I am not candidate for the next CSM.
This decision is not one taken lightly, but has matured over time and has been reinforced with my CSM experience this year. There's a few things it's not based on: It's not that I don't think I could get reelected; It's not been a bad year, Au contraire, it's been an excellent year for the CSM, and that is why I'm taking my leave.
When I first decided to run for CSM 2 and got elected, in 2008 (god, time has passed), it had been a frustrating time, 0.0 had been neglected for too long, CCP was pushing expansion after expansion filled with half-finished new content and precious little in the way of fixes and additions to things everyone was using on a daily basis; The UI, well, let's just say it was underwhelming; CCP was nowhere to be found on the forums, the GM department appeared a distant, mean and arbitrary beast; and CSM 1 spent what seemed to me a lot of time bickering about pesky details of minute bug fixes and not working on the big picture. So I ran...
The one constant point on my agenda, year after year, CSM after CSM, has been that there was a need for more iteration and less shiny. I'm not opposed to new things, it just requires a careful balance. One that was not tilted towards "new" at 110%... That need for what is now fashionably called "iteration" has been loudly embraced by other CSM members as well. Not that it was a magically brand new original idea in the first place... But this was my major point.
Over time, we managed to get CCP to listen to us, partially through our successes in providing valuable feedback and partially, unfortunately, through CCP's dismal failures when they ignored us. InCarna was such example, and while "I told you so" may sound like something satisfying to say in theory, in practice it always has been a bitter thing to go back to CCP with.
Either way, fast forward 7 CSMs and 5 years. CCP is present on the forums, they listen to players (CSM and non-CSM alike), their expansion plans are a lot more in tune with our wishes. The implementation details and specific choices sometimes leave to be desired, but that's the nature of the process. GMs have made efforts to communicate and refine some of their policies, and when in doubt CCP does check for input. This one step alone, this change of attitude is what I'm proud to have helped accomplish, for in that change of mindset is the hope for the continued success of the game.
This last CSM is one I'd consider "uneventful". Not in the meaning that nothing happened: lots of work was done, lots of questions asked by CCP, lots of feedback provided; but it's been one where we haven't had to riot, shake our fists, grimace in disgust or be intensely frustrated. The opposite of the old curse "may you live in interesting times".
One of my fellow CSM members had asked me a few years ago, and another one last year: "I don't know how you do it year after year". Well, I did it because it was needed! I don't possess enough hubris to believe myself to be the one and only person capable of producing change, but I've had lots of success over the years expressing my thoughts in a way CCP could resonate with and I didn't think anyone could do my specific part of the whole as well as I could, so I did the work and stayed the course. It's easy to keep focused and alert when things suck, we're riled up, there's lots of "juice" in anger and frustration. This year however, things were fine, I could still produce valuable input, but not significantly different than the others combined, and it looks like things are going to keep that way. The CSM has matured in a more diverse bunch than 0.0 alliance leaders.
I'm expecting CCP to have learned their lesson, and it looks like they did (though only the FSM knows, with CCP), so it seems like the right time to stop my involvement with the CSM, and get back to enjoying the fine gaming experience CCP gives us in Eve.
I have a few (a number?) of parting thoughts to share with CCP, the CSM, and players alike... (and I'll probably post a few more of them as time goes).
I wish the "free trip to Iceland" crowd would just shut up some day... Being on the CSM takes a lot of work and time, we have to leave our lives aside regularly, keep constantly interacting with other members, with all of you, with CCP, read the forums, read the CSM forums, have skype conferences, etc. When in Iceland, 3 days of meetings is gruesome work. Sure we spend the evenings having a few drinks and a meal with CCP. Guess what we talk about? Eve. We don't simply recount our fun game experiences, we also try to make the very same points we are trying to make during the meetings to the friendly people kind enough to accompany us.
If any one CSM member ever takes credit for an addition, bugfix, feature, modification, or whatever, call bullshit on them. No one person has in my memory been responsible for the inclusion of something in Eve, not even me. It has never been a case where one of us wrote down a stone tablet, laid
it down at CCP's feet while being jealously watched by the other CSM
member, their eyes filed with silent hatred at not being able to say "I
did this!" should CCP pick it up. We theorycraft, we mention problems, possible solutions, relative priorities, explore alternatives, we go back and forth between ourselves, with different people at CCP. If an idea has traction, it gets worked on, elaborated, refined by all, and sometimes it gets implemented, sometimes after a couple of years, sometimes fairly directly. A side note to this is that the first half of the stuff CCP produces during a term is after the output of the previous CSM, not the current. Be very wary of people taking credit with "I did this"...
CCP is not a single entity, there's people in there. These people are hard working, dedicated and passionate for the most part. They err, they sometimes have poor judgment, they sometimes don't have as thorough a knowledge of the game as we do, but they're good people who genuinely want to do good. When shit hits the fan, they get bashed to oblivion, regardless of whether they have anything to do with the problem at all. It is probably a bit naive of me to expect a measure of restraint, but it's something I wish we all could keep in the back of our minds.
I would like to thank, first and foremost, the thousands of players who have voted for me over the years. I know I haven't been one of the most prominent members of the community, or one of the most talkative, but your trust and votes have helped me help CCP make a better game. So, my thanks to you.
My thanks also to my fellow CSM members. No matter the various backgrounds they came from, the in-game enmities, the personal grudges, there has always been a significant climate of "work needs to be done, let's do it" in the CSM. We all have different approaches in dealing with problems, we all have different levels of communication with the players, but we all worked as a team over time, and that was great. In particular my thanks to: Dierdra Vaal, Vuk Lau, Mynxee, Trebor Daehdoow, The Mittani, Seleene, Larkonis Trassler, Darius Johnson, Omber Zombie, John Zastrow. With different personalities and attitudes, they all made my experience in the CSM a wonderful one.
Then there is obviously Rooks and Kings, my alliance, for their unwavering support, for being a wonderful community and a great group of people to call one's own. There is a lot of pride in being able to say "I am a member of Rooks and Kings" in addition to being able to share companionship with people who happen to be members of that alliance.
Last but not least, thanks to CCP for giving me the great opportunity to help make Eve a better game. I could list individual devs, but the list would be too long and I'd be forgetting people. So, global thanks.
As far as what I am going to do now... Well, I'll ease back into being another wheel in the great machinery of my alliance and be able to breathe a bit and just play the game I've spent close to half a decade helping improve :p
So, so long, and thanks for everything. I'll just rest on my laurels now :p
Monday, March 25, 2013
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
So long Sean
Today I woke up to the sad news that Sean Smith, aka Vile Rat, was killed in Libya...
I hadn't had contact with Sean until he got elected in the 6th Council of Stellar Management, and all of my interactions with him were in his capacity as a player representative. I was initially full of skepticism about him, never having had the chance to have a conversation with him prior to that, and him being a goon and all.
Yet it became very clear early on that he was just another person, interested in making the game better for everyone, willing to put in the effort and give his perspective on the game, where it should be headed and why. Sean consistently acted in that quality. To put it in his own words take from an early conversation I had with him after he got elected:
There is frequently the idea that, because he was a goon, he would only stand for "goon approved" or "goon aligned" ideas, but that was far from the case. Sean was a person of principle and ideals. He defended what he thought was right.
I've had arguments with Sean, quite a few of them actually, but that's what happens when different ideas clash, yet arguments can be had in mutual respect and, in that regard too, he certainly showed himself to be a good person.
We had meals and drinks in Iceland, he was always relaxed but enthusiastic about whatever topic we discussed, always ready for a small joke or anecdote, and always full of ideas that he was more than willing to share.
No matter what players may think of Goonswarm, and whether they know it or not, every Eve Online player owes Sean for his numerous and frequent contributions that helped make the game what it is today.
I will keep the memory of a good human being, one who spoke fondly of his wife and children. I will keep the image of Sean passionately arguing a point in a meeting room while everyone listened...
He will be missed.
My thoughts go out to his wife, children and friends.
I hadn't had contact with Sean until he got elected in the 6th Council of Stellar Management, and all of my interactions with him were in his capacity as a player representative. I was initially full of skepticism about him, never having had the chance to have a conversation with him prior to that, and him being a goon and all.
Yet it became very clear early on that he was just another person, interested in making the game better for everyone, willing to put in the effort and give his perspective on the game, where it should be headed and why. Sean consistently acted in that quality. To put it in his own words take from an early conversation I had with him after he got elected:
You either love the game and want to be a part of the solution or you're just doing this to pick a fight and be a douche. I know my alliance apparently betrays a lot of peoples interest but I do take this very seriously.And take it seriously he did. He argued, made his points heard, presented rationales, ideas, gave his perspective on any and all topics. Sean was driven and passionate, and that showed...
There is frequently the idea that, because he was a goon, he would only stand for "goon approved" or "goon aligned" ideas, but that was far from the case. Sean was a person of principle and ideals. He defended what he thought was right.
I've had arguments with Sean, quite a few of them actually, but that's what happens when different ideas clash, yet arguments can be had in mutual respect and, in that regard too, he certainly showed himself to be a good person.
We had meals and drinks in Iceland, he was always relaxed but enthusiastic about whatever topic we discussed, always ready for a small joke or anecdote, and always full of ideas that he was more than willing to share.
No matter what players may think of Goonswarm, and whether they know it or not, every Eve Online player owes Sean for his numerous and frequent contributions that helped make the game what it is today.
I will keep the memory of a good human being, one who spoke fondly of his wife and children. I will keep the image of Sean passionately arguing a point in a meeting room while everyone listened...
He will be missed.
My thoughts go out to his wife, children and friends.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Mittens and stuff
It is regrettable it had to come down to this... I've spent more than 3 years in the CSM and it always hurts when something like this erodes a lot of hard work behind the scenes (including work by Mittens himself).
I don't subscribe to the view that things have to be only negative or only positive. So I'll break it down.
So let me start by saying that I think The Mittani's words during that Alliance Panel were inconsiderate and stupid. I don't condone that action or those words in any way, I would never have said that kind of thing and I'm certainly not happy he did. There was a real potential for damage and while alcohol and a history of being a self-professed asshole is an explanation, it is not an excuse. Yet I would be remiss if I didn't point out that it is my opinion those words have been blown way out of proportion. He got carried away by his in-game persona, made an off-hand remark in an attempt to be funny (it wasn't) that could have had serious consequences, but admitted his mistake, apologized profusely both publicly and privately to the player, and the player in question was unharmed and wasn't harassed. The player was apparently not even aware of anything until news sites started to get in touch with him.
When speaking publicly, either as a member of my alliance, a member of the CSM or generally an Eve player, I try very hard not to cause any bad image to be reflected to those groups I belong to, being mindful that no matter in which quality I speak as, my words will be associated with all of them. The CSM are player representative, and should be held to higher standards than the average player. His lapse in judgement was bad for all of us in that regard...
I don't agree with The Mittani a lot on the CSM, at least as far as implementation details go his objectives and mine are frequently opposite. I'm not a fan of his public persona either, and I certainly feel no value in being liked by the groups he belongs to. Yet the way I gauge the value of a CSM member is not according to who they got elected by or whether I agree with their opinion. My only concern is whether they can contribute constructively, whether they actively participate and communicate with CCP and the players and thereby bring something to the CSM process. In that regard Mittens was an effective member of the CSM and I'm really sorry to see him go. It is fair to say that CSM 6 was successful in no small part due to his efforts and commitment and I regarded him as a valuable colleague. I had looked forward to working with him again in CSM 7, differences of opinion aside, and it's fair to say that CSM 7 will be lesser for his absence.
Yet the rules are the rules, and he did act against them. Just as players were banned for making threats against devs or other players, his tempban was practically unavoidable. The TOS/EULA of all games are crafted to basically give the developper license to ban anyone for anything remotely questionable, and for a reason: It's bad publicity for a developper to be perceived as condoning objectionable actions, and failure to act only creates a perception of bias when actions have to be taken in other cases. I personally felt his apology sufficient, but CCP didn't or couldn't. I'm not happy it came down to this, but I now think it was the unavoidable thing for CCP to do, it may also have been the legal thing to do, but I don't know about that. The fact that it was done by a high-profile member of the community in such a public fashion forced CCP's hand, I would think.
I'll talk about the implications of this situation on CSM 6 chairmanship, CSM 7 chairmanship, representation of Mittens' voters and a few others things in a separate blog, they are still under consideration.
I don't subscribe to the view that things have to be only negative or only positive. So I'll break it down.
So let me start by saying that I think The Mittani's words during that Alliance Panel were inconsiderate and stupid. I don't condone that action or those words in any way, I would never have said that kind of thing and I'm certainly not happy he did. There was a real potential for damage and while alcohol and a history of being a self-professed asshole is an explanation, it is not an excuse. Yet I would be remiss if I didn't point out that it is my opinion those words have been blown way out of proportion. He got carried away by his in-game persona, made an off-hand remark in an attempt to be funny (it wasn't) that could have had serious consequences, but admitted his mistake, apologized profusely both publicly and privately to the player, and the player in question was unharmed and wasn't harassed. The player was apparently not even aware of anything until news sites started to get in touch with him.
When speaking publicly, either as a member of my alliance, a member of the CSM or generally an Eve player, I try very hard not to cause any bad image to be reflected to those groups I belong to, being mindful that no matter in which quality I speak as, my words will be associated with all of them. The CSM are player representative, and should be held to higher standards than the average player. His lapse in judgement was bad for all of us in that regard...
