violin? I for one would love to have my character play a violin, and would train the skill to lvl V - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Steel Tigeress Gallente Steel-Wolfs	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:43:00 - [27] The thing about those for and against nano-nerf threads: How do you think those two threads would have gone if there was not an announced nerf on the horizon. Just a "Who's for a Nano-nerf" And a "Who's against a Nano-Nerf" threads. I'ld be willing to bet money that the results would be exactly the opposite as they are now. Reason being: People who are happy with the way things are are generally silent, people who arnt are vocal. Thats why prior to the nerf anouncement, Cries for a nerf were 3-4 deep on the front page everyday, while only about 5-6 people showed up to defend nano's in those same threads. Now with the nerf on the horizon, roles have reversed, and those wanting a change to speed are content, while the nano crowd is not and is flooding the forums. TLDR: Those poll's in the assembly hall dont really mean jack. as they will never represeant an accurate cross section of what eve's population really thinks. At least not on big issues. The only way to find out for sure is to have a vote cast when people log into the game.
Kil'Roy Minmatar The Rat Patrol	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:43:00 - [28] I would be dumbfounded if they even considered musical istruments for ambulation in this game. What would you ask for next? A charmer profession? What is this? The twilight zone?
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:44:00 - [29] Originally by: Tzar'rim If you would have read it, the consensus was that since it is still in the testing stages and NOT on TQ it's not something the CSM can comment on. All they can do is bring it to the attention of CCP that people are worried (doh) but without (f)actual changes they can not do anything at this point. Remember, the CSM doesn't change things, all they can do is raise issues. Since it's not on TQ yet it can not be an issue. I really don't buy that. You can test the changes on SISI and see the way the wind is blowing. We need large scale testing of this stuff to ensure it doesn't get rolled out to the live server in a form that right royally screws small unit combat and roving playstyle. Only way to do that is get players energized to test test test and I really don't see any reason why the CSM couldn't advise that. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:46:00 - [30] Originally by: Dirk Magnum The fact that CCP didn't want ultra high speed should have been obvious when they nerfed the use of multiple MWD's. I hadn't even heard of this game when they did that, so there's a long-established precedent for speed limits. I will rephrase then: Arguments for and against the nerf are irrelevant in this thread. What is relevant - and undeniable 1Their is clear support for the "anti nerf" movement in the assembly forums. 2The assembly forum are designed to allow the player base to express concern/support/ideas to the CSM 3The CSM is designed to pass on these concerns/support/ideas to ccp. This has not happened, in the most supported issue in the game. Instead, we have utterly peabrained (and it should be noted majorly self proposed by members of the council) issues put forward. SKUNK

Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:47:00 - [31] Originally by: Danton Marcellus However else would we be able to play the miniature violin? Thats the funniest thing ive read of the forum for weeks :))) SKUNK
Zeba Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:47:00 - [32] Originally by: Tzar'rim If you would have read it, the consensus was that since it is still in the testing stages and NOT on TQ it's not something the CSM can comment on. All they can do is bring it to the attention of CCP that people are worried (doh) but without (f)actual changes they can not do anything at this point. Remember, the CSM doesn't change things, all they can do is raise issues. Since it's not on TQ yet it can not be an issue. lol no? It on sisi right now with the intention of getting extended player feedback so they can tweak it out into something that can be released on TQ. If gathering that playerfeed back and condensing it into something that can be passed on to CCP is not what the CSM is suppost to do then wtf are they supposed to do? inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan
McDonALTs	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:48:00 - [33] Edited by: McDonALTs on 03/08/2008 20:49:12 Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:18:30 Maybe the fact that more people support instruments in ambulation than don't support the nano change is saying something about the nano change.... WRONG Player supports for in game trombones : 36 Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK It is a bit pathetic. Especially since we specifically agreed in the CSM we'd let the big issues from the assembly hall make the agenda. For the CSM to be relevant to the players it needs to look out for the interests of players and I have to say a big sorry to everyone who expected something better of us on the speed-issue. Its very disappointing to me personally to have us ducking out on a huge issue like the speed changes and sovereignty and generally only being able to escalate little things like instruments and fixes. All I can personally promise is that I'll be on the test server this week and I'd advise as many people who care about the speed issue to do the same and lets look at sending in some detailed feedback documentation to CCP on the issue. Even if the CSM as a body isn't interested in this stuff I'll undertake to send this stuff personally and try my best to get the issue heard somehow. Despite being the chairman of the CSM, you still have not got a clue about what it is meant to do. You do not exist to design the game. CCP disign the game and they can see thousands of players leave because pvp went to shit due to nano. The same nano that meant ships could outrun their own missiles that they fired. You do not exist to tell them, The Ceaser that is CCP, how high they should jump. You exist to tell them that aquducts are leaking or that the gardens need improvement, or to advise on things that CCP's bloated structure would not know about (e.g how 0.0 pvp is fought etc). Its CCP's game and CSM has no power other than to sort out the dirt for CCP. Sometimes the dirt has a nugget of gold that CCP can look at. That is the Job of the CSM, since the CMS are not the balance team. The CSM are just the dirt sorters and dealers of petty issues. CSM do not look at hard data. They look at subjective data. That is why the balance team will balance baised upon hard facts insted of whatever flavor of the month that you guys get stuck upon.
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:49:00 - [34] Consider also that the CSM delegates are aware of the fact (or I sure hope they are) that in general people aren't going to spend a Sunday afternoon defending something that's already seen as a fait accompli. When you have participatory systems like this, only those who are worked up enough about an issue are going to participate. That means that most of the people who support speed changes aren't going to show, simply because CCP's already said they're doing it, and it's obviously been in the works for some time, and because they agree with it. The vocal minority shouting down any changes to their favorite game mechanic should be listend to, but not allowed to dominate, the discussion.
Furb Killer Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:50:00 - [35] Nanos killed non nano small gang/solo combat Apparently many CSM members agree in general with the nano nerfs (yes there need to be some boosts to minnie ships to compensate). Just because the assembly hall is filled with alts posting doesnt mean that csm should agree with them. Especially considering all the strange statements that are being made by the nano'ers. (when will they learn that hit and run guerilla tactic is not the same as orbitting your enemy?)
Tzar'rim Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:54:00 - [36] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Tzar'rim If you would have read it, the consensus was that since it is still in the testing stages and NOT on TQ it's not something the CSM can comment on. All they can do is bring it to the attention of CCP that people are worried (doh) but without (f)actual changes they can not do anything at this point. Remember, the CSM doesn't change things, all they can do is raise issues. Since it's not on TQ yet it can not be an issue. I really don't buy that. You can test the changes on SISI and see the way the wind is blowing. We need large scale testing of this stuff to ensure it doesn't get rolled out to the live server in a form that right royally screws small unit combat and roving playstyle. Only way to do that is get players energized to test test test and I really don't see any reason why the CSM couldn't advise that. 2008.08.03 16:20:46 ] Darius JOHNSON > To be frank I have no idea why we're wasting our time discussing htis. There's nothing even on test so I can't have an opinion about what doesn't exist. 2008.08.03 16:21:18 ] Darius JOHNSON > When I know what the changes to be implemented REALLY are I can discuss it as an issue 2008.08.03 16:21:27 ] Darius JOHNSON > Yes but test is subject to change [ 2008.08.03 16:21:42 ] Darius JOHNSON > This is a phenonmenal waste of time. 2008.08.03 16:22:13 ] Omber Zombie > everything being put forward by ccp has already been marked as "subject to player input', so until a final version of teh changes are ready, the topic isn't really something we should be discussing [ 2008.08.03 16:22:27 ] Bane Glorious > i agree with that, for the most part 2008.08.03 16:23:34 ] Inanna Zuni > I tend to agree with Darius; just because some idea is being tested on SiSi doesn't mean it will make the final cut. Whilst some of the devblog ideas will no douibt migrate to TQ I am sure the feedback will result in not all of them doing so, but [ 2008.08.03 16:23:45 ] Inanna Zuni > until we know which ones we can't really speak to the issue. 2008.08.03 16:31:16 ] Jade Constantine > but I do take the points raised by the CSM here [ 2008.08.03 16:31:21 ] Jade Constantine > this is a patch in testing 2008.08.03 16:37:02 ] Tusko Hopkins > I think it is way too early to handle this problem. Everyone who is whining or waving is trying to protect his own playstyle and is not considering the big picture. 2008.08.03 16:37:44 ] Tusko Hopkins > As for me, I would wait and see how it all turns out in the end. And rediscuss it in 3 months time or so when its already rolled out. 2008.08.03 16:40:15 ] Jade Constantine > itÆs the CSMÆs position that the best answer to the anti-speed-nerf ISSUE at this time is that people feeling strongly against this balancing patch should make time to test it on SISI and form realistic combat situations and provided detailed feedback 2008.08.03 16:42:54 ] Inanna Zuni > point of information - the only thing as CSM we can do is write that we widsh to bring something to the Dev's attention. This already has their attention as it is pre-live. As such we can comment but not vote (imho) 2008.08.03 16:45:40 ] Jade Constantine > okay its 4/4 and decision is that CSM will say nothing on the issue I'd say that can be seen as "the CSM feels it's not the time to act since there's nothing official yet" Perhaps I'm blind or something?
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:55:00 - [37] I think some CSM members are walking away from their responsibilities if they refuse to take part in the development process and the critical communication between the players and the developers during this phase, and instead prefer to wait till the changes hit and THEN go cry about it. The CSM was formed to get player input to the developers to help them, well, develop. If these CSMs are deaf to the current TOP ISSUE amongst the players, do not want to hop to sisi to see what the changes are all about, and do not want to relay the concerns to the developers, then I think they are in the wrong place. Simple as that. You can't have all play and no work. Right after the vote I called them slackers, and I'm not going to take back that comment. Oh and here is how the individual votes went: Jade Constantine: For Bane Glorious: Against Omber Zombie: For Darius JOHNSON: Against Ankhesentapemkah: For Tusko Hopkins: Against Inanna Zuni: Against Ben Derindar: For However, do not panic, you will be heard. We might not directly discuss this issue with CCP, but I've just had a word with Jade Constantine, and we're going to WORK on this together and report our findings and concerns to CCP in our own document. Sometimes the CSM might not work, but there's always an individual CSM that's there for you! If you would like to assist with our tests or have constructive comments in general, please, contact us. We will announce the details in the near future and set up a topic in the CSM section of the forum where you can leave feedback, expect that up tomorrow, I'll link to it from this post when we're done. --- Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:56:00 - [38] I'm curious, though. If you could say what you wanted and have the CSM escalate it to CCP with their imprimatur, what would you say? Don't make any changes? Make some changes? Don't make the changes as they exist now? The first is right out, there's no way they're not going to, and nothing the CSM says or does is going to affect that. The CSM doesn't have control over such things and while it might be gratifying for some to carp in a more official capacity than on the forums, it's basically wasting bandwidth to bring it to CCP. The second and third- well, that's what they're doing, you can engage on that by going to sisi and trying them out and providing feedback.
Tzar'rim Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:01:00 - [39] I welcome the changes, for now. Have them come through and see how we all react to it, what new problems/tactics arise, only then can you have an educated opinion wether the changes are good or not. Changes will be happening, no amount of whining can stop that. Lets see what CCP comes up with and how it pans out.
Mr Friendly	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:03:00 - [40] Oh look... Skunk is stinking up the place again with another "I hate everything about Eve, the devs, the forums, the CSM, oxygen, the Sun, the Universe, my own existance, other possible existences, physically impossible realities et al" whine thread. Surprise surprise. I'm left wondering why you pay for a game you so clearly loathe.

