Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vuk Lau
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 20:26:00 -
[1]
2nd CSM Formal Meeting 2 - Saturday 6th December. 16:00 hours Eve Time.
Agenda:
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. 2.
CSM Raised ISSUEs - (CSM Delegates must 1. Reply to this thread listing the ISSUE name and Assembly Hall thread they wish to advocate AND 2. Supply the ISSUE in templated form to CSM mailing list by 16:00 hours Thurday 4st Dec to be heard in the subsequent meeting.)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
POPULAR Issue (Biggest unaddressed Assembly Hall Issue – will be added after CSM raised ISSUEs.)
1.
AOB (Any other business) (additions can be submitted prior 16:00 hours Thurday 4st Dec)
1. 2.
***
All CSM delegates and Alternates are invited to attend.
Can I ask the moderation team to pay special attention to this thread please and ensure that it is kept free of trolling, flaming and personal attacks and is able to serve its intended purpose of allowing CSM delegates to list the ISSUEs they wish to be heard in the next meeting and for members of the Eve public to ask questions in a respectful and civil tone.
Thank you.
|
Bunyip
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 04:39:00 -
[2]
The issue I wish to raise: Removal of T1 Meta 0 loot from NPCs http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=808874
-Bunyip
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 06:05:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Bunyip The issue I wish to raise: Removal of T1 Meta 0 loot from NPCs http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=808874
Since the thread is locked.
Removal of t1 meta 0 loot from NPC's will have a net negative or no effect for meta 0 producers. As proposed in the thread, any increase in higher meta item drops will produce a reduction in price of those items. Since meta 0 items are substitutes for named items and since named items are higher quality than meta 0 items it will be even harder to be a tech 1 producer after your proposed change.
|
Bunyip
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 09:08:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Goumindong Removal of t1 meta 0 loot from NPC's will have a net negative or no effect for meta 0 producers. As proposed in the thread, any increase in higher meta item drops will produce a reduction in price of those items. Since meta 0 items are substitutes for named items and since named items are higher quality than meta 0 items it will be even harder to be a tech 1 producer after your proposed change.
Goumindong, I've refined the idea on my webpage to what I think is a workable mechanic. In it, the chance of meta 1+ items dropping isn't changed, but a 10% bonus to bounty is applied to compensate for the lost minerals/items.
This will enhance T1 Meta 0 item manufacture, as it's currently subsumed almost completely (except with items with no meta, such as ammo and ships) by item drops in NPCs. The cost to destroy an NPC is extremely small, then reselling the item on the market means that the manufacturer-wannabe makes almost no effort to create the item/items and resell them.
As a mission-runner, I can make more minerals from missioning than mining, and that doesn't include the salvage/bounties/mission rewards/etc. This is a broken mechanic, and needs fixed desperately.
This will also have the net effect of making mining more used, to be joined with future topics of improving mining in general. Overall, this idea will only serve to expand the game, and not penalize as you might think. -Bunyip
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 15:22:00 -
[5]
I'm going to be laying down the framework for an investigation into t2 turret ammo, especially considering the changes done to missile t2 ammo after the patch
relevant thread
I'm sure the CCP is aware of this issue so it would be helpful if we could have the relevant balance dev available at the meeting for live Q&A |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 19:56:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Bunyip My website
That is great, this is the place where we discuss things. If you want to enter into the record things from your website, do it first.
Quote:
As a mission-runner, I can make more minerals from missioning than mining, and that doesn't include the salvage/bounties/mission rewards/etc. This is a broken mechanic, and needs fixed desperately.