I don't agree with The Mittani a lot on the CSM, at least as far as implementation details go his objectives and mine are frequently opposite. I'm not a fan of his public persona either, and I certainly feel no value in being liked by the groups he belongs to. Yet the way I gauge the value of a CSM member is not according to who they got elected by or whether I agree with their opinion. My only concern is whether they can contribute constructively, whether they actively participate and communicate with CCP and the players and thereby bring something to the CSM process. In that regard Mittens was an effective member of the CSM and I'm really sorry to see him go. It is fair to say that CSM 6 was successful in no small part due to his efforts and commitment and I regarded him as a valuable colleague. I had looked forward to working with him again in CSM 7, differences of opinion aside, and it's fair to say that CSM 7 will be lesser for his absence.
Yet the rules are the rules, and he did act against them. Just as players were banned for making threats against devs or other players, his tempban was practically unavoidable. The TOS/EULA of all games are crafted to basically give the developper license to ban anyone for anything remotely questionable, and for a reason: It's bad publicity for a developper to be perceived as condoning objectionable actions, and failure to act only creates a perception of bias when actions have to be taken in other cases. I personally felt his apology sufficient, but CCP didn't or couldn't. I'm not happy it came down to this, but I now think it was the unavoidable thing for CCP to do, it may also have been the legal thing to do, but I don't know about that. The fact that it was done by a high-profile member of the community in such a public fashion forced CCP's hand, I would think.
I'll talk about the implications of this situation on CSM 6 chairmanship, CSM 7 chairmanship, representation of Mittens' voters and a few others things in a separate blog, they are still under consideration.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Last CSM 7 Meeting Minutes
Slight correction, this is about CSM 6 meeting minutes, CSM 7 hasn't started yet. I just forget which number we're at, but since I already posted the link everywhere, it's staying as it is :p
The latest CSM Meeting Minutes are out.
A foreword on minute writing and The Borg
There's been some discussion about the use of "The CSM" throughout the minutes.
Throughout the CSMs, minutes had been released over the course of the term, highlighting individual stances and points of view and, to an extent, allowing some accountability. As far as the CSM-CCP face to face meetings were concerned, the minutes used either individual names or "The CSM" to denote a general degree of consensus. This construct was very useful in the first CSMs, because we were perceived as a loose collection of individuals incapable of constructive communal approach to problems, which wasn't the case. However in CSM 6, there have been none of the regular meetings where voting happened, instead favouring internal forum debates where points of view are exchanged, and on issues known to be tricky, internal consensus was reached among ourselves before reaching out to the devs. This change is not for the worst in terms of progress and efficacy, and I genuinely believe this allowed us to be very constructive. However in terms of accountability and allowing the public at large to know "who does what, who thinks what", this way of doing things is a failure.
Before the minutes were being written out, I had requested individual names be used wherever applicable, our secretary considered the suggestion but eventually decided not to go through with that suggestion. So I'll just have to go through the minutes again and say what I personally think and where my opinion differs or where my opinion was the one emphasized in a way or other.
Just to be clear, I don't mean by this to bash Trebor (CSM 6 Secretary) for his job with the minutes. If every CSM member had to be ranked in terms of time spent working on CSM stuff, he's at the top, just like he was during CSM 5, and I know from experience doing minutes is gruesome work.
This Council has been one of the most generally homogenous CSM to date. From the start it became apparent that a number of councilors were representative of the same playstyle, which in my opinion dilutes the value (if 6 voices say the same thing, one would have been as good). Still, Seleene was in there and despite being a member of a 0.0 alliance at the time, his former experience as Game Designer for Eve brought something different to the table. Trebor may have been a member of a sovholding alliance at some point too, but he wasn't the classical alliance leader representative and had some degree of knowledge of other subjects/areas, and I obviously do my own thing, going with whatever I believe is best for the game as a whole no matter who it seems to favor. I expected Mittens to be the major speaking person for the rest, and it mostly proved true, but he was quite productive and while I may not agree with all his ideas/opinions, he did present them well. So while the number of messages was limited, there was a good overlap from a number of good people. Let me reiterate that I do not in any way endorse the opinions of these members as a whole, rather that I find that they have a point to make, they make it, whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant as long as it's not retarded. Biased does not count as retarded.
As a final point on hivemind, I'll point out that throughout most of the term, there was little question what was a priority (get back to working on the fucking game), differences emerged when we finally obtained that and the focus was placed on smaller detailed changes. So it's fair to say the CSM was in agreement most of the time, but the devil lies in the details...
The minutes
Unless pointed otherwise, whenever "The CSM" is used, I agreed. Some points I will clarify.
A glaring "omission" is, to start with, the fact that the only thing I requested is that it be pointed out specifically I objected to partial skill respec. This is an important point to me as I was the only one speaking against it and arguing against it repeatedly during the meetings. The subject came up like 3 or 4 times, I objected it every time, yet not once is my objection mentioned. Either way, more on that later...
The reorganisation
The reason I asked "what role the Creative Director will be playing." is because Torfi, creative director, has been perceived and generally pointed at as the reason for so many resources being spent (wasted?) on InCarna, seeing that he was still part of the organisation post-layoff, the question was obviously what job he'd do, what level of authority he would have and whether he would go back to what I personally perceive as his strongest point: coming up with good ideas, particularly when it comes to the aesthetical and graphical aspect of the game.
While I was happy to see the reorganization of the company, and the fact Jon Lander (CCP Unifex) would be taking the lead, I was a bit afraid CCP Zulu would be perceived as the reason everything failed. Zulu did a good job (particularly in CSM 5, beginning of 6), then went a tad too much to the "dark side", but he was given an impossible task. So as one who's worked with him over the past 2 years, I can say there's no hard feelings and I trust he'll do a good job in his new role.
The changes to the CSM
I'm not a big fan of the idea of there being 7 members only, especially since the top 7 are usually representatives of large 0.0 alliances, but it's not something I can do much about (budget is budget). I insisted vehemently that STV would be a very bad thing until voter turnout increases, because with low voter turnout, STV gives an advantage to blocs (you can read the rest of my argument in the minutes :p). That message was well received, at least for now...
I agreed with the requirement to get a number of "likes" in a forum thread prior to the elections, the number I thought would be appropriate was at least 50 and no more than 100.
The Economy
During the economy session, the question of the economic input of incursions came up. Just to be clear, I agree with the assertion that the payout/time needs to be made more uniform across sites, a full argumentation for my reasoning why can be found on the forums. And for those who are not going to read the posts in that thread: I like incursions, I want more of them, I like the rewards as they are for most player, it's the blitzability I don't like.
The PLEX
I'll only say for this session was heavily about economics and influences between markets etc. As such, Trebor and I were practically the only ones talking with Eyjo, so I agree with everything in there ;-)
Security
I'll just point out I wasn't the one arguing that "arms race" point.
Crucible wrapup
"The CSM noted that the new T2 Triage module was functionally useless." Special mention for my triaging friends: I did say it, twice :p
"The CSM praised Crucible’s addition of implants on pod killmails". It took 3 years since I first made that request, but man I'm happy it got done. The dev who coded it (CCP Masterplan) got a bottle of vodka ;-)
"The CSM reiterated its desire for CCP to implement a partial skill respec, especially in the aftermath of major changes to ship classes such as the removal of drones from supercarriers."
One of the ways our good friend Mittens accomplishes things is by repetition and bundling. This is a valid tactic, one he uses repeatedly to good effect. The downside is when you disagree, you have to object a lot of times, which I had to do against the inclusion at least 4 times during the meetings, none of which mentioned in the minutes. So, no "The CSM" didn't reiterate its desire, the other 8 members did. I think it's a terrible terrible idea, and I've written very long posts on the subject about why. I'll probably reproduce them here, after this is done. But let me be clear on this point. I insisted it was a bad idea every time.
About the jump spool-up, it's a follow-up on a previous discussion (held during CSM 5), the idea is not new, it tries to handle a very real issue, and there are ways to do it which I support and others which I object. The main problem being that people would have time to flee from a scene when a beacon is lit if the spool-up works as a delay on a committed jump to an existing beacon.
The supercap tackling point on supercarrier wasn't one I particularly liked, at least not as a supercarrier only mechanics, if more ways to keep supers on field are going to be designed, I'd rather see a new ship class (capital interdictor, whatever), or the "stronger warp core strength" method. Otherwise it's another case where the only way of killing a super is with another super. And that I don't like.
Station Services on NPC Nullsec Stations
Having grown in the Great Wildlands, where NPC stations are the only options, I spent my time during that session defending the need for viability of NPC 0.0. I don't disagree with destructible outposts (on the contrary), but NPC 0.0, particularly when it's not surrounded by sov 0.0 need to be preserved as a viable place to live. Another thing the minutes don't mention is that I don't want services to be disabled for NPC 0.0 stations or this line: "CCP offered a suggestion of having a capital-only docking service added to NPC stations that could be disabled. The CSM agreed that this might work, as long as the service would regenerate over time." I disagreed with. I want capitals to be able to dock in NPC 0.0 stations.
Little things – Factional Warfare, Wormholes
Since I live currently mostly in lowsec, and KEEN (Rooks and Kings' wormhole division) lives primarily in wormholes, these topics were of particular interest to me. My general stance on FW is that it needs to be fostered, and the ways in which it could be are mostly what is described in the minutes. To the forum posters who object to the notion of FW being a testbed for 0.0 sov mechanics, it's the other way around. Meaningful occupancy mechanics need to be developed for Faction Warfare. And if they work correctly, the same principles should be extended to 0.0. To be clear, the devs (and I) really want Factional Warfare to be meaningful in its own right.
Wormholes
This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM. That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting. Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes. I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)
"Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people.". Pod people, why not, attack POSes I objected to that idea.
[Side politicking bit]
I take offense at Two Step's notion (he wrote this slightly self-serving part of the minutes) that the changes requested to wormholes are his and his only, by the way. He had a list, but many of the items in the list had been discussed before by others (including yours truly), and it wasn't the whole set of changes requested. For better or worse, the minutes have been kept free of names, I think it extremely poor taste to attribute to oneself the collective work in this instance. While he did a good job as a CSM alternate, the change requests to wormholes that have been made this year are far from his alone.
[/side politicking bit]
Game balance
I agreed the drake needed a rebalance, I agree the resits may be too high, but I certainly didn't agree that the RoF was the way to go (I actually don't remember hearing that mentioned at all, but I've been assured it's been said). My point of view on the drake is that it has both good long range damage, good buffer, good passive tank. Other BCs have to make compromises, the drake doesn't.
I agree (I actually request this) that Fleet CSes be looked into, the "multi-bonus" is a could not should as far as I'm concerned, but they need to be better than the T3 in raw bonus on a given ganglink.
The trickle mode I offered when I suggested it was to have the amount drained be a the actual value divided by the percentage difference between the nosser and the target. Either way it's a possibility if devs feel the NOSes need to be improved. I like them as they are, but that option could be viable.
Highsec wardec mechanics
Those haven't been included in the minutes, but the general idea and direction for them was the one I had been requesting, so I was happy with that session. The ability to be wardecced is not something I want to remove, by the way, just the way it happens and the griefing aspects of it. Won't say more on the subject...
Future highlevel discussions – Fixing broken systems
Using faction warfare as a test-bed for nullsec sov? -> Once more, no, implementing FW occupancy correctly and extending that to 0.0. In this instance, FW mechanics are the important bit.
Several CSMs didn’t like the idea of affecting spaceships directly -> I didn't like the idea. A ship should perform equally under sov than not.
CSM emphasized that "nullsec is about hate and cruelty". -> I didn't, but I don't necessarily disagree as far as large wars are concerned. My concerns when it comes to 0.0 are not about large wars (other people handle that bit well), my concern is how to get more people to enjoy it without being curbstomped.
The lowsec part were nice ideas being floated around, unfortunately no conclusions reached during most of that session. The line of thought that was CCP's during this conversation was however very much in line with the changes to FW/lowsec/piracy that I want.
In that same conversation, I objected to the notion that a ship was, in the context of piracy, a money-earning activity in and of itself. So that is why I made the comment "One CSM member pointed out that that buying a ship to fight in is not an investment in making more ISK (like when a player invests in his mission running ship), it is an investment in fun". I had added that such a balance would only be achieved when the value of fittings would be worth twice that of the hull on average (considering the item drop formula), and for that to happen drastic changes would need to occur on the module market, none of which have been discussed or are foreseeable. And some of which being undesirable (would mean T2 items worth at least 3 times more than they are now).
About ganking: One CSM comment was that if a player gets shot down by Concord, he shouldn't get a cut of the payout from the poor guy he just ganked. I don't remember if I said this or if I simply agree, but basically this. Ganking should be a viable activity (no space should be safe), but it shouldn't be a revenue stream, except preying on idiots ferrying billions in frigates.
A meeting with the Art department
I just want to point out that this conversation where we compared our priorities as far as art is concerned is the first that ever happened. We had meetings with art in previous CSMs, but never have we managed to get "priority" discussions. This is a very very positive change.
The rest of the minutes are fine with me.
Random/Misc stuff I forgot
Just commenting on some stuff other bloggers have reacted to...
I supported Drone giving ISK bounties instead of drone alloys. While this creates an influx of ISK, it helps revalue mining. It's a small step in the direction of making mining a viable activity again.