Jim Raynor Caldari Shinra	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:04:00 - [41] Originally by: Le Skunk Edited by: Le Skunk on 03/08/2008 20:16:32 Edited by: Le Skunk on 03/08/2008 20:15:46 1. The "nano-nerf" implications as per dev blog - Popular Issue CSM voted 4-4 not to escalate or make any kind of collective statement on the current speed patch on SISI. 2. Musical Instruments in Ambulation - Bane CSM voted to escalate this proposal. So we get "musical instruments" put forward, and not the biggest protest the CSM has seen (nano objection) YOU COULDNT MAKE IT UP! Musical instruments? What is this shit! Can you have blue aliens with big noses playing the saxaphone please! Resign all of you! - your stinking up the place SKUNK hilarious. ------ I'll make a sig later.
McDonALTs	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:04:00 - [42] Edited by: McDonALTs on 03/08/2008 21:05:16 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah If you would like to assist with our tests or have constructive comments in general, please, contact us. We will announce the details in the near future and set up a topic in the CSM section of the forum where you can leave feedback, expect that up tomorrow, I'll link to it from this post when we're done. CCP's idea removed the MWD as 100% needed for pvp, which is good. CCP idea is Rock paper Scissors (MWD > Ab > Scram > MWD). If your idea can give AB's a chance, prevent people from MWDing back to gate by the time you lock them as well as force the attackers to commit to a engagement, then I would love to hear it. because nanos destroyed game balance to such a degree, that you needed a nanoship to counter a nanoship!
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:05:00 - [43] Quote: [ 2008.08.03 16:42:54 ] Inanna Zuni > point of information - the only thing as CSM we can do is write that we wish to bring something to the Dev's attention. This already has their attention as it is pre-live. As such we can comment but not vote (imho) That is some reasonable approach. I mean ... come on guys. Do you really believe that CCP doesn't know that there are players out there who are mighty **** off at the changes? Do you really think they didn't notice the 100+ pages replies of the devblog? The immense posts on the forums everywhere about the changes? What they heck should a simple notification from the CSM help there?! If the CSM can do something, then they can go and gather all the various reports from players on the development forums and condense them into a overview chart. Maybe going through all the ships and just REPORTING what the players are thinking. I think such an approach would help CCP and the playerbase. But just a notification that players are upset about the changes? LOL - CCP knows that already. So what use would it be?
Zeba Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:05:00 - [44] Originally by: Jimer Lins I'm curious, though. If you could say what you wanted and have the CSM escalate it to CCP with their imprimatur, what would you say? I'd have them look at interceptors. If they try to perform thier role with the new speed mechanics they die. Not gradualy take damage so they eventualy have to fly/warp away but get wtfpnd. inappropriate signature. ~WeatherMan
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:06:00 - [45] Originally by: Tzar'rim I welcome the changes, for now. Have them come through and see how we all react to it, what new problems/tactics arise, only then can you have an educated opinion wether the changes are good or not. Changes will be happening, no amount of whining can stop that. Lets see what CCP comes up with and how it pans out. I think the CSM can help distill player feedback on current and upcoming changes, certainly. But that's not the same as boiling things down to an up/down vote on it. CCP is well aware of the fact that some players don't like the impending changes, certainly. ;) But very few reasonable people would assert that the current situation is working as intended.
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:09:00 - [46] Originally by: Jimer Lins I'm curious, though. If you could say what you wanted and have the CSM escalate it to CCP with their imprimatur, what would you say? Don't make any changes? Make some changes? Don't make the changes as they exist now? The first is right out, there's no way they're not going to, and nothing the CSM says or does is going to affect that. The CSM doesn't have control over such things and while it might be gratifying for some to carp in a more official capacity than on the forums, it's basically wasting bandwidth to bring it to CCP. The second and third- well, that's what they're doing, you can engage on that by going to sisi and trying them out and providing feedback. I am neutral on the matter, however, I support a good testrun and discussion on this. There simply are concerns that cannot be ignored, founded or unfounded. What about the impact on 0.0 warfare? What about close range turret ships and the webifier nerf? And the age old turret vs missile damage debate, of course. These are questions that the CSM should be aware of, and that's why I'm going to hop onto sisi and communicate with the players to get some answers. So is Jade. And I believe this is the duty of everyone that signed up to be CSM, they should not run away from a discussion when things get difficult, yet come up with trivial gimmick issues instead! --- Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:09:00 - [47] The CSM fails it's first test of relevance without even firing a shot.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:12:00 - [48] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Jimer Lins I'm curious, though. If you could say what you wanted and have the CSM escalate it to CCP with their imprimatur, what would you say? Don't make any changes? Make some changes? Don't make the changes as they exist now? The first is right out, there's no way they're not going to, and nothing the CSM says or does is going to affect that. The CSM doesn't have control over such things and while it might be gratifying for some to carp in a more official capacity than on the forums, it's basically wasting bandwidth to bring it to CCP. The second and third- well, that's what they're doing, you can engage on that by going to sisi and trying them out and providing feedback. I am neutral on the matter, however, I support a good testrun and discussion on this. There simply are concerns that cannot be ignored, founded or unfounded. What about the impact on 0.0 warfare? What about close range turret ships and the webifier nerf? And the age old turret vs missile damage debate, of course. These are questions that the CSM should be aware of, and that's why I'm going to hop onto sisi and communicate with the players to get some answers. So is Jade. And I believe this is the duty of everyone that signed up to be CSM, they should not run away from a discussion when things get difficult, yet come up with trivial gimmick issues instead! Honestly with your nonexisting experience in 0.0 and pvp i'm not exactly reassured by hearing that you will "investigate". Vote against the nano nerf!
Tzar'rim Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:12:00 - [49] Edited by: Tzar''rim on 03/08/2008 21:13:22 As I see it, there's nothing the CSM can do, add or change in this situation. Not until the actual changes have gone live and we/the CSM have had the opportunity to construct factual reasoning for or against it. As stated; CCP know already a prtion of the playerbase is kinda miffed, they don't need a note from the CSM for that.
Lolarina	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:14:00 - [50] nice troll skunk hi-5

Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:16:00 - [51] Originally by: Esmenet Honestly with your nonexisting experience in 0.0 and pvp i'm not exactly reassured by hearing that you will "investigate". If you think you can do better, you're hereby invited to assist. --- Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
Zephyr Rengate dearg doom	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:16:00 - [52] Originally by: Lolarina nice troll skunk hi-5 Do you really think hes trolling?
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:18:00 - [53] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Originally by: Jimer Lins I'm curious, though. If you could say what you wanted and have the CSM escalate it to CCP with their imprimatur, what would you say? Don't make any changes? Make some changes? Don't make the changes as they exist now? The first is right out, there's no way they're not going to, and nothing the CSM says or does is going to affect that. The CSM doesn't have control over such things and while it might be gratifying for some to carp in a more official capacity than on the forums, it's basically wasting bandwidth to bring it to CCP. The second and third- well, that's what they're doing, you can engage on that by going to sisi and trying them out and providing feedback. I am neutral on the matter, however, I support a good testrun and discussion on this. There simply are concerns that cannot be ignored, founded or unfounded. What about the impact on 0.0 warfare? What about close range turret ships and the webifier nerf? And the age old turret vs missile damage debate, of course. These are questions that the CSM should be aware of, and that's why I'm going to hop onto sisi and communicate with the players to get some answers. So is Jade. And I believe this is the duty of everyone that signed up to be CSM, they should not run away from a discussion when things get difficult, yet come up with trivial gimmick issues instead! I agree with you on the approach of getting on Sisi and gathering information. The thing is that many seem to feel that the CSM should have made a statement of some sort. This is not the sort of thing that you can boil down to a simple sentence that you send to CCP in a report. The problem is complex and should bear some more examination in Sisi and forum discussions. The "trivial gimmick issues" thing is kind of silly. I mean, you've got an agenda, and some items are going to be less important in the overall scheme of things than others, but still. It's fluff, deal with it and move on; you're a politician and you've gotta deal with stupid shit as well as the real meat. The problem is really that people are saying the CSM failed because they didn't send a concise statement of some kind to CCP on the upcoming speed changes when you can't even get any 3 people to agree on a given aspect of those changes? How can the CSM be expected to make a statement on anything when there's no consensus among the players, no confirmation on what the final changes are, and active development being done on it even as we speak?
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:19:00 - [54] Originally by: Tzar'rim Edited by: Tzar''rim on 03/08/2008 21:13:22 As I see it, there's nothing the CSM can do, add or change in this situation. Not until the actual changes have gone live and we/the CSM have had the opportunity to construct factual reasoning for or against it. As stated; CCP know already a prtion of the playerbase is kinda miffed, they don't need a note from the CSM for that. Ignoring your players and getting them riled up and ****ed at you then shoving change they don't want down their throats is not a good thing either. See: Star Wars Galaxies and the Combat Downgrade, and the New Gawdawful Experience for what doing that gets you (90% less subscribers).
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:23:00 - [55] Originally by: Richard Angevian Originally by: Tzar'rim Edited by: Tzar''rim on 03/08/2008 21:13:22 As I see it, there's nothing the CSM can do, add or change in this situation. Not until the actual changes have gone live and we/the CSM have had the opportunity to construct factual reasoning for or against it. As stated; CCP know already a prtion of the playerbase is kinda miffed, they don't need a note from the CSM for that. Ignoring your players and getting them riled up and ****ed at you then shoving change they don't want down their throats is not a good thing either. See: Star Wars Galaxies and the Combat Downgrade, and the New Gawdawful Experience for what doing that gets you (90% less subscribers). NGE? you can't be serious. I played SWG when the CU and NGE were released, and this doesn't even begin to compare. As I've said in the past, most reasonable people would agree there's a problem with speed that needs addressing. How far those changes go is still unknown, but it's a necessary change. If 0.0 were removed and made highsec- that would be comparable to the NGE. This is nothing.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:28:00 - [56] Bleh, it is no fun when Jade admits to the CSM messing up Anyways, the CSM is for bringing up issues that are either very important or smaller issues that annoys players but CCP never hears about. I think CCP would have to be living under a rock to not notice player feedback on the speed issue. In fact, on the first days of testing, the devs read the feedback thread and were on sisi and told people where to give feedback. So the CSM have no job to do, CCP is already working on the speed issue, there is literally nothing for the CSM to do and it is a waste of time. I mean what do you want the CSM to do, tell the devs, "Hey this speed thing is an issue, some people are not happy". Well no SHIT SHERLOCK. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:30:00 - [57] I notice a few VERY loud voices, making endless threads and rants, but otherwise, I've seen a lot of posts saying 'changes need to happen, but not so much or so drastic.' Every change you make will **** off someone. If you aren't willing to make someone upset, you shouldn't even get out of bed in the morning ;?j "The greatest offense is no defense."
