Skip to main content

CSMX - Post #01

I am going to try to avoid weeks and days this time and stick to something I can keep track with and that is a bit more flexible when it comes to writing about the CSM side of things. With that, welcome to CSMX with your blogging host, Sugar Kyle. I'm sitting in Iceland still and it has been a very, very busy time. The CSMX elections were announced on Thursday at the Keynote.

I've been asked how I feel about the line up. I'm fine with it. I'm happy to have familiar faces and working partners back. I just want everyone to work because there is a lot of work to do.

Fanfest has released the changes to Structures, discussions about Sov, and some of the goals that we are headed to this Summer. I have more round table sessions to work out, the lore panel has left a miasma of fear and worry. Things are going to change in Eve Online and not just ship balancing and sovereignty structures. There have been hints of world sculpting, systems changing, and major disruptive events across the cluster. I wish I had been able to attend the lore panel but there is a list of notes out there I will try to hunt down for everyone.

The Fanfest day broadcasts are available on twitch. They should also be getting them uploaded to their youtube channel over this next week. It is a lot of information to process and absorb. I have not yet.

Structures - I've been sitting on the structures blog for a bit. I am really very happy with where it is. We're not yet at all the fine details but I will say that not all space has to be anchorable equally. Right now we have anchoring restrictions based on the type of space and there is no reason that cannot continue. Members of CSM9 raised questions about anchoring in wormholes, anchoring in null sec, and anchoring in general. What you are seeing is the large picture and then we will break it down further and get it tuned so that we keep current functionality and reason while gaining a better system.

This came out right before Fanfest and some may have missed it but the Buddy Invite system is getting a rework. It is getting greater flexibility and better tracking. We sat down with the team and discussed usage. We discussed how people use the buddy system and the rewards. Making this system better will enable people who use this system to help bring people into the game.

There are changes coming to Faction Warfare low sec. While not 100% locked into the development plan yet, CCP Affinity has allowed the goals to be shared. That is reworking the FW missions, changing FW space's shape, breaking up the alliances between the factions for a four way war. There are small other bits and pieces but these are some of the biggest and I'm happy to share it. I wanted to share it before Fanfest but I could not.  However, now I'd like to call up a review of the Winter Summit by Niden at Crossing Zebras. He wrote that it looked as if FW would be on the back burner. These potential ideas came right after the Summit by a few days and they would have been NDA anyway. Still, when he wrote his review I was sitting on my hands and biting my lip. My hopes for after summer and after Sov is a serious look into the potentials for piracy, contraband/smuggling, and what it can bring to non-faction warfare low sec.

Somewhere in there we need some love for NPC null sec as well.

There is a great amount of stuff to sift through now. There are some things that have been on simmer that we can now turn back up to boil. NDAs and confluence access will be sorted out for the members of CSMX over the next few days. Those of us still here will recover from Fanfest and keep at work.

Thank you for giving me the chance to continue my work on CSMX. If you don't mind videos please give the information a watch. If you do mind them the bloggers and news sites will be chewing through the information over the next few weeks so keep your eyes peeled. I'll be doing some of that myself. I'm very, very excited.


  1. Sugar, I am very excited at the Structures Concepts and I know it’s a WIP and it is early in the discussion, which is why I am posting these questions and concerns now, and will take up and relentlessly fly the banner on these concerns right up to when the Structures updates start hitting TQ…

    Has there been ANY discussion on how this all effects those of us in W-Space? We are not Sov holders and we are not Empire space (Hi or Lo)... Anoikis is DIFFERENT... The Entosis module and The Sov effects on structures is a mechanic that will NOT work in Anoikis.

    (1) Will we in WSpace get the XL 'POSes'? IE dockable/moorable Outposts in WSpace??

    (2) Why oh why are you considering removing the Forcefield? (for that matter why in hell are you even talking about removing Fleet Warps… but I’ll leave that for a different bich session…)

    (3) I'm very concerned about anyone being able to use an Entosis link on the POS (and often sole home) of a 20 or 10 or 5 man corp in Anoikis since there is no way that small to middling WH corps are going to be able to cover time periods like Null alliances will be able to.