The basic idea that I support in terms of sov as a source of wealth is that the value generation should come from the bottom up, not top to bottom. Ie, if the rank & file make isk, the alliance gets richer, otherwise it doesn't. The moon as a primary income source for alliances causes a lot of differences in territory valuation, and decreases the overall fun to be had by members.
Faction Warfare leaders could be elected, and pvp should play a larger part in FW ranks, as opposed to PvE plexing.
The number and "category" of items that CCP has available to throw at the NeX store is of such nature that I think CCP should hold back on those until such a time as a viable regular release plan is decided, as well as a sane pricing structure. Releasing more stuff "because it's there" without a plan would be a bad thing.
In closing
This meeting was the last of CSM 6, it also marks an milestone of sorts for me. A while ago, I received this message:
That marked the beginning of what is currently the longest held position on the CSM, more than 3 years, 5 terms... This term was a very nice one. I had great pleasure in working with my fellow delegates, and I hope I will be there again for some time to come. So thanks to everyone who voted for me over the years, I hope you will do the same next one.
PS: I'll be out of the country until wednesday, so won't have time to comment/react until then
The latest CSM Meeting Minutes are out.
A foreword on minute writing and The Borg
There's been some discussion about the use of "The CSM" throughout the minutes.
Throughout the CSMs, minutes had been released over the course of the term, highlighting individual stances and points of view and, to an extent, allowing some accountability. As far as the CSM-CCP face to face meetings were concerned, the minutes used either individual names or "The CSM" to denote a general degree of consensus. This construct was very useful in the first CSMs, because we were perceived as a loose collection of individuals incapable of constructive communal approach to problems, which wasn't the case. However in CSM 6, there have been none of the regular meetings where voting happened, instead favouring internal forum debates where points of view are exchanged, and on issues known to be tricky, internal consensus was reached among ourselves before reaching out to the devs. This change is not for the worst in terms of progress and efficacy, and I genuinely believe this allowed us to be very constructive. However in terms of accountability and allowing the public at large to know "who does what, who thinks what", this way of doing things is a failure.
Before the minutes were being written out, I had requested individual names be used wherever applicable, our secretary considered the suggestion but eventually decided not to go through with that suggestion. So I'll just have to go through the minutes again and say what I personally think and where my opinion differs or where my opinion was the one emphasized in a way or other.
Just to be clear, I don't mean by this to bash Trebor (CSM 6 Secretary) for his job with the minutes. If every CSM member had to be ranked in terms of time spent working on CSM stuff, he's at the top, just like he was during CSM 5, and I know from experience doing minutes is gruesome work.
This Council has been one of the most generally homogenous CSM to date. From the start it became apparent that a number of councilors were representative of the same playstyle, which in my opinion dilutes the value (if 6 voices say the same thing, one would have been as good). Still, Seleene was in there and despite being a member of a 0.0 alliance at the time, his former experience as Game Designer for Eve brought something different to the table. Trebor may have been a member of a sovholding alliance at some point too, but he wasn't the classical alliance leader representative and had some degree of knowledge of other subjects/areas, and I obviously do my own thing, going with whatever I believe is best for the game as a whole no matter who it seems to favor. I expected Mittens to be the major speaking person for the rest, and it mostly proved true, but he was quite productive and while I may not agree with all his ideas/opinions, he did present them well. So while the number of messages was limited, there was a good overlap from a number of good people. Let me reiterate that I do not in any way endorse the opinions of these members as a whole, rather that I find that they have a point to make, they make it, whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant as long as it's not retarded. Biased does not count as retarded.
As a final point on hivemind, I'll point out that throughout most of the term, there was little question what was a priority (get back to working on the fucking game), differences emerged when we finally obtained that and the focus was placed on smaller detailed changes. So it's fair to say the CSM was in agreement most of the time, but the devil lies in the details...
The minutes
Unless pointed otherwise, whenever "The CSM" is used, I agreed. Some points I will clarify.
A glaring "omission" is, to start with, the fact that the only thing I requested is that it be pointed out specifically I objected to partial skill respec. This is an important point to me as I was the only one speaking against it and arguing against it repeatedly during the meetings. The subject came up like 3 or 4 times, I objected it every time, yet not once is my objection mentioned. Either way, more on that later...
The reorganisation
The reason I asked "what role the Creative Director will be playing." is because Torfi, creative director, has been perceived and generally pointed at as the reason for so many resources being spent (wasted?) on InCarna, seeing that he was still part of the organisation post-layoff, the question was obviously what job he'd do, what level of authority he would have and whether he would go back to what I personally perceive as his strongest point: coming up with good ideas, particularly when it comes to the aesthetical and graphical aspect of the game.
While I was happy to see the reorganization of the company, and the fact Jon Lander (CCP Unifex) would be taking the lead, I was a bit afraid CCP Zulu would be perceived as the reason everything failed. Zulu did a good job (particularly in CSM 5, beginning of 6), then went a tad too much to the "dark side", but he was given an impossible task. So as one who's worked with him over the past 2 years, I can say there's no hard feelings and I trust he'll do a good job in his new role.
The changes to the CSM
I'm not a big fan of the idea of there being 7 members only, especially since the top 7 are usually representatives of large 0.0 alliances, but it's not something I can do much about (budget is budget). I insisted vehemently that STV would be a very bad thing until voter turnout increases, because with low voter turnout, STV gives an advantage to blocs (you can read the rest of my argument in the minutes :p). That message was well received, at least for now...
I agreed with the requirement to get a number of "likes" in a forum thread prior to the elections, the number I thought would be appropriate was at least 50 and no more than 100.
The Economy
During the economy session, the question of the economic input of incursions came up. Just to be clear, I agree with the assertion that the payout/time needs to be made more uniform across sites, a full argumentation for my reasoning why can be found on the forums. And for those who are not going to read the posts in that thread: I like incursions, I want more of them, I like the rewards as they are for most player, it's the blitzability I don't like.
The PLEX
I'll only say for this session was heavily about economics and influences between markets etc. As such, Trebor and I were practically the only ones talking with Eyjo, so I agree with everything in there ;-)
Security
I'll just point out I wasn't the one arguing that "arms race" point.
Crucible wrapup
"The CSM noted that the new T2 Triage module was functionally useless." Special mention for my triaging friends: I did say it, twice :p
"The CSM praised Crucible’s addition of implants on pod killmails". It took 3 years since I first made that request, but man I'm happy it got done. The dev who coded it (CCP Masterplan) got a bottle of vodka ;-)
"The CSM reiterated its desire for CCP to implement a partial skill respec, especially in the aftermath of major changes to ship classes such as the removal of drones from supercarriers."
One of the ways our good friend Mittens accomplishes things is by repetition and bundling. This is a valid tactic, one he uses repeatedly to good effect. The downside is when you disagree, you have to object a lot of times, which I had to do against the inclusion at least 4 times during the meetings, none of which mentioned in the minutes. So, no "The CSM" didn't reiterate its desire, the other 8 members did. I think it's a terrible terrible idea, and I've written very long posts on the subject about why. I'll probably reproduce them here, after this is done. But let me be clear on this point. I insisted it was a bad idea every time.
About the jump spool-up, it's a follow-up on a previous discussion (held during CSM 5), the idea is not new, it tries to handle a very real issue, and there are ways to do it which I support and others which I object. The main problem being that people would have time to flee from a scene when a beacon is lit if the spool-up works as a delay on a committed jump to an existing beacon.
The supercap tackling point on supercarrier wasn't one I particularly liked, at least not as a supercarrier only mechanics, if more ways to keep supers on field are going to be designed, I'd rather see a new ship class (capital interdictor, whatever), or the "stronger warp core strength" method. Otherwise it's another case where the only way of killing a super is with another super. And that I don't like.
Station Services on NPC Nullsec Stations
Having grown in the Great Wildlands, where NPC stations are the only options, I spent my time during that session defending the need for viability of NPC 0.0. I don't disagree with destructible outposts (on the contrary), but NPC 0.0, particularly when it's not surrounded by sov 0.0 need to be preserved as a viable place to live. Another thing the minutes don't mention is that I don't want services to be disabled for NPC 0.0 stations or this line: "CCP offered a suggestion of having a capital-only docking service added to NPC stations that could be disabled. The CSM agreed that this might work, as long as the service would regenerate over time." I disagreed with. I want capitals to be able to dock in NPC 0.0 stations.
Little things – Factional Warfare, Wormholes
Since I live currently mostly in lowsec, and KEEN (Rooks and Kings' wormhole division) lives primarily in wormholes, these topics were of particular interest to me. My general stance on FW is that it needs to be fostered, and the ways in which it could be are mostly what is described in the minutes. To the forum posters who object to the notion of FW being a testbed for 0.0 sov mechanics, it's the other way around. Meaningful occupancy mechanics need to be developed for Faction Warfare. And if they work correctly, the same principles should be extended to 0.0. To be clear, the devs (and I) really want Factional Warfare to be meaningful in its own right.
Wormholes
This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM. That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting. Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes. I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)
"Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people.". Pod people, why not, attack POSes I objected to that idea.
[Side politicking bit]
I take offense at Two Step's notion (he wrote this slightly self-serving part of the minutes) that the changes requested to wormholes are his and his only, by the way. He had a list, but many of the items in the list had been discussed before by others (including yours truly), and it wasn't the whole set of changes requested. For better or worse, the minutes have been kept free of names, I think it extremely poor taste to attribute to oneself the collective work in this instance. While he did a good job as a CSM alternate, the change requests to wormholes that have been made this year are far from his alone.
[/side politicking bit]
Game balance
I agreed the drake needed a rebalance, I agree the resits may be too high, but I certainly didn't agree that the RoF was the way to go (I actually don't remember hearing that mentioned at all, but I've been assured it's been said). My point of view on the drake is that it has both good long range damage, good buffer, good passive tank. Other BCs have to make compromises, the drake doesn't.
I agree (I actually request this) that Fleet CSes be looked into, the "multi-bonus" is a could not should as far as I'm concerned, but they need to be better than the T3 in raw bonus on a given ganglink.
The trickle mode I offered when I suggested it was to have the amount drained be a the actual value divided by the percentage difference between the nosser and the target. Either way it's a possibility if devs feel the NOSes need to be improved. I like them as they are, but that option could be viable.
Highsec wardec mechanics
Those haven't been included in the minutes, but the general idea and direction for them was the one I had been requesting, so I was happy with that session. The ability to be wardecced is not something I want to remove, by the way, just the way it happens and the griefing aspects of it. Won't say more on the subject...
Future highlevel discussions – Fixing broken systems
Using faction warfare as a test-bed for nullsec sov? -> Once more, no, implementing FW occupancy correctly and extending that to 0.0. In this instance, FW mechanics are the important bit.
Several CSMs didn’t like the idea of affecting spaceships directly -> I didn't like the idea. A ship should perform equally under sov than not.
CSM emphasized that "nullsec is about hate and cruelty". -> I didn't, but I don't necessarily disagree as far as large wars are concerned. My concerns when it comes to 0.0 are not about large wars (other people handle that bit well), my concern is how to get more people to enjoy it without being curbstomped.
The lowsec part were nice ideas being floated around, unfortunately no conclusions reached during most of that session. The line of thought that was CCP's during this conversation was however very much in line with the changes to FW/lowsec/piracy that I want.
In that same conversation, I objected to the notion that a ship was, in the context of piracy, a money-earning activity in and of itself. So that is why I made the comment "One CSM member pointed out that that buying a ship to fight in is not an investment in making more ISK (like when a player invests in his mission running ship), it is an investment in fun". I had added that such a balance would only be achieved when the value of fittings would be worth twice that of the hull on average (considering the item drop formula), and for that to happen drastic changes would need to occur on the module market, none of which have been discussed or are foreseeable. And some of which being undesirable (would mean T2 items worth at least 3 times more than they are now).
About ganking: One CSM comment was that if a player gets shot down by Concord, he shouldn't get a cut of the payout from the poor guy he just ganked. I don't remember if I said this or if I simply agree, but basically this. Ganking should be a viable activity (no space should be safe), but it shouldn't be a revenue stream, except preying on idiots ferrying billions in frigates.
A meeting with the Art department
I just want to point out that this conversation where we compared our priorities as far as art is concerned is the first that ever happened. We had meetings with art in previous CSMs, but never have we managed to get "priority" discussions. This is a very very positive change.
The rest of the minutes are fine with me.
Random/Misc stuff I forgot
Just commenting on some stuff other bloggers have reacted to...
I supported Drone giving ISK bounties instead of drone alloys. While this creates an influx of ISK, it helps revalue mining. It's a small step in the direction of making mining a viable activity again.
The basic idea that I support in terms of sov as a source of wealth is that the value generation should come from the bottom up, not top to bottom. Ie, if the rank & file make isk, the alliance gets richer, otherwise it doesn't. The moon as a primary income source for alliances causes a lot of differences in territory valuation, and decreases the overall fun to be had by members.
Faction Warfare leaders could be elected, and pvp should play a larger part in FW ranks, as opposed to PvE plexing.
The number and "category" of items that CCP has available to throw at the NeX store is of such nature that I think CCP should hold back on those until such a time as a viable regular release plan is decided, as well as a sane pricing structure. Releasing more stuff "because it's there" without a plan would be a bad thing.