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:31:00 - [58] Comparing this 'fix' to the NGE shows how ignorant a person you really are. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Reptzo Channel 4 News Team	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:31:00 - [59] Originally by: Jimer Lins NGE? you can't be serious. I played SWG when the CU and NGE were released, and this doesn't even begin to compare. As I've said in the past, most reasonable people would agree there's a problem with speed that needs addressing. How far those changes go is still unknown, but it's a necessary change. If 0.0 were removed and made highsec- that would be comparable to the NGE. This is nothing. I have to agree with this man. The changes are not really that big. The missile change was bigger than this, that was a total change in gameplay, for every single combat player (PvP and PvE). And low and behold, there are still people playing EVE. Really I don't understand why all the complainers think that CCP will care at all what 1% of their players think about the game. 2500 vocal people think this is a bad idea, you are 1% of the player base. You think a company is going to let they product die (they think it needs changing) because 1% of their income thinks it should stay as-is? I am not saying they won't listen and take your opinions under advisement, but lets think about it. The missiles nerf was HUGE, it was a total change of gameplay. And it happened anyway, despite any complants. (and I am talking about the missile change 3 years ago, where all the extra skills got added, not the torp rng nerf)
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:35:00 - [60] What's the problem with the CSM making a statement along the lines of: 'x% of people are highly upset for these reasons, y% are in favour for these other reasons, and z% don't care?' There's considerable disagreement outside the CSM as to what should happen regarding speed, so it's only natural that we should see disagreement within it as well. Also, as an accomplished amateur trombonist (at least, that's what we call ourselves in England), I approve of the other submission Zzz research towers Direrie NEW: Liekuri 20:1 low-end compression

Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:35:00 - [61] You want to make an impact on CCP. Tell CCP you will resign as CSM unless they take you seriously and tell them you will give interviews that you are not being taken seriously to game magazines etc. Hell maybe even the NYT is interested, I am amazed at how often the bring Eve news.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:40:00 - [62] Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro What's the problem with the CSM making a statement along the lines of: 'x% of people are highly upset for these reasons, y% are in favour for these other reasons, and z% don't care?' There's considerable disagreement outside the CSM as to what should happen regarding speed, so it's only natural that we should see disagreement within it as well. Also, as an accomplished amateur trombonist (at least, that's what we call ourselves in England), I approve of the other submission When they give this percentage, let's make sure they stay honest: Of the 8% of the playerbase who visits the forums, 70% are against the nano nerfs (80% saying they are two extreme and need to be toned down, 18% saying they are completely out of line, and 2% saying nothing), while 15% voted for the nano nerfs (90% saying they are necessary, but need to be toned down, 10% saying nothing), while the remaining 15% voted between both or didn't vote at all. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:45:00 - [63] Originally by: Malachon Draco You want to make an impact on CCP. Tell CCP you will resign as CSM unless they take you seriously and tell them you will give interviews that you are not being taken seriously to game magazines etc. Hell maybe even the NYT is interested, I am amazed at how often the bring Eve news. Let's all continue to threaten and coerce a company, as we try to MAKE the managers of said company do what WE, the customers, want. That way, we can rest assured that no new development goes into the product (your only paying for the current month as-is, your not paying for free expansions), no major changes are ever made, and the game is no longer hosted as soon as the WhiteWolf project comes to fruition. OR, better yet, we really **** off CCP, and they sell EvE to SOE. Hey, the playerbase want's to get all pssy? Give them to the company that is world-renowned for 'handling' it's playerbase. I laugh at all the forum warriors who complain and moan about CCP. If you've lived through SOE, you know dmn sure how good you have it. CCP is an awesome company that has been devoting all of it's attentions to EvE for a long time. So we want to really have an impact, is that it? Only an idiot kicks the horse he's riding. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Doc Fury	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:50:00 - [64] Edited by: Doc Fury on 03/08/2008 21:51:55 Does anyone in the CSM know what the word "ineffectual" means? I'll give you a hint, it is a synonym for "impotent", at least the way I see things... Just sayin'... The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'no.'
Reptzo Channel 4 News Team	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:51:00 - [65] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Malachon Draco You want to make an impact on CCP. Tell CCP you will resign as CSM unless they take you seriously and tell them you will give interviews that you are not being taken seriously to game magazines etc. Hell maybe even the NYT is interested, I am amazed at how often the bring Eve news. Let's all continue to threaten and coerce a company, as we try to MAKE the managers of said company do what WE, the customers, want. That way, we can rest assured that no new development goes into the product (your only paying for the current month as-is, your not paying for free expansions), no major changes are ever made, and the game is no longer hosted as soon as the WhiteWolf project comes to fruition. OR, better yet, we really **** off CCP, and they sell EvE to SOE. Hey, the playerbase want's to get all pssy? Give them to the company that is world-renowned for 'handling' it's playerbase. I laugh at all the forum warriors who complain and moan about CCP. If you've lived through SOE, you know dmn sure how good you have it. CCP is an awesome company that has been devoting all of it's attentions to EvE for a long time. So we want to really have an impact, is that it? Only an idiot kicks the horse he's riding. I wish there was a better and more powerful way to say I agree with you. The simple words don't hold the emotion. You are 100% right. Personally, I would prefer all the whining idiots to just quit now, so the rest of us could enjoy the game. Stop threatening to leave and just do it.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:05:00 - [66] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Malachon Draco You want to make an impact on CCP. Tell CCP you will resign as CSM unless they take you seriously and tell them you will give interviews that you are not being taken seriously to game magazines etc. Hell maybe even the NYT is interested, I am amazed at how often the bring Eve news. Let's all continue to threaten and coerce a company, as we try to MAKE the managers of said company do what WE, the customers, want. That way, we can rest assured that no new development goes into the product (your only paying for the current month as-is, your not paying for free expansions), no major changes are ever made, and the game is no longer hosted as soon as the WhiteWolf project comes to fruition. OR, better yet, we really **** off CCP, and they sell EvE to SOE. Hey, the playerbase want's to get all pssy? Give them to the company that is world-renowned for 'handling' it's playerbase. I laugh at all the forum warriors who complain and moan about CCP. If you've lived through SOE, you know dmn sure how good you have it. CCP is an awesome company that has been devoting all of it's attentions to EvE for a long time. So we want to really have an impact, is that it? Only an idiot kicks the horse he's riding. CCP is starting to make the same mistakes SOE did with the CU and the NGE. If they continue to **** up I don't care if they go under. Its a cruel world, isn't it?
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:05:00 - [67] Originally by: Jade Constantine I really don't buy that. You can test the changes on SISI and see the way the wind is blowing. We need large scale testing of this stuff to ensure it doesn't get rolled out to the live server in a form that right royally screws small unit combat and roving playstyle. Only way to do that is get players energized to test test test and I really don't see any reason why the CSM couldn't advise that. Note: emphasis mine Jade, here is news for you: IT RIGHT ROYALLY SCREWS OVER THE INTERCEPTOR PILOTS!!!, which if I'm not mistaken, falls under "small unit combat". Sadly, it seems that I have been the only one to notice just how badly it DOES effect us inty pilots, while everyone else has been busy whining about how their HAC/Vagabond is getting nerfed. Thread with my testing on both servers: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=837604 There is a serious issue here Jade, and it frankly makes me sick that the CSM voted to not bring this up to CCP. If you're sitting around waiting for it to go to TQ before you raise heckles about it, it will be too late. You guys need a revote or something done, because these changes are unacceptable to those of us that have chased after a viable speed profession/ship for months of training and lots of isk. You MUST bring up to CCP about how the speed changes will KILL interceptors as a viable PvP ship, as my testing has (sadly) confirmed. ----- Originally by: Haakkon I feel a great deal of patriotism at being a part of Goonswarm. We've accomplished great things... we're just mainly jerks about it
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:05:00 - [68] Originally by: Reptzo Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Malachon Draco You want to make an impact on CCP. Tell CCP you will resign as CSM unless they take you seriously and tell them you will give interviews that you are not being taken seriously to game magazines etc. Hell maybe even the NYT is interested, I am amazed at how often the bring Eve news. Let's all continue to threaten and coerce a company, as we try to MAKE the managers of said company do what WE, the customers, want. That way, we can rest assured that no new development goes into the product (your only paying for the current month as-is, your not paying for free expansions), no major changes are ever made, and the game is no longer hosted as soon as the WhiteWolf project comes to fruition. OR, better yet, we really **** off CCP, and they sell EvE to SOE. Hey, the playerbase want's to get all pssy? Give them to the company that is world-renowned for 'handling' it's playerbase. I laugh at all the forum warriors who complain and moan about CCP. If you've lived through SOE, you know dmn sure how good you have it. CCP is an awesome company that has been devoting all of it's attentions to EvE for a long time. So we want to really have an impact, is that it? Only an idiot kicks the horse he's riding. I wish there was a better and more powerful way to say I agree with you. The simple words don't hold the emotion. You are 100% right. Personally, I would prefer all the whining idiots to just quit now, so the rest of us could enjoy the game. Stop threatening to leave and just do it. 100% agreed Whining and b!tching and even threatening CCP about the changes which they think are necessary is funny. If those lamers really want to improve the game they would be on sisi testing and then writing down their results in a good post at the development forum - but I guess that is far to much work for them. Whining is so much easier. Some of the changes are way over the top. But the devs are reading eagerly every results from sisi. So in participating the testing WE can change the development. Tell me other comercial games where YOU can change the development in such a really big way as CCP allows you to do?!! And the CSM? The CSM is there to make CCP aware of problems, ideas or concerns from the playerbase which was previously not aware of. Do you really think that this is necessary with the speed nerf?
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:12:00 - [69] Originally by: Tobin Shalim Originally by: Jade Constantine I really don't buy that. You can test the changes on SISI and see the way the wind is blowing. We need large scale testing of this stuff to ensure it doesn't get rolled out to the live server in a form that right royally screws small unit combat and roving playstyle. Only way to do that is get players energized to test test test and I really don't see any reason why the CSM couldn't advise that. Note: emphasis mine Jade, here is news for you: IT RIGHT ROYALLY SCREWS OVER THE INTERCEPTOR PILOTS!!!, which if I'm not mistaken, falls under "small unit combat". Sadly, it seems that I have been the only one to notice just how badly it DOES effect us inty pilots, while everyone else has been busy whining about how their HAC/Vagabond is getting nerfed. Thread with my testing on both servers: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=837604 There is a serious issue here Jade, and it frankly makes me sick that the CSM voted to not bring this up to CCP. If you're sitting around waiting for it to go to TQ before you raise heckles about it, it will be too late. You guys need a revote or something done, because these changes are unacceptable to those of us that have chased after a viable speed profession/ship for months of training and lots of isk. You MUST bring up to CCP about how the speed changes will KILL interceptors as a viable PvP ship, as my testing has (sadly) confirmed. Its not news to me. Was apparent from the testing on the SISI I did mid week. I know this is a massively important issue and it is a real failure for the CSM to addresss it appropriately. I agree with you in every respect. Its a terrible idea to wait till this gets to TQ before bringing it up and by then it'll be another CSM group anyways. This is really passing the buck as Ank intimated. Best chance now is that we simply collate some test data and feedback and mail it straight to the devs in question and don't count on the CSM to do anything in this respect. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:14:00 - [70] Originally by: Gnulpie 100% agreed Whining and b!tching and even threatening CCP about the changes which they think are necessary is funny. If those lamers really want to improve the game they would be on sisi testing and then writing down their results in a good post at the development forum - but I guess that is far to much work for them. Whining is so much easier. Some of the changes are way over the top. But the devs are reading eagerly every results from sisi. So in participating the testing WE can change the development. Tell me other comercial games where YOU can change the development in such a really big way as CCP allows you to do?!! And the CSM? The CSM is there to make CCP aware of problems, ideas or concerns from the playerbase which was previously not aware of. Do you really think that this is necessary with the speed nerf? Already done that. Several posts, zero response from Devs on what they are thinking. If they cant even communicate properly about this kind of sweeping changes, then screw em. All we got so far from them is: Gee, looks like we might need to change missiles too. If they had an IQ over ****ing roomtemperature they'd realize by now that if they have to change all that to speed, and then immediately change missiles as well because they were breaking something there, that their change maybe needs some more thinking. But so far I failed to see any proof that CCP Nozh is actually an intelligent lifeform.

Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:16:00 - [71] Originally by: Tobin Shalim Jade, here is news for you: IT RIGHT ROYALLY SCREWS OVER THE INTERCEPTOR PILOTS!!!, which if I'm not mistaken, falls under "small unit combat". Sadly, it seems that I have been the only one to notice just how badly it DOES effect us inty pilots, while everyone else has been busy whining about how their HAC/Vagabond is getting nerfed. There is a serious issue here Jade, and it frankly makes me sick that the CSM voted to not bring this up to CCP. If you're sitting around waiting for it to go to TQ before you raise heckles about it, it will be too late. The vote was not about "notify ccp that interceptor pilots are screwed up currently on sisi", was it? There is so much going on sisi at the moment and the patch far from rolling out. Write your concerns in the development section - backed up by solid numbers! Wait the next few patches on sisi and then see if intercepts are still that bad. It makes absolutely no sense to argue with current numbers while the devs over and over stated that the numbers are going to change - eventually quite a lot. Or do you want that the CSM spews countless reports to CCP everytime sisi changes? What would be the difference then to the forums? Be a bit more patient and trust CCP. They certainly do not want to destroy their own dream - or do you think they are all working that hard only because they earn some good money? I believe that they are working so hard because they really want to improve Eve (not that they always succeed ).
KISOGOKU	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:23:00 - [72] Edited by: KISOGOKU on 03/08/2008 22:24:44 Copy/paste from cpt branco and im totally agree with him '' Balancing and testing isn't a game of 'who screams the loudest'. I bloody wish that for one month they'd turn EvE balancing into a voting game. I can guarantee you'd see drakes firing torps over 250km distances with 10km/s speed and 1m explosion radius, because there's just more caldari players who would, given the choice, say 'let me wtf-pwn everything, please'. You'd be begging CCP to stop asking players and actually balance the game themselves. The fact there's a lot of whining shouldn't deter CCP from rebalancing the game, and if a number of players decide they want to just block any changes, well, it's not their game nor their decision.'' Btw what were you thinking for CSM? A parliament over CCP? Made decisions about game? There is no way something like it under the sun .But i can ask same question from another angle to you where were they when speed out of hand ?did they pass on these concerns to CCP? Originally by: Le Skunk 1Their is clear support for the "anti nerf" movement in the assembly forums. 2The assembly forum are designed to allow the player base to express concern/support/ideas to the CSM 3The CSM is designed to pass on these pass on these concerns/support/ideas to ccp. This has not happened, in the most supported issue in the game. Instead, we have utterly peabrained (and it should be noted majorly self proposed by members of the council) issues put forward. SKUNK
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:24:00 - [73] Originally by: Malachon Draco Several posts, zero response from Devs on what they are thinking. If they cant even communicate properly about this kind of sweeping changes, then screw em. Agreed, the lack of response is "a bit" annoying and disappointing. But it was always this way, wasn't it? Originally by: Malachon Draco so far I failed to see any proof that CCP Nozh is actually an intelligent lifeform. And actually with such an attitude it is not really a wonder that they don't respond. It is true that they need to change missiles also with the speed nerf and probably drones as well - and it is good that they acknowledged it. So what? If they can change all these things and make it a working and balanced system? Then I cant see why the changes would be bad. Question only is: can they make it working and balanced? I would say: not without the help of the playerbase. They NEED the players and their input. So I would add: stay polite and get numbers and point out where problems are. And have faith.
Captain Porter	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:25:00 - [74] Originally by: Jimer Lins A divisive and contentious topic doesn't make it out of committee, while a silly and fluff topic does. This is not news, nor is it even slightly peculiar. This sounds like politics to me.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:28:00 - [75] Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Malachon Draco Several posts, zero response from Devs on what they are thinking. If they cant even communicate properly about this kind of sweeping changes, then screw em. Agreed, the lack of response is "a bit" annoying and disappointing. But it was always this way, wasn't it? Originally by: Malachon Draco so far I failed to see any proof that CCP Nozh is actually an intelligent lifeform. And actually with such an attitude it is not really a wonder that they don't respond. It is true that they need to change missiles also with the speed nerf and probably drones as well - and it is good that they acknowledged it. So what? If they can change all these things and make it a working and balanced system? Then I cant see why the changes would be bad. Question only is: can they make it working and balanced? I would say: not without the help of the playerbase. They NEED the players and their input. So I would add: stay polite and get numbers and point out where problems are. And have faith. I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to.
Kerfira	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:32:00 - [76] Originally by: Le Skunk Player supports for an expression of severe malcontent by the CSM to CCP: 1248 SKUNK Putting the inmates in charge of the prison is never going to be a good idea..... All your above 1248 support for nano shows is that there are 1248 players (incl. their alts) that doesn't want their I-Win button taken away.... Players (99% or more of them) are inherently incapable of deciding what is good for the game...... Balancing decisions should NEVER be decided by player arguments, but by developer analysis only. Player posts pointing out holes in implementation or design should be taken into account, but nothing more.... Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
Reptzo Channel 4 News Team	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:32:00 - [77] Originally by: Malachon Draco I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. You realize you pay for the game as-is. Not for how it will be. You say you don't have to be polite, true, you don't. But CCP owes you nothing, they already have your money. You are mad because you paid for something, and the next "model" is going to be different. That is like buying a car, and getting angry at the company for not making the same exact car next year, and the year after.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:35:00 - [78] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Malachon Draco Several posts, zero response from Devs on what they are thinking. If they cant even communicate properly about this kind of sweeping changes, then screw em. Agreed, the lack of response is "a bit" annoying and disappointing. But it was always this way, wasn't it? Originally by: Malachon Draco so far I failed to see any proof that CCP Nozh is actually an intelligent lifeform. And actually with such an attitude it is not really a wonder that they don't respond. It is true that they need to change missiles also with the speed nerf and probably drones as well - and it is good that they acknowledged it. So what? If they can change all these things and make it a working and balanced system? Then I cant see why the changes would be bad. Question only is: can they make it working and balanced? I would say: not without the help of the playerbase. They NEED the players and their input. So I would add: stay polite and get numbers and point out where problems are. And have faith. I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. And all you are 'entitled' to is to play the game that they deliver to you, each month. /whisper And just so you know, if they decide to change it mid-month, or every month ... that's also covered in the EULA. If you don't like the game anymore, don't play. I'm sure you've figured that part into your battle plan of insults and perceived slights. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:36:00 - [79] Originally by: Reptzo Originally by: Malachon Draco I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. You realize you pay for the game as-is. Not for how it will be. You say you don't have to be polite, true, you don't. But CCP owes you nothing, they already have your money. You are mad because you paid for something, and the next "model" is going to be different. That is like buying a car, and getting angry at the company for not making the same exact car next year, and the year after. No its not the same. This is a subscription. Wouldn't you be angry if they changed the source code into the WoW sourcecode and turned us all into level 5 paladins? In your example, its just a 'different model car next year, right?' That is not true for subscription based products and you know it.
Kazuma Saruwatari Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:37:00 - [80] Didnt CCP themselves say that LUDICROUS SPEED was breaking their Destiny physics engine and to fix that, they have to go ahead with the range of speed reductions across the board? -

Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:38:00 - [81] Originally by: Ruze /whisper And just so you know, if they decide to change it mid-month, or every month ... that's also covered in the EULA. If you don't like the game anymore, don't play. I'm sure you've figured that part into your battle plan of insults and perceived slights. There is no battleplan of insults. You need a tinfoil hat I guess. I will simply address them with the same level of courtesy I perceive them as extending to me. Which is to say, none at all. You can disagree with me all you want, I don't care.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:39:00 - [82] Quick lesson on video game consumerism, as it applies to MMO's: You are not hiring a company to produce a product to your specifications. You are purchasing time to USE their product, as they see fit to present it. You, as a player, have no rights or entitlements to any of the creative license of that product. If you disagree with the way the product is or will be presented, your single and only right and ability is to not continue to purchase time. Essentially, every time you renew your subscription, you are approving of their actions. Every month you DON'T renew, your are disagreeing with their actions. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:41:00 - [83] Originally by: Ruze If you disagree with the way the product is or will be presented, your single and only right and ability is to not continue to purchase time. You missed one right. My right as a consumer is also that I complain about said product and let other people know why I am dissatisfied with it. If this causes other people not to become customers of the producer of said product, that is the problem of said producer, and not of me.
Reptzo Channel 4 News Team	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:43:00 - [84] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Reptzo Originally by: Malachon Draco I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. You realize you pay for the game as-is. Not for how it will be. You say you don't have to be polite, true, you don't. But CCP owes you nothing, they already have your money. You are mad because you paid for something, and the next "model" is going to be different. That is like buying a car, and getting angry at the company for not making the same exact car next year, and the year after. No its not the same. This is a subscription. Wouldn't you be angry if they changed the source code into the WoW sourcecode and turned us all into level 5 paladins? In your example, its just a 'different model car next year, right?' That is not true for subscription based products and you know it. Your desire to knit pick the argument shows your lack of understanding. Yes, I would be mad if the turned EVE into WOW. I would quit, I likely wouldn't complain more than simply stating my reasons for canceling my sub, when asked why. To give a better example. TV programming: lets say your cable company decided that your favorite channel was very popular, so, they decided to charge more for that one station. Legalities aside (relating to total power the game devs have), you would now have to pay more for that channel. Your argument is that because you didn't have to pay extra before, you shouldn't now. To translate to EVE, you can go fast now, and you pay now. You want it to stay as it is, but the company doesn't. In the end you lose.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:44:00 - [85] You know, I have a two year old son. If he comes to me and says 'I wan food', and I know he hasn't eaten in awhile and it's about time for a snack or lunch, I will give him food. If he says 'I wanna bannana', I'm happy to give him one. But if he comes to me and asks for food, and I give him something healthy, and he throws a tantrum and screams and says he didn't want that, but wanted a candy bar instead? I let him scream, and scream, and scream. I patently continue to put the banana in front of him, until he eats it or wears himself out. I don't capitulate to 'shut him up.' And though I was raised different, I don't go smacking him either, cause thats a quick way to get your child taken from you. Maybe CCP is having to treat you like a two-year-old, and letting you scream your heart out? "The greatest offense is no defense."
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:44:00 - [86] Originally by: Reptzo To translate to EVE, you can go fast now, and you pay now. You want it to stay as it is, but the company doesn't. In the end you lose. SOE thought the same with their CU and NGE. Guess who lost? Not me.
Jimer Lins Gallente Federation Fleet New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:45:00 - [87] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Reptzo To translate to EVE, you can go fast now, and you pay now. You want it to stay as it is, but the company doesn't. In the end you lose. SOE thought the same with their CU and NGE. Guess who lost? Not me. Please stop comparing these changes to the CU and NGE. They're nowhere near the same in scope or scale. Where's Taraminic with his thread on this subject?
