Difference between revisions of "Factional Warfare - Lack of Development (CSM)"
m (Protected "Factional Warfare - Lack of Development" [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) |
m (Factional Warfare - Lack of Development moved to Factional Warfare - Lack of Development (CSM): Naming conventions) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
[[Category:CSM_Third_Candidacy]] | [[Category:CSM_Third_Candidacy]] | ||
[[Category:Rejected_Issues]] | [[Category:Rejected_Issues]] | ||
| + | [[Category:CSM Submission]] | ||
Latest revision as of 06:42, 18 December 2009
Stats
- Raised by: Erik Finnegan
- Submission Date: 7 June 2009
- Issue ID: tbd
Problems
FW issues are well-known and acknowledged by CCP, and moreover many very concrete suggestions have been made by the players and previous CSM. Yet FW still hasn't seen any improvements since its launch almost a year ago. This is extremely demoralizing for many pilots which have engaged in FW and found themselves plagued by bugs and lacking game mechanics. It is not showing a good face of EVE to the new players, which receive immediate access to FW as part of the boxed version of EVE, either. Many players fear that FW will turn into another COSMOS - an overhyped feature that is rushed out in an incomplete state and subsequently left to die.
CCP's previous answers to the CSM have been weak and not reasonably concrete, either not showing any sign of commitment, or simply being ignored (Alliances in FW).
Solutions
Prioritize the suggestions, which have been made by the previous CSM and at fanfest, as well as on the forums. They are on the table. They are ready to be put to the game design crew.
Relevant Forum Threads
Relevant Documentation
- Extended, Comprehensive Analysis of the Facwar Mechanic - CCP respond?
- Factional Warfare (by Ankhesentapemkah) - (MS Word .doc) Sent to CCP the month after the release of Factional Warfare