CSM Meeting Minutes 3.004
All this data is potentially out of date, and should be taken with a truckload of salt
see also: raw log - txt
- 1 Attendance
- 2 Discussion
- 2.1 Skill injection
- 2.2 Covert cynosural fields in high security space
- 2.3 Make Certain Factions More Valid for Mission Running - Part 2
- 2.4 Faction warfare - allied forces
- 2.5 Add probes to overview
- 2.6 Revisit the standing matrix
- 2.7 Personal wallet divisions
- 2.8 Machinima support in Walking in Stations
- 2.9 Visible Aggression Indicator in 0.0 Space
- 3 Next Meeting
Absent: Zastrow (marked absent as of 17:47, joined 18:00)
Physical violence is reported as going to happen in the offices of a SW developing company on Iceland with regards to the delay in setting up the official CSM delegate email addresses.
Dierdra announces the truncation of the agenda by topics 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 12, and 14, since they have not been wikified in a timely fashion.
in raw text from 16:23:53
OZ introduces the issue as an addition which would allow injecting skill books into your head under the condition that the skill queue contains the necessary prerequisites.
Lark mentions that he would regret negative impact on item drops from ship kills.
The motion passes unanimously.
in raw text from 16:32:22
DV summarizes the issue as to allow covert cynos in high sec. It would allow great new tactics in high sec PvP, including Black OPs and portalling technology
Erik wants to have an update on the estimated trade impact, which was critisized on the forums. Meissa later adds to that concern. DV replies that jumps between major market hubs would stay the same, but the actual effect should be watched.
Meissa adds a probable negative impact on carebear wars.
Lark points out that BO jump range limit would constrain trade impact.
Meissa stats that, in her opinion, later development would be negatively restrained regarding BO jump range and covert cynos, once they would be introduced in high sec, and feels the negative effect outweighs the benefit.
DV affirms a prevailing positive effect on highsec war tactics and usefulness of covert cynos and covert portals, especially when hunting ALTs in highsec. Meissa objects that hunting ALTs was hard due to the number of stations, not game mechanics.
Motion passes 6/1 (against: Meissa)
DV points out that abstaining from a vote is not allowed by CSM procedure rules
in raw text from 16:48:50
Erik introduces the issue as to consider other factions than Caldari to have more agents added to make them more attractive for mission running.
OZ points out that the issue's request for higher LP reward outside high-sec will not improve incentivation, as he thinks the mission system has reached its capability limits. Erik adds that he was working on player-generated missions for a revamp of missions.
Meissa affirms that pilots were actually running mission in low and 0.0 already, improving incentives would not be bad. Lark adds that mission running in 0.0 on the one hand and ratting on the other had adverse effects on each other due to outer space being inhabited by one faction only. Erik states that he does not want missions as major income in 0.0 which should instead be player-driven. DV points out that the discussion was going off topic.
Vuk states that he was fine with the imbalance of agent availability.
in raw text from 17:07:13
OZ introduces this issue as a modified "let alliances join FW", in that outside forces be allowed to declare war against factions.
Erik adds, however, that the possibility to grief FW was not fully researched. Also, highsec access and the ability to attack complexes might be problematic. OZ agrees to some extent, pointing out FW police response as a highsec access regulation and the inability to capture plexes as a limit to FW power. Lark does not consider FW grief a problem, as 0.0 entities had other things to do.
Meissa wants to know if war declaration against all four empires was possible then, with easy kills everywhere. OZ refers to the standing requirements in the issue as a constraint. Vuk interposes that alliances did not have standings, which is something he would like to see anyway. OZ and Erik agree.
Motion passes 7/1 (against: DV)
in raw text from 17:21:05
DV introduces the issue as a UI improvement, simplifying the task of locating probes in the directional scanner, which today is plain tedious instead of logic.
While Meissa generally agrees with improving UI usability, the consequence of this change would be total ease of finding ship probers, rendering ship probing pointless. DV does not see a categorical change resulting from increased speed of probe detection. Lark, also knowing both sides in the probe race, seconds Meissa by stating that probing success rate would be nerfed too much by an increase of the signal-to-noise ration in the victim's scanner; a view, shared by Erik.
OZ recommends to ask CCP if they left probes out of overview for a reason. Meissa suggests a scanner cooldown as a means to boost the predator's side; this was approved of by Erik. But she warns of the negative side effects on other scanner uses. Maz suggests to somehow reduce the time of scanning plus warping to a target, in order to strengthen the predators. She generally dislikes UI inabilities. Erik responds that UI inabilities of the game would make up for the fuzziness of physics in real life, because the binary world would else be too easy to master. He suggests to add the scanner cooldown, suggested by Meissa, to the proposal.
Vuk does not see probing nerfed beyond usefulness by the issue.
in raw text from 17:48:18
Erik introduces the issue as an amendment of the "no way out" of some (negative) standing situations.
OZ does not like the notion of equality. He sees the need for people to make choices as a necessary feature of the game.
DV adds that avenues should never be closed, and would prefer not to see some factions being less desirable to affiliate with.
Motion passes 8/0
in raw text from 17:56:13
DV points out that this issue had been brought up already, but deserved to be mentioned again due to popular demand.
Motion passes 8/0
in raw text from 18:00:59
DV introduces the issue as request for supporting camera angles and other features in WIS, providing a better basis for works like the highly acclaimed Clear Skies movies, which had to resort to Half Life footage.
OZ objects the issue as a waste of time since CCP has never shown any consideration for CSM submissions related to ambulation. DV and Erik point out that WIS will likely be still in development, and mentioning a feature idea like this would not required debate on Iceland. It is a mere suggestion and thought ahead. This view is seconded by Lark.
Motion passes 7/1 (against: OZ)
While the remaining issues on the agenda have not been documented properly in the wiki, the assembly decides to do the one issue, which seems to be quickest and least controversial.
in raw text from 18:17:40
Avalloc introduces the issue as a UI improvement to show the aggression timer just like in highsec/lowsec, or at least some indication during session change.
DV is interested whether a disambiguation of the aggression state would lead to undesired changes in advantages and disadvantages during confrontations. Avalloc dismisses such worries as the current state is simply bad UI design. The opinion is seconded by Meissa.
Motion passes 8/0
CSM 3 Meeting 5 - Sunday july 19th, 16:00