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:46:00 - [88] Originally by: Jade Constantine Its not news to me. Was apparent from the testing on the SISI I did mid week. I know this is a massively important issue and it is a real failure for the CSM to addresss it appropriately. I agree with you in every respect. Its a terrible idea to wait till this gets to TQ before bringing it up and by then it'll be another CSM group anyways. This is really passing the buck as Ank intimated. Best chance now is that we simply collate some test data and feedback and mail it straight to the devs in question and don't count on the CSM to do anything in this respect. Jade, I suggest that you take a look at my thread link I posted if you haven't already. Page 2 gives out some solid Sisi vs. TQ numbers from inty testing that I have done using the exact same setup+skills on both servers. I also have a battle report here (http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=836076&page=2#55) that starts from the guy I was engaging, and my dissection of it right below his. It makes for an interesting and worrying read for us inty pilots. Now, it is not my job to tell the CSM what to do or how to handle their affairs for business, so I do hope you forgive me for saying the following: You can't just collate test data and feedback for mailing straight off to devs in question. That is not going to be sufficient to address the massive issue this nerf raises for interceptors. You guys seriously need to go to CCP and be like, "Look, we think that you need to take a hard, important look at how these changes will effect interceptors and their pilots, because it very much removes them being effective for any kind of tackling role with these changes". Only by bringing this direct to their attention over how much the speed changes effect an entire ship class will it even be addressed. While I doubt that CCP overlooked how it would effect interceptors, it very much appears from the changes they are proposing/in place on Sisi that they haven't seen how this will effect us. You need to inform them direct that what they are doing is going to kill the interceptors as tacklers, which is their main and only role to be used in PvP.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:48:00 - [89] Originally by: Ruze You know, I have a two year old son. If he comes to me and says 'I wan food', and I know he hasn't eaten in awhile and it's about time for a snack or lunch, I will give him food. If he says 'I wanna bannana', I'm happy to give him one. But if he comes to me and asks for food, and I give him something healthy, and he throws a tantrum and screams and says he didn't want that, but wanted a candy bar instead? I let him scream, and scream, and scream. I patently continue to put the banana in front of him, until he eats it or wears himself out. I don't capitulate to 'shut him up.' And though I was raised different, I don't go smacking him either, cause thats a quick way to get your child taken from you. Maybe CCP is having to treat you like a two-year-old, and letting you scream your heart out? Except that CCP Nozh has proven that unlike a daddy and his food, he has no clue at all about how the game works. He presents insane multi billion isk setups (which are nonetheless extremely crappy) as a reason for a massive sweeping nerf and then stops responding completely when called on it. You can compare complaining Eve-players with 2 year olds all you want, that does not make it true. We know a hell of a lot more about this game than CCP Nozh, that much is obvious. If we could have had ANY faith in him actually knowing how this stuff works in practice on Tranquility, then the arguments would be very different. But he is showing absolutely no understanding of basic fundamentals of warfare on TQ. And this is not just because he is disagreeing with me. I have talked to people who are in favour of the nano-nerf, for example TZeer from Burn Eden. We disagree on it. But it is very obvious that TZeer actually knows wtf he is talking about. Then you can have a discussion. But how do you talk to someone who doesn't have a clue about how it actually works?
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:49:00 - [90] Originally by: Malachon Draco I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. So you pay $15 for a game. CCP delivers you that service. If yo don't like this service any more, stop paying... But obviously it is not that easy. Because it is clear that you like Eve and wouldn't want it to degenerate into something crappy. But don't you think the devs would like to impove Eve even more? Yes, every major change (and the speed nerf as proposed will be a major change) will induce big emotions. So far CCP always managed to not break their game with the changes they made. Sure, there are many things which could be better gameplaywise. But to think that Eve would die because of the changes? I don't think so. Sure, if one invested billions in good implants and modules such a change is very bad. But that is the personal view. And CCP has a global view. If 500 people would suffer (because eg. high grade snakes) but the other 199500 subscribers will gain ... wouldn't you think it would make Eve better? Sadly someone is always messed up with every patch. So to make the best of it the only solution can be to provide CCP with hard facts based on numbers from sisi and present them in a reasonable form. I am sure they will consider these numbers then.

Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 22:54:00 - [91] Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Malachon Draco I am not a very 'believing' person. I don't do 'faith' until they show me some reason to trust them. Which they haven't. Simple as that. Their ignoring of a significant number of players (this time its me, other times it has been others) in my opinion shows their contempt for us. Well, if they don't respect us enough to keep us informed, then I don't feel obliged to respect them enough to stay polite. I don't owe them any favours, I pay them 15 bucks a month per account and that is all the 'favour' they are entitled to. So you pay $15 for a game. CCP delivers you that service. If yo don't like this service any more, stop paying... But obviously it is not that easy. Because it is clear that you like Eve and wouldn't want it to degenerate into something crappy. But don't you think the devs would like to impove Eve even more? Yes, every major change (and the speed nerf as proposed will be a major change) will induce big emotions. So far CCP always managed to not break their game with the changes they made. Sure, there are many things which could be better gameplaywise. But to think that Eve would die because of the changes? I don't think so. Sure, if one invested billions in good implants and modules such a change is very bad. But that is the personal view. And CCP has a global view. If 500 people would suffer (because eg. high grade snakes) but the other 199500 subscribers will gain ... wouldn't you think it would make Eve better? Sadly someone is always messed up with every patch. So to make the best of it the only solution can be to provide CCP with hard facts based on numbers from sisi and present them in a reasonable form. I am sure they will consider these numbers then. CCP is pushing more people into blobs. That is the effect of these changes. And people who actually live and fight in 0.0 instead of being backseat drivers from Empire know what that means. This is not about highgrade snakes. I dont care if they are nerfed. What CCP is doing is making a gamestyle obsolete. And when that gamestyle is obsolete, there will be just 1 gamestyle left in 0.0 warfare. Blobbing. That is not a problem for me. I can do blobs. We just fought a 230 man Hydra gang with 140ish in our fleet. I think the K/D ratie is close to 100 to 1 in our favour. GG Hydra. But this is not good for the game. Simple as that. And the only frustrating thing is that CCP Nozh has shown himself to be ignorant of a great number of things involving the mechanics he is messing with. I don't mind trusting or at least argueing civilly with someone wwho knows what he is talking about, even if he disagrees with me. But I don't trust people I consider to be idiots.
Treelox Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:07:00 - [92] While this discussion is all very nice, what I really want to know is how come there were only 8 members of the CSM voting? Is it not supposed to be an odd numbered board just so we dont end up with silly ties? I noticed that some attending were designated alternates. Have some of those elected, now that they got their free trip to Iceland, stopped attending regular meetings? Or is something else going on? --
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:09:00 - [93] Originally by: Treelox While this discussion is all very nice, what I really want to know is how come there were only 8 members of the CSM voting? Is it not supposed to be an odd numbered board just so we dont end up with silly ties? I noticed that some attending were designated alternates. Have some of those elected, now that they got their free trip to Iceland, stopped attending regular meetings? Or is something else going on? Damn good questions. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:10:00 - [94] Originally by: Malachon Draco CCP is pushing more people into blobs. That is the effect of these changes. There is indeed reason that the changes will increase blobbing. But what do you suggest then? CCP is going to change the speed things for the better or worse. I think the only reasonable thing to do is to make well thought suggestions and propose them firmly and with good reason. And you should be happy about this chance! Where else do you have such a change? YOU can change Eve and influence it in a positive way. It might not be much and it might take a while and is work, but yes, it is possible. I don't know any other game where this is possible. Originally by: Malachon Draco What CCP is doing is making a gamestyle obsolete. And when that gamestyle is obsolete, there will be just 1 gamestyle left in 0.0 warfare. Blobbing. That is anyway already the case. And CCP is aware of this, believe it or not. The problem is that there is no benefit from NOT blobbing. As soon as they introduce benefits from not blobbing then the blobs will become much less. And no, certainly not it is only in 0.0 In 0.0 only the blobs are that large that the nodes cannot handle them which adds another problem there. Originally by: Malachon Draco The only frustrating thing is that CCP Nozh has shown himself to be ignorant of a great number of things involving the mechanics he is messing with. I don't mind trusting or at least argueing civilly with someone wwho knows what he is talking about, even if he disagrees with me. But I don't trust people I consider to be idiots. Then either you shouldn't discuss with them or explain them with simple words and examples what exactly is wrong. Not discussing would lead to a development you wouldn't really like so that is not a good option then? That leaves only discussions left as good option. If you think he has no clue about what he is doing then explain it slowly and step by step what exactly is wrong. I usually found people quite reasonable after you break down a complex matter into many small simple matters and then explaining those simple matters each at a step unless the other is a complete dumbhead (and I don't think nozh is such an moron that he wouldn't understand the simple matters). If people don't understand the problem, the problem might be too complex. Break it down into easier parts until they understand it.
Gone'Postal Minmatar Vengeance 8 Interceptors	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:11:00 - [95] Give it up Le Skunk, CCP fail to care and the CSM are there puppets. I feel sorry for some of the CSM tbh, they jumped on teh back of CCP wording "We nolonger care about the forums, lets get the players to just bring us the good ideas from it" just in a larger document. Give a man a hint of power (and a free drinking holiday) and he will kill other men to get it. -V8I-
Treelox Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:14:00 - [96] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Treelox While this discussion is all very nice, what I really want to know is how come there were only 8 members of the CSM voting? Is it not supposed to be an odd numbered board just so we dont end up with silly ties? I noticed that some attending were designated alternates. Have some of those elected, now that they got their free trip to Iceland, stopped attending regular meetings? Or is something else going on? Damn good questions. Sadly these questions will get ignored in the generall rabble rabble over the other topics in this thread. --
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:16:00 - [97] Originally by: Gnulpie That leaves only discussions left as good option. That would be all good and nice, if it were actually possible to communicate with him. But he has been a big no show. How do you explain something to an idiot who refuses to even show up for a dialogue?
White Ronin Gallente Screenout	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:21:00 - [98] Originally by: Jimer Lins Irrelevant? No, being in the minority doesn't make one irrelevant. c.f. "tyranny of the majority". Actually I believe the quote is more along the lines of "beware the tyranny of the masses" and was in reference to democracy and the ignorance of mob mentality. As to the rest of this thread that I wont read all the way through as it is more of the same crying by those who can only fly ships that they can do so by "buying" it. While I understand so many people are crying over this issue, I think the CSM are actually doin the right thing though maybe not intentionally. Wait and see how it works out cause right now nano is screwing everyone but those rich enough to use it. But the new changes are adding depth and tactics to a game that was beginning to become stale in its pvp approach. So far, only good things have been written about the changes they are testing on SiSi. The game looks like it is expanding, ships are getting fixed and one more "win" button is being removed from the game. AB's now have a purpose while still allowing MWD's to have one as well. AF's look like they finally might have a role instead of just a wasted time sink to get to Hvy Assault ships. Recons are getting a slight edge that will make them effective for experienced players. And you can stand a chance-in-hell without spending 3 billion on implants and rigs and ships. Priceless. Now, if your only argument against these changes is the money you spent on ships and rigs and implants or the fact that now you cant be great cause all you can fly is nano and will cancel your account if these changes happen then by all mean pls leave. CCP wont tell you that but let me spell it out for ya real sweet. Nano is driving people from the game. By removing its abuse you help game population. If you quit then that is more room for someone else who WILL come play this game since it is more then a "win" template game and is more skill and strategy. Adapt or die. But if you are gunna leave, please do it soon and take all your "I spent billions of farmed isk for those implants" and the "I cant pvp otherwise" and those "but I suck at pvp otherwise" people with you so we can move on with making the game better. Jade- Please stop sucking up to the vocal isk ***s. IF anything you should have came here and said it was the smart thing to do by waiting to see how it turned out before saying anything. But you came here claiming disgrace without a shred of reason why the proposed "nerf" was more harmful then good. That is disgraceful. The devs are doing their job. Do yours please. They outlined it for you if you would reread the minutes from Iceland. Get off your knees and do it or quite. But for gods sake stop playing forum *** for political leverage. --------------------------------------------- "There have always been ghosts in the machine . . . random segments of code that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols. "
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:22:00 - [99] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Gnulpie That leaves only discussions left as good option. That would be all good and nice, if it were actually possible to communicate with him. But he has been a big no show. How do you explain something to an idiot who refuses to even show up for a dialogue? With people calling me an idiot all the time, I would find any number of things that I could better spend my time on. Like, cleaning underneath my fingernails. Pealing paint off a wall. Designing text images. Playing EvE. Building stick-figures with paper clips. Reading WoW forums, which are quickly being surpassed in 'lowest average intelligence of posters' by these forums here. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:26:00 - [100] Originally by: Ruze With people calling me an idiot all the time, I would find any number of things that I could better spend my time on. .... Playing EvE. God, if only this were true. Then I'd call him an idiot a lot more often.