    We NEED a method that allows WSpace corps to clearly defend in a realistic fashion.

    I have no issue whatsoever with what CCP is attempting overall with POS & Structure changes, it needs doing, badly. But while I appreciate consistency, please keep in mind IRL we have different equipment for different environments... you don't setup an ingloo in the Bahamas and you wouldn't try to live in a grass hut in Antarctica. Forts built in polar climates are basically different from forts built in equatorial climes... and so it should be in EVE also.

    WSpace is not Empire space and, having lived in both I can tell you from experience it is NOT Nullsec no matter what the number at the top left says... it is inherently DIFFERENT and those differences simply MUST be taken into account or you end up forcing unbalanced and unpleasant gameplay on the players who live and fly in those spaces...

    The FF... The Great POS Window is one of the few truly enjoyable things about POSlife... unlike the poor sots in Stations and Outposts we have a huge 360 deg WINDOW... Please, effing PLEASE don't take that away from us... Hell make the damn thing WORK right FFS. Instead of shooting THROUGH the FF how about all weaponsfire impacts the FF itself? I see a chance for the art team to do some more of their amazing graphics magic dontcha think?

    CCP/CSM, please keep Wormhole Space in mind while you look at POSes.... we are not Empire and we are happily NOT Sov null, we don't want to be... don't please don't make us play their game.

    Please don’t screw us over once again like you did with the effing Discovery Scanner.

    1. This post mirrors my concerns exactly, Sugar.

      Here's some additions to Tur's concerns (and yes, I know it's incredibly early days yet, but easier to make changes at the start than in the middle or near the end):

      Will this new system make it easier for POSes to be bashed? That might be desirable in k-space, but in w-space, all we have is our POS and if that can now be relatively easily wiped out...

      I'm worried the new system will be unaffordable for most corps in w-space; remember, C1-C4 does NOT produce the same isk fountains that C5 and 6 do. It seems to me that we'll have to use even more structures under the new system than what we use now and that those new structures will be less viable.

      One of my biggest concerns is docking of ships. W-space denizens generally need/have a LOT of ships on hand because resupply is so difficult. I have 2-3 times as many ships in w-space than I ever needed in null or FW. I hope the new system is not going to require more structures to do then what we can do now.

      In all this discussion about revamping sov and the new structures, has CCP ever given any thought to getting rid of the concept of sovereignty ? Do we really need mechanics to encourage people to claim space? We already do that in w-space quite well without the extra goodies our sov-holding brethren get.

      If we must have sov mechanics, has there been any serious discussion about how these new structures will work/sov requirements for anchoring in w-space, where no sov can be claimed? I want to avoid a situation where the new structure system suddenly prevents us from doing things we can do now because someone tacked a sov-holding requirement to some new piece of kit.

      Finally, I'd like to re-iterate that I'm excited by the new structure system. Excited and terrified at the same time.

      Please, please, please, don't forget the effects on w-space and also, please, please, please, don't just hit up the guys in the C5s and 6s for comment.

    2. No one has forgotten wormholes, even for a minute. I understand that everyone keeps talking sov but I beg of you, please, please, please, please, please understand there is not some ignoring of wormhole space or low sec space just because everyone insists that ONLY SOV is getting attention.

      All structures are not anchorable equally. They are not currently and they will not be. CCP has to address the usage of it and things like anchoring anywhere in wormhole space is a problem where it is not in high sec. Space can be different and it will be different. What needs to be replicated is why we use POS as we do and better ways to give the same gameplay created. CCP Nullabor has been excellent in incorporating CSM and player feedback into the design and you will see that in the changes.

      Functionality is not missing. Mooring is a replacement for the shields to give that safety/invulnerability but retain visibility. POS shields are they currently are are broken and problematic. They don't work with how Eve functions which leads us to the endless cases of POS shield exploits.

      This is about adding not removing. You will still have hangers and accesses. I have to catch up on the entosis link and its usage. Timer stuff has been moving at a mile a minute with changes to how it will function. For POS some of this is about new ways to take over abandoned structures without a huge HP grind.