In closing
This meeting was the last of CSM 6, it also marks an milestone of sorts for me. A while ago, I received this message:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM, CSM-admin <xxxxxx@ccpgames.com> wrote:
Hi,You have been elected as an alternate in the CSM elections. You can find the full results in the latest CSM dev blog.
That marked the beginning of what is currently the longest held position on the CSM, more than 3 years, 5 terms... This term was a very nice one. I had great pleasure in working with my fellow delegates, and I hope I will be there again for some time to come. So thanks to everyone who voted for me over the years, I hope you will do the same next one.
PS: I'll be out of the country until wednesday, so won't have time to comment/react until then
Thursday, October 20, 2011
CCP Layoffs
CCP just laid off 20% of its task force. It's nothing the CSM can really say about it, so these are my personal thoughts...
We still don't have clear answers as to who got laid off, but the first I can see a sizeable part consists in "new" hires and WoD people.
The part that annoys me is that the people responsible are still going to be there to repeat their stupid mistakes.
It's fairly simple... Layoffs happen because cash is not available.
Cash is not available because subscription for Eve are not where they should be, and the growth does not provide indication enough that the prospect are overwhelmingly positive, so investors are not going to poney up cash if there's no good prospect.
The reason the subs are not where they should be is because of 2 failed InCarna expansions. We warned CCP it would happen, employees warned it would happen, and yet they went through with it.
Hilmar may have come forward to take the blame, and that's fine he's the CEO after all, but eventually one has to realize that Hilmar bases his decisions based on more than just himself. "People" had been pushing for that ridiculous plan. Yet they don't seem to have taken any blame for that.
In addition to which NeX could have been a success and a show for growth. Once again the release was botched, and the people responsible for the insane pricing structure are still around.
Bad decisions happen, especially when you try things out. A string of bad decisions in the face of contrary evidence however should result in sanctions.
Lay-offs, if they're unavoidable, are a good opportunity to get rid of the dead weight accumulated over the years. In every company there's people who are redundant, unproductive, and some who got there because of nepotism, sometimes all of the above. On this scale it's unavoidable that good people get eliminated who shouldn't be, but they can be a minority.
It seems that instead of axing the people responsible and the dead weight, CCP managed to botch its round of layoffs as well... Sad...
So once more, good luck and godspeed to the good people at CCP who got axed.
We still don't have clear answers as to who got laid off, but the first I can see a sizeable part consists in "new" hires and WoD people.
The part that annoys me is that the people responsible are still going to be there to repeat their stupid mistakes.
It's fairly simple... Layoffs happen because cash is not available.
Cash is not available because subscription for Eve are not where they should be, and the growth does not provide indication enough that the prospect are overwhelmingly positive, so investors are not going to poney up cash if there's no good prospect.
The reason the subs are not where they should be is because of 2 failed InCarna expansions. We warned CCP it would happen, employees warned it would happen, and yet they went through with it.
Hilmar may have come forward to take the blame, and that's fine he's the CEO after all, but eventually one has to realize that Hilmar bases his decisions based on more than just himself. "People" had been pushing for that ridiculous plan. Yet they don't seem to have taken any blame for that.
In addition to which NeX could have been a success and a show for growth. Once again the release was botched, and the people responsible for the insane pricing structure are still around.
Bad decisions happen, especially when you try things out. A string of bad decisions in the face of contrary evidence however should result in sanctions.
Lay-offs, if they're unavoidable, are a good opportunity to get rid of the dead weight accumulated over the years. In every company there's people who are redundant, unproductive, and some who got there because of nepotism, sometimes all of the above. On this scale it's unavoidable that good people get eliminated who shouldn't be, but they can be a minority.
It seems that instead of axing the people responsible and the dead weight, CCP managed to botch its round of layoffs as well... Sad...
So once more, good luck and godspeed to the good people at CCP who got axed.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
How I do it
Being on the CSM, I get a barrage of complaints about the game, and people who contact me usually expect me to do something about it.
I spend countless hours reading about issues and problems voiced by people who engage in all of the activities eve has to offer. Living at a POS in wormholes is much harder than it needs to be, supercapitals are broken, industry hasn't had improvements in ages and many of the POS modules are useless, bots ruin the game, mining is boring and not really profitable, lowsec has no purpose, hybrids are broken, Black Ops are worthless, ... I could go on and on all day.
Many of the past CSM delegates burn out after a term, or even during the term, in no small part because not only do we get to listen and repeat that things are broken day in and day out, we have to face the frustration of dealing with the internal politics of a company, something the average player doesn't have to deal with; that the realities of software development are hard; and that resource allocation is never what we think it should be; etc. In addition to the "Eve Online" drama, we have the CSM Drama and the CCP Drama... CSM Members get sometimes bashed when CCP blunders, but you don't get to see how many blunders we actually manage to prevent.
Former and current CSM members sometimes comment "I don't know how you manage to do it and not get submerged by all this". I never thought about it very much, I just keep trudging along through thick and thin. After some thought the answer is pretty easy however: As it is, Eve Online is a good game. It has a large community of players, they're engaged, they communicate, they create things within the game and out of the game. The game itself is ever evolving, people find new things to use and abuse, groups of people rise and fall, everyone in their little corner of the game has something fun and interesting they're doing. They may be trying to build a mining corporation in highsec or shooting sansha in the face for fun and money or making traps for one another to blow their hard-earned spaceships up, but everyone is doing something, has a plan or a goal or a vision...
Eve is something that provides fun for the 18 year old college student in search of PvP adrenaline to my 81 year old (it's true) corpmate who enjoys logging in 1 or 2 hours a day to gather minerals and doing missions while chatting with people. We focus so much on the negative aspect we often lose sight of all the things that make Eve the great game it is, even with its issues.
I haven't turned all stary-eyed and morphed into a fanboi all of a sudden, I'm usually extremely [constructively] critical, I've been characterized as "Pitbull" or Mr. "What the hell is wrong with you" Cop during CSM-CPP meetings, but when trying to fix the flaws, it is sometimes nice to remember why we want to fix those so badly in the first place... So I take a step back, look at the game as a whole, and then dive into problem fixing :rage: mode.
Each has their own thing, but if you're curious my friends in Rooks and Kings are invaluable in providing the kind of fun I keep playing the game for (when I'm not busy manufacturing stuff :p), the latest examples of which can be read about here and here.
I spend countless hours reading about issues and problems voiced by people who engage in all of the activities eve has to offer. Living at a POS in wormholes is much harder than it needs to be, supercapitals are broken, industry hasn't had improvements in ages and many of the POS modules are useless, bots ruin the game, mining is boring and not really profitable, lowsec has no purpose, hybrids are broken, Black Ops are worthless, ... I could go on and on all day.
Many of the past CSM delegates burn out after a term, or even during the term, in no small part because not only do we get to listen and repeat that things are broken day in and day out, we have to face the frustration of dealing with the internal politics of a company, something the average player doesn't have to deal with; that the realities of software development are hard; and that resource allocation is never what we think it should be; etc. In addition to the "Eve Online" drama, we have the CSM Drama and the CCP Drama... CSM Members get sometimes bashed when CCP blunders, but you don't get to see how many blunders we actually manage to prevent.
Former and current CSM members sometimes comment "I don't know how you manage to do it and not get submerged by all this". I never thought about it very much, I just keep trudging along through thick and thin. After some thought the answer is pretty easy however: As it is, Eve Online is a good game. It has a large community of players, they're engaged, they communicate, they create things within the game and out of the game. The game itself is ever evolving, people find new things to use and abuse, groups of people rise and fall, everyone in their little corner of the game has something fun and interesting they're doing. They may be trying to build a mining corporation in highsec or shooting sansha in the face for fun and money or making traps for one another to blow their hard-earned spaceships up, but everyone is doing something, has a plan or a goal or a vision...
Eve is something that provides fun for the 18 year old college student in search of PvP adrenaline to my 81 year old (it's true) corpmate who enjoys logging in 1 or 2 hours a day to gather minerals and doing missions while chatting with people. We focus so much on the negative aspect we often lose sight of all the things that make Eve the great game it is, even with its issues.
I haven't turned all stary-eyed and morphed into a fanboi all of a sudden, I'm usually extremely [constructively] critical, I've been characterized as "Pitbull" or Mr. "What the hell is wrong with you" Cop during CSM-CPP meetings, but when trying to fix the flaws, it is sometimes nice to remember why we want to fix those so badly in the first place... So I take a step back, look at the game as a whole, and then dive into problem fixing :rage: mode.
Each has their own thing, but if you're curious my friends in Rooks and Kings are invaluable in providing the kind of fun I keep playing the game for (when I'm not busy manufacturing stuff :p), the latest examples of which can be read about here and here.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Once more into the breach, my friends
Verily, the bards will tell the tale of those valiant knights who went on to storm the castle, forsooth! Or something.
We showed up fresh for the meetings. There was one item on the agenda and that was to solve the non-vanity microtransactions. We went on over the messages, the historical and recent posts, we went over the intentions behind the words, past and present, we tried to tackle the problem in broad terms, in precise examples, eventually settled on leaving the easy stuff aside and attacking the problem by the middle (the grey areas).
We discussed the merits of precise (as in contractual) statements as opposed to vaguer statements. We discussed the definition of words. It wasn't easy. But we understood our mutual stances and worked from there.
Then we worked on the statements that each (the CSM and CCP) would publish following this summit separately then compared notes. Upon doing so, a 2 hour discussion flared up on an agreement we had met yesterday where one of the party was not in agreement anymore. Except it turned out they were and what each meant was not what the other meant. All in all, we all finished and agreed on the respective statements and went through with them.
Those statements are being translated, rereviewed and published most likely today.
There are always caveats when we can't talk about absolutes in such a tense situation. But I would advise the reader not to nitpick too much the wording.
I take the fact that CCP and the CSM argued so much over the definition of words and the statements in general as a sign they mean what they say.
The result is positive to me and I get out of the summit satisfied that I have done my job correctly, even though some things didn't go as far as I would have wanted (or as soon), but progress has definitely been made and the statements as they are stand on their own and it is my personal impression that this should restore a situation where we can finally start shooting one another again.
It is less important, but in addition to these things, we were shown parts of the next Eve marketing campaign (looks great), and received some surprising and welcome news as to the directions and progress several teams had made with their projects.
I am still in transit back from Iceland, and couldn't post yesterday due to hotel internet malfunction, but I'll be back home in a few hours.
If the devblog gets published and you have questions, I will log into Eve and here and on eve-o etc right as soon as I'm back home, so don't hesitate to ask questions.
Edit: while the released blog doesn't specifically address it: the player economy will not be circumvented. a painted/remodeled ship bought in the NeX store will require the regular version to be provided as well as AURUM.
We showed up fresh for the meetings. There was one item on the agenda and that was to solve the non-vanity microtransactions. We went on over the messages, the historical and recent posts, we went over the intentions behind the words, past and present, we tried to tackle the problem in broad terms, in precise examples, eventually settled on leaving the easy stuff aside and attacking the problem by the middle (the grey areas).
We discussed the merits of precise (as in contractual) statements as opposed to vaguer statements. We discussed the definition of words. It wasn't easy. But we understood our mutual stances and worked from there.
Then we worked on the statements that each (the CSM and CCP) would publish following this summit separately then compared notes. Upon doing so, a 2 hour discussion flared up on an agreement we had met yesterday where one of the party was not in agreement anymore. Except it turned out they were and what each meant was not what the other meant. All in all, we all finished and agreed on the respective statements and went through with them.
Those statements are being translated, rereviewed and published most likely today.
There are always caveats when we can't talk about absolutes in such a tense situation. But I would advise the reader not to nitpick too much the wording.
I take the fact that CCP and the CSM argued so much over the definition of words and the statements in general as a sign they mean what they say.
The result is positive to me and I get out of the summit satisfied that I have done my job correctly, even though some things didn't go as far as I would have wanted (or as soon), but progress has definitely been made and the statements as they are stand on their own and it is my personal impression that this should restore a situation where we can finally start shooting one another again.
It is less important, but in addition to these things, we were shown parts of the next Eve marketing campaign (looks great), and received some surprising and welcome news as to the directions and progress several teams had made with their projects.
I am still in transit back from Iceland, and couldn't post yesterday due to hotel internet malfunction, but I'll be back home in a few hours.
If the devblog gets published and you have questions, I will log into Eve and here and on eve-o etc right as soon as I'm back home, so don't hesitate to ask questions.
Edit: while the released blog doesn't specifically address it: the player economy will not be circumvented. a painted/remodeled ship bought in the NeX store will require the regular version to be provided as well as AURUM.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Emergency Meeting
Day 1 of the emergency meeting is practically over. Now we have the "informal meetings" that happen over dinner and beer. (No, these are not attempts at buying us off, though I'd love that).
I won't be able to discuss some specifics of the meetings until the thing is over and we've cleared everything, but a status update is in order.
The atmosphere within the attending CSMs was relatively relaxed. Unlike other times, there was no discussion about World of Tanks or other non-CSM things however and all of the time spent yesterday was spent talking about the issues. There is general consensus on the situation with some slight nuances when it comes to specifics.
Today, we started with the "easy stuff". InCarna perception, CQ, Nex Store useability and pricing structure, we also touched up a bit on the 99 dollars program. Tension was present in growing quantities over the day, but the conversations were constructive and not overly confrontational. Points were made clearly and unequivocally, but in a decent atmosphere.