Shar'Tuk TheHated	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:27:00 - [101] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 03/08/2008 20:27:41 Originally by: Le Skunk Player supports for in game trombones : 36 True fact: I was a tromboner from fifth through twelfth grade. Other true fact: nano mechanics needed a change Therefore: internet trombones > nanoships Sorry you are in the minority with this opinion. And its a democraticaly elected CSM. So im afraid you must pipe down. SKUNK Yeah because everyone that plays EVE posts on the forums. Maybe the minority of the forum ***s but as a whole of EVE we will never truly know. CSM was a horrible idea, but the nano changes were needed. There is/was a reason nano's were being overused and turning into a must. Best counter to nano was to nano, that was unhealthy for EVE. DRINK RUM It fights scurvy & boosts morale! THE BEATINGS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES!**
Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:38:00 - [102] Originally by: Zephyr Rengate Originally by: Lolarina nice troll skunk hi-5 Do you really think hes trolling? Yes
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:01:00 - [103] Ambulate to the Music! Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Gone'Postal Minmatar Vengeance 8 Interceptors	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:03:00 - [104] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Ambulate to the Music! Just what eve needs tbh, what a load of ****ing shit. -V8I-
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:06:00 - [105] Originally by: Gone'Postal Originally by: Roy Batty68 Ambulate to the Music! Just what eve needs tbh, what a load of ****ing shit. In the one had, it's a shame you won't enjoy it. In the other, I'm glad I don't have to listen to you while I DO enjoy it. (I'm just saying that, since we're getting this development free, we might as well use it.) "The greatest offense is no defense."
Gone'Postal Minmatar Vengeance 8 Interceptors	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:10:00 - [106] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Gone'Postal Originally by: Roy Batty68 Ambulate to the Music! Just what eve needs tbh, what a load of ****ing shit. In the one had, it's a shame you won't enjoy it. In the other, I'm glad I don't have to listen to you while I DO enjoy it. (I'm just saying that, since we're getting this development free, we might as well use it.) Walking around in stations I might enjoy, but hanging around in stations playing music on trumpets and other instruments? that fits the discription of eve down to a T. but i'm glad you will enjoy it, I hope I won't have to listen to you while you do. -V8I-
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:19:00 - [107] Nah. While I am hyped about the social climate that Ambulation might bring, being as much a roleplayer as anything else, I'm more looking forward to ambulation because of the later possibilities it could bring. Right now, they don't have any plans of adding combat. But I imagine, as their other game grows and develop, we might at least gets some hand-to-hand fighting in a ring or two. By that point, there will be some CEO's and corporate officers I'll challenge to a fist fight, just because honor demands it ;?j I look forward to Ambulation because of the possibilities. Most likely, it'll fall WAY short of all my hopes and dreams. But I'm a realist, so I expect the worst anyhow. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:19:00 - [108] Originally by: Jimer Lins The "trivial gimmick issues" thing is kind of silly. I mean, you've got an agenda, and some items are going to be less important in the overall scheme of things than others, but still. It's fluff, deal with it and move on; you're a politician and you've gotta deal with stupid shit as well as the real meat. The problem is really that people are saying the CSM failed because they didn't send a concise statement of some kind to CCP on the upcoming speed changes when you can't even get any 3 people to agree on a given aspect of those changes? How can the CSM be expected to make a statement on anything when there's no consensus among the players, no confirmation on what the final changes are, and active development being done on it even as we speak? This. I mean, what can the CSM say? "There is a lot of player concerns about the changes?" - I think they aren't blind. "We think X or Y (if they can't agree on the issue!) should be nerfed/un-nerfed?" - That's infringing on the roles of the balance team for one, and if the CSM cannot agree what should be done precisely (which it most likely can't!), then it cannot make suggestions either. Jade going on to send his own papers is just pushing your own agenda and bypassing the CSM, which IS bad. "We don't think there should be any changes." - Well, CCP does. "Take care that some ships/playstyles don't get nerfed to oblivion." - Well, that's why its on SISI and going to be on SISI for at least a month. I mean, realistically, what can the CSM say? Particularly if not all members agree on it. And, anyway, you've always got to deal with fluff, and fluff is easier to deal with then the preety contested hard stuff - the CSM is a democratic committee. If something is very contested, it will not pass, simple as that, regardless of the good will of some CSM members (and them acting on their own hand is a bad thing; pushing your own agenda instead of being a proper representative of the players who voted you in sucks tbh). Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:22:00 - [109] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/08/2008 00:22:30 At any rate, with SISI testing in such early stages, wait and see is the best approach for the CSM anyway. Formal documents/complaints at this stage are silly; they're testing and changing things. By the time your formal complaint gets done, there might be a different situation on SISI. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Sicex Blake Industries Collective Asylum	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:26:00 - [110] I do agree that the CSM is damn-near useless, but that may be a fault of the players just as much as the devs who acted like it would call CCP's shots. If people want more out of their CSM, maybe the players need to first put some amount of trust in them - or simply don't expect them to read your minds and have the time to come up with logical problems to overcome. If you are a player that sees an area of EVE that needs major improvement, take it upon yourself to investigate the matter as much as you can. Run the numbers, reproduce the problem, get hard evidence if you can of a problem. Then take all that info - write it down in a post and you can then submit it to the CSM directly. You cannot expect CSM members to be delving deep into all the areas of EVE that all the players think need improvement. That would be a monstrous task - instead bring the issue to their attention with actual numbers and a problem presented in a coherent way. We simply cannot sit back and expect the CSM to be these super-players that suddenly have 36 hour days... Help them, help you. And for the Love of Jebus, why does everyone expect HEAVY Assault Cruisers to be the fastest thing on the block??

Gone'Postal Minmatar Vengeance 8 Interceptors	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:29:00 - [111] Originally by: Ruze Text I'm all for fistfighting, contract killing and other "dark" things, as it fits into the discription of eve, a cold dark harsh world. Somehow a "enter style of music" band standing around playing songs really isn't Eve imo. But i'll agree, I expect the worst as well it's just a shame that carebears will get there happy happy joy joy rock band wannabe WoW loving dancing crap before we get the bash you over the head with my metal pipe -V8I-
EnslaverOfMinmatar Yarsk Hunters DeaDSpace Coalition	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:39:00 - [112] CSM sucks.
Druadan Aristotle Enterprises	Posted - 2008.08.04 00:44:00 - [113] I can't really fault the CSM's decision to wait until there's something to discuss before attempting to push the nano nerf discussion to the table, but musical instruments in ambulation is an issue that I don't think the CSM should be concerning itself with. Does this mean that the Features and Suggestions area is defunct now? Should we just fill the CSM voting area with everything we want to say, on the off-chance that it's a slow month and it gets in the top number of voted threads? Pretty ridiculous state of affairs. Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Richard Angevian The Crusaders.	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:20:00 - [114] Grade the CSM: F-
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:18:00 - [115] So, one issue goes somewhere, another, unrelated issue (to the previous), does not. Now, how are these two related? I also find it amazing that these threads are pretty much always made by the forums most well-known whiners. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Redhouse	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:45:00 - [116] I for one welcome our trombone playing overlords
dassit Finis Lumen	Posted - 2008.08.04 02:57:00 - [117] Originally by: Malachon Draco CCP is starting to make the same mistakes SOE did with the CU and the NGE. If they continue to **** up I don't care if they go under. Its a cruel world, isn't it? C'mon man. Please dont be dramatic. The first HUGE difference is that CCP doesnt charge for their expansion. The 30 dollars 2 weeks before changing the game was the biggest effect. Secondly, to do what SOE did CCP would literaly have to take 60%+ of the ships, and races out of the game permanently. I dont see that. I see balancing. Maybe a little heavy handed, but balancing that in the end needs to be done.
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.04 03:20:00 - [118] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/08/2008 03:19:54 Originally by: Malachon Draco CCP is starting to make the same mistakes SOE did with the CU and the NGE. If they continue to **** up I don't care if they go under. Its a cruel world, isn't it? Tarminic's law. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.04 05:54:00 - [119] Originally by: dassit Originally by: Malachon Draco CCP is starting to make the same mistakes SOE did with the CU and the NGE. If they continue to **** up I don't care if they go under. Its a cruel world, isn't it? C'mon man. Please dont be dramatic. The first HUGE difference is that CCP doesnt charge for their expansion. The 30 dollars 2 weeks before changing the game was the biggest effect. Secondly, to do what SOE did CCP would literaly have to take 60%+ of the ships, and races out of the game permanently. I dont see that. I see balancing. Maybe a little heavy handed, but balancing that in the end needs to be done. This is not as big as the NGE, granted. But is it that dissimilar in size to the CU (Combat Upgrade) that happened in april 2005? This is a chart of MMO subscriptions, including SWG: http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html The first big drop for SWG was the CU. Also there are similarities. The whole CU thing was caused by the fact SOE didn't understand their game. From the stacking of templates (fencer/pistoleer) to the effect of maximizing crafting (2k-3k doctor buffs leading to 85% armor becoming wearable)? How is that noticeably different from CCP getting blindsided apparently by the stacking of speedmodules they themselves introduced? If you look at what CCP Nozh has brought up as practical examples of the problem, and you had to guess whether or not he actually played Eve, what would your guess be? Bottomline, CCP is not inspiring any confidence with the way they are handling this. The devs seem uninformed and are not communicating properly about such a big change.
dassit Finis Lumen	Posted - 2008.08.04 06:40:00 - [120] Originally by: Malachon Draco This is not as big as the NGE, granted. But is it that dissimilar in size to the CU (Combat Upgrade) that happened in april 2005? This is a chart of MMO subscriptions, including SWG: http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html The first big drop for SWG was the CU. Also there are similarities. The whole CU thing was caused by the fact SOE didn't understand their game. From the stacking of templates (fencer/pistoleer) to the effect of maximizing crafting (2k-3k doctor buffs leading to 85% armor becoming wearable)? How is that noticeably different from CCP getting blindsided apparently by the stacking of speedmodules they themselves introduced? If you look at what CCP Nozh has brought up as practical examples of the problem, and you had to guess whether or not he actually played Eve, what would your guess be? Bottomline, CCP is not inspiring any confidence with the way they are handling this. The devs seem uninformed and are not communicating properly about such a big change. I view it as CCP unscrewing what they screwed up with the introduction of rigs. Speed is imbalanced in this game IMO. The mechanics affected stop at nano ships...I.E HACs, Recons, and inties. The basics of industry POS, and fleet warfare will remain the same. There is no dumbing down of the PVP mechanics IMO, in fact I think they are injecting back a lot of the tactical decisions you needed to make before you could just outrun everything with nanos. I will agree that they are pretty deep changes in one specific skill set, however Nothing like the core mechanic changes of the CU and the NGE specificaly, and it only really affects one FOTM playstyle. It isnt like they are completely taking drones, or any attributes of any of the weapon systems away. If everyone who only used a unbalanced mechanic exclusively, "speed" quit well then there is less lag for me in all honesty. You all have the right to vote with your pocket book...lord knows that I did with SWG.

