Brisc_Rubal

We will have a summit this year, so there should be meeting minutes after that.

Thanks for putting this together, CCP Swift.

Because one is true and the other is not.

Everyone knows highsec has the most accounts, and nobody is suggesting that CCP only listen to null, nor have I ever advocated for null alone or at the expense of the rest of the game.

You have this odd tendency of saying things that are untrue and then get bent out of shape when confronted with reality.

Or it could be that somebody pinged him.

Stop with the dumb conspiracy theories.

#2 - No RL politics. Which is a rule on pretty much every video game forum.

I don’t support this, but I will ask them about it.

No, you weren’t.

What Shines said here is key.

BYE BYE GATE RATS!

Finally!

Thanks for doing this post, all. Transparency is difficult when it comes to what Team Security does, but I still think it is necessary so that folks know that their reports and complaints about cheating in the game are being acted upon.

They’re usually far cheaper.

We’ve asked about this. I seem to recall that the Shanghai office was doing Portal, and they’ve been disrupted by COVID.

As an aside, mine seems to be working fine.

Thanks to Swift for putting this up.

One of my biggest issues with the lack of CSM summits has been the lack of minutes, so folks don’t know what we’re doing. This post is a good first step to point out things we’ve done and I hope that in the future, CCP will make it a priority to make more CSM internal workings public as they can.

The CSM had a number of conversations with CCP regarding this, and while I can’t speak for the rest of the CSM (although as I recall we were in general agreement), the idea was that on the combat cap scale we wanted it to look like:

Dreads → Carriers → Faxes → Supers → Titans

The reason for dreads being cheapest is they are usually the starting block for most cap escalations, they’re designed to die because they are immobile, ...

You know the minute you get war decked that you need to start preparing. High sec gets far more notice in that regard than anybody else.

Then quit wasting our time posting.

Extremely hard to swallow a price increase without any new content.

It’s not. Again, the CSM has value to the company. Player sentiment about it doesn’t matter.

You are wasting your breath on something th...

Since almost the beginning of the CSM, there have been calls for a “none of the above” option, or people who have tried to run on a platform of disbanding the CSM. Neither of those things have been accepted, so it’s time to stop bringing them up. CCP created the CSM because they wanted to give players a role in development, by letting the players select representatives to serve on this focus group. As long as CCP gets some value from the program, and they repeatedly have said they do, they will continue the program.

If you don’t like me, don’t like the CSM, don’t like the current make up, don’t believe it’s actually democratic, think its useless, think its just a way for nullsec to dominate the game, think its responsible for all the bad things that happen in EVE every day, are upset that you lost or can’t win a seat, there is one thing you can do that will directly address all your concerns - don’t participate. Don’t run, don’t vote.

Problem solved. Please don’t ma...

Man, it’s hilarious watching people talking to their alts in here. And then watching them try to claim I’m spamming to get my stuff hidden.

Pro-tip. You’re generally not going to win if you’re trying to use the mods against a CSM member in a CSM related post, lol.

Citadels have been content deniers for far too long, and I’m happy to have had a chance to work with Aurora and the rest of her team on this. This doesn’t represent all the changes I’d like to see, but it hits a lot of them. The end goal, in my view, is to make structures a force multiplier, but not a content denier, and not something that makes fleet fights on the same grid impossible.