The Employees within CCP who don't participate in the meetings and knew us took the time to discuss aspects of the issues during lunch and breaks, on both sides, either appreciating our perspective or playing devil's advocate or providing mitigating (but still reasonable) points to the discussion.
As far as the meetings are concerned, progress has been made on some points, elements of answers have been found for others. Overall I deemed this day positive with one caveat I will get into after the public announcement has been made (note to self:230).
The toughest day will obviously be tomorrow, and we'll see how that goes, but considering the conversations we've had both with people who will participate to those sessions and others, I have good hope things will turn out fine. Hope I won't be proven wrong.
Sorry for not getting into the gritty details, but it would be unfair to promise or incite to rage either way until things are set in stone.
Now off for debriefing with the CSM delegates. Will update tomorrow.
PS: I don't have *real* internet access, please repost this to the appropriate channels as appropriate.
PPS: Sorry for not answering all your evemails, there was just too many to respond to individually, I read them all up to yesterday.
Stephan aka Meissa Anunthiel
I won't be able to discuss some specifics of the meetings until the thing is over and we've cleared everything, but a status update is in order.
The atmosphere within the attending CSMs was relatively relaxed. Unlike other times, there was no discussion about World of Tanks or other non-CSM things however and all of the time spent yesterday was spent talking about the issues. There is general consensus on the situation with some slight nuances when it comes to specifics.
Today, we started with the "easy stuff". InCarna perception, CQ, Nex Store useability and pricing structure, we also touched up a bit on the 99 dollars program. Tension was present in growing quantities over the day, but the conversations were constructive and not overly confrontational. Points were made clearly and unequivocally, but in a decent atmosphere.
The Employees within CCP who don't participate in the meetings and knew us took the time to discuss aspects of the issues during lunch and breaks, on both sides, either appreciating our perspective or playing devil's advocate or providing mitigating (but still reasonable) points to the discussion.
As far as the meetings are concerned, progress has been made on some points, elements of answers have been found for others. Overall I deemed this day positive with one caveat I will get into after the public announcement has been made (note to self:230).
The toughest day will obviously be tomorrow, and we'll see how that goes, but considering the conversations we've had both with people who will participate to those sessions and others, I have good hope things will turn out fine. Hope I won't be proven wrong.
Sorry for not getting into the gritty details, but it would be unfair to promise or incite to rage either way until things are set in stone.
Now off for debriefing with the CSM delegates. Will update tomorrow.
PS: I don't have *real* internet access, please repost this to the appropriate channels as appropriate.
PPS: Sorry for not answering all your evemails, there was just too many to respond to individually, I read them all up to yesterday.
Stephan aka Meissa Anunthiel
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Light at the end of the tunnel?
It seems CCP has heard our complaints, partially at least...
CCP Zulu's latest devblog goes on in a better direction than the previous one...
While it doesn't fully address our concern, and what it does address does not do so to the extent we would want, it is apparent our message has been heard and CCP is willing to engage (again) in constructive dialog.
It may have been the case that CCPers were under pressure from top management to "stay the course" and our recent demonstrations/cancellations/posts/shooting at structures started to raise some alarms.
Either way, we've been summoned to Iceland on very short notice. Frankly I don't see the point, we could convey mostly the same thing with the skype conversations we've been having non-stop. However there's genuine added value to being present face to face when engaging in conflictual dialog, so that may be that, and also the people we are having skype conversations with may not be the same...
I just hope they don't hope they're going to change our minds by getting us some dinner or something, but I doubt that's what they plan. We've had enough interactions in the past for them to know I, for one, do not shy away from strong words when they are necessary and cannot be bought of. Considering the tone of this last message and the discussions we've had over the past days, I expect something productive to come out of it. We'll see... To recap, my position is this:
1) I don't want gold ammo, ships for $, +10% damage implants or any other form of "pay2win". I'm fine with t-shirts, ship paint jobs, corp logos on ships & outposts, that kind of non competitive thing. I want CCP to stick with that stance.
2) I want NeX price to be altered, ideally between the $2 and $5 price range for the vast majority of the items so that everyone can participate, as opposed to the to 10% richest plebs. I don't mind $150 monocles as long as everyone can participate to a significant degree.
3) I want commitment that the option not to load CQ stay in place until such time as the performance for docking & loading station environment becomes acceptable (read: 20 seconds on my machine, subjective criteria, I know :p)
4) I want clarifications on the $99 program so that fansites are not milked if they manage to recoup even the slightest bit of their cost through ads.
This is what I'll be going to Iceland with, as well as the reasons for those things. Should there be anything more to add, be sure to contact me or one of the other CSM delegates.
I'll definitely keep you posted.
CCP Zulu's latest devblog goes on in a better direction than the previous one...
While it doesn't fully address our concern, and what it does address does not do so to the extent we would want, it is apparent our message has been heard and CCP is willing to engage (again) in constructive dialog.
It may have been the case that CCPers were under pressure from top management to "stay the course" and our recent demonstrations/cancellations/posts/shooting at structures started to raise some alarms.
Either way, we've been summoned to Iceland on very short notice. Frankly I don't see the point, we could convey mostly the same thing with the skype conversations we've been having non-stop. However there's genuine added value to being present face to face when engaging in conflictual dialog, so that may be that, and also the people we are having skype conversations with may not be the same...
I just hope they don't hope they're going to change our minds by getting us some dinner or something, but I doubt that's what they plan. We've had enough interactions in the past for them to know I, for one, do not shy away from strong words when they are necessary and cannot be bought of. Considering the tone of this last message and the discussions we've had over the past days, I expect something productive to come out of it. We'll see... To recap, my position is this:
1) I don't want gold ammo, ships for $, +10% damage implants or any other form of "pay2win". I'm fine with t-shirts, ship paint jobs, corp logos on ships & outposts, that kind of non competitive thing. I want CCP to stick with that stance.
2) I want NeX price to be altered, ideally between the $2 and $5 price range for the vast majority of the items so that everyone can participate, as opposed to the to 10% richest plebs. I don't mind $150 monocles as long as everyone can participate to a significant degree.
3) I want commitment that the option not to load CQ stay in place until such time as the performance for docking & loading station environment becomes acceptable (read: 20 seconds on my machine, subjective criteria, I know :p)
4) I want clarifications on the $99 program so that fansites are not milked if they manage to recoup even the slightest bit of their cost through ads.
This is what I'll be going to Iceland with, as well as the reasons for those things. Should there be anything more to add, be sure to contact me or one of the other CSM delegates.
I'll definitely keep you posted.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
And so it continues...
Yesterday I was informed a mail was making the rounds, purported to be from CCP Hellmar (CCP CEO). That email was really really not good, and I hoped, for the sake of trying to find solutions, that it wouldn't get released to the world... The cat is out of the bag: http://www.evenews24.com/2011/06/25/ccp-hilmar-global-email-shows-the-reasoning-behind-ccp-zulu-devblog/
In that mail (that I couldn't confirm comes from Hilmar, so it may be wrong), we hear several things:
However, he also says this:
Also, if you have a subscription, cancel it. I don't ask you biomass your characters, I would rather see a resolution to these issues than stopping playing the game, but the only metrics CCP has easy access to is subscriber numbers. So cancel your subscription, and if you're about to lapse, buy a plex with that same CC. The non-permanence of your account will in and of itself send a strong message.
Will keep you informed.
In that mail (that I couldn't confirm comes from Hilmar, so it may be wrong), we hear several things:
[the latest expansion: CQ] rolls out without a hitch, is in some cases faster than what we had before, this is the pinnacle of professional achievement.The pinnacle of professional achievement... The turd that lets me dock up in 90 seconds, has lighting issues all over the place, disabled cynojammers, broke effects in wormholes, removed implants from people's heads... Ok...
After 40 hours we have already sold 52 monocles, generating more revenue than any of the other items in the store.So, going by these figures, CCP made, at most, in the first 2 days 15,000$. And they call that a success.
This we have done after months of research by a group of highly competent professionals, soliciting input and perspective from thought leaders and experts in and around our industry.And yet, a few weeks before release, they still didn't have a pricing plan to communicate to the CSM. I repeat, not that they didn't do it, they didn't HAVE it.
We went out with a decisive strategy on pricing and we will stay the course and not flip flop around or knee jerk react to the predictable.Sooo, in essence, that says "fuck you guys, you can shout all you want, we won't budge". This explains Zulu's devblog, and paints a bleak picture as far as negociation is concerned.
However, he also says this:
I can tell you this is one of the moments where we look at what our players do and less of what they say.
Since dialog is conditioned to actions, let me ask all of you, readers, to protest in Jita, Amarr, Rens. Jetcan shuttles, shoot monuments, rename all your ships, whatever is necessary.
Will keep you informed.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Adding napalm to the fire...
So I've spent the past 16 hours reading forums, posting in 4 languages on different forums, chatting continuously with CCP, with individual players, with my fellow CSM members. Kudos to Trebor Daehdoow, Seleene and Two Step for the continuous and constructive posts throughout the day, btw.
I've tried to put things in perspective, provide constructive feedback to CCP as to how to handle the drama. I might as well have been pissing in the wind...
After lengthy discussions, CCP finally got back to us with a draft devblog for feedback. I was baffled at what I was seeing, I couldn't believe CCP would post that after all we had talked. So I put my thinking cap on again and posted constructively in that thread, mentioning things that needed to be addressed, like "will CCP add items providing in-game advantage to the store" and "this pricing scheme will not work, change it", and asking for data on what the grand plan that was alluded to but never presented actually was.
1 hour later, while still waiting for comments on our feedback, the devblog gets posted, nearly as it was.
Needless to say, I'm fucking pissed. What have I been doing if it's to get ignored?
Specifically, the lack of comments about:
Not going to include items that provide in-game advantages (read: gold ammo) is terrible terrible news, and a total change from past comments from CCP to the CSM.
The pricing scheme, not only is it against our wishes, but it's plain retardedness from CCP as they're not going to accomplish their objective AND are going to alienate part of the playerbase in the process...
The crap performance of CQ and the stated temporary nature of the "do not load station environment" settings.
I don't know how to make CCP reason. They seem hell bent on putting their fingers in their ears and singing in unison "everything's fine and dandy, lalalalalalalalala can't hear you".
I have to think some more about this, but this doesn't smell good...
We're being consulted on the price scheme for the next batch of MT items. If it goes the way of the devblog, well don't hope for too much...
I've tried to put things in perspective, provide constructive feedback to CCP as to how to handle the drama. I might as well have been pissing in the wind...
After lengthy discussions, CCP finally got back to us with a draft devblog for feedback. I was baffled at what I was seeing, I couldn't believe CCP would post that after all we had talked. So I put my thinking cap on again and posted constructively in that thread, mentioning things that needed to be addressed, like "will CCP add items providing in-game advantage to the store" and "this pricing scheme will not work, change it", and asking for data on what the grand plan that was alluded to but never presented actually was.
1 hour later, while still waiting for comments on our feedback, the devblog gets posted, nearly as it was.
Needless to say, I'm fucking pissed. What have I been doing if it's to get ignored?
Specifically, the lack of comments about:
Not going to include items that provide in-game advantages (read: gold ammo) is terrible terrible news, and a total change from past comments from CCP to the CSM.
The pricing scheme, not only is it against our wishes, but it's plain retardedness from CCP as they're not going to accomplish their objective AND are going to alienate part of the playerbase in the process...
The crap performance of CQ and the stated temporary nature of the "do not load station environment" settings.
I don't know how to make CCP reason. They seem hell bent on putting their fingers in their ears and singing in unison "everything's fine and dandy, lalalalalalalalala can't hear you".
I have to think some more about this, but this doesn't smell good...
We're being consulted on the price scheme for the next batch of MT items. If it goes the way of the devblog, well don't hope for too much...
The recent CCP fuck-ups
This is a message I posted to CCP, I think it expresses my stance on the series of recent fuck-ups.
[note: There's nice things about the latest release. I like the turret effects, other than lighting it's nice to walk about in CQ, the new NPE & Aura is awesome, the integration for new player recruitment is great and I get reports that it accomplishes its goal.]
Hello CCP,
For the past 3 years as a member of the CSM I've been extremely constructive with you guys, even on things I disagreed with.
I like to think we've been a nice group of people to have conversations with so far, and overall trustworthy (we've had our moments, but heh). We disagree, but the discussions have led to more good results than not. We reach compromises and understand one another after discussing and we helped you both reach better decisions and communicate those better...
For that reason I don't understand the lack of communication to us about a series of things...
I've never had issues defending CCP's position publicly, even when I don't always agree with everything as long as I agree with the plan, I even went so far as publicly defend the objective behind the anomaly nerf, because I was willing to recognize that I may be wrong in the assertion that it wouldn't lead to the desired goal and I agreed with the goal (So far I was right by the way). One thing I don't like is being deceived, lied to, manipulated and otherwise ignored (that last bit is hubris, but forgive a man his ego :p).
The recent strings of fuck-ups fall in these category and each individually would be bad, but the series of it gets me irked.
Let's talk about $99.