Charney deGeoff Caldari Green Men Incorporated	Posted - 2008.08.04 07:31:00 - [121] Originally by: Malachon Draco If you look at what CCP Nozh has brought up as practical examples of the problem, and you had to guess whether or not he actually played Eve, what would your guess be? Bottomline, CCP is not inspiring any confidence with the way they are handling this. The devs seem uninformed and are not communicating properly about such a big change. Oh, for crying out loud. You've got lots of nerdrage bottled up inside don't you? Balancing and tuning complex beasts like MMOs is not a black and white process - and being such a super-armchair-dev, you should know this. Compared to many other MMO's the devblog was actually good and informative - with numbers and everything. And I'm fairly sure Nozh has played the game and looked at the source before writing it. Cut the drama already man.
Po3tank Amarr Basgerin Pirate	Posted - 2008.08.04 07:42:00 - [122] the fourm is not the majoratey of the eve community hell it is not even a large part of it at all now if only we could get ingame voting towards a issue so we can get a accurate count of how many people want a certian chang,instead of lissing to the people that come to the fourms to whine Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:00:00 - [123] Originally by: Po3tank the fourm is not the majoratey of the eve community hell it is not even a large part of it at all now if only we could get ingame voting towards a issue so we can get a accurate count of how many people want a certian chang,instead of lissing to the people that come to the fourms to whine But isn't that just it? I mean, what if ... and I mean, IF ... the devs aren't doing this because someone complained. What if they were looking at a serious problem in their coding, a serious malfunction caused by ships breaking the speed that the physics engine can handle? Then, when you step back and look at it from a player perspective, you see one fitting style lets you do what can't be done in any other, avoid damage. You can't avoid damage in an armor tank. You can't avoid damage in a shield tank. But you CAN avoid damage (and what you can't outright outrun, you can mitigate) with a speed tank. So maybe, just fricking maybe, popular opinion doesn't have a damn thing to do about it. Maybe it needed to be changed because it NEEDED to be changed? I don't know. What I do know is that this doesn't effect anybody near as bad as they say it is. You ever hear a preacher talk about how 'the reason gas prices are so high is because Jesus is coming'? Or 'New Orleans was flooded because God was whiping out the filth?' Does the thought 'complete and utter bullsht not pop into your mind? That's the same way every one of these NGE threads sounds. People who probably never played SWG for more than a month or two, don't know a damn thing about how the CU and NGE effected it's audience, and every time a fix comes down, LITERALLY IN EVERY FCKING MMO IMAGINABLE, the company in question is doing what SOE did. Bunch of bullsh*t, to be honest. This will be felt, but it won't be that massive, cause even those who were willing to come on the forums and 'vote', were littered with a whole lot of middle-of-the-road types. Personally, CCP doesn't need a lot of our opinions to run THEIR game. If they want hard data, all they have to look at is number of logins and number of renewed subscriptions. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Durzel Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:09:00 - [124] Originally by: Jade Constantine I agree with you. We failed mightily and if anbody wants to call me a useless so and so on this issue go ahead, failing to get a CSM statement on this speed nerf I kinda feel like one As an aside I think this is a terribly unprofessional stance to take. Whether or not the CSM collective made a bad decision or not you should show some respect to your colleagues by not selling them out just to garner favour with a faction (whether it be pro/anti-nano or whatever). Imagine what a shambles the political system would be if every politician who didn't get their own way spoke out and undermined their party? The CSM made a decision on this one way or the other, you may not like it but you should tow the line - or get out of politics completely, anything else shows a marked lack of respect for your CSM peers.
Quelque Chose New Eden Roller Disco Supply	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:30:00 - [125] Originally by: Durzel As an aside I think this is a terribly unprofessional stance to take. Whether or not the CSM collective made a bad decision or not you should show some respect to your colleagues by not selling them out just to garner favour with a faction (whether it be pro/anti-nano or whatever). Imagine what a shambles the political system would be if every politician who didn't get their own way spoke out and undermined their party? The CSM made a decision on this one way or the other, you may not like it but you should tow the line - or get out of politics completely, anything else shows a marked lack of respect for your CSM peers. Dude congressmen say "congress failed" all the time, usually when it didn't vote the way they wanted it to. But yes, otherwise if you feel an organization has been derelict in its duty you should just keep your mouth shut about it. Criticism = subversion. ___________________________________________
Franga NQX Innovations	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:33:00 - [126] This is an excellent thread. Originally by: Rachel Vend ... with 100% reliability in most cases ...
heheheh The Scope	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:41:00 - [127] Originally by: Po3tank the fourm is not the majoratey of the eve community hell it is not even a large part of it at all now if only we could get ingame voting towards a issue so we can get a accurate count of how many people want a certian chang,instead of lissing to the people that come to the fourms to whine Thats not the point, the point is they prefered to escalate a ridiculous Idea and to not escalte the one people actually care about.
Wen Jaibao Soul Ripper Consortium	Posted - 2008.08.04 12:53:00 - [128] Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/08/2008 03:19:54 Originally by: Malachon Draco CCP is starting to make the same mistakes SOE did with the CU and the NGE. If they continue to **** up I don't care if they go under. Its a cruel world, isn't it? Tarminic's law. This. Oh god, this.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.04 14:04:00 - [129] Forgive the derail, but I did have to laugh at the allegation of the CSM stinking the place up by a person called Skunk... ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Tal Nok Amarr Digital assassins	Posted - 2008.08.04 14:54:00 - [130] Originally by: Tal Nok Originally by: Bane Glorious This idea passed with a unanimous grand slam, 8-0. I'm sorry, you rather play the Rusty Trombone than look into issues which should have higher priority? Vote of no confidence, impeachment, wtf, GTFO, all of you. tbfh Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY. Need sacrifice.

Joey Meow	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:10:00 - [131] I do find it weird that "Musical Instruments" was at all considered, I mean this had to be a joke by Goonswarm to make fun of EVE and the developers. Whatever we think about the speed nerf, and I for one am undecided as of yet, it is still rather bizarre that CSM voted on musical instruments ahead of Minmatar Capitals? WTF were you people thinking?
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:14:00 - [132] Originally by: Durzel As an aside I think this is a terribly unprofessional stance to take. Whether or not the CSM collective made a bad decision or not you should show some respect to your colleagues by not selling them out just to garner favour with a faction (whether it be pro/anti-nano or whatever). You don't imagine that as an eve player I might have a personal view on the speed changes then? You haven't considered for a moment that I might be pro small unit combat, pro raiding/guerrilla warfare? That I might have tested these changes on SISI and helped the bughunters set up simulations of 0.0 bubble camps and watched nano ships fail to pass camps and get utterly bbq'ed by pulse apocs and ravens and pretty much any larger ship that fires at them? You can't believe that I might actually worry about the state of balance in eve where we're going back to Battleships online from 2004 era and it becomes pointless to fly smaller ships since speed is no longer part of the combat balance equation? Of course its easy to attack the chair of the CSM for being "unprofessional" "breaking ranks" "not supporting the decisions of the rest" etc etc. I had no illusions that I wasn't going to critized by every bitter rival/enemy/stalker I've ever had in the game by taking this office but frankly - attacking a fellow Eve player for having a personal opinion about the CSM reaction to the most significant combat balance change in the last few years is stretching credulity to breaking point. And ask yourself why exactly I might "need favour" for a "faction" at this point? I've already been elected, I've been doing the job the best I can for three months at this point, chaired 8 full meetings and 24 hours of online chat and attended 20 hours of face to face moderated meetings of face time with the eve developers. I've presented 8 sets of chat logs, arranged 8 agendas, prioritized 60 odd issues and spent endless hours debating these things with my fellow reps. Those people attacking the work record at this point simply don't have a clue. What exactly do I need "favour" of factions for? At this point if other people want the job at the next elections they are welcome to give it a go Quote: Imagine what a shambles the political system would be if every politician who didn't get their own way spoke out and undermined their party? The CSM doesn't have parties. We are each representing different aspects of the community and to be honest my support group - small unit pvp and roving warfare/combat dynamism fans are getting right royally screwed by the speed changes / inability to get any progressive 0.0 change through the CSM. If you expect me to stay silent on that from some kind of "organizational loyalty" to the representatives of other eve interests then you are kidding yourself. I wasn't elected by people that wanted to see me simply tow the "party line" on the csm and keep quiet about bad ideas. Quote: The CSM made a decision on this one way or the other, you may not like it but you should tow the line - or get out of politics completely, anything else shows a marked lack of respect for your CSM peers. Politics isn't about towing the line. Sometimes its about commitment, passion and belief. If you expect me to respect bad decisions then frankly you are in the same boat as the people that expect me to respect badly thought out whines, carping and personal attacks in anti CSM threads. As an Eve player I have an opinion about this game and like it or not you are going to get to hear it. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Misanth The Forsakened Companions Pure.	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:35:00 - [133] Originally by: Le Skunk 590. So under half and therefore irrelevant. I have three accounts that can and would vote no. The reason I don't is because I feel the vote is irrelevant and stupid, just like your reasoning. I love flying fast ships. Actually I survived when you caught me in low sec in your HIC with some friends of yours, thanks to a combination of overdrive/istab, I aligned and dashed back to the gate and managed to warp off before you guys caught me. Not to mention all the fun I had flying the nanos offensively. But in this case, my old experience as GM (not in EVE) tells me this is simply a matter where CCP has to fix it for game balancing purposes. You realise they (the devs) might actually fly and enjoy flying nano themselves? This fix is coming because of the same reasons we got stacking nerfs on heat sinks, and changed the MWD mechanics (years ago) to make sure we couldn't stack them. Before the rigs, boosters etc people could get speed and it was fine. Now it's too many modules that affect eachother and that is breaking the game balance. Right now? No, module nor speed tanking itself is overpowered. But the escalated speeds, especially where we have cases where battlecruiser sized vessels have a speed where they outrun t2 light drones and missiles (!), it's affecting the core of the game. This is a game balance issue. In that sense CCP have no choice. And thus our vote is pointless. We just have to understand and accept that CCP either give in and say "fine, we ignore stacking penalties", and thus they give us back the non-stacking penaltied Heat Sinks etc. It makes no sense. It's called balance. As I said, CCP might not even like having to do this, but they have no choice. Thus.. all votes are pointless. Either way, add +3 on your fictionary flawed voting list on the side that is "irrelevant" to your irrelevant argument, just for the sake of your own interst. I'll miss my nano ships. But this was bound to happen.
Drunk Driver Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:42:00 - [134] YOU CAN NOT USE BEER AS A CHASER FOR VEGETABLE SOUP!
