Gorski-CSM-report

The Gorski CSM Report: First Week on the Job

 
So I figured it is time to do a quick recap of my first week on the CSM and what I have been up to. For those of you who didn’t know, I replaced Corebloodbrothers on the CSM when he decided to resign. Although I didn’t know I was next in line, it felt great to see people’s support in this thread on reddit. Later that night, I got a message from CCP Leeloo on Skype telling me that I was next in line, asking if I wanted the spot. I accepted it instantly, and CCP announced the next day, July 7th, that I was going to be on CSMX. Coincidentally, it was also my birthday and was probably the best gift I could have asked for. Once again, I loved all the support from you people over on reddit. Since this was the second time I managed to get on the CSM after people dropped out, I now assume only casuals have to actually campaign for it. During the first two days of my reign, I set up the CSMX Slack and emails etc. It wasn’t until the first meeting that I realized I had joined just after CCP decided to drop the drama-laden change to null sec wormholes. I wasn’t on the CSM when that stuff was discussed and tried my best to ignore and stay out of it. I spent the next few days trying to catch up on current events and discussions within the CSM, a process I’m familiar with from the last time I joined half-way through the year. One difference from last year is that I will actually be attending a summit in Iceland. I know I got a lot of criticism for not being as active as I should have been during the winter summit for CSM 9 due to time constraints and work. This time, however, I have taken time off work and will be in Iceland to attend all meetings. Directly after the summit, I am going to visit EVE Nottingham. The schedule should be tight but doable. That’s going to be a really great experience, and I have already started gathering bullet points and talking to friends and other people about changes and improvements to certain aspects of the game. I also got access to Confluence, CCP’s internal communications system, which means that I can make suggestions, comment on game developments and provide feedback. This, of course, is what I do the most of while I’m on the CSM. I have asked CCP Leeloo, and I am allowed to share my suggestions without breaking the NDA. In my first week, I suggested CCP make three changes I would love to see. The first was a rework of the Punisher frigate into a rocket frigate. Right now, the Punisher is the weakest frigate, in my opinion. It shares a role and competes with the Tormentor and, on some level, the Executioner, both which are better PvP ships. I suggested reworking the Punisher into a missile ship to provide a stepping stone to the other rocket ships in the Amarr lineup such as the Vengeance and Sacrilege The second suggestion I made was some small UI tooltips for overheating. Specifically, show how much nanite would be required to repair a module and potentially an estimated repair time. I also would love if it was possible to do partial repairs and hide passive modules that are not damaged by heat. The last one I made was a simple change to the ISIS page to help our newer guys out a bit. ss+(2015-07-12+at+09.51.52) Basically, I wanted the role icons in ISIS to be clickable in order to highlight all ships in the tree that shared that role. I think it would be a great way for newer guys using the ISIS system to see which ship to train for next if they enjoy that role. That’s all I have done for the first week, but I am looking forward to giving you all more updates. It is quieter during the summer, but I know the work can ramp up quickly, and there is a lot of work to do for CSM members. One thing is sure, though, I hope that I can leave this CSM term having made the game a better place. The last time I was on the council, we got warp speed rigs, BC warp speed buffed and Skynet, one of the most broken forms of “elite” PvP, removed, and I hope to achieve more this year. For the rest of my term, I really want to focus on helping FW and making sure the rework is going to be good. I am also obviously going to comment on ship balance and any new additions to the available ships in EVE. I would also love to try to get links removed from the game, but I know that is not going to be easy and will be met with a lot of resistance.  
Tags: csm, CSM 10m CSMX, gorski

About the author

Gorski Car

Gorski Car was a CSM 9 member whose theorycrafting and knowledge of mechanics has had a key role in helping CCP adjust how we play EVE. He is an avid small gang PvPer with a background in lowsec, but flies in all areas of space, depending on his fancy.

  • Bitter-Tea

    As much as I wanted to dislike this post, from personal bias against the way you name your gas mining frigs, I confess that this was an excellent read, with some really good ideas.

    The idea of the Punisher giving up its lasers goes against all my nostalgic memories, but yeah… What you said makes more sense by far.

  • Messiah Complex

    I like your suggestions, particularly the UI tool tips for overheating. I also agree that the Punisher needs a rework, and needs it badly. Making it a rocket boat would probably kill my 50MN MWD fit, but I can live with that. 😉

  • Kamar Raimo

    That *all* you did in a week?! You damn inactive waste of my vote that only got you in on the back of Corebloodbrother’s resignation!

    Seriously: Congrats on being selected to go on a summit in person. I reckon that indicates how much devs value your input and that’s a good sign.

    I like the suggestions but I am still sitting on the fence about the links. It’s really not because I depend so much of them. I have two alts that can fly command ships or link T3s and only one actually has some in the hangar. I hardly ever use them.

    Like I said in conversations, I just have the feeling that removing the whole link mechanic from the game would need re-purposing of so many different ships that I wonder whether it wouldn’t be more feasible to just wait for the technological prerequisites to be there for links to become an AOE on-grid effect.