When in Iceland, we were presented with a nice program. One that would let 3rd party application developers get access to more stuff than they have now, for a token fee (for a dev, $99 is nothing), and that people would be able to monetize their apps through that license. Then you publish the devblog and it looks like it's going to be mandatory (you didn't mention that), that you plan on taxing fansites who make money through advertising and that there's going to be no extra APIs or stuff. You'd think we'd be interested in knowing that...
There's been Eve fansites for 8 years, so the "IP dilution" thesis doesn't hold water. It can't be money grabbing, so what is it? Are you trying to tone down negative PR that sometimes comes from fansites and partners? I don't get it...
Then there's AURUM.
I don't give a shit about monocles or people having them. I care about you creating an experience that few will be able to take part in. That's both foolish in terms of resource spending and in terms of reception (not even talking about how much money you'll be able to make). First when we talked about it, you called it "microtransactions". Turns out it's MACROtransactions. Relabeling it "Virtual Goods" post facto does not really mitigate the fact that it's a drastic change in direction from what we initially talked about. We ASKED you for pricing values during the meeting in Iceland, you said it was being studied, we asked you to come back to us when you'd know, you said you would... You didn't... I explained my position on the relative value of items in the other thread, so I'm not going to repeat it now. But let me just say this: When you spend so much time and effort developing something, it'd be nice if more than 2% of the population could take part in it. "Have" and "Have nots" is not how you want to go with this. Create expensive items, sure, make them all cost an arm and a leg, not ok... Not for me... You mentionned having a plan. I'm still waiting to see it. Or at least have Dr.Eyjog or another economist come forward and say it makes sense. Because frankly from this point of view, it looks like there's no plan, that pricing scheme was thrown together 2 days before release without consulting anyone. Please show me that it's not the case.
Then there's Zinfandel's saying the CSM approved of the direct AURUM to scorpion conversion when we said the exact opposite. We, as a compromise, agreed that it wouldn't be too bad for 2 weeks. I'm sure it was a honest mistake, after all Rick engaged us quite constructively and meaningfully (thanks Zinfandel, don't stop), but it still leaves a sour taste...
Then there's InCarna part 1 of 2 aka CQ.
The performance is terrible, despite Zulu's assurance that docking would take the same time as it did before. And yeah, I'm aware there's the "turn off station environment" temporary solution. And I say temporary, because that's what Zulu said. This leaves me wondering "will I be stuck with 90 seconds docking time in december?". That would be totally unacceptable, and I'm waiting for an answer on that one. I understand software development, I know that sometimes unrealistic expectations have been set, but a clarification on the (new) acceptance criteria is definitely necessary.
Oh, side note, the lighting is not what it should be. I'll put that in the bug category.
And I'm still annoyed at being stuck with a verokhior character and no ability to change bloodline, as are many others. This isn't going to increase immersion (your stated objective) when people are forced into a character look they didn't pick.
Then, there's the nice PDF document...
The Stoffer/John thing: The point of the exercise was to show 2 different end of the spectrum when it comes to player perception about virtual goods, I get that. Different opinions are good to be able to reach sensible decisions.
What I don't get is how you can, in May 2011, after CSM 5 spent so much fucking time tell you we don't want that shit, plan on releasing "straight aurum to ships" and "ammunition". We told you time and time again SPECIFICALLY we don't want that. We named it, we don't want gold ammo. And the kicker for me is: you agreed, repeatedly! You said you wouldn't do it, then you still plan on doing it? I resent being lied to.
For Stoffer's sake, I'll address some of his points:
I already have controlled spending, I have a *SUBSCRIPTION* I already pay for the stuff. You want to add that kind of controlled spending you're talking about, then remove the subscription and go full retard. One thing you'll find out is that spending may increase, but playerbase will decrease. Income isn't everything, if I play a game where 30,000 people each spend 200$ a month, it's not a game I want to play, because unlike World of Tanks or LOTRO or DDO, Eve is extremely competitive and puts players against one another in a permanent world, as opposed to players against the environment or repeats of matches without consequences, and, let me repeat, has LASTING effects (that's one of your marketing points as I recall, you leave your mark on the world).
And no you're not going to be burnt at the stake for talking to us. Some go ballistic, but haven't we been able to hold constructive discussions in the past when we first talked about microtx? Haven't we given you ideas about what would be well received and what wouldn't?
Stoffer mentions "and if you don't like it, you can just buy a PLEX". Well, can you check the ISK income growth of the 30% of the playerbase who buy PLEXes today? How many of them can afford to buy more than one.
I think PLEXes are brilliant, they give an opportunity for people who are time rich and real money poor to play the game, and they do, and those people participate in making Eve a vibrant place with lots of people in it interacting. I'll repeat my point: $ income isn't the only metric. Would you think it acceptable to lose 50% of the playerbase if the remaining 50% pay twice more? I wouldn't.
I don't claim to have the answer to every question about these topics, these are my perceptions, maybe they're right, maybe they're not, but at the very least they're not gut reactions. As I told Kurt about something else, I'm willing to wear a pink tutu and post a youtube video apologizing for being wrong, but given how little I like tutus, this is not likely...
Now that I've expressed why I'm pissed, would you please be so kind in the future to at least talk to us and present these things before they have a chance to provide more and more drama, because one thing is certain, we may not be economist or game designers, but when it comes down to gauging player perception (at least in the short & medium terms), you suck, we don't...
Edit: And my stance with regards to pricing is this:
On the positive side, the items are nice looking and the store works fine. Now...
Where's the magic strategy? What data have you used to back it up? Why haven't we been consulted?
How do you expect to justify price differences between random items when, for the average player, it's going to be a case of "default clothing" vs "vanity clothing", and not a case of "this vanity clothing" vs "that vanity clothing". In essence you're not going to be able to justify a price difference between the items because the perceived value is "has one" vs "doesn't have one".
I don't give a rat's ass about a monocle costing $70, it could cost $200 and I wouldn't care, the problem is you put the barrier of entry too high, and there lies the problem with creating perceived value for your $70 shit, because too few people are going to participate.
It's supposed to be MICROtransactions, not MACROtransactions ffs. At least that's what you presented it to us as initially, renaming it "virtual goods" does not alter the fact.
This, compounded with the mischaracterization of our stance with the scorpion (I'll attribute it to oversight rather than intentionally trying to have us rubber stamp something we don't approve of) makes me really unhappy about the whole current situation.
You may have better ideas as to what the economic reasoning is behind this but if so I'd *LOVE* to hear them...
Another CSM member whose opinion is worth reading: http://seleenes-sandbox.blogspot.com/
[note: There's nice things about the latest release. I like the turret effects, other than lighting it's nice to walk about in CQ, the new NPE & Aura is awesome, the integration for new player recruitment is great and I get reports that it accomplishes its goal.]
Hello CCP,
For the past 3 years as a member of the CSM I've been extremely constructive with you guys, even on things I disagreed with.
I like to think we've been a nice group of people to have conversations with so far, and overall trustworthy (we've had our moments, but heh). We disagree, but the discussions have led to more good results than not. We reach compromises and understand one another after discussing and we helped you both reach better decisions and communicate those better...
For that reason I don't understand the lack of communication to us about a series of things...
I've never had issues defending CCP's position publicly, even when I don't always agree with everything as long as I agree with the plan, I even went so far as publicly defend the objective behind the anomaly nerf, because I was willing to recognize that I may be wrong in the assertion that it wouldn't lead to the desired goal and I agreed with the goal (So far I was right by the way). One thing I don't like is being deceived, lied to, manipulated and otherwise ignored (that last bit is hubris, but forgive a man his ego :p).
The recent strings of fuck-ups fall in these category and each individually would be bad, but the series of it gets me irked.
Let's talk about $99.
When in Iceland, we were presented with a nice program. One that would let 3rd party application developers get access to more stuff than they have now, for a token fee (for a dev, $99 is nothing), and that people would be able to monetize their apps through that license. Then you publish the devblog and it looks like it's going to be mandatory (you didn't mention that), that you plan on taxing fansites who make money through advertising and that there's going to be no extra APIs or stuff. You'd think we'd be interested in knowing that...
There's been Eve fansites for 8 years, so the "IP dilution" thesis doesn't hold water. It can't be money grabbing, so what is it? Are you trying to tone down negative PR that sometimes comes from fansites and partners? I don't get it...
Then there's AURUM.
I don't give a shit about monocles or people having them. I care about you creating an experience that few will be able to take part in. That's both foolish in terms of resource spending and in terms of reception (not even talking about how much money you'll be able to make). First when we talked about it, you called it "microtransactions". Turns out it's MACROtransactions. Relabeling it "Virtual Goods" post facto does not really mitigate the fact that it's a drastic change in direction from what we initially talked about. We ASKED you for pricing values during the meeting in Iceland, you said it was being studied, we asked you to come back to us when you'd know, you said you would... You didn't... I explained my position on the relative value of items in the other thread, so I'm not going to repeat it now. But let me just say this: When you spend so much time and effort developing something, it'd be nice if more than 2% of the population could take part in it. "Have" and "Have nots" is not how you want to go with this. Create expensive items, sure, make them all cost an arm and a leg, not ok... Not for me... You mentionned having a plan. I'm still waiting to see it. Or at least have Dr.Eyjog or another economist come forward and say it makes sense. Because frankly from this point of view, it looks like there's no plan, that pricing scheme was thrown together 2 days before release without consulting anyone. Please show me that it's not the case.
Then there's Zinfandel's saying the CSM approved of the direct AURUM to scorpion conversion when we said the exact opposite. We, as a compromise, agreed that it wouldn't be too bad for 2 weeks. I'm sure it was a honest mistake, after all Rick engaged us quite constructively and meaningfully (thanks Zinfandel, don't stop), but it still leaves a sour taste...
Then there's InCarna part 1 of 2 aka CQ.
The performance is terrible, despite Zulu's assurance that docking would take the same time as it did before. And yeah, I'm aware there's the "turn off station environment" temporary solution. And I say temporary, because that's what Zulu said. This leaves me wondering "will I be stuck with 90 seconds docking time in december?". That would be totally unacceptable, and I'm waiting for an answer on that one. I understand software development, I know that sometimes unrealistic expectations have been set, but a clarification on the (new) acceptance criteria is definitely necessary.
Oh, side note, the lighting is not what it should be. I'll put that in the bug category.
And I'm still annoyed at being stuck with a verokhior character and no ability to change bloodline, as are many others. This isn't going to increase immersion (your stated objective) when people are forced into a character look they didn't pick.
Then, there's the nice PDF document...
The Stoffer/John thing: The point of the exercise was to show 2 different end of the spectrum when it comes to player perception about virtual goods, I get that. Different opinions are good to be able to reach sensible decisions.
What I don't get is how you can, in May 2011, after CSM 5 spent so much fucking time tell you we don't want that shit, plan on releasing "straight aurum to ships" and "ammunition". We told you time and time again SPECIFICALLY we don't want that. We named it, we don't want gold ammo. And the kicker for me is: you agreed, repeatedly! You said you wouldn't do it, then you still plan on doing it? I resent being lied to.
For Stoffer's sake, I'll address some of his points:
I already have controlled spending, I have a *SUBSCRIPTION* I already pay for the stuff. You want to add that kind of controlled spending you're talking about, then remove the subscription and go full retard. One thing you'll find out is that spending may increase, but playerbase will decrease. Income isn't everything, if I play a game where 30,000 people each spend 200$ a month, it's not a game I want to play, because unlike World of Tanks or LOTRO or DDO, Eve is extremely competitive and puts players against one another in a permanent world, as opposed to players against the environment or repeats of matches without consequences, and, let me repeat, has LASTING effects (that's one of your marketing points as I recall, you leave your mark on the world).
And no you're not going to be burnt at the stake for talking to us. Some go ballistic, but haven't we been able to hold constructive discussions in the past when we first talked about microtx? Haven't we given you ideas about what would be well received and what wouldn't?
Stoffer mentions "and if you don't like it, you can just buy a PLEX". Well, can you check the ISK income growth of the 30% of the playerbase who buy PLEXes today? How many of them can afford to buy more than one.
I think PLEXes are brilliant, they give an opportunity for people who are time rich and real money poor to play the game, and they do, and those people participate in making Eve a vibrant place with lots of people in it interacting. I'll repeat my point: $ income isn't the only metric. Would you think it acceptable to lose 50% of the playerbase if the remaining 50% pay twice more? I wouldn't.
I don't claim to have the answer to every question about these topics, these are my perceptions, maybe they're right, maybe they're not, but at the very least they're not gut reactions. As I told Kurt about something else, I'm willing to wear a pink tutu and post a youtube video apologizing for being wrong, but given how little I like tutus, this is not likely...
Now that I've expressed why I'm pissed, would you please be so kind in the future to at least talk to us and present these things before they have a chance to provide more and more drama, because one thing is certain, we may not be economist or game designers, but when it comes down to gauging player perception (at least in the short & medium terms), you suck, we don't...
Edit: And my stance with regards to pricing is this:
On the positive side, the items are nice looking and the store works fine. Now...
Where's the magic strategy? What data have you used to back it up? Why haven't we been consulted?
How do you expect to justify price differences between random items when, for the average player, it's going to be a case of "default clothing" vs "vanity clothing", and not a case of "this vanity clothing" vs "that vanity clothing". In essence you're not going to be able to justify a price difference between the items because the perceived value is "has one" vs "doesn't have one".
I don't give a rat's ass about a monocle costing $70, it could cost $200 and I wouldn't care, the problem is you put the barrier of entry too high, and there lies the problem with creating perceived value for your $70 shit, because too few people are going to participate.