This is not true. It is not a broken mechanic, since the barrier to entry for missions is so much more than mining. Similarly there is more risk involved and a higher amount of time needed for production.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 20:39:00 -
[7]
Bunyip, I don't think anyone wants this thread to turn into a discussion of your topic. Please post a new thread in the Assembly Hall for further debate.
|
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 11:29:00 -
[8]
I'd like to add this one to the agenda (assuming Tusko agrees since he initiated it): Additions to Decorations
I'd also like to add the Skill Queue debate as the popular item
and.. AOB: Promoting CSM to the masses, how we can do it better - so it can be discussed in Iceland. ----------------------
My Blog |
Dariah Stardweller
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 11:50:00 -
[9]
Yes, please push forward the skill queue again. I personally am quite fond of the CSM but this should really be a major point. It's prolly the most requested feature out there. CCP more or less ignored it till now and I think the playerbase represented by the CSM should keep asking for it until CCP implements it.
This is too big a thing to be ignored. The attitude and actions of CCP and the CSM on this topic will prolly decide my future in EVE (as in staying or leaving the game in the coming 6 to 12 months).
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 13:13:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Omber Zombie I'd like to add this one to the agenda (assuming Tusko agrees since he initiated it): Additions to Decorations
I'd also like to add the Skill Queue debate as the popular item
and.. AOB: Promoting CSM to the masses, how we can do it better - so it can be discussed in Iceland.
Skill queue was already raised by CSM1 by Jade I believe. We will be discussing this in Iceland next year as you know.
|
|
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 14:05:00 -
[11]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Skill queue was already raised by CSM1 by Jade I believe. We will be discussing this in Iceland next year as you know.
skill queue was raised by the last csm and ccp answered in the negative. Why would we discuss it again unless it's raised again? ----------------------
My Blog |
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 14:06:00 -
[12]
As sent to the mailing list:
Quote: New context menu UI
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=939322
The current context menu(Right-click menu) is quite horrible. For new players this is a barrier to entry to some degree. Not only is it annoying it also causes people to make mistake. For instance, reprocessing button is quite far at the top and trashing things is not uncommon to do by mistake. Entity made a great sketch for how the menu should look. It will cause less annoyance at the user and it will lessen the load on customer supports for people who made a mistake.
http://home.wanadoo.nl/ntt/menudesign101.png
Solutions New context menu http://home.wanadoo.nl/ntt/menudesign101.png
Pros
Made of win. Will cause less confusion. Will make people do less mistakes, decreases the load on customer support.
Cons Could confuse older players for... 1 hour.
Relevant forum thread(s) http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=939322
|
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps
|
Posted - 2008.12.03 15:57:00 -
[13]
As sent to the mailing list:
Quote: Ship fitting made easy!
Raised by:Scagga Laebetrovo Date submitted:3/12/2009
Problem:
Fitting out a ship is sometimes an unnecessarily time-consuming activity. This idea aims to reduce this wasted time.
Problem background:
We've all been there - fitting out a ship. Some of us fit out dozens of ships in advance; for our own stockpiles, for our corporate stockpiles, for our alliance...etc. Many a time you may have a standard setup, which you will use again and again. Why not be able to 'save' this fitting as an 'instruction sheet'?
Solution:
Create æinstruction sheetsÆ
How this solution works:
Create an instruction sheet by æsavingÆ a fitting you have set to your ship, or manually entering the ship and what modules should fit into the slots.
Usage: You have an unfitted ship, with all the modules you need to attach to it - simply activate your prepared instruction sheet on it and it puts itself together! You're now ready to go.
Also, to use these instruction fees may incur a fee to station crew. This may also be a source of income for station owners, while also functioning as a mild isk sink of the lazy!
Pros:
òCan benefit virtually every player in Eve at the individual, corporate and alliance level òReduces time spent doing tedious things òIs a highly supported idea that is clear and makes sense
Cons:
òNone so far identified
Relevant forum thread
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=845056
|
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.12.07 16:53:00 -
[14]
So what's the actual agenda for the CSM II Meeting 2?
≡v≡ Strategic Maps in Eve-Online Store | eve-maps.com |
Arithron
Gallente Gallente Trade Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.07 21:07:00 -
[15]
Did this meeting take place? If so, are there likely to be meeting logs posted anytime soon?
Agenda looks a little slim!