      The HP grind is going away. Some gameplay is going to change, regardless. The whole game, not just Sov is going to feel changes in the next months but the goal of the structures is to replace and replicate and improve. Thats why they are coming into the game piece by piece.

      This has been something extensive for the last two months to get to the point this information was released in the dev blog. We still have plenty of soundboards to do and input to give.

    3. A quick comment to Heretic Caldari . . .

      "In all this discussion about revamping sov and the new structures, has CCP ever given any thought to getting rid of the concept of sovereignty ? Do we really need mechanics to encourage people to claim space? We already do that in w-space quite well without the extra goodies our sov-holding brethren get."

      Unless it's your desire to make null-sec some version of 'wormhole light', pointing out that you get along without sov so they should too lacks basis.

      I'm inclined to say that the differences between spaces should be differences in kind, not just degree. Being able to plant observable flags is one of the unique things about sov nullsec. Sov nullsec players find the mechanic highly motivating. Why take it away from them?

    4. No, Dire, though it does, I admit, sound like that was what I was saying.

      The reason I brought it up was for the same reasons Sugar has told us to wait until the changes happen: The way Sov is working now isn't helping and needs to be changed. When making big changes, why not put everything on the table?

      TCUs can be - and are - anchored in w-space right now. Without sov. So if planting flags is important (and it hugely is), why do we need a special mechanic to allow it when we already have space where it's being done without that mechanic?

      What makes w-space special isn't the lack of sov, it's the instability of access, the fact that you never know from day to day where you'll have a connection to, the frontier (even more so than null) aspects of living.

      I don't mind not being able to build supers, for example, or not having the POS fuel benefits of sov. But if we're trying to revamp the sov system, why not look at completely revamping it?

      Why do we need sov? To build supers? CCP could just as easily make the anchoring or the CSAA be linking to k-space instead of sov status and it would accomplish the same thing. Does having an elaborate set of mechanics for taking systems and making things vulnerable add to the game or take away from it?

      Why wouldn't occupancy-based sov work? If having sov does fulfill some vital part of null, then kepp it. But if it doesn't, why not look at removing it or at least paring it down?

    5. Unlike HC I really don't give a crap about whatever flag you want or how nullseccers feel about it... it's all greek to me, but as a wormholer this worries me plenty...

      "Mooring is a replacement for the shields to give that safety/invulnerability but retain visibility."

      Getting rid of the shield does not do that. It either puts us inside a structure we cannot see out of or it puts us sitting next to a POS with a view from our ship and invulnerable BUT it does not keep the riff raff from sittin 500m off my ship and trying to mess with me...

      As I understand it, and please correct me if I am wrong, but "Mooring" will only apply to capitols that cannot dock (IE be stored inside the POS/whatever)... If this is so then what you have done in Anoikis is EXPOSE direct intel on our highest value ships to our enemies.

      One of the unwritten rules of Anoikis POS life is you do NOT leave ships 'out'... 'POS trash' or ships just floating in the POS (or Moored in plain sight and one assumes on dscan) give away intel on what you have and can make you a juicy target...

      In Anoikis we follow the old adage... "Out of sight, out of mind." if they don't know we have it they don't know whether or not to camp us and try to kill it.

      "POS shields are they currently are are broken and problematic. They don't work with how Eve functions which leads us to the endless cases of POS shield exploits."

      Then FIX POS shields FFS... but don't just get rid of them. Make them work as they should... make them the thing you target, make them the thing you shoot, make the POS Forcefield actually impenetrable and anything inside it untouchable, period. And until a ship is say 25% or more through the POS shield it is UNBUMPABLE... and it cannot target or rep or whatever until is it more than 25% out of the FF.

      Also, may I ask for clarification of, "They don't work with how Eve functions..."

      What? because Empire Stations and Nullsec Outposts don't have them? Empire Stations and Nullsec Outposts aren't POSes... of course they don't have them... they are huge and invulnerable... POSes are a western frontier fort with a wooden palisade, a sturdy log cabin out on the prairie with gun ports in the shutters...

      Anoikis is not Nullsec... we are the wild west of EVE... let us BE the wild west of EVE... please.