It's supposed to be MICROtransactions, not MACROtransactions ffs. At least that's what you presented it to us as initially, renaming it "virtual goods" does not alter the fact.
This, compounded with the mischaracterization of our stance with the scorpion (I'll attribute it to oversight rather than intentionally trying to have us rubber stamp something we don't approve of) makes me really unhappy about the whole current situation.
You may have better ideas as to what the economic reasoning is behind this but if so I'd *LOVE* to hear them...
Another CSM member whose opinion is worth reading: http://seleenes-sandbox.blogspot.com/
Monday, April 11, 2011
How I managed to miss all the fights
Rooks and Kings has a wormhole-specific corporation called Guillotine Therapy (KEEN), they're french, they're good at what they do. The rest of the alliance lives mostly in lowsec and goes to fight whatever is reachable wherever it may be, as long as there's a fight.
Regularly, KEEN calls our attention to some fun to be had in wormholes, so we gather some people (or many, depending on the perceived fight size), pack up our gear and get ready to get in there...
Last week was one such time.
It turns out that one of KEEN's POSes has been put in reinforced by a small fleet belonging to "nocorp". So I pack up my loki, head towards the lowsec wormhole entrance KEEN found for us some 20 jumps away, travel through 5 wormholes to arrive at the POS. And now we wait, logged off, for the reinforce timer to tick down...
Knowing how these things go, I stay on comms in case something happens. Sure enough, we intercept an Aperture Harmonics [AHARM] covops sneaking in and some more of their ships have been spotted in our wormhole... Things may escalate... So I wait while my alliance mates chain collapse wormholes...
My fridge is empty and I'm getting hungry, I haven't eaten yet today and I forgot to eat yesterday. I inform people I'll be AFK for 30 minutes to go buy some food. There's still 3 hours before the tower comes out of RF, I should be fine. I come back to find this on our killboard: http://www.rooksandkings.com/killboard/?a=kill_related&kll_id=25284 .
Turns out we spawned a wormhole connexion to Aperture Harmonic's main wormhole, jumped through and a fight ensued... I'm a bit annoyed, to say the least...
Now we're camping both sides of the wormhole, I'm logging in, ready to get into any possible fight, I jump to meet the fleet on AHARM's side. They don't bring anything at this stage and we're just quietly camping, debating on invading or not, retreating or not.
After a few hours of camping, I get a call from a RL friend, I have to leave. It's fine, the tower is being repped, we should still be in their wormhole when I'm back, I'm assured.
I come back, to find out AHARM had come to force the wormhole to collapse, a 2nd fight was had, and I had once more missed it...
The next morning, I log in and a prober finds me an exit back to empire so I can get back to our wormhole the back way. I end up in a 0.5 system in Derelik my character is -4.77 security status, travelling in highsec in a loki is out of the question, I have to get to Placid. A quick check on autopilot with settings "prefer less secure" paints a grim view. 83 jumps, some of which through highsec. Grrrr...
I bring a freighter alt to my location, put the loki in it, and travel with my pod back to home. A fun 2 hours of hauling follows.
Now I learn that the entrance we found back to the WH is deep within 0.0 (and certainly not closeby)... I give up and do some planetary interactions while the rest of our forces go and kill random people in WHs all through the evening.
Better luck next time I suppose.
The story of the people who don't eat or have friends or get stuck hauling stuff is here: http://failheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=159
Regularly, KEEN calls our attention to some fun to be had in wormholes, so we gather some people (or many, depending on the perceived fight size), pack up our gear and get ready to get in there...
Last week was one such time.
It turns out that one of KEEN's POSes has been put in reinforced by a small fleet belonging to "nocorp". So I pack up my loki, head towards the lowsec wormhole entrance KEEN found for us some 20 jumps away, travel through 5 wormholes to arrive at the POS. And now we wait, logged off, for the reinforce timer to tick down...
Knowing how these things go, I stay on comms in case something happens. Sure enough, we intercept an Aperture Harmonics [AHARM] covops sneaking in and some more of their ships have been spotted in our wormhole... Things may escalate... So I wait while my alliance mates chain collapse wormholes...
My fridge is empty and I'm getting hungry, I haven't eaten yet today and I forgot to eat yesterday. I inform people I'll be AFK for 30 minutes to go buy some food. There's still 3 hours before the tower comes out of RF, I should be fine. I come back to find this on our killboard: http://www.rooksandkings.com/killboard/?a=kill_related&kll_id=25284 .
Turns out we spawned a wormhole connexion to Aperture Harmonic's main wormhole, jumped through and a fight ensued... I'm a bit annoyed, to say the least...
Now we're camping both sides of the wormhole, I'm logging in, ready to get into any possible fight, I jump to meet the fleet on AHARM's side. They don't bring anything at this stage and we're just quietly camping, debating on invading or not, retreating or not.
After a few hours of camping, I get a call from a RL friend, I have to leave. It's fine, the tower is being repped, we should still be in their wormhole when I'm back, I'm assured.
I come back, to find out AHARM had come to force the wormhole to collapse, a 2nd fight was had, and I had once more missed it...
The next morning, I log in and a prober finds me an exit back to empire so I can get back to our wormhole the back way. I end up in a 0.5 system in Derelik my character is -4.77 security status, travelling in highsec in a loki is out of the question, I have to get to Placid. A quick check on autopilot with settings "prefer less secure" paints a grim view. 83 jumps, some of which through highsec. Grrrr...
I bring a freighter alt to my location, put the loki in it, and travel with my pod back to home. A fun 2 hours of hauling follows.
Now I learn that the entrance we found back to the WH is deep within 0.0 (and certainly not closeby)... I give up and do some planetary interactions while the rest of our forces go and kill random people in WHs all through the evening.
Better luck next time I suppose.
The story of the people who don't eat or have friends or get stuck hauling stuff is here: http://failheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=159
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Forum fuckups
Well, looks like CCP managed to screw up once more.
On the one hand I can be sympathetic. No piece of software is without bugs... That being said, some of the bugs exploited in here seem to reveal some gross ignorance of basic web app security. Ie, don't trust the client...
It's like, extremelly basic, web programming 101, totally stupid, retarded, ... no words...
There's not enough facepalm pictures out there to convey the enormity of the fail... It's mind boggling...
Now, Catari found the issues and reported them. It is my understanding he found them after the forums went live. Which means the devs had less than 24 hours to fix the issues before he went public. At that stage everything went downhill...
Reporting bugs to get fixes in place is one thing, showing off about CCP fucking up and making the situation worse in the process is another.
I've been asked "what is the CSM's position on this".
Well, there's no position to be had. Epic fail is epic fail.
I don't think we need to convince CCP that they need to tighten the security of the forum, or convince them to devote more resources than they are on it. We'll be certain to tell them in no uncertain terms what we think of that quite blatant lack of professionalism, but as much as bashing CCP is a popular sport on the forums, it's really not an interesting place to put oneself in if one wants to have a dialog (well, sometimes it is, but not in this instance).
In other news, cooperation and dialog with other CSM members still doing well. We're still all trying to get on the same page when it comes to positions on different topics, after initial discussion about its content, Mittani produced a draft of our first public announcement, a few members gave feedback in terms of form and content, all were incorporated into the latest version.
It's going pretty well I would say.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
And so it begins
CSM 6 starts today...
I wasn't sure I'd make it, but I did. I must say I was very happy about that, and a few people were surprised to see me there (which is something I also was happy about :p). So many thanks to everyone who voted for me and spread the word. Thank you, Gracias, Merci ;-)
The composition is really 0.0 heavy this time around:
- Mittani, Goonswarm
- Vile Rat, Goonswarm
- Draco Llasa, Razor,
- Killer2, Morsus Mihi
- White Tree, TEST
- UaxDeath, from xDeathx
- Seleene, AAA
- Trebor, Initiative Mercenaries
and myself, Meissa, Rooks and Kings :-)
There was much yelling on the forums about "0.0 ruining the game for everyone", so here's a few thoughts...
5 people from the same background saying the same thing is not equivalent to 5 people from different backgrounds saying the same thing. If individuals are nothing but mouthpieces for 0.0 and have no opinion or ideas of their own, they're not going to get anything more done, so that's one thing.
Second, despite coming from 0.0 background, I'm pretty sure some of these individuals have interesting things to contribute to things that are not 0.0 centric.
Mittani... Well, Mittens got elected by being his publicly douchebag self. That's a fair and viable election tactic. It got him elected, it worked. How he behaves on the CSM itself very likely will have little to do with how he got there in the first place. That's politics for you.
I know for a fact that he's more than capable of intelligent thought and discourse, is highly motivated, and has a certain well-known quality that will help getting the attention of the population of Eve (and outside of it too I suspect). Those things are a win in my opinion.
We'll see if he's capable of leaving his ego at the door when it comes to having actual live discussion and actually bring something to the discussions in Iceland, but if he doesn't, there's others that are capable on the council.
So far we got everyone talking semi-permanently together (permanent skype convo). Discussing things we agree on, things we disagree on, plans for communications, plans for getting stuff done, I've shared information as to how the CSM functions so everyone can turn their ideas into concrete things after. And we're probing each other a bit to see who thinks what and if we can truly have a unified front. For that's the thing, no matter where we originate from, it's safe to say that everyone wants to improve the game. We have different opinions, but that's a good thing, not a bad one.
While interspersed with lots of "lol, ur gay" moments, it's been 4 days of continuous meeting with the others, and quite productive ones at that.
As far as I'm concerned, I made it clear that I would be "on board" with the rest of the CSM as long as I agreed with what was said and done in my name. Considering the first bits, attempts at reaching a consensus have been seen, information and communication exchanges are happening, so there's a good chance this CSM will prove fruitful. Time will say...
It goes without saying that any proposal that 0.0 delegates oppose will have no chance of getting through (them having more than half the seats), but from the looks of it it's headed more into a direction where they won't oppose what they're not directly interested in, and actually try to provide meaningful input rather, than the opposite.
I will reserve judgment on the delegates until I've had more time to see them in action, so far no red flags...
I wasn't sure I'd make it, but I did. I must say I was very happy about that, and a few people were surprised to see me there (which is something I also was happy about :p). So many thanks to everyone who voted for me and spread the word. Thank you, Gracias, Merci ;-)
The composition is really 0.0 heavy this time around:
- Mittani, Goonswarm
- Vile Rat, Goonswarm
- Draco Llasa, Razor,
- Killer2, Morsus Mihi
- White Tree, TEST
- UaxDeath, from xDeathx
- Seleene, AAA
- Trebor, Initiative Mercenaries
and myself, Meissa, Rooks and Kings :-)
There was much yelling on the forums about "0.0 ruining the game for everyone", so here's a few thoughts...
5 people from the same background saying the same thing is not equivalent to 5 people from different backgrounds saying the same thing. If individuals are nothing but mouthpieces for 0.0 and have no opinion or ideas of their own, they're not going to get anything more done, so that's one thing.
Second, despite coming from 0.0 background, I'm pretty sure some of these individuals have interesting things to contribute to things that are not 0.0 centric.
Mittani... Well, Mittens got elected by being his publicly douchebag self. That's a fair and viable election tactic. It got him elected, it worked. How he behaves on the CSM itself very likely will have little to do with how he got there in the first place. That's politics for you.
I know for a fact that he's more than capable of intelligent thought and discourse, is highly motivated, and has a certain well-known quality that will help getting the attention of the population of Eve (and outside of it too I suspect). Those things are a win in my opinion.
We'll see if he's capable of leaving his ego at the door when it comes to having actual live discussion and actually bring something to the discussions in Iceland, but if he doesn't, there's others that are capable on the council.
So far we got everyone talking semi-permanently together (permanent skype convo). Discussing things we agree on, things we disagree on, plans for communications, plans for getting stuff done, I've shared information as to how the CSM functions so everyone can turn their ideas into concrete things after. And we're probing each other a bit to see who thinks what and if we can truly have a unified front. For that's the thing, no matter where we originate from, it's safe to say that everyone wants to improve the game. We have different opinions, but that's a good thing, not a bad one.
While interspersed with lots of "lol, ur gay" moments, it's been 4 days of continuous meeting with the others, and quite productive ones at that.
As far as I'm concerned, I made it clear that I would be "on board" with the rest of the CSM as long as I agreed with what was said and done in my name. Considering the first bits, attempts at reaching a consensus have been seen, information and communication exchanges are happening, so there's a good chance this CSM will prove fruitful. Time will say...
It goes without saying that any proposal that 0.0 delegates oppose will have no chance of getting through (them having more than half the seats), but from the looks of it it's headed more into a direction where they won't oppose what they're not directly interested in, and actually try to provide meaningful input rather, than the opposite.
I will reserve judgment on the delegates until I've had more time to see them in action, so far no red flags...
Preamble
I'm Meissa...
I hate blogs... I really do. Just the thought of sitting in front of this blank page to type :words: at people makes me cringe. Not only do I suck at wordsmithery, I'm a pro at procrastination. Not a very nice combination for a blogger... Whatever.
