Crossing Zebras Episode 62

Sup dear listener? It’s been a wee while since we last sat down for that ill-fated episode 61. We’re aware there were some issues and we appreciate all the feedback from all of you, both good and bad. Hopefully you’ll get to see the reaction from our end begin with this episode! Joining Xander this week are two very special guests. First up is the Editor in Chief of Crossing Zebras and Gallente Militia pilot, Niden. Joining him is legendary PL FC and CSM10 delegate, Manfred Sideous. We discuss a very important recent dev blog from CCP Fozzie and the fallout between certain CSM members as well as touching upon the recent sovereignty contest on Duality. Crossing Zebras Episode 62.mp3 Incursion (0:32) Introductions CZ61 Retrospective – We got it wrong last episode. What we are changing going forward. Summer of Sov (Part One) – The first part of our group dissection of this incredibly important dev post from CCP Fozzie. (39:32) Summer of Sov (Part Two) – The second part of our discussion which goes in depth into the recent changes announced to 0.0 WH connections and the fallout between certain members of CSM. Duality Fozziesov Contest – PL was rather successful at this. We talk about what happened and how. Shoutouts As always, huge shout out to our amazing sponsors at Eve Bet who continue to support everything we are doing here at Crossing Zebras. Keep on RTing us on twitter (@midi2304, @niden_gmva and @OhTakashawa), telling your corpies and friends about us and posting reviews on iTunes! We hugely appreciate you spreading the word. You can subscribe to the podcast and post reviews here: You can subscribe to the Crossing Zebras YouTube channel here: This episode’s playlist is as follows: Muse – Mercy Petite Meller – Baby Love
Tags: aegis, fozzie, Fozziesov, manny, niden, sov, sovereignty, wormholes

About the author

Xander Phoena

The good looking, funny, intelligent member of the team, Xander set up Crossing Zebras with Jeg in April 2012 mainly because he was talking too much about Eve on his other podcast. Playing the game for almost five years, Xander still has absolutely zero clue about how to actually play Eve but somehow still manages to talk a good game.

  • Dirk MacGirk

    Interesting discussion. I’m going to focus on the part about how hard players are on CCP, but with more of a focus on we talking heads. I know its something we probably all struggle with in trying to maintain some semblance of balance in highlighting the good while also discussing areas we may see as being an issue. Positive aspects tend to get less air time, primarily because it doesn’t take a lot of words to agree with each other. On the other hand, areas of disagreement are what takes time and thus end up sounding like complaining/tears/bitterness, etc.

    It really is a difficult balance to maintain, especially if the material you’re being given is itself a bit skewed towards what might be the more controversial aspects of a much larger package. As an example of that, I’ll toss out two examples. The first being the Pheobe jump changes where, in spite of knowing before they wrote the devblog that they weren’t going to fully hit the jump freighter, they still put it out there as though they were. The result was that far too much discussion took place regarding the JF that it was really became a distraction from the core issue related to combat force projection. It’s not to say the JF wasn’t a possible target at some point, it just wasn’t when they released their ideas for public discussion.

    The second example is more recent. For months, details about the FozzieSov/Sov 3.0 mechanic were being released with almost nothing that addressed reservations related to how a more concentrated footprint would be sustainable. As a result, the focus for months was on one side of the equation and did not allow for a properly balanced review. Not until the last minute.

    As I’ve said before, starting with Pheobe, there was a lot of perceived stick being handed out, and little in the way of carrot. Not that a stick always requires an equal and offsetting carrot, but there were hints of it that probably could have been fleshed out along the way to help provide better context and better public discussion without giving away super top-secret details that can be gamed.

    It’s the nature of the business to some extent, but it can’t be surprising to anyone that the majority of what gets discussed is going to skew towards areas of disagreement. I am quite certain that most writers and podcasters want to be as fair as possible and provide a balanced discussion as often as possible rather than sound as though they are hammering on CCP at some personal level. By and large I think the community of talking heads truly loves this game and knows how hard the employees of CCP work to maintain and improve such a multi-faceted game.

    • Niden

      Thanks Dirk. Your points are certainly valid and I agree with what you’re saying. I think all three of us wanted to express the positive _because_ it gets said so seldom that it could easily be mistaken for taking all that good stuff for granted, or even worse, not noticing it at all. I think it’s important to say these things from time to time, to remind CCP and other players that we _do_ appreciate everything that we are given. As far as paid entertainment goes, I can’t think of any other media that has given me so much bang for my buck, and as far as gaming companies go, I can’t think of any other that players feel so connected with as CCP.

      • Dirk MacGirk

        Yeah, the comment was partly a response to what I was listening to at the time, which I thought was balanced. It was also partly a general response to a common topic that comes up quite frequently, especially if you’re doing a live show with listeners. Oftentimes they will ask why we’re bitching when in fact the only thing that is happening is a discussion of the available details. There is nothing more I would enjoy than saying “thanks for the hard work CCP” or “you did a bang up job here CCP, I have nothing to say but thank you.” But that’s a Hallmark card, not a broadcast. It doesn’t make for a conversation that can take place all that often and podcasts and radio are every-week events. By and large, I know that when we really get into it on The Open Comms show, its more disagreeing with each other than it is taking it to CCP. Because even amongst the players and talkers, some find things to be both good and bad. There is no being 100% right about anything. But that’s what we do. We host shows designed to be as entertaining and/or informative as possible for an audience interested in listening to chatter about a videogame. It’s thinking out loud, taking into account other perspectives, and having a conversation, hopefully one that creates feedback from the audience or gets others to provide input through their own means. What’s funny is that the only thing worse than sounding like CCP can do no right is CCP can do no wrong. I can’t say enough how much I like the employees from CCP that I have met or interacted with and how much I respect the work put forth by all of the employees. But the only way I could build a show around that would be to move to Iceland and a hold a weekly episode of Hug-a-Dev. And there’s only so many times cradling Guard in my arms will play before people go watch a streamer giving shit away.

  • Kamar Raimo

    The CZ podcast has come back to interesting discussions with nuance and intelligence. Great!

    Also +1 for the perfect line delivery about professional PVEers. I laughed out spontaneously.

  • Fat Elvis

    Back to normal great content thanks

  • Frost

    I feel it would be ALTRUISTIC of me to point out that Xander might need to go look up what ALTRUISTIC actually means. I gain nothing by helping out here, this it’s just an ALTRUISTIC act on my part… No benefit for me here, I’m just being ALTRUISTIC. Hope it’s not slightly awkward using ALTRUISTIC so many times in such a short space.

    • Kardii
    • Sticker Jim

      Exactly. They’re confusing “altruistic” (for basically the good of all) with being “biased” and thinking only of how a suggestion/change might benefit THEM, their friends or their style of play

  • Alphax45

    Much better 🙂

  • Glad to hear you back Zebras. Good, serious podcast. I was wondering if the “CSM members can identify themselves if they want” was maybe intended to be a “hey the CSM are important” kinda nudge from Fozzie, but the more I hear the more it did seem a lot more of a dodge. I’m sure if you’re a CCP rep it feels like every little thing you say can get twisted way out of what you meant though.