    6. I don't remember the whole discussion loop on force fields, but it was several years ago in a dev blog about POS and SOV. Mostly it comes down to it cannot be fixed without a deep level rewrite of how the game functions and handles objects. I'm not talking horror code, I mean a complete rethink of the entire engine that handles objects in space, and therefore a complete ground up rewrite. The impact of that would be far beyond force fields. By it's very nature it'd change the entire balance of how Eve work; from flying ships, to weapons, to just about everything you'd do in space.

      Force Fields were one of those things put into the game way way back in the day when they didn't know if Eve would last till the next year. It was one of those "Wouldn't it be cool" ideas CCP was so fond of and didn't think through because at the time the knock on effects didn't matter as much as adding features.

      The devs have wanted to do away with force fields for the better part of a decade, but couldn't. And now that they finally can, they're gleefully going to kill it. I absolutely guarantee the day they turn them off for good, one of the coders is going to have a victory dance.

      As for mooring, supers will do it, but there's audio of one of the roundtables where instead of docking inside the station for smaller ships and the station interior is loaded, the current plan is to remove your ship from grid like happens with docking, but you keep the outside view of the system. Overview and stuff is removed and station panels are added in their place, giving you complete 360 rotatable view of around the station. Whenever you undock it just removes the station panels and adds overview and stuff back, then loads your ship to grid at the undock point like a normal undock.

      Now you can say that system removes all sorts of tactical stuff about fighting in WH and POSes, and you'd be right. But it isn't finalized, and even if it ends up being the system they use, you may end up with other things to offset the loss. CCP said they haven't written a single line of code for any of this yet, other than the groundwork code that makes it possible. That means it's minimum 6 months out till it hits SISI, much less TQ. A whole lot of stuff is going to change before it's finalized, and with anything this big, a whole lot more is going to change after it actually does hit TQ.

      So calm down dude.

    7. Thank you Halycon.

      They are trying to keep functionality (things floating in the shields are safe) with things like Intel and fix problems in Eve.

      Force fields do not work. I'm sorry that I'm using the wrong words. But they don't work and they have to go. That means what you have now is going to be given to you in a different way.

      Thianis the discovery phase of the details and everyone is trying to get it right but its not going to be the same. Your hangars should still be there for storage.

      But shields are not staying.

    8. Thank you Halycon.

      They are trying to keep functionality (things floating in the shields are safe) with things like Intel and fix problems in Eve.

      Force fields do not work. I'm sorry that I'm using the wrong words. But they don't work and they have to go. That means what you have now is going to be given to you in a different way.

      Thianis the discovery phase of the details and everyone is trying to get it right but its not going to be the same. Your hangars should still be there for storage.

      But shields are not staying.

    9. Tur does bring up a very good point that I'd forgotten about with regards to intel. I'm assuming that the plan is for ships that are stored inside an SMA will still be inside and not viewable and those that can't, like supers, wil be moored and visible. If so, that's no different than how things work now.

      Oh, and just for the record, Tur, I don't care about flag-planting. But it is recognized that visibly planting one's flag is a huge draw for being in null, and therefore is part and parcel of what has to be retained in the sov and structure change. I was responding to Dire's comments about my question about the need for sov.

    10. "Shields are not staying." well... fuck me I guess. I guess I have to take it as gospel now that Sugar has rubber stamped... twice... Halycon's :reasons: why POS shields are going away... no matter what.

      Does this piss me off... yeah, but obviously it is in the cards and everyone but me is happy so whatever.

      So... we're gonna be just like Stations... with station dock games station camping and all the oh so fun content that entails... oh effing joy... and, " Your hangars should still be there for storage." just warms my heart with trust and anticipation.... thank you CCP.

    11. You're mistaking resignation for happiness. I'm not happy about it, but I've known for several years that the moment CCP got around to touching POS, that the shields were going. So'd the rest of us old moldy people who paid attention.

      The question has never been complaining about it, the question is what to ask for in replacement. Personally, I want multiple selectable undocks on new POS. A few other things, but that's the biggie.