I've been a member of the Council of Stellar Management for a few years now. I first got in as an alternate of CSM 2, then a full member of CSM 3, then again as an alternate of CSM 4 -- this once on purpose, there was at the time a limit to how many times one could be elected as a full member and I wanted to be full member on CSM 5, but I didn't want to lose track of what was going on during CMS 4, so I carefully managed my election campaign to get enough votes to get alt but not so much that I'd get a seat. Tricky business, but it worked -- then full member of CSM 5, and once more of CSM 6...
I'm not e-famous, I'm a member of a 2 (or 3, depends) member corporation that started as a carebear corporation in empire. I wasn't CEO of my corporation, I just ran for CSM after my CEO (Kilhu Emmek) told me repeatedly I should run. I ran to show him I wouldn't get elected (haha).
Anyway, my story isn't much of one, I started as a miner, then industrialist in empire.
After a few months of missioning and producing, I grew interested in seeing what else the universe had to offer.
I went to lowsec lured by the promises of riches. I armed myself with a POS and a few modules to check moonmining R16 minerals. Not very profitable, but the idea seemed fun. It was indeed fun, and indeed not very profitable...
(Note: yes, that's a passive shield tanked hurricane)
So the profits didn't materialize, but a few chance drops from escalations got me above 1 billion ISK. I remember those escalations leading me into 0.0 for their last step. 2 jumps into the Great Wildlands. I was a scared little noob, I sat cloaked for 4 hours watching the comings and going at the gate separating lowsec from 0.0, looking at the colored dot on the map to see if there was much activity, camping, killing going on on the other side. Should I or should I not go? I eventually did go, was probed doing that site 4 times, still managed to warp out every time and cloak and finish for the prizes!
Anyway, I had 1 billion! I was ecstatic... At that stage I could buy shiny ships or blueprints or... I could try making more money in 0.0! Except I didn't know anything about it, other than it was dangerous... Kilhu (my CEO) knew that the Great Wildlands was NRDS, and happened to know someone in there. We got given permission to go there and do "our thing". The alliance in control of the region was Foundati0n.
So I moved around the region, did anomalies and angel/DED sites, got ganked a few times in the begining (I had prepared for this and purchased a set of passive shield tanked myrmidons). My plan was to die 4 times a week in those cheaply replaceable ships, and still make more money than I'd lose. It went according to plan. I didn't PvP then, just tried to cloak up if anyone showed up. I was so scared of PvP... I had set up the myrmidons for extreme tank, being able of sustaining 1300 DPS omni (and about 1900 against exp/kin), so when I was getting ganked, I regularly had time to call in for reinforcements.
I've had a number of killmails with more than 200,000 damage tanked, but 2 fights really come back to mind. One where I was coming back from doing an escalation in the drone regions. I tanked 7 guys (and killed a sabre) for 19 minutes, waiting for reinforcements to come. And right when they were about to, the hostiles jumped in an extra 3 and I died, having tanked 369k damage. The other one was getting attacked by 4 ships (hacs), and after 25 minutes of fighting and barely succeeding at tanking, they had to let me go because they ran out of ammo. That was fun.
(me getting ganked and being cocky, that screenshot was 10 minutes into the fight, still tanking but running out of drones :p)
After familiarizing myself a bit with how it worked (ie, reading docs), I asked FDN if I could use some systems for moonmining, they agreed, gave me a few systems, I set up a POS, then 2, then 17... (if you've tried to manage moonmining POSes solo, don't go there, it's a pita). Anyway, at this stage I figured I was making money, I could try and assist with the defense of the region that the local blues left to FDN to solve... Problem was I didn't know anything about fighting. I joined anyway, for the principle of it, in the only ship I knew how to fly (passive shield tanked myrmi in an armor tanked fleet, I sure was useful *cough* *cough*).
After a few months our "friendly" neighbours, Red Alliance, decided they wanted the region to rent it to people and started to invade GW. The local blues fled. FDN was left to defend on its own. At that stage I had made about 17 billions (and lost about 2bil in ships and pods), purchased a JF, a regular freighter, had started into T2 production, invested heavily in POSes and POS modules, got some ships and blueprints. I figured I could try and give a hand. So I got my fighting alt (Meissa is a good tank, but 30k SP in gunnery and missiles didn't get me far) a carrier... The only one I was close enough to get was the nidhoggur, but I still got it, knowing I'd lose it. It's the principle that counts right?
(fighting the red alliance in my new nidhoggur)
So I fielded the nid in defense of the region, and it didn't die too quickly, got a few fights out of it, we repelled RA and started invading Scalding Pass in retaliation, leading to some very nice fights with 700ish people. I lost the nid to a desync (damn you CCP), directly bought another one. We stole a few systems from RA, who went to cry to xdeathx for assistance since they couldn't repell us. xDeathx came, we lost, we got back to GW...
Foundati0n imploded a tiny bit later and there ended my year living in 0.0. After a brief stint back to highsec and WHs, I got invited to join former FDN members who had formed a PvP alliance called Rooks and Kings. Being a carebear, I hesitated a long time, thinking I wouldn't be of much use, but after a long conversation, I eventually joined and haven't regretted it. I usually fly command ships and guardians, they don't provide much in the way of killmails but they're important. My main alt flies carriers, guardians, HICs and sabres. Again support roles, which I prefer.
(me looking pretty during ops)
That's my story (was a tad longer than I expected).
As far as who I am in terms of "important internet spaceship person"...
I'm nobody, I'm not well known, I'm not an alliance leader and I don't want to be one. I have opinions that I like to voice, but I'm perfectly happy with leaving the decisions and the spotlight to others.
I'm not most communicative CSM member, but I have a good grasp on the game and I have an analytical mind, I usually do good argumentation for the topics we defend...
I form my opinions using my own experience and tapping into that of others. It takes me some time and thought to form one, so it's based on something rational and not just guts, but I'll happily change my opinion if the facts I relied upon are shown to be untrue or incomplete. As a consequence, once held, I defend my opinion tooth and nails...
I appreciate other's opinions if they differ from mine, as long as they're based on rational thought. We all have different priorities and that's fine with me. I actually welcome it. I'll frequently play devil's advocate on things I support if nobody else does...
No matter whether I support going for something or not, that doesn't change the aknowledgements of the reasons to support the opposite, it helps with not bashing anyone who doesn't reach the same conclusions I did, at least I don't dismiss their reasons as invalid, just maybe incomplete (or mine are!) or the person has a different perspective on where the balance should be...
So when I post, it's rarely to :rage: but rather to provide a more balanced position on whatever is being discussed (something CSM5 chair Mynxee called me being "too diplomatic"). That usually is seen as me sucking up to CCP, which I don't, but I never saw dichotomical positions to be very constructive.
That's me in a nutshell...
I hate blogs... I really do. Just the thought of sitting in front of this blank page to type :words: at people makes me cringe. Not only do I suck at wordsmithery, I'm a pro at procrastination. Not a very nice combination for a blogger... Whatever.
I've been a member of the Council of Stellar Management for a few years now. I first got in as an alternate of CSM 2, then a full member of CSM 3, then again as an alternate of CSM 4 -- this once on purpose, there was at the time a limit to how many times one could be elected as a full member and I wanted to be full member on CSM 5, but I didn't want to lose track of what was going on during CMS 4, so I carefully managed my election campaign to get enough votes to get alt but not so much that I'd get a seat. Tricky business, but it worked -- then full member of CSM 5, and once more of CSM 6...
I'm not e-famous, I'm a member of a 2 (or 3, depends) member corporation that started as a carebear corporation in empire. I wasn't CEO of my corporation, I just ran for CSM after my CEO (Kilhu Emmek) told me repeatedly I should run. I ran to show him I wouldn't get elected (haha).
Anyway, my story isn't much of one, I started as a miner, then industrialist in empire.
After a few months of missioning and producing, I grew interested in seeing what else the universe had to offer.
I went to lowsec lured by the promises of riches. I armed myself with a POS and a few modules to check moonmining R16 minerals. Not very profitable, but the idea seemed fun. It was indeed fun, and indeed not very profitable...
(Note: yes, that's a passive shield tanked hurricane)
So the profits didn't materialize, but a few chance drops from escalations got me above 1 billion ISK. I remember those escalations leading me into 0.0 for their last step. 2 jumps into the Great Wildlands. I was a scared little noob, I sat cloaked for 4 hours watching the comings and going at the gate separating lowsec from 0.0, looking at the colored dot on the map to see if there was much activity, camping, killing going on on the other side. Should I or should I not go? I eventually did go, was probed doing that site 4 times, still managed to warp out every time and cloak and finish for the prizes!Anyway, I had 1 billion! I was ecstatic... At that stage I could buy shiny ships or blueprints or... I could try making more money in 0.0! Except I didn't know anything about it, other than it was dangerous... Kilhu (my CEO) knew that the Great Wildlands was NRDS, and happened to know someone in there. We got given permission to go there and do "our thing". The alliance in control of the region was Foundati0n.
So I moved around the region, did anomalies and angel/DED sites, got ganked a few times in the begining (I had prepared for this and purchased a set of passive shield tanked myrmidons). My plan was to die 4 times a week in those cheaply replaceable ships, and still make more money than I'd lose. It went according to plan. I didn't PvP then, just tried to cloak up if anyone showed up. I was so scared of PvP... I had set up the myrmidons for extreme tank, being able of sustaining 1300 DPS omni (and about 1900 against exp/kin), so when I was getting ganked, I regularly had time to call in for reinforcements.I've had a number of killmails with more than 200,000 damage tanked, but 2 fights really come back to mind. One where I was coming back from doing an escalation in the drone regions. I tanked 7 guys (and killed a sabre) for 19 minutes, waiting for reinforcements to come. And right when they were about to, the hostiles jumped in an extra 3 and I died, having tanked 369k damage. The other one was getting attacked by 4 ships (hacs), and after 25 minutes of fighting and barely succeeding at tanking, they had to let me go because they ran out of ammo. That was fun.
(me getting ganked and being cocky, that screenshot was 10 minutes into the fight, still tanking but running out of drones :p)
After familiarizing myself a bit with how it worked (ie, reading docs), I asked FDN if I could use some systems for moonmining, they agreed, gave me a few systems, I set up a POS, then 2, then 17... (if you've tried to manage moonmining POSes solo, don't go there, it's a pita). Anyway, at this stage I figured I was making money, I could try and assist with the defense of the region that the local blues left to FDN to solve... Problem was I didn't know anything about fighting. I joined anyway, for the principle of it, in the only ship I knew how to fly (passive shield tanked myrmi in an armor tanked fleet, I sure was useful *cough* *cough*).
After a few months our "friendly" neighbours, Red Alliance, decided they wanted the region to rent it to people and started to invade GW. The local blues fled. FDN was left to defend on its own. At that stage I had made about 17 billions (and lost about 2bil in ships and pods), purchased a JF, a regular freighter, had started into T2 production, invested heavily in POSes and POS modules, got some ships and blueprints. I figured I could try and give a hand. So I got my fighting alt (Meissa is a good tank, but 30k SP in gunnery and missiles didn't get me far) a carrier... The only one I was close enough to get was the nidhoggur, but I still got it, knowing I'd lose it. It's the principle that counts right?
(fighting the red alliance in my new nidhoggur)
So I fielded the nid in defense of the region, and it didn't die too quickly, got a few fights out of it, we repelled RA and started invading Scalding Pass in retaliation, leading to some very nice fights with 700ish people. I lost the nid to a desync (damn you CCP), directly bought another one. We stole a few systems from RA, who went to cry to xdeathx for assistance since they couldn't repell us. xDeathx came, we lost, we got back to GW...
Foundati0n imploded a tiny bit later and there ended my year living in 0.0. After a brief stint back to highsec and WHs, I got invited to join former FDN members who had formed a PvP alliance called Rooks and Kings. Being a carebear, I hesitated a long time, thinking I wouldn't be of much use, but after a long conversation, I eventually joined and haven't regretted it. I usually fly command ships and guardians, they don't provide much in the way of killmails but they're important. My main alt flies carriers, guardians, HICs and sabres. Again support roles, which I prefer.
(me looking pretty during ops)
That's my story (was a tad longer than I expected).
As far as who I am in terms of "important internet spaceship person"...
I'm nobody, I'm not well known, I'm not an alliance leader and I don't want to be one. I have opinions that I like to voice, but I'm perfectly happy with leaving the decisions and the spotlight to others.
I'm not most communicative CSM member, but I have a good grasp on the game and I have an analytical mind, I usually do good argumentation for the topics we defend...
I form my opinions using my own experience and tapping into that of others. It takes me some time and thought to form one, so it's based on something rational and not just guts, but I'll happily change my opinion if the facts I relied upon are shown to be untrue or incomplete. As a consequence, once held, I defend my opinion tooth and nails...
I appreciate other's opinions if they differ from mine, as long as they're based on rational thought. We all have different priorities and that's fine with me. I actually welcome it. I'll frequently play devil's advocate on things I support if nobody else does...
No matter whether I support going for something or not, that doesn't change the aknowledgements of the reasons to support the opposite, it helps with not bashing anyone who doesn't reach the same conclusions I did, at least I don't dismiss their reasons as invalid, just maybe incomplete (or mine are!) or the person has a different perspective on where the balance should be...
So when I post, it's rarely to :rage: but rather to provide a more balanced position on whatever is being discussed (something CSM5 chair Mynxee called me being "too diplomatic"). That usually is seen as me sucking up to CCP, which I don't, but I never saw dichotomical positions to be very constructive.
That's me in a nutshell...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)