Durzel Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:44:00 - [135] Edited by: Durzel on 04/08/2008 15:45:12 Originally by: Jade Constantine Grandstanding Well, I still think my point stands. You're of course entitled to an "individual opinion" but how often do you see the President or equivalent come on television and undermine the party stance by stating their personal opinion? It's just an observation really - posting your personal thoughts about decisions made by the CSM just undermines the vote result, whichever way it went about whichever topic that was on the table. FWIW I don't have a strong opinion about nano as I have a limited interest in PvP, however it is abundantly clear from reading many accounts on here that it is the current FoTM and that despite the apparently numerous counters people still gravitate towards the copy-and-paste poly/snake Vaga/Ish/Crow or whatever. There is no logical explanation for why the price for the items involved in nanoing are so high if not for the fact that a) there is considerably less repeat business (people don't lose the ships/implants as often as they would have you believe) and b) so many people aim for it as their PvP "end game". Another factor in nanoing is that whilst there may be counters to it most if not all of these counters involve having to field ship(s) with very specific and peculiar-in-any-other-circumstance adaptations to deal with it. Having one protagonist who doesn't have to change his fit, can dictate the terms of the fight and escape at will (unless they do something stupid) vs having to fit ships specifically for dealing with those people is hardly balanced.
TheG2 Gallente Dirty Rotten Scoundrels	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:48:00 - [136] Originally by: Jade Constantine Stuff Seriously, after reading a lot of your posts and the suggestions in the CSM area of the forums, its readily apparent your fighting to change the game to fit just your playstyle. Fortunately for the game and everyone that plays it, you're not in charge of balance and the Devs don't have to listen to you. Either CCP gives the CSM's some guidance and settles them down (stops the bickering, blatant self-serving interests, and elitist whines) or CSMs need to be booted, because right now its a farce and all of you are responsible for it.
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.04 15:58:00 - [137] Originally by: TheG2 ... its readily apparent your fighting to change the game to fit just your playstyle. What makes you think that I wasn't elected by people that like that playstyle? What makes you think its wrong for an elected CSM member to fight to protect and promote a playstyle that the people electing them enjoy? Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:04:00 - [138] Originally by: Durzel You're of course entitled to an "individual opinion" but how often do you see the President or equivalent come on television and undermine the party stance by stating their personal opinion? I'm not the president of Eve. I'm not the leader of a party. There are no parties in the CSM. I've got some non political responsibilities as CSM chair - holding meetings, arranging agendas, okaying minutes, holding votes etc etc. That stuff is process and completely open and needs to be unbiased. Then I've got stuff as a CSM delegate that is all about opinion, preference, judgment and representing that section of the community that voted me to office. Thats pretty much what I'm doing. Quote: It's just an observation really - posting your personal thoughts about decisions made by the CSM just undermines the vote result, whichever way it went about whichever topic that was on the table. I think it was a very bad decision and it paints the CSM in a terrible light. I'm not going to hide my opinions on that. I felt the very least we could possibly do was issue a statement advising everyone to go on the test server and test test test and post feedback so we could compile and fast-track the results to the appropriate devs. But the CSM refused to do even that and adopted a "wait and see" (ie until after the patch hits) that pretty much delivers a blob-tastic eve with speed no longer playing a significant role in eve combat. Its a big issue and to my eyes shows a problem occurring where the CSM has stopped being an agency of progressive change and becomes a champion of the status quo getting in the way of player opinions being heard. Nobody in their right mind can expect me (of all people) to be happy with that. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Heartstone Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:13:00 - [139] Originally by: TheG2 Originally by: Jade Constantine Stuff Seriously, after reading a lot of your posts and the suggestions in the CSM area of the forums, its readily apparent your fighting to change the game to fit just your playstyle. Fortunately for the game and everyone that plays it, you're not in charge of balance and the Devs don't have to listen to you. What you appear to have misunderstood TheG2 is the simple fact that in any political process there needs to be issues and people generally get voted into power (in this case into the CSM) based on the voters perception of the way the person they vote for will vote themselves on the issues they consider important. As there are no formal parties in the process yet special interest groups play the strongest role in getting someone elected and, quite rightly, expect their views to be supported by their candidate. In this case part of Jade's platform included play styles that will be affected by the proposed patch and after our alliance devoted hours upon hours to testing the changes on SISI I believe Jade thinks that the changes will indeed be adverse for some of the people he was elected to represent. That is democracy for you. As Churchill once said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." ---
Bad Borris 20th Legion Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:32:00 - [140] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: TheG2 ... its readily apparent your fighting to change the game to fit just your playstyle. What makes you think its wrong for an elected CSM member to fight to protect and promote a playstyle that the people electing them enjoy? What makes you think it is right for you to dump all over the remaining 89%+ percent who didnt vote for you. Before speaking about such things as electorate and in fact anything to do with democracy I think you should shut your shitter about democratic stuff and stick to your brief. There is absolutely no mandate for you to be basing what you do in this role on under 11% of the population. ps I agree, dont nerf nanos.

Tal Nok Amarr Digital assassins	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:43:00 - [141] Bad Borris makes me feel funny down there <3 Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY. Need sacrifice.
Bad Borris 20th Legion Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:45:00 - [142] Originally by: Tal Nok Bad Borris makes me feel funny down there <3 Lol did u get in before I retracted? Tbh im actually worried about the nerf so I chose to shut my drunken mouth.
Tal Nok Amarr Digital assassins	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:47:00 - [143] Edited by: Tal Nok on 04/08/2008 16:47:59 lol no, I just saw that you posted. Figure I'd give you some lubbin. I wanna be drunk, but I'm stuck at work for the next 4 hours :( Ninja Edit: Yeah, I don't like what's on SiSi whatsoever, but Skunks got a point with the whole trombone thing vs other issues at hand. Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY. Need sacrifice.
Bad Borris 20th Legion Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:49:00 - [144] Originally by: Tal Nok lol no, I just saw that you posted. Figure I'd give you some lubbin. I wanna be drunk, but I'm stuck at work for the next 4 hours :( Ahhh dude I feel for u man. Big hug from me
TheG2 Gallente Dirty Rotten Scoundrels	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:52:00 - [145] Originally by: Heartstone Originally by: TheG2 Originally by: Jade Constantine Stuff Seriously, after reading a lot of your posts and the suggestions in the CSM area of the forums, its readily apparent your fighting to change the game to fit just your playstyle. Fortunately for the game and everyone that plays it, you're not in charge of balance and the Devs don't have to listen to you. What you appear to have misunderstood TheG2 is the simple fact that in any political process there needs to be issues and people generally get voted into power (in this case into the CSM) based on the voters perception of the way the person they vote for will vote themselves on the issues they consider important. As there are no formal parties in the process yet special interest groups play the strongest role in getting someone elected and, quite rightly, expect their views to be supported by their candidate. In this case part of Jade's platform included play styles that will be affected by the proposed patch and after our alliance devoted hours upon hours to testing the changes on SISI I believe Jade thinks that the changes will indeed be adverse for some of the people he was elected to represent. That is democracy for you. As Churchill once said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." And my point isn't the fact that he stands for changing things, its the fact that those changes revolve around his (and yours) world in your alliance. When in fact 0.0 and alliances account for under 50% of the player base. Not to mention the childish hostility Jade has displayed in several other threads. CSMs have no guiding path, and CCP needs to give them one, until then, they're a joke and calling them a democracy is an insult to that form of government (especially when only 10% of people voted).
Tal Nok Amarr Digital assassins	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:55:00 - [146] you should come pew pew with us in our ludicris speed ships Originally by: CCP Mitnal Forum gods ANGRY. Need sacrifice.
LaVista Vista	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:56:00 - [147] Originally by: TheG2 CSMs have no guiding path, and CCP needs to give them one, until then, they're a joke and calling them a democracy is an insult to that form of government (especially when only 10% of people voted). I agree. CCP needs to tell us what they want us to be. Right now, the idea I get about CSM, is that they are basically a streamlining of the feedback to CCP. But the question is, does CCP agree? I think we need a public discussion about this really. Some people seem to still want CSM to be a watchdog. But that is hardly realistic nor is the intention of Xhagen(The guy who created CSM) from what I gather.
Tzar'rim Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.04 16:57:00 - [148] Wrong Vista, the CSM is the fall guy and PR trick at the same time.
Ranger 1 Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.08.04 17:01:00 - [149] I'm really not sure why you would get involved in this anyway. This is a matter of game balance, pure and simple. Whether or not the balancing will happen is not up for debate, nor should it be. The details of the balancing are open to change, but that will be determined by testing on SISI (as Jade pointed out, those who actually give a damn one way or another should be doing just that instead of this garbage). The vote showed at least half of the CSM shared that same opinion. This isn't an issue that the CSM should involve itself in as a group. This issue rather is of a nature and scale that needs to be addressed in other ways. So back off, quit grasping at straws, and come to terms with (virtual) reality.
Tobin Shalim Vulcan Foundry United Star Federation	Posted - 2008.08.04 17:06:00 - [150] Originally by: Ruze That's the same way every one of these NGE threads sounds. People who probably never played SWG for more than a month or two, don't know a damn thing about how the CU and NGE effected it's audience, and every time a fix comes down, LITERALLY IN EVERY F*CKING MMO IMAGINABLE, the company in question is doing what SOE did. I was in SWG since the open beta test, and was there the day of launch, and I played every single day. The CU and NGE killed the game. In fact, it was the killing of SWG through those two "upgrades" that led me direct into Eve. You may now return to your regularly scheduled ignorance of what you're talking about. This has been a public service announcement.

Heartstone Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.08.04 17:09:00 - [151] Edited by: Heartstone on 04/08/2008 17:10:03 Originally by: TheG2 And my point isn't the fact that he stands for changing things, its the fact that those changes revolve around his (and yours) world in your alliance. When in fact 0.0 and alliances account for under 50% of the player base. Well it isn't just our allaince's view of things to be honest otherwise Jade wouldn't have got enough votes to even be elected let alone elected with the highest number of votes. As to what Jade supports well to be brutally honest with both you and him I don't always agree with what he brings forward to the CSM and I am sure there are others amongst the alliance who feel the same way but to be frank the CSM gets little discussion in Alliance or Corp Chat or on Vent. At the end of the day though he will bring forward those things that he feels will make a real difference to those he stands for. 0.0 sov changes may not be your cup of tea or what you agree with but at least it's not music instruments in ambulation (Sorry Darius but seriously that was the most pressing issue for you this week?) Quote: Not to mention the childish hostility Jade has displayed in several other threads. No comment. Quote: CSMs have no guiding path, and CCP needs to give them one 100% agree on this. I think CCP has been very lax in giving the CSM the guidelines it needs in order to function smoothly. I not surprised mind you as this is new ground for them as well although it would have been an idea to maybe get someone's input who setups operating principles for committees as a living. Quote: they're a joke and calling them a democracy is an insult to that form of government (especially when only 10% of people voted). I have the say this is the thing that annoys me the most from people's comments on the CSM (not just yours) just because people didn't bother to cast their vote doesn't mean that it wasn't democratic. There was ample opportunity to vote and if there wasn't someone running who's idea one person liked well they could have run as a spoiler candidate anyway. It was democratically done and as such is a democratically elected committee. Personally I wouldn't have done this sort of thing via. council or committee anyway as all the drama was going to be an obvious result of it. (<tinfoil>Or maybe that's what they wanted ;)</tinfoil>) If it HAD to be democratic I would personally have made it compulsory to vote and given a "No CSM" option. ---
Eternal Error Exitus Acta Probant	Posted - 2008.08.04 17:20:00 - [152] Pathetic.
Plumpy McPudding	Posted - 2008.08.04 17:21:00 - [153] Originally by: Eternal Error Pathetic. Where's Shao Khan when you need him? __________________________ Fear me for I have an insatiable appetite! Proprietor and inventor of Chocolate Chip Chocolate Donut flavored Ice Cream.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.