      Also, you're kidding yourself if you think POS shield games weren't the same as station dock games from a strategic level. Tactically they may have played out differently, but it was the same crap in a different form. So, ask yourself what you want to champion to make sure the new WH POS undock games don't look like anywhere else. Entosis link is already going to be vastly different in WH by the virtue that WHs don't have constellations in the same way High/Low/Null have for taking over stations. So it's already going to play out somewhat differently. So, what do you tell Sugar.. and by extension the CSM and CCP... you want which will keep Anoikis remain different in this brave new world that's coming? Because complaining about it won't help. A reasoned argument may.

    12. First... I was more than a few sheets in the wind last night when I posted the above... I have been considering removing it, but in the light of day it really doesn't sound as bitter as I felt at the time so meh...

      As for POS'es having dock games like Stations.... they are really not the same. I have lived almost exclusively in a POS for like 3.5 years... and in all that time the ONLY times you have enemy ships on grid with your POS is
      (1) a cloaked up scout or two you can't see and
      (2) a gang or a fleet actively shooting your POS... period.

      Oh we do 'POS up' as we put it, which is the 'strategic level' gameplay you refer to... of course we do, it's Anoikis, no local, no CONCORD... if/when we 'see' ships on dscan we get inside the POS ASAP... but while it is similar as a 'tactic' it is not the same 'gameplay' as hisec dock games... the Forcefield around the POS and defenses are OURS and they work for us.

      At a station or outpost you can, and in Empire often do, have a gang or fleet sitting idle or just boofing around for hours on the undock... which simply does not happen in WSpace... if they are on grid with the POS, whether you are there or not, the POS is shooting at them... and if you are there then you are shooting them and far more effectively.

      The loss of the FF for me is all about gameplay and "gamefeel", IE how the game feels to me... the gameplay and feel around being ongrid with a live POS is very different from the gameplay and feel of being on grid at a Station in Empire or even an Outpost in Sov Null... though in Sov Null the thing they are careful about isn't being 'on grid', it's simply being 'in system' which is dangerous... but they have local and gates and we don't... hence different gameplay and a very different feel to that gameplay.

      Plus, almost every wormholer I know uses the FF on Dscan as a std scouting method... you may 'see' 4 POSes, but only 2 FF's and you know you have only 2 LIVE POSes to deal with...

      And lastly, and this one is the big one for me personally… we have a 30km sphere we can fly around INSIDE of in safety… you can have a fleet on grid and whatever but they CANNOT fly inside your POS FF… this is completely different from Stations and Outposts where if you undock, at all, you are open to at the very least being bumped… IE they can REACH you even if they can target or shoot you immediately… but inside our POS FF, we can sit and reship and refit and move stuff around and even self-destruct ships if we want to… the bad guys cannot touch us.

      The gameplay in stations is very very different… and I don’t want to lose the way it feels to be in a POS… but EEV is no more about what I want than it is about what anyone player or even one groups wants… and if the code is so FUBAR that it has to go for things to get better… then ok.

      But I’m sure as hell gonna miss that beautiful shimmery soapbubble of safety…

  2. Crap... I missposted... I had it all typed up but posted out of order...

    CONGRATS!!!! I had faith and hope but for you to be one of the permanent seats is just too good to be true. Keep the balance, keep the line of communication open and keep on keeping on...

    You are simply yhe best thing that has happened to the CSM since someone first said EVE might need a CSM.

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. (deleted & reposted for typos)

      I've been disconnected from EVE during most of Fanfest so just learned of your election and the lots of new stuff to read (and complain) about in the upcoming days/blog entries... :P

      Now seriously, it looks as if CCP is back to doing new stuff for EVE. That's good as perpetual rebalancing and fixing of old crap was bad, bad, bad. Anyway, that doesn't means that EVE is in this way to release its full potential. I still think that a sizeable amount of EVE players are not in it for the opportunities to mess with other players, and so as far as development goes *just* in that direction, CCP will be preaching to the choir and alienating the parish, IMO.

      There is a untapped wealth, IMO, of people who are not for the ability to fuck people and make their game miserable. I see the Drifters as an opportunity, as far as CCP avoids the easy route of turning the Drifters into a kind of "Incursions 2.0". I think that Drifters provide a opportunity to allow players to interact to NPCs in a way more sophisticate than "press button, get bacon".

