CSM9 Report: Week Eight

 
Cliff Richard once sang ‘We’re all going on a summer holiday!‘ and it appears many members of CCP are starting to take him up on his seasonal advice. Crius is progressing very nicely indeed and just like Tranquility itself, things are at a bit of a lull. Of course, that doesn’t mean nothing is happening…

CSM Townhall

The first CSM9 Townhall is now in the bag and very successful it was too. Thanks to Lanctharus from Cap Stable for hosting and everyone who took the time to ask a question. As with every other Townhall I have ever listened into previously, the quality of questions ranged from excellent and well researched to, well, let’s just say ‘not so much’. But it was entertaining and interesting and hopefully gives you guys some idea of what CSM9 is all about. You can listen to the whole thing back here.

Multiboxing

This one is doing the rounds again. I have chased CCP Leeloo about organising a meeting with the relevant people but between the recent CCP restructuring, Crius and holidays, we’ve not got round to it yet. My own personal thoughts on this one are simple. Isboxer and it’s variants are a symptom of the problem rather than the cause. There are certain mechanics in game that cause people to use Isboxer because otherwise it would just be too damned tedious. However – and this is a big one – there are individuals out there piloting 20, 30 man bomber gangs solo with deadly precision. These people aren’t multiboxing because of a faulty mechanic as such (unless you want to argue that bombers are grossly OP in the current meta which makes them a faulty mechanic which they probably are) but because it is the ‘perfect’ way to run a small bomber gang. So yes, the mechanics need fixed, but none of us are so naïve as to believe that’s an overnight job. I would ‘like’ to see the likes of Isboxer banned. Of course, I’m well aware that ‘banning Isboxer’ isn’t quite as easy as that for CCP. It’s a pretty messy one. What I would like to find out from CCP definitively is what is and what isn’t allowed under the EULA. My understanding is that at the moment Isboxer itself is fine. What ‘may’ not be ok is using a piece of software such as Isboxer to allow one mouse click to activate 30 modules on 30 ships over 30 clients (yeah, I know – why would you use Isboxer otherwise). I’m not going to let this one go. Soon as I can organise a meeting with the correct people in CCP to make things more black and white, I’ll report back. multibox-title

Destructible Stations

This one has also been the cause of some debate in CSM9 of late. CCP went on record at Fanfest as saying they want to make as much of New Eden as possible to be destructible. The question is, would destructible stations in sov null be a good thing? Within the current mechanics, I think destructible stations would make sov null considerably worse than it already is and I don’t make that statement lightly. There would likely be an exciting few months where PL and CFC fight everyone to raze everything to the ground. Once that’s complete, we’re done – nullsec is locked down from that point. That’s how I see things playing out if we don’t see substantial changes to sov mechanics before destructible stations become a reality. (Mynnna has a great anecdote about his solution for this. I hope he shares it in his weekly update). I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this one – I fully accept I could be dead wrong but if you think so, tell me why.

CPM1 Elections

Some of you are going to be Dust players so I just wanted to give a shout out for the upcoming first set of CPM elections coming to a town near you in less than a month. Get all your details here. One last wee PSA – you can track all CSM9 activity either at csm9.org or at the site Noisy set up here. If you want to read our blogs or find out how best to contact us, either of those sites should work for you. We did have one meeting this week and I can tell you precisely nothing about it, sorry. You’ll find out soon enough. In the meantime, Glastonbury, Wimbledon AND the World Cup are all on today so I’m off back to that.
Tags: crius, csm, csm9, destructible, isboxer

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.


  • I would love to see destructable stations as a wh option.
    As for the large coalition effect in sov nul , how would this be worse than current destructable POS ?

    • Kamar Raimo

      Outposts are a much bigger investment and also offer much more storage space. A lot of people would like to have destructible stations because they feel that outpost proliferation has gone too far. An outpost in a system creates a vast advantage for the defender.

      On the other hand, what Xander says seems like a likely scenario. I don’t see how a change in sov mechanics would help with that problem, though.

      Maybe a middle-ground solution would be to make station services destructible?

  • Kethry Avenger

    My 0.02 iskies,

    Isoboxer and other software enhanced multiboxing. I would be happy to see it go.

    Destructable stations. Not yet. I definately want them but there needs to be a few things added first. Sov changes, changes to setting up stations, a debate about what happens to your stuff, probably should allow more than one station per system and other stuff.

    • xanderphoena

      Yep, agree on both counts.

  • Hiram Alexander

    ***Raze to the ground – (I feel bad about pointing that out, sorry.)

    To get back on topic, though…

    Banning Isboxer is definitely a touchy subject for some, but yeah, I too would be happy to see it go.

    As far as destructible stations go? Maybe some day (I think everything should be vulnerable to loss, even the littlest things like vanity items), but with Sovereignty the way it is right now, I feel it’d just make things worse.

    As an aside… any non-NDA news/views on resolving the discovery scanner giving too much free intel in WH space?

    • xanderphoena

      Ugh, I missed the ‘raise’ / ‘raze’. Fixed now, ta.

      Can I ask why banning Isboxer is touchy for you? I presume you use it currently? Can I ask what you use it for (not so I can condemn you – I am genuinely curious).

      We agree on destructible stations as long as sov is as it is currently.

      Regarding the discovery scanner, I’d be lying if I said I have a strong opinion either way but I don’t think it breaks NDA to say that Corbexx has been looking at this one closely.

  • Smokey

    Running an effective bomber gang solo is silly. But each 20 man bomber/miner/ratter multiboxer pays for 20 accounts, so i’m not convinced CCP will do much.

    If it takes way more than 1 week to raze 2 neighboring regions, then killing stations will shake up nullsec a lot and make alliances lose some “fat”. 0.0 started unconquered and players survived. Now poses are getting better and mobile depots are great for daily activities of the average grunt. If we pretend supers/titans don’t exist (that’s “the fix” IMO), then 0.0 will be more risky than lowsec, but far from locked down.

    Some players might be losing billions in assets, but being too lazy to move assets out of a risky area of space – or flying what they can’t afford to lose – shouldn’t be a good reason to stop CCP from working towards their vision.

  • Pingback: CSM9 Report: Week Thirty » Crossing Zebras – EVE Online articles, videos, news()