Council of Stellar Management Voting Active

[Goumindong]

Haulers are already invulnerable to ordinary attacks once they get into the JB networks.  You can kill them, but you're going to need battleships, and you're going to lose a few (and forget about taking out the freighters).

--Dave

No they aren't. Its not all that hard to kill a hauler at a jump bridge actually.

[Goumindong]

What does the gate bunker idea mean for roaming gangs?  Each red system you warp into will have a scram and web battery at the gate to catch one or two of you?

Well, these things would be defensive structures that a fleet would need to destroy in order to take sov., and not freeform towers that the defenders can deathstar and anchor webs and scrams and set to aggro.  Basically, CCP decides how many HP's and shields a gate bunker would have, and whether it has guns, ewar capabilities, etc.  We just plop it down to add to sov.; we can defend it with ships, but it's not a POS tower that we can anchor stuff at.

The idea is to let us customize the whole system (the smallest sov. unit) by fitting it out like a ship with various fixed-capability towers (not neccessarily deathstars).  The solar system is customizable, the POSes aren't anymore (unless they're industry POSes, then we can feel free to mix and match harvesters, reactors, silos, and manufacturing arrays to our hearts content). 

Its a lot easier and better to just make strategic POS structures easier to assault and disable. (possibly with a reinforced timer)

[MahrinSkel]

Haulers are already invulnerable to ordinary attacks once they get into the JB networks.  You can kill them, but you're going to need battleships, and you're going to lose a few (and forget about taking out the freighters).

--Dave

No they aren't. Its not all that hard to kill a hauler at a jump bridge actually.

Only if the guy who set it up was an idiot and didn't put in the right gun mix.  Put a small pulse/AC/blaster turret on it, a couple of small arty/beams/rails, and a couple of warp scrams.  Make sure you keep them turned on and loaded.  Then your only vulnerability is to T2 snipers that can sit 251km from the tower.

--Dave

[Endie]

Haulers are already invulnerable to ordinary attacks once they get into the JB networks.  You can kill them, but you're going to need battleships, and you're going to lose a few (and forget about taking out the freighters).

--Dave

No they aren't. Its not all that hard to kill a hauler at a jump bridge actually.

Only if the guy who set it up was an idiot and didn't put in the right gun mix.  Put a small pulse/AC/blaster turret on it, a couple of small arty/beams/rails, and a couple of warp scrams.  Make sure you keep them turned on and loaded.  Then your only vulnerability is to T2 snipers that can sit 251km from the tower.

Would that lock stealth bombers fast enough to stop a couple firing then cloaking?

[MahrinSkel]

It should, yes.  Small arty locks frigates in around 10 seconds.  Of course, it would be on auto, so it would only lock one.

--Dave

[Goumindong]

Haulers are already invulnerable to ordinary attacks once they get into the JB networks.  You can kill them, but you're going to need battleships, and you're going to lose a few (and forget about taking out the freighters).

--Dave

No they aren't. Its not all that hard to kill a hauler at a jump bridge actually.

Only if the guy who set it up was an idiot and didn't put in the right gun mix.  Put a small pulse/AC/blaster turret on it, a couple of small arty/beams/rails, and a couple of warp scrams.  Make sure you keep them turned on and loaded.  Then your only vulnerability is to T2 snipers that can sit 251km from the tower.

Would that lock stealth bombers fast enough to stop a couple firing then cloaking?

Nope, not nearly, your stealth bombers will only stay up for one volley. They have no lock penalty from the cloak and will be fitting a sensor booster. They will have locked a second after they decloak and be damping their target so they cannot be locked back in time.

 Stealth bombers only die on POS when they get targeted by what they are attacking or they lag out. Whatever they are targeting will get damped, so that isn't much of a threat either.

A hauler will go down in 2-3 volleys depending on the ship. You can kill them at POS with tech 1 cruisers if you get lucky at the right time.

edit:

E.G. here is a run from Vio Geraci in BWF and then another in TDE4. There are few other guys that do this, but i haven't looked at their boards

http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/206417
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/205991
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/206368
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/206191

http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/207082

Martin gets a hauler alone at a bridge
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/208851
and another
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/208464
and another
http://killboard.goonfleet.com/km/208372

[MahrinSkel]

I still think it's a combination of bad POS fitting and people using cheap-ass T1 haulers with no tanks in 0.0.  You're not going to kill a T2 hauler with a couple of stealth bombers without scrambling it, not if it has any kind of tank.  You're safer than low-sec, but it's 0.0 for crying out loud.

--Dave

[Goumindong]

No, no bad POS fittings needed, nor did you need an untanked hauler. Though a good tank will make it harder.

You also do not necessarily need a scrambler, but it does help.

The answer is that you are simply not safe at jump bridges, safer, but not safe.

[bhodi]

So, the new york times had a piece on this thing... It all sounds so reasonable, the way they paint it!

here's an article in arts that seems like 1/4th an article with 3/4s of it cut off and hidden somewhere. It ends really abruptly weird.

[Phildo]

Molle is a lot less intimidating when you know what he really looks like.

[UnSub]

I liked how disappointed the Eve dev seemed with the CSM.

[Simond]

I liked how disappointed the Eve dev seemed with the CSM.

"How dare they point out all the bugs and that the UI sucks instead of working on pie-in-the-sky ideas!" 

[Sparky]

I'm worried now that CCP seems to actually want the CSM to come up with something like the car that Homer built.  And that they'd actually listen to them.

[bhodi]

Noah Ward: I haven't really been surprised about it at all, I've been - I guess initially what I felt was the first issues that they brought up were maybe not as "grand" as we had hoped for or expected, you know, some little niggling UI issues and that kind of stuff. And we were thinking that they were going to bring up broad, sweeping things.

Those "niggling UI issues" affect your entire player base, piss us off every time we undock, showcase your incompetence as a company, and drives newbies away.

Why would you think it wouldn't be brought up? Why don't you think they are serious issues?

What a douchebag.

[Thrawn]

Those "niggling UI issues" affect your entire player base, piss us off every time we undock, showcase your incompetence as a company, and drive newbies away.

Why would you think it wouldn't be brought up? Why don't you think they are serious issues?

What a douchebag.

Agreed.

CSM should just go "UI, UI, UI, UI" over and over and suggest nothing else until some issues are resolved.  Then point to this guy as the reason. 

[Amarr HM]

Noah Ward: I haven't really been surprised about it at all, I've been - I guess initially what I felt was the first issues that they brought up were maybe not as "grand" as we had hoped for or expected, you know, some little niggling UI issues and that kind of stuff. And we were thinking that they were going to bring up broad, sweeping things.

Those "niggling UI issues" affect your entire player base, piss us off every time we undock, showcase your incompetence as a company, and drives newbies away.

Why would you think it wouldn't be brought up? Why don't you think they are serious issues?

What a douchebag.

Yeh he needs to take the hair out of his eyes, literally and metaphorically.

[ajax34i]

CSM should just go "UI, UI, UI, UI" over and over and suggest nothing else until some issues are resolved.  Then point to this guy as the reason. 

That won't work.  CCP got what they wanted, their spot in front of the cameras.  Now we have to wait through the "Soon" and "This stuff takes time to code and push through our QA procedures" and "We can't have mini-patches in between our regularly scheduled patches that are 6 months apart" periods.  It'll be a year before any changes from this CSM meeting see the Live server, and we'll have to convince the next two CSM terms to keep focus on things like the UI or whatnot to see anything get implemented.

The whole thing is a fucking joke. 

They (CCP devs) want to play, not work.  They want to spend time coding pie in the sky shit, not put effort into debugging minutiae and making their product actually work better.

[UnSub]

I liked how disappointed the Eve dev seemed with the CSM.

"How dare they point out all the bugs and that the UI sucks instead of working on pie-in-the-sky ideas!" 

I think it was that article that pointed out the key flaw in the whole CSM idea: neither CCP nor the CSM has set a plan for what it meant to achieve. Does CCP want the CSM to come to them with brilliant new ideas, or to represent the concerns of the community? No-one knows! 

Also, the 6-month terms, while they sound 'fair' to all the people not on the CSM, means that the members have just enough time to settle in and try to achieve something before they have to campaign to be elected again (should they want the full 12 month period they are allowed to be a CSM). It's going to see a lot of time lost to exactly what we've seen already - time spent laying down how things should work just to have a meeting, what ideas should be discussed, who is in charge of what, etc.

I'm beginning to think that CCP hadn't really thought through the whole CSM idea in any great detail. 

[TripleDES]

I'm beginning to think that CCP hadn't really thought through the whole CSM idea in any great detail. 

CCP doesn't think through a lot of things.

The heads of CCP are UO griefers and a lot of their designers hired out of the player base. Sure as hell isn't going to generate a lot of stupid shit.

[Simond]

The heads of CCP are UO griefers and a lot of their designers hired out of the player base.

Mind you, the same applies to WoW. 

[Amarr HM]

Looks like Jade was right CCP are gonna be taking Destructible outposts seriously

Priority List

After internal discussion, the following priority list was established by the CSM. Note that a few issues were only informally discussed, and thus not included in the minutes above.

High Priority:

0004 Black Ops Improvements
X Jump Bridges and Cynojammers
0029 Eve-Mail Issues
0019 Contract Improvements
0018 0.0 Sovereignty Issues
0013 Skill Page Tweaks
0007 Double Click function on avatars

Medium-High Priority

0026 Suicide Ganking
0012 Minimum Size of HUD elements
0009 Alliances and Factional Warfare
0017 Empire War Decs
0030 PVP Wreck Ownership
0003 Problems with Aggression Timer
0001 Skill Queue

Medium Priority

0016 Switching all Ammo at the same time
0015 Pilot Avatar Listing
0002 Bombs need a Boost
0039 Roleplay Storylines
0028 Forum Issues and Fixing
0021 Assembly Array Issues
0022 Shares and Dividends Issues
0024 Experimental Industry Issues
0027 Drone Implants
0036 Small Freighter
X Corp -> Alliance sync

Low Priority

0006 Pillageable Outposts
X More Corp Standing Slots
0011 Electronic Warfare Icons
0033 Color Deficiency
0014 Personal Assets and HUD
0038 Buff Large Autocannons

Rejected/Unfeasable/Completed

0025 Game Time Codes
0020 Public POS Arrays
0023 Sell order availability
0008 Cargo Hold Size

[Phildo]

Pillageable outposts is given the same priority as more corporation standings slots?  Lame.

[apocrypha]

Rejected/Unfeasable/Completed

0025 Game Time Codes

Fuck you CCP, seriously, fuck you in the poopchute with a Brutix. GTC's are now going for 400m isk for 60 days, that's a 50% increase ffs. In my current Real Life situation I can't justify 3 EVE accounts and 2 WoW accounts all paid for with Real Money! This is gonna be a tougher decision than having to choose between training Minmatar or Gallente Cruiser 5! 

Also... "0007 Double Click function on avatars" - High Priority? WTF? Is that list of High Priority issues REALLY what the EVE playerbase is most concerned about? Or has the CSM spectacularly failed to do any of the assorted jobs it was set up to do?

Minus twelve million points all round I think.

[Calantus]

Yeah I quit over timecodes. Oh well.

[Amarr HM]

Yeh it's a sham I can't believe that double clicking on avatars is in the hi-priority list. I don't even know what that is, nor do I really care.

[ClydeJr]

Yeh it's a sham I can't believe that double clicking on avatars is in the hi-priority list. I don't even know what that is, nor do I really care.

It might be just some low-hanging fruit thing. Something that they can bang out quickly which improves some little part of the game so they can say they're following up on the CSM items.

[ajax34i]

It's because Inanna Zuni saw it fit to break up the "UI Sucks!" issue into tiny little bits, and present those to CCP in small bits at a time, because she thought they wouldn't be able to handle overhauling the client or whatever.  As a result, CCP's patching parts of the UI here and there, rather than fixing the whole thing.  And, it's hard to keep saying "the UI is an important issue" in response to every little "wtf is the avatars thing?" question that will rise every time a tiny little problem is brough up.

She fucked the whole thing up.

[Amarr HM]

Ah a female compartmentalising things who would have thought 

[Phred]

Pillageable outposts is given the same priority as more corporation standings slots?  Lame.

And the same priority as color changes to actually make the stupid game a little more reasonable. I am so tired of red text.

[Pezzle]

I agree, standing slots is far more important than some other issues raised!

[sanctuary]

Anyone know the details for the next term, ie who is nominating and when the voting starts?

[Phildo]

Here's another issue that I keep forgetting about: how about letting us see how our stats are effecting our drones?  Why does my damage multiplier never go above 1.92?  Why does the game never show what their modified optimal range is?

[TripleDES]

Ah a female compartmentalising things who would have thought 

"Working" for Wikimedia and playing EVE all day long. I'm sure with all the expected fat slabs, you'll be unable to define whether that are real breasts or not, or whether there's a penis or clitoris in that camel toe.

[ajax34i]

WTF, cut that out.   You don't know what she does or how much work that is, and what she looks like doesn't matter in any way (and you're wrong, pictures of the CSMs have been published, go look).

I'm pissed off that the CSM didn't submit a broader "UI sucks" issue, and I'm pissed off that they aren't taking the initiative to do some work.  They would have had to read all the UI-related threads and compose an actual document, and they didn't put any effort into doing that.  They just copy-pasted text straight into their agenda. 

They're still doing that.  To CSM reps:  CCP can read the damn forums, you idiots.  Your job isn't to cut/paste, your job is to manage the damn issues, put them together, compile them, figure out the root causes.  If you get 15 "buff ship x" issues, but they're all about different ships, you're supposed to analyze that and submit a "CCP, take another look at overall ship balance and roles, because the y mechanic isn't working" issue.  Do some work putting shit together and analyzing why the complaints are there.

Eh, nobody's paying them, so I guess it's "do as little as possible and get a free ride to Iceland."  The whole CSM thing is stupid.

[Amarr HM]

Ah a female compartmentalising things who would have thought 

"Working" for Wikimedia and playing EVE all day long. I'm sure with all the expected fat slabs, you'll be unable to define whether that are real breasts or not, or whether there's a penis or clitoris in that camel toe.

Well I wouldn't quite have taken it that far, I mean I admit I'm being slightly sexist but that's just a bit OTT.

(and you're wrong, pictures of the CSMs have been published, go look).

Links? for my voyeuristic penchant please.