Arithron Vote Arithron for CSM! Check out my thread: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=899358 |
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 02:40:00 -
[16]
minutes will be up shortly, just stuck at work and unable to post them atm. ----------------------
My Blog |
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 13:06:00 -
[17]
apologies for the delay
Council of Stellar Management Meeting Minutes
Saturday 6th December 2008 Present: Ankhesentapemkah (Vice-Chair), Omber Zombie (Secretary), Darius JOHNSON, Tusko Hopkins (Vice-Secretary), LaVista Vista, Pattern Clarc, Issler Dainze, Scagga Laebetrovo (alternate), Sophie Daigmeau (alternate), Extreme (alternate) Apologies: Vuk Lau (Chairman), Bunyip
I.Announcements / Elections none
II. Popular Issue UI Import/Export Overview Settings No need for introduction as the documentation was clear. Darius pointed out that this was actually possible to do already, but is technical in nature and supports an easier way to do it. Issler noted it was similar to the Ship Fitting issue and could have the same system implemented to fix both. Tusko pointed out this was an easier fix. A small discussion regarding local scripting occurred. Omber pointed out that things were getting too technical again.
Vote: 9-0 pass
III.Discussion 1) Additions to Decorations û Raised by Omber Zombie & Tusko Hopkins Omber introduced the issue and possible solutions, Scagga raised the issue of possibly adding player avatars as possible decorations for medals, and that the issue be raised as low priority. Omber agreed on the low priority. Extreme raised a seprate issue regarding the ability to delete mis-created medals û this issue will be raised separately as itÆs not part of this one. Tusko commented that the player avatar as decorations was interesting, but wouldnÆt be all that nice to look at.
Vote: 9-0 pass
2) Drone Improvements û Raised by Ankhesentapemkah Ankhe introduced the issue and possible solutions. Pattern commented that the intentions are on the right path, but new mods should all be high slots. Tusko noted that while the damage of drone ships at the moment is high, introducing new modules/implants/ships would need CCP to look at overall drone damage to stop them being overpowered. He also agreed that utility drones definitely need looking at as they are underpowered and underused currently. Drone damage/ROF implants were also suggested to be used in the same place as drone ship users currently use implants. Omber suggested that adding more drone ships was unlikely due to CCPÆs prior stance to adding new faction ships, and that assuming the T3 modular hulls grant inherent bonii, there will more than likely be drone bonus hulls. Ankhe agreed that ships are not high priority in this issue. Pattern commented that giving drone bandwidth implants would upset balancing on existing ships, he would rather give options for specialized drone ships. A small discussion over what drone rigs were available on the market was followed by OmberÆs statement that most drone ship users ignore the drone rigs as they have a CPU drawback which makes fitting drone ships difficult. LaVista noted that we arenÆt here to balance the game, we should stop delving into the minutiae.
Vote: 9-0 pass
----------------------
My Blog |
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 13:06:00 -
[18]
3) Ship Fitting Made Easy û Raised by Tusko Hopkins & Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga introduced the issue and possible solutions. Extreme agreed with the solution but only if the sheet cannot be traded, he also noted that the fitting sheet would become outdated with skill advances, and that people would just create cookie cutter setups with them. Scagga responded that half of the idea was to make them tradeable and that skill advances would have no effect on the sheets as they are purely to fit a ship and it was a moot point. He also noted that most people post their setups to forums, so these sheets would have no impact on that area. Issler liked the general idea but thought the solution was a bit impractical. Omber agreed with the idea in principle as well, but thought it would be far easier for CCP to implement it as an import/export system rather than spend time creating a new interface and artwork for it. Scagga believes that the time required to do as suggested was minimal. Darius noted that we were getting into too much detail again. Ankhe suggested fitting template codes which could be exchanged. LaVista noted we were still being technical and supposed to just provide high level issues and solutions, not minutiae. Ankhe showed an example of how guildwars does templates. Tusko likes the general idea, just has issues with the suggested implementation. Issler agreed we should just send CCP the idea and let them sort out the details. Extreme thought that considering the large amount of important issues out there, this shouldnÆt be sent to CCP to waste their time.