  • Bob

    I’m pretty sure partial repairs are already possible, just cancel a running repair and it will preserve the work being done so far.

  • TYBG

    thank you based gorski

    i voted for you

  • ControlBlue

    I’m sure many will offer you their support to stop the evil links menace o7

  • Strata Maslav

    Gorski it made me pretty happy to see you get a position on CSM!

    Heres my suggestion for fixing links and making them actually fun.

    Links should be an active targeted effect.

    The passive links that a ship gives to a fleet should be nerfed (halved?) and should act passively the way that leadership skills work currently (require no module). So the fleet gets a 15% bonus to tank etc.

    To make up for it they can lock and activate modules to give buffs to specific fleet members (similar to the way friendly logistics ships work).

    So in order to give the additional bonus to the tackler’s speed for example, the command ship pilot must target his ally and active the speed link module on him (CCP can decide on the effective range and bonus amount).

    So in theory you can have a command ship off field and receive a significantly reduced bonus but if they are on field they can give your fleet a significant advantage to individual pilots.

    You would have multiple command ships on field trying to ensure that your lachesis are getting point range and that the primary is getting their tank resistances buffed.

    Is that interdictor running in to get a bubble on their fleet? He can call out and I buff his tank and speed before he makes his run in.”

    Not only does this address the issue of off-grid boosts but adds a new active role for pilots to interact with allies who can make meaningful decisions.

    Also give them slots for guns so you can shoot stuff in your command ship at the same time!

    • Ben i.

      @gorski: keep up the good work!

      @Strata&gorksi: I know a lot of pilots who fly logistics, but realy whish to remotely buff their fleet in a meaningful way. So yeah, i vote for this kind of active use. but maybe restrict to fit a maximum of one link per kind. Thats speed/resistance/pointrange/… . I imagine this would work as incentive for a fleet to divide into roles.
      The buff that the ships gives to links currently, is directly transfered to all in your squad/…, but nothing else.
      Stacking penalty of 100/0/0/… for targeted links, so only one can be active. Or restrict it so a ship can only be affected by one link at a time.

      • Strata Maslav

        I’d like to see T1 BCs with the same link power as command ships but only able to fit 1 at a reasonable fitting cost and 2 with a larger sacrifice from firepower/tank. The discrepancy between high SP links and low SP links is too large.
        T2 command ships should be more specialised and have 3 or 4 links and bonused guns so they don’t lose too much DPS from fitting the links.

        Another nice touch to add flavour for command ships would an integrated ship scanner with a large range so the ship can provide intel on ship fittings and capacitor.

        Tech 3 should probably be able to fit 1 or 2 with maybe a reduced effective range?

        • JZ909

          I love that idea, maybe you could give it a d-scan bonus as well, with a longer range and an automated refresh, to encourage FCs to command from them.

  • Dermeisen

    Great post, love to hear how it’s going further along.

  • Congratulations! looking forward to read your updates, and you got my support for removing links from the game.

  • JZ909

    Thanks for the update! I think it’s easy to get wrapped up in the drama of big changes, and forget about the little changes that keep making EVE better. I especially like the idea of the Punisher as a missile boat. A T1 armor missile frigate would add something very unique to the meta.

    I can see a lot of reasons to get rid of links, but if that happened, do you have any proposals for a new role for command ships?

  • Druik Arbosa

    I would love to see link ships nerfed in such a way that creates a new option to PVP.
    Prevent link ships from activating their mods within 150ks of gates, stations and structures.
    When a link ship activates their modules, a suspect timer goes live for that character.
    When a link go live, the link ship scannable profile increases, where even implants that reduce the profile would have negligible effect.
    That’s it , no more than that.
    Truthfully, I don’t what it would take to fiddle with the code to make that happen.
    In the end, the people fighting against the force with link support have an option to send a task force to take down the link ship, they don’t have to, but it makes sense to, and creates some terrain to the fights.

  • Dwaigon Aumer

    Please five some luff for BC’s!

  • Samira Kernher

    Thank you for making the punisher suggestion to CCP. <3 Turning it into a missile ship to differentiate it from the tormentor is something I've mentioned to friends a few times and I think it'd really give it a solid role to fill (one we lost when the Inqui became a logi frig).

  • blobby

    Great to see you on the CSM again

  • Freelancer117

    Thanks for being so casual about speaking your ideas for Eve Online 🙂
    I’m glad I voted for you as a non bloc member and wish you the best of luck.

    It’s a great idea you have about the Punisher, “bringing solo back”

    Regards, a Freelancer

    PS: been trying the Tormentor for solo pvp it has potential, only lost it twice !

  • Altrue

    Suggestions on the topic of UI tweaks for overheating:

    – The heat indicator telling exactly how much damage there is, instead of an approximation based on ~15% increments.

    – The little overheat green semicircle at the top of the module icon, turning from green to orange if the module has a chance to break if you overheat one more cycle (meaning if there is an overheat in progress, it needs to include the incoming damage + the potential damage of the next cycle)