Sunday, August 10, 2014

CSM- Day 98

This was wormhole week.

First, Wormholes have some changes coming to them. CCP Fozzie wrote a dev blog that not only details the changes but details CCP’s view for wormholes. The purpose of this dev blog is to explain to the players how CCP feels about wormholes, in official words.

Early in the week someone loaded up SiSi and discovered that the spawn range for ships had changed when they came out of a wormhole. This caused some questions, a lot of anger, and a threadnought. At the same time, there appeared to be changes in the polarization effect of wormholes. There was a lot of anger. I was told that people were going to unsub because CCP was changing wormholes and not engaging the community. Others said that because Corbexx is the only wormhole member terrible things were happening due to under representing.

There was a lot of reaction and almost none of that reaction remembered that the CSM is under an NDA and we don’t get to discuss changes until CCP releases that information to the public. However, there was also the automatic assumption that nothing had been said or done by the CSM because we had not said anything. Again, that ignores the simple problem that we are under the NDA and we cannot discuss what we have been discussing with CCP until we are allowed to discuss it with the player base in public. This makes it look as if we are behind and people start to panic.

Sadly, some people went straight to rage and assumed these changes were being pushed to Tranquility in the exact state they were found at on SiSi. All of that was incorrect. The CSM and especially Corbexx have been discussing this with CCP. Corbexx is not ignored because he is the only wormhole rep. At the same time, CCP doesn't elect the CSM to make game design decisions for them to implement. While we suggest plenty, CCP comes up with things on their own and we may or may not agree with them. But, we’re not going to be able to discuss anything until we are allowed to.

The NDA is very frustrating but it is there because CCP does share this information with us and brings us into the process of change and implementation. I’ve had half a dozen people call the NDA stupid this week because it restricts me from telling them what they want to hear.  Yes, I give answers that say, “This has been brought to the attention of the CSM.” And that’s all I’m going to give out because I’m not breaking the trust I was elected to honor. Frustrating for all sides? Yes.

After all of that happened, CCP Fozzie released the Dev Blog and released individual threads for the wormhole changes.

K162 Signatures Appearing on First Jump
Wormhole Effect Rebalance
Second Static for C4s
Mass-Based Spawn Distance after WH Jumps
Bookmarks and Bookmark Copying
Random WHs and the New Small Ship WHs

Most have received positive feedback. The mass-based spawn distance after WH Jumps is the unloved one. All of these are set up for the Hyperion release at the end of August. Please, enter in the discussion. If you hate the forums just hit reply and type your opinion without reading anything but the first post by CCP Fozzie.

Corbexx amused me greatly. When the dev blog about the wormhole changes went live he said, “let me get some beers and start responding.” He’s also written some personal blogs and released the first one which details one of the major projects has has taken on. The project is about the actual average ISK in various classes of wormholes. The range of how much people makes is huge and instead of assumptions being created off of guesses or ‘he said, she said’ Corbexx is working on actual documentation. Give it a read.

Wormholes are not my specialty. I know enough about them to get basic lingo. I know how they work. I don’t feel that I can speak from an educated stance about how these changes will change life for wormhole residents. Thankfully, I’ve had people come and explain their opinions to me. I send them to the threads and I discuss things with Corbexx. I am comfortable saying that Corbexx doesn’t look down on those who live in the C1-4 wormholes and he is not trying to make them come play in the C5 and C6 wormholes. He is very fair and will point out how a change will make things easier to invade or harass the lower class wormholes when we discuss.

Copying bookmarks will benefit everyone. It is a quality of life change that will have a quietly large effect.

With the new random and small ship WH thread someone asked why not add them to null sec -> null sec. CCP Fozzie points out that the CSM has asked for  this type as a High Sec -> Wormhole connection

CREST and API stuff is moving along at rapid rates for those interested. Steve is on the ball.

POS fees can now be paid from a corporation wallet or a personal wallet.

There was also an issue where the materials for bubbles (mobile warp inhibitors) was greater than intended.

There should be a Town Hall before the summit in mid-September. I don’t know if I will be able to attend. I work the weekend before the summit and that is the best weekend for the Town Hall.