Vote: Passed 6-3, NoÆs were Darius JOHNSON, LaVista (believes too much confusion from CSM side), Pattern Clarc (abstained)
4) Removing T1 meta-0 loot Postponed to next meeting
5) UI New Context Menu LaVista introduced the topic and showed us this nice picture by Entity http://home.wanadoo.nl/ntt/menudesign101.png Issler pointed out that CCP were already working on new UI for the next expansion. LaVista noted that we should help them by showing them what we want.Tusko wanted to add other context menus that could also be fixed in similar ways. LaVista wants this one sorted out first, others can be done at a later date. Darius thinks that this solution is way too detailed and he wouldnÆt support anything with that much detail. LaVista responded by way of saying this was a suggestion rather than a high-level proposal. Darius thinks we should stick to high-level issues only. Ankhe thinks the item positioning is personal preference and while she liked the layout, if submitted like this, chances are people will whine. LaVista pointed out that concern was listed in the Cons of the solution. Tusko thinks the issue is that the current context menuÆs suck and the image was just an example of how it could be done better. Omber pointed out that CCP are already changing the UI for the next expansion so there was no loss adding this to their options.
Vote: 6-3 pass, NoÆs were Darius JOHNSON, Ankhesentepemkah, Pattern Clarc
Meeting End.
----------------------
My Blog |
Scagga Laebetrovo
Ammatar Free Corps
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 13:19:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Omber Zombie 3) Ship Fitting Made Easy û Raised by Tusko Hopkins & Scagga Laebetrovo Scagga introduced the issue and possible solutions. Extreme agreed with the solution but only if the sheet cannot be traded, he also noted that the fitting sheet would become outdated with skill advances, and that people would just create cookie cutter setups with them. Scagga responded that half of the idea was to make them tradeable and that skill advances would have no effect on the sheets as they are purely to fit a ship and it was a moot point. He also noted that most people post their setups to forums, so these sheets would have no impact on that area. Issler liked the general idea but thought the solution was a bit impractical. Omber agreed with the idea in principle as well, but thought it would be far easier for CCP to implement it as an import/export system rather than spend time creating a new interface and artwork for it. Scagga believes that the time required to do as suggested was minimal. Darius noted that we were getting into too much detail again. Ankhe suggested fitting template codes which could be exchanged. LaVista noted we were still being technical and supposed to just provide high level issues and solutions, not minutiae. Ankhe showed an example of how guildwars does templates. Tusko likes the general idea, just has issues with the suggested implementation. Issler agreed we should just send CCP the idea and let them sort out the details. Extreme thought that considering the large amount of important issues out there, this shouldnÆt be sent to CCP to waste their time.
Vote: Passed 6-3, NoÆs were Darius JOHNSON, LaVista (believes too much confusion from CSM side), Pattern Clarc (abstained)
Omber, I'd like to point out that the voting results here are incorrect. Darius voted yes, Extreme voted no.
|
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 13:38:00 -
[20]
yup, just noticed that, as you can understand, certain votes during that meeting were hard to verify ----------------------
My Blog |
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 14:38:00 -
[21]
Omber, if your report stay as good as those produced so far, you have my votes for the next CSM.
Very good and timely work. And I know how hard it can be to do a minute from a voice registration.