      God knows that the game needs that. NPC interaction must allow to generate content as much as player interaction does.

      Hey, I am in a optimistic mood now. Then I'll start updating with the Fanfest and will see how CCP just misses the train again and I'll keep my bitterness intact...

      But so far, CCP is moving. NPCs (let's hope) may become a thing. Just let players use NPCs for good and evil, and we'll have a deal.

      As far as the ony thing I could do with Drifters is shooting red crosses and get ISK... forget it. Done it already, too long.

      BTW, I hope that CCP doesn't intends to shove Driters down the throat of guys like miners & al... as hilarious as would be Drifters ganking Hulks around or "blockading" systems with "incursions 2.0", the people being hit by it would not agree. Some people are in EVE for relax, and they would not pay for being fucked by NPCs on top of the usual player shit...

  4. Oh and Corbexx is a douche. Get's voted in on a wormhole ticket only to go Goon on stage at Fanfest... what a dick. If there is anyway we could vote 'no confidence' and get him impeached, removed from office or even thrown out of he doors of the Harpa nude... I'd do it inna second.

    Corbexx announces he's joining Goonswarm at CSM Panel

    "'Im still going to be doing everything for wormhole people." yeah... roight.... asshole.

    1. I also agree with this sentiment. I specifically did not vote for any major bloc candidates. Had I known Corbexx was going Goon, I wouldn't have voted for him. Simply put, I don't trust any Goon to do what's good for the game vs what's good for Goons.

      Now wormhole space has no wormhole rep and Goons get another :(

    2. Well, CCP runs the show and they're fine with this shenanigans, so what can anyone do?

    3. I have no stake in this at all.


      Does him joining Goonswarm somehow erase his knowledge on wormholes? I think not. Give a man a chance and see what he actually does over his next term before you bring out the feathers and tar.
      If he doesn't, sure feel free to scream you indignation from the rooftops. But people deserve a chance and frankly the benefit of the doubt. Especially if they just *did* serve a term serving you interests and apparently well enough to get him re-elected.

    4. Kaeda's right. Give Corbexx a chance to stand by his word. If he doesn't, well then unleash the dogs. But he seems like a stand up guy and we have zero knowledge of what may have prompted his move.

    5. Sit back and think for a moment. What is the point of getting into bed with the goons? Goons desire a work around to the Jump Fatigue mechanic. One of the primary reasons for the their investment into CSM6 was the threat posed by CSM5 tabling a jump nerf. Then as everybody is aware, the practical ambush by CCP to introduce jump fatigue.

      The streamline solution is reliability of wormhole access as a workaround. Plus the forthcoming revamp to Null Ores and Industry would logically tie into an expansion to logistics losing their current 90% fatigue resistance. Rather than develop an expertise in WH, they have out-sourced it through Corbexx.

      Now, what would you prefer, several thousand goons getting lost in your system and turning to mischief or a fleet of allies passing through?

      clarify: I am guessing all of this, but it is how I interpret this turn of events. I only hope this works out for Corbexx better than it did for Xander.

    6. Go watch, or more importantly listen to the link I posted...

      Corbexx, "... I, I, I think I might be going there (Goons) as a diplo, yes,"

      Sion, "...glad to have you as the CFC's fourth CM for this term."

      Then he goes and shakes hands with Sion... sealing the deal on stage.

      Sion, "And Corbexx has been a really great friend and a fantastic Jayyy... agent, for this entire time."

      Corbexx, "Wormhole people, do not freak the fuck out, I will still be doing everything for the Wormhole people." as a GOON DIPLO... not as a wormholer.

      And everyone knows Goons are our friends and everyone know we can all trust Goons right?

      Does him joining Goonswarm somehow erase his knowledge on wormholes? nope... but that's part of the PROBLEM.

      Give a man a chance and see what he actually does over his next term before you bring out the feathers and tar." that's what many said of other people in other times... and paid for it later. As far as I am concerned, there is too much at stake to trust someone who gets voted in on a lie.

      And TBH, I will not be at all surprised if we do see a huge increase in C5 & 6 scouts scanning down high mass limit holes in a EVE Scout fashion for the Goons and other Nullsec alliances to use as a bypass for jump fatigue... nope, would not at all.

      After all, they are not here to ruin 'the' game... they are just here to ruin 'YOUR' game.... or don't you remember that?

    7. Actually, Kaeda, for me, his being part of Goons makes all the difference. It's a matter of trust.

      I have no doubt that Mynna, for example, has a vast store of industry knowledge, yet I never voted for him, either. Why? Because he's a Goon.

      The Goons have stated their raison d'etre is to ruin everyone else's game. Mitten, when he was CSM Chair, came right out and said he was there to represent the Goons and the rest of the CFC and that's it. So how can I trust any of their candidates to really represent the best interests of the game at large?

    8. Kaeda's right. Give Corbexx a chance to stand by his word. If he doesn't, well then unleash the dogs. But he seems like a stand up guy and we have zero knowledge of what may have prompted his move.

    9. Let's wait and see if Corbexx the *CSM Rep* can remain separate from Corbexx the *player*. I know Mittens outright said he was on the CSM for the Goons, and the Goons alone -- but Mittens is Mittens and Corbexx has the chance to be that rare thing[1], a politician who represents his constituency instead of himself.

      [1] And luckily that "rare thing" got herself a permanent seat on CSMX -- you go, girl!

  5. I currently use Dscan to identify worthwhile POS modules on offline POSes to shoot at, such as CHAs and SMAs, whilst I'm roaming about looking for content. With the removal of forcefields I imagine that this will no longer be possible using Dscan and will become too time-consuming to be worthwhile.

  6. It's very great to see your post!I like it .I'm looking forward to you in the next

    post.Thank you .There is a dell recovery software to you.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe one day!

 [15:32:10] Trig Vaulter > Sugar Kyle Nice bio - so carebear sweet - oh you have a 50m ISK bounty - so someday more grizzly  [15:32:38 ] Sugar Kyle > /emote raises an eyebrow to Trig  [15:32:40 ] Sugar Kyle > okay :)  [15:32:52 ] Sugar Kyle > maybe one day I will try PvP out When I logged in one of the first things I did was answer a question in Eve Uni Public Help. It was a random question that I knew the answer of. I have 'Sugar' as a keyword so it highlights green and catches my attention. This made me chuckle. Maybe I'll have to go and see what it is like to shoot a ship one day? I could not help but smile. Basi suggested that I put my Titan killmail in my bio and assert my badassery. I figure, naw. It was a roll of the dice that landed me that kill mail. It doesn't define me as a person. Bios are interesting. The idea of a biography is a way to personalize your account. You can learn a lot about a person by what they choose to put in their bio

Taboo Questions

Let us talk contentious things. What about high sec? When will CCP pay attention to high sec and those that cannot spend their time in dangerous space?  This is somewhat how the day started, sparked by a question from an anonymous poster. Speaking about high sec, in general, is one of the hardest things to do. The amount of emotion wrapped around the topic is staggering. There are people who want to stay in high sec and nothing will make them leave. There are people who want no one to stay in high sec and wish to cripple everything about it. There are people in between, but the two extremes are large and emotional in discussion. My belief is simple. If a player wishes to live in high sec, I do not believe that anything will make them leave that is not their own curiosity. I do not believe that we can beat people out of high sec or destroy it until they go to other areas of space. Sometimes, I think we forget that every player has the option to not log back in. We want them to log


Halycon said it quite well in a comment he left about the skill point trading proposal for skill point changes. He is conflicted in many different ways. So am I. Somedays, I don't want to be open minded. I do not want to see other points of view. I want to not like things and not feel good about them and it be okay. That is something that is denied me for now. I've stated my opinion about the first round of proposals to trade skills. I don't like them. That isn't good enough. I have to answer why. Others do not like it as well. I cannot escape over to their side and be unhappy with them. I am dragged away and challenged about my distaste.  Some of the people I like most think the change is good. Other's think it has little meaning. They want to know why I don't like it. When this was proposed at the CSM summit, I swiveled my chair and asked if they realized that they were undoing the basic structure that characters and game progression worked under. They said th