But! My next Eve Uni chat is scheduled for August 23rd at 1500 and 2200. As always, everyone is invited. This is open to everyone and Eve Uni is kind enough to host. I’ve been told to publicize them more but, I’m terrible at publicizing things. Marketing is not a career I would succeed in.

26 comments:

  1. While you can't break the NDA, you can pre-write an opinion post and instantly release when the dev-blog or dev-post is up. This way the people will know that you spoke up against the bad feature.

    About WHs: the problem isn't that Corbexx is the only representative, it's that he is the representative of the WH gankers. No one speaks for those who want to run Sleeper sites in WH space, only for those who want to gank them. It's like the only representative of highsec mining would be James 315.

    Don't get me wrong, these people should have a voice, but they shouldn't be the only voice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do write my opinion on the things I've had input, Gevlon.

      I disagree on your opinion of Corbexx.

      Delete
    2. I'm a C1 resident and C3 site runner. I really respect your opinion, but Gevlon's opinion of Corbexx is widely shared among the lower-class wormhole residents I know, including me. Corbexx wouldn't be an effective agent for advancing the gankers' agenda if he couldn't persuade others that he was reasonable and fair. Not all that glitters is gold.

      Delete
    3. And that's okay. That is why I am here. I have to be honest and say, "I am not a wormhole player" but I can also say, "This is what I hear. This is what people say to me." And Corbexx does not try to repress that. He asked me to come to the townhall because he knew I carried the representation of people who are not comfortable with him.

      I speak the truth as I know it. However, I won't say, "You must go to him." That is not what choice and representation are about.

      Delete
    4. And that is why we love you, Sugar.

      But the only reasons for mass-based spawn distance are 1.) to make it easier for Corbexx to gank your bigger ships, inflating his killboard stats, and 2.) to make it harder for people to collapse holes before Corbexx gets his entire fleet into their system.

      Delete
    5. seriously have you even listened to the wh town hall? Cos if you had you would know exactly my feelings on this as I think this is a terrible idea. Ive said all along its terrible. Also you forget I dont just live in a c6 c6 I have a alt in a c4/c3 and another alt in brave's wh training corp to help them out. If you checked my csm campaign thread you would see nearly all the stuff I want to do favour the lower class wh's over the higher class wh's. Your also forgeting the 100plus hour's ive done so far on low class wh income so i can try and get it increased. As sugar said I knwo alot of the lower class people come to her and thats fine she passes stuff to me, its one of the reasons i asked her along to the wh townhall as i knew a fair few had complained about this to her. and the more people saying this the better. its also worth saying that while we' will happily gank stuff we'd much rather fight bigger people who can fight back (ganking really isnt that much fun) and this change will screw that for us. It will also attually make it safer for the farmers in c5 and c6 space as it takes longer to roll wh's so they will be at risk for less "rolls". its also a idea from the old wh csm chista. so please dont go saying i like this idea when i don't anyone checking the wh forum or the wh townhall would know this.

      Delete
  2. Bether write up some guides about the difference between low sec and wormhole space.
    People will be leaving wormholes in droves thanks to the Mass based spawn distance change.
    All the small to medium corps will be steamrolled by the big ones thanks to that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A blanket.... "Lots of things are under NDA and cannot be discussed. But rest assured, no change goes in without the CSM knowing about it anymore, and rarely is whatever initially on SISI what ends up on Tranquility.".... wouldn't work ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do. I did.

      The 'I asked about this and have not gotten an answer yet. What is its status. It is a simple question its dumb that you can't answer me.'' Comes up a lot. When I give blanket statements I'm told 'so political' or 'you are supposed to represent the players so represent me and tell me what is going on.'

      It is frustrating. I bring it up because this week, its been a daily topic. Bringing it up causes its own set of problems as well. :)

      Delete
    2. Then people are silly and need to calm down. Especially that last quote.

      I voted for you and never in a million years expect you to represent me to CCP on all things I have concerns over. Of course, I'm American... and our political system is so broken it engenders a sense of a healthy respect for what a vote and a representative does not mean. :)

      Sorry about that joke, but couldn't keep myself from not making it.

      Delete
  4. My 2 cents:

    It would help if CCP didn't deployed changes to Singularity before introducing them to the players.

    Optionally, the could try and don't fix what isn't broken.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. However, what happens is what I have to work with.

      Delete
  5. You were not "elected to honor [the NDA]." You were elected to represent the players. You were then required to sign an agreement (with CCP) to not communicate with the people you represent without prior authorization (from CCP).

    That's the problem with the CSM: its "mission creep" from a panel of ombudsmen to a focus group, paired with the use of an NDA as a tool to manage expectations instead of tool to protect trade secrets.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's what you (generic you as in you the CSM panel as a whole, not you personally) say, the problem is there's no proof.

      For example, WH residents are upset right now. They want to know exactly what stances different CSMs (and especially Corbexx) took on the various different WH changes.

      There's no transparency in the process. Discussions are held in secret and kept secret afterwards.

      Regular players feel like mushrooms. Kept in the dark and fed *&#$.

      Delete
    2. I feel for the CSM sometimes. Sans some kind of NDA the CSM wouldn’t be brought in early for anything since to tell the CSM would be equivalent to going public with the added disadvantage of game owner CCP being preempted by the CSM. With the NDA the CSM can (and I suppose is) brought in early but the CSM can’t reveal what they’ve seen and discussed since CCP doesn’t wish to be preempted.

      I’m confident CCP finds the CSM a useful resource otherwise they wouldn’t continue to pay for it. I’m also confident CSM members find interstellar space politics a satisfying activity or they wouldn’t continue participating. I’m not confident there’s an indubitably clear and unchanging role for the CSM in our overarching space opera - after the fact (not NDAd?) ombudsman or preemptive (NDAd) focus group or something else entirely. Rather, I suspect CCP and the CSM continue negotiating just what role the CSM is to play with each and every interaction they undertake. What other reasonable choice is there?

      Delete
    3. In response to DireNecessity ("What other reasonable choice is there?"):

      Two councils. One council cannot be both ombudsmen and focus group at the same time. Burn the whitepaper, define the roles of each in plain language, eliminate the conflict of interest.

      Delete
    4. this is in reply to moxnix.

      most the changes i am fine with. The mass change is terrible really terrible. the frig/destroyer wh's i have some issues with as it will allow big groups like mine to screw over smaller groups we connect to.

      the rest i'm happy with.

      Delete
  6. It amuses me how adverse most eve players are to any type of change.

    Things change. The mark of a successful player is the ability to adapt. If you throw your hands in the air and yell "I'll quit" every time a change is announced.... well, I don't know what to tell you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait untill it happens to your space. Then you will be screaming far worse.

      Delete
    2. Your assumption that "change" means "better" is both adorably naive and incredibly dumb.

      Delete
  7. Almost the same reaction to some of the changes for Industry. Unsub and unrepresented being the common themes. Today I can put in 220k worth of modules and reprocess into 100k in minerals. So likewise, am guessing that much of these "proposed changes" are pretty much finished product. Meanwhile I can point to the ESS and siphons being "killed by lobby".

    Still waiting for Fozzie to point a microscope at the destroyers with the same lens used on barges. Does anything get flown other than a catalyst these days?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dragoons are easily the strongest destroyer in the line up.

      Talwars are easily the preferred fleet doctrine destroyer.
      Algos are super popular in FW space.
      Thrashers are still popular as both ac & artillery platforms.
      Coercers are popular with a particular kind of solo pilot too.

      So yes.

      Delete
    2. Whilst on paper they are the same. A quick browse through killmails, particularly throughout hi-sec will show a predominance towards the gallente destroyer. The argument for the battlecruiser re-balance was that there was a over-weight towards drakes and hurricanes. The re-balances for barges was similar, too much reliance on macks and retrievers. If the same method is continued, then logically catalysts should be nerfed to encourage a consistent use across the races.

      Delete
    3. @Kaeda: Cormorants and Coraxes are... easily left in the hangar.

      Some additional balancing is not completely unwarranted.

      Delete