Second CSM X Summit Notes

The meeting notes from the second summit in Iceland for CSM X are available.

Like recent summit notes, these are timely and contain plenty of interesting bits of information.

It seemed to have a somewhat antsy vibe at the start and a problematic session or two between the CSM and CCP, but overall it read as more positive as it went along.

I also noticed an “expansion” tone in CCP’s conversations. They seemed less dynamic – they were all busy with their time already scheduled and booked out, so they couldn’t really respond to much outside of the Expansion. It was one of CCP’s faults in the past – where they would concentration so much on each new expansion that they dropped the ball on fixing issues with previous expansions. It will be interesting to see if CCP can balance the different mindsets of monthly against expansion releases moving forward.

Some of the things that stood out for me:

Page 3 – CSM raised concerns about what the road map would look like after Citadels. Personally I am hoping CCP are just waiting for Fanfast to wow us, but I fear not.

Page 4 – CCP Seagull commented that she believes the game ecosystem was not healthy at this stage (I assume particularly talking about Null Sec)

Page 8 – CCP thinks if you disable the dynamic field of view and the speed center offset, the new camera operates similar to the old. For my situation, that view is very inaccurate.

Page Unknown – I had a note that CCP said it was not tenable to keep the old camera alongside the new. I don’t think I am a particularly dramatic person, but I’m not sure I could keep playing if my only choice was the new camera as is. It saps my enjoyment when undocking.

Page 20 – New Drone miners were mentioned for the Rorqual, along with the idea of an invulnerability button to protect it and its fleet – locking them in place but giving time for a defence fleet to get there to help. A sort of notion that laughs at solo players.

Page 20 – There will be NPC Capitals in future designed to be attacked by player Capital Ships.

Page 22 – We can expect redesigned Heron, Griffin, Executioner, Vigil and Mining Barge hulls at some point

Page 27 – CCP do want to review / iterate on jump range and fatigue – although this might be moving space where needed as they did for FW instead of changing ship stats.

Page 34 – T3 are high on the list for rebalancing after Capitals.

Page 35 – CCP are considering an Industrial Command Destroyer – like a mini Orca for Mining / Expedition Frigates. If you could use that to support deep / long range exploration ships, that there would possibly be the most exciting bit of information in the entire document for me.

Page 39 – In reference to Citadels, possibly only in wormholes, it seems like they will allow you to store more than one clone, letting you swap between them without getting a jump timer. That is something I’ve wanted for a long time. You will lose them though if the related module is offlined, or the Citadel is destroyed. That could be very expensive. I’m also not sure how you would move them in and out – I assume only 1 at a time with the jump timer, meaning you wouldn’t want to leave too many clones in any one Citadel.

Page 55 plus – more information on Citadels. They want to increase taxes in NPC stations, to make it cheaper to use markets in Citadels. Not a fan of being forced to use something in a sandpit game. They would like it to take a week to unanchor – then allow it to be scooped by anyone. That means as a solo player once I plant a Citadel, I won’t ever unanchor it. I didn’t think there would be a valid reason for me to use Citadels in my game – and I am even stronger in that view now.

Page 72 plus – CCP still haven’t got their New Player Experience right. One of their new ideas is a medal system that new players can be awarded as they achieve key training objectives. I actually think that is a good idea.

Anyway – there was plenty more. I obviously just concentrated on things that might impact my own game style – which I guess were a little light on.

2 thoughts on “Second CSM X Summit Notes

  1. For the camera especially, can you point to a post (or write/get one written) with what is ‘broken’ and what needs to be fixed. The old camera is apparently not compatible with citadels so needs to be removed. So we need to explain what is broken, and why doing CCP’s recommendations is not the same.

    Even when I am in space, I tend to look largely at various windows (overview, drone, chat, fleet) so don’t see the view. However there are still ways to get your point explained.

    For something like this are there even youtube / twitch streams that show the problem?

    In terms of citadels, my feeling is that a medium is not much (cost wise) different than a large pos … without the mandatory fueling requirements to keep the thing alive, or the general pain of setting the damned things up. That too has a delay for unanchor with a anyone scoop option, but are still used by plenty of solo players. Don’t give up on citadels just yet. Also citadels are planed to be one of several new structures eventually.

    I like moving towards player structures and away from NPC ones. I like players doing more and NPC’s doing less.

    I have set ‘notify new comments via email’ … but I am much better at evemail (to DoToo Foo) than email. If you had some stuff you wanted forwarded on I can try to find someone.

    This applies regardless of how successful or otherwise my CSM run is (though CSM is heard a little better than the average forum post).

    • I’ve mentioned my thoughts on the new camera in a number of posts, including video, plus I’ve also left a number of comments on the official forum thread. I’m now waiting to see the work they do on it in the March Release, hoping it works better for me.

      I’ve run many small and medium POS solo over the years. I’m aware of the unanchor time for them – but you can pick a quiet period to do it and minimise the risk of someone else scooping it. A week for a Citadel gives plenty of time for someone else to come across it and make plans with others, which is hard to counter playing solo.

      The problem I see with Player structures is that most people in the game can’t defend them properly from the likes of PL. If a powerful group wants to destroy it, there is nothing meaningful most of us can do about it. So you end up having to rely on something that you can’t rely on – hence the need for NPC services. This is made worse by the fact – unlike POS, Citadels won’t defend themselves unless you are online and in system.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s