Thumbs up.
|
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 18:19:00 -
[22]
Cheers. Linkage to the raw log is also linkage to the .pdf Please fix to raw log :)
≡v≡ Strategic Maps in Eve-Online Store | eve-maps.com |
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 18:19:00 -
[23]
it's actually a pdf of the raw log as for some reason the raw log ends up corrupted every time i upload it... ----------------------
My Blog |
Serenity Steele
Dynamic Data Distribution Ministry of Information
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 18:44:00 -
[24]
Ah, can you pls make a .doc of the log? Easier to put tabs in for readability than PDF of the .txt :)
≡v≡ Strategic Maps in Eve-Online Store | eve-maps.com |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 00:13:00 -
[25]
I've made this point in other places, but I'll say it again here. Looking at this meeting, I see issues getting a pretty small amount of discussion, and people complaining that it's taking too long. Obviously, something isn't right here. We all want the CSM to make informed decisions, and we can't expect them to spend an hour of meeting time per issue doing so. So why exactly are you guys discussing this in the meeting? All the policy disagreements(should ship fits be tradeable, things like that) should be hashed out in advance - you won't necessarily come to an agreement, but you'll know where everyone stands and why. You have a period of some days between an issue being placed on the agenda and it being voted on, so spend that time having some discussion on the topic. The meetings will go faster, communication will flow better, and decisions will be made in a more informed fashion. ---------- Thanks to all those who voted for me. |
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 00:40:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've made this point in other places, but I'll say it again here. Looking at this meeting, I see issues getting a pretty small amount of discussion, and people complaining that it's taking too long. Obviously, something isn't right here. We all want the CSM to make informed decisions, and we can't expect them to spend an hour of meeting time per issue doing so. So why exactly are you guys discussing this in the meeting? All the policy disagreements(should ship fits be tradeable, things like that) should be hashed out in advance - you won't necessarily come to an agreement, but you'll know where everyone stands and why. You have a period of some days between an issue being placed on the agenda and it being voted on, so spend that time having some discussion on the topic. The meetings will go faster, communication will flow better, and decisions will be made in a more informed fashion.
Your self-righteousness hits their exaggerated lack of commitment for 0 votes in future elections.
|
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 06:27:00 -
[27]
done serenity - and Herschel, we only got the internal forums this week and had little chance to use them before the meeting. ----------------------
My Blog |
Cyprus Black
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 06:52:00 -
[28]
We all know this CSM stuff is all one big joke anyways. ___________________________________________________ The Escapist: EvE Online video review. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:15:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've made this point in other places, but I'll say it again here. Looking at this meeting, I see issues getting a pretty small amount of discussion, and people complaining that it's taking too long. Obviously, something isn't right here. We all want the CSM to make informed decisions, and we can't expect them to spend an hour of meeting time per issue doing so. So why exactly are you guys discussing this in the meeting? All the policy disagreements(should ship fits be tradeable, things like that) should be hashed out in advance - you won't necessarily come to an agreement, but you'll know where everyone stands and why. You have a period of some days between an issue being placed on the agenda and it being voted on, so spend that time having some discussion on the topic. The meetings will go faster, communication will flow better, and decisions will be made in a more informed fashion.
Your self-righteousness hits their exaggerated lack of commitment for 0 votes in future elections.
I'm not trying to punish them electorally - really, I don't expect this to be much remembered in six months. Also, I like most of the current reps. I'm trying to make the system work better.
Originally by: Omber Zombie done serenity - and Herschel, we only got the internal forums this week and had little chance to use them before the meeting.
I didn't mean private forums, I meant public forums. The chatlogs are public, so there's nothing wrong with the policy discussions being public too. Each topic has a thread on the Assembly Hall. Talk there. Even if you made it a suggestion that each rep respond to each issue thread once with their thoughts before the meeting started, that'd clean up quite a lot of it. ---------- Thanks to all those who voted for me. |
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 22:02:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
I didn't mean private forums, I meant public forums. The chatlogs are public, so there's nothing wrong with the policy discussions being public too. Each topic has a thread on the Assembly Hall. Talk there. Even if you made it a suggestion that each rep respond to each issue thread once with their thoughts before the meeting started, that'd clean up quite a lot of it.
Ok, thanks for rewording that. I agree that delegates should be showing a presence in each of the assembly hall threads. At the moment many threads have replies from only a handful of delegates.
Even if the idea is complete garbage, delegates should still add a few lines of their own opinion to give the authors feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |