Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Friday, August 17, 2012

Questions for CSM7

I'm almost certainly not going to be able to make the second CSM7 town hall tomorrow.  As I said, I have a prior commitment tomorrow so I'll have to hope to listen to the replay.  For reference, the most recent (and first) town hall CSM7 had was back in May.  Here's the recap I posted after attending it.  Let us please please please hope that some lessons are learned from that one.

Two step and Hans Jagerblitzen are taking questions from players.  Before I knew it, I had almost 30 of them written down.  I then decided a little sheepishly that this was probably a tiny bit excessive, so I've cut it down to ten.  They're below.

How questions in this sort of format work is that questions that get asked a lot generally get answered.  So if you like some of my questions, feel free to copy them and send them along to Two step and Hans yourself.  Or you can (and should!) send in your own questions.  One tip for questions, though: don't bother asking the CSM to fix this or that game design problem.  They're not game designers.  You can ask them if they think this or that game design topic is well done... that's perfectly fair.  Asking them about a specific element of a solution that you like is also fair.  But make sure you spin the question in terms that the CSM can actually answer and do something about.

Here's an example.  Suppose you think super-capital ships badly need rebalancing.  Asking:
  • "In my opinion, the only balance to a super-cap fleet continues to be a larger super-cap fleet.  Does this CSM regard super-cap proliferation as a problem?" is a fair question; and,
  • "I think super-caps should be banned from low-sec space.  Do you agree?" is also a fair question, though borderline (even if the CSM agrees, they can't make CCP do it); but,
  • "Why don't you guys tell CCP that super-caps are broken?" is unfair and leading; and,
  • "What do you think CCP should do about super-caps?" is only going to buy you an undirected five-minute debate from three or four CSM members who will tend to contradict each other.
With that last question, you might learn who you're going to vote for for CSM8, but there will be CSM debates next winter for that purpose.  Again, the CSM are not game designers.  For town halls, stick with the fact that the CSM's job is to bring CCP player feedback.  So please ask them questions that they can address.

Jester's list of questions:
  1. CSM7 stated they would greatly improve CSM-to-player communications over CSM6.  Do you feel that goal is being met so far?  Will the CSM be having more frequent meetings with the players in the rest of 2012?
  2. What is CSM7's process for actively soliciting (not passively reading) player feedback about the game between summits?  Will there be a crowd-sourcing effort this year?
  3. Does this CSM regard super-cap balance and proliferation as a problem?  If so, why?  If not, why not?
  4. When the CSM stated (in the Summit Minutes) that players are rich, losses don't matter, and player income should be reduced across the board, was this based on player feedback?  If not, what was it based on?
  5. In the Minutes, it seems clear that CCP was fishing for a CSM member to volunteer to rewrite or revise the White Paper.  Why didn't a CSM member volunteer to do this?  What is the current thinking about the CSM8 election process?
  6. CSM6 and CCP first discussed how unbalanced the moon situation was 15 months ago at the May 2011 Summit.  Since then, little seems to have been done.  Tech costs exactly what it did last May and continues to be the key T2 production bottleneck.  Does CSM7 feel that CCP is acting with a sense of urgency about this situation?  Why or why not?
  7. For Seleene and Elise Randolph: why do you feel that 16 or 17 Titans "isn't a lot" when there are, at most, only five groups in EVE that can field this many?  Do you feel super-caps are too concentrated into the hands of only a few players?
  8. CCP has stated in the past that they would like null-sec to become a chaotic mess of very small independent fiefdoms that engage in warfare with their neighbors instead of NAP'ing them.  Do you feel that is still CCP's goal?  Is this CSM encouraging that direction?
  9. What if anything is CSM7 doing to promote a positive image of EVE in the gaming press?
  10. What are CSM7's goals for the second half of their term?  What can players do that will be most helpful to CSM7 in those goals?


  1. if i had any question for the CSM it would be: "what do you think CCP means when they call eve a 'social engine'?"

  2. Honestly I would say that they probably look at EVE as a game that drives social interaction. The game is after a pvp centric game whether is players blowing each other up, competing on the market, trying to be the first to find that exploration site, competing with other miners to get the best belts. EVE also drives one of the strongest meta games if not the strongest of any other MMO out there. You have a vibrant community on the forums, 3rd party forums, news sites, bloggers, twitter.

    So you have this game that is bringing all these people together both in game and out, hence a social engine. EVE is the medium, interaction is the result.

  3. Refreshingly constructive approach, Jester. Thanks for the great questions and for coaching the community on effective dialogue. I hope this will generate an improved question set from the last round, I'll be taking your previous advice into consideration as we compile the list to answer on the air tomorrow.

  4. Also wanted to add that you're welcome to send me the other 20 questions if you'd like, if there's some quality ones there and / or other people have also asked the same thing, we'll hit those as well if possible.

  5. Question for Jester: Are you planning on posting these questions in one of the threads made for this purpose or eve mailing them to me or Hans, as you were asked to do?

    1. Yep, they were EVE mailed to you and Hans about a minute after I posted this.

    2. Two step seems a little hostile there.

    3. Good god, what an utter arse-first attitude. How embarrassing.

    4. (of Two Step).

  6. With the current PLEX spike a good question would be when ( or at what current price ) does the CSM believe that Dr E should start dumping confiscated PLEX onto the market?

  7. Jester for CSM8!!!

    1. Imagine the mittani, selenne, two step, jester and hans in next year's CSM...
      nice post today btw jester

  8. I find myself really interested in the answer to question 8. If CCP wanted "null-sec to become a chaotic mess of very small independent fiefdoms that engage in warfare with their neighbors instead of NAP'ing them" then they have gone in the pretty much opposite direction than would be necessary to accomplish that. (Short and very incomplete answer: you have to make game mechanics that make large alliances and corporations less attractive and that includes informal confederations.) Humans who trade have a very strong bias in favour of cooperating (on average) and you have to set things up carefully to get around that (resources, communications, divisive mechanics, etc.).

  9. From a Lore-Perspective Supers should not be banned from lowsec, but empire should react to them.

    A super not under military control, maybe under influence of hostile forces close to high sec empire space? Calls for a navy counter drop. Its low-sec not abandoned space. It spice up the situations and increase the stakes.

    From a game play perspective I do not find supers really that interesting, as they are to cheap and fit to much the role a regular ship. They are to much and not much enough if you know what I mean.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.