CSM roundtable transcript

This page contains the transcript of the CSM Roundtable that was held on November 21st, 19:00. The original announcement can be found here.

CSM members in attendance

Dierdra Vaal Elvenlord (Alt) Korvin Meissa Anunthiel Sokratesz TeaDaze Trebor Daehdoow Vuk Lau

Questions

Hybrid guns

Q1: Okay, fine, I'll break the ice with a potentially misinformed question; Why isn't Blaster or Hybrid Balance on the 200-odd list of priorities?

[19:05:14] Dierdra Vaal > The list is created by issues CSM members bring up over the years and succesfull get a majority vote. If there are no blaster or hybrid issues that have passed it is because they were either not brought up, or did not get a majority vote.... [19:05:59] Dierdra Vaal > I do know that shortly after quantum rise (and the speed nerf), a few blaster issues were voted down because CSM members wanted to be sure it wasn't just the new, lower speed that was confusing people... [19:06:16] Dierdra Vaal > however, I do recall blasters and hybrids being mentioned by Korvin during our meetings in iceland. end

[19:06:51] Trebor Daehdoow > I just extracted the issues from the current in-process list. We haven't passed a blaster/hybrid balance proposal AFAIK, so it didn't make it. In other words, what DV said. We do have a planned session on game balance issues requested by players scheduled for December. [/end]

[19:07:41] Korvin > We had a discussion about blasters on CSM4 and 5 during the summits [19:08:00] Korvin > the real problem is - there is no clear answer how to fix them [19:08:20] Korvin > to keep them unique and dont ruin the balance of guns even more [19:08:42] Korvin > i keep an eye of discussions on an Assembly hall for that [19:08:50] Korvin > and brainstorming this issue [19:09:00] Korvin > and ccp is aware of the issue with hybrids [19:09:22] Korvin > so far i defined some points [19:09:36] Korvin > All Hybrids.
1. Tracking is fine, it should be in a line with a projectiles, lasers have a native tracking advantage.
2. Hybrids should use kinetic and termal, in this case termal dmg can be an extra advantage to the close ammo. [19:09:47] Korvin > 3. Cap useage of hybrids can be lowered, since most of a ships have an active tank bonus. [19:09:56] Korvin > Blasters.
1. Should stay the close range and have the most DPS, but limited alpha on a closerange ammo.
2. Should have their ROF between the projectiles and lasers. [19:10:06] Korvin > 3. Alpha can be limited by giving the ammo ROF modifyer.
4. Range can be extended by giving the ammo a faloff modifyer. [19:10:16] Korvin > 5. Faloff and optimal values should be at a close values, to make them usefull for ships both with faloff and optimal bonuses. [19:10:27] Korvin > Railguns.
1. Should have the alpha between the lasers and arty, closer to arty. [19:10:37] Korvin > 2. Can have alpha lower with a close range ammo, and higher with a snipe ammo to have the advantage, their alpha with an iridium-tungsten ammo can be higher than the arty on a same range, to give the advantage to the caldari sniper ships on an average f [19:10:53] Korvin > to the caldari sniper ships on an average fleet range. [19:11:04] Korvin > 3. Should have a 2nd version of a long range t2 ammo for the caldari ships. [19:11:15] Korvin > but the further discussion with ccp and csm needed [19:11:20] Korvin > and planed for december [19:11:23] Korvin > [end]

[19:12:11] Meissa Anunthiel > Also, most of the proposals related to those brought up by other members later on were so grossly misinformed/oversweeping that they got shot down. In the end Korvin brought it in a general balancing session, where it's going to be just fine. And as [19:12:21] Meissa Anunthiel > he said, it's not just a question of "blaster suck". More like a question. Do they, really? Under what circumstances? And are those circumstances not a fair tradeoff for their advantages. That is what balancing is about.

[19:13:05] TeaDaze > There are a few "fix hybrid" proposals floating around and there is one I'm going to submit for the next CSM meeting - however it wasn't raised in time for inclusion in the prioritisation list. [end]

CSM's input on Incarna

What is the CSM's read on how much input they/we will have on Incarna game play given how it's been revealed to be more or less a blank space?

[19:15:32] Meissa Anunthiel > As much as we want to, so far CCP has been receptive to the ideas we've thrown at them, and I'm sure they'll be quizzing us again this december meeting. And given that it's a "blank space", now's the time to contact your favourite councilmembers to [19:15:43] Meissa Anunthiel > give them suggestions you may have... [/end]

[19:17:04] Mynxee > Agree with meissa, and we are already having discussions about Incarna with CCP. [19:17:52] Mynxee > People should chime in, in related threads in assembly hall and other forusm; that info will be gathered and used to help convey the players' preferences to CCP regarding Incarna. end.

[19:18:30] TeaDaze > I don't believe the CSM will have much input into the first interation of incarna due to the people calling the shots on that feature (who subscribe to the "players can't game design" point of view) and the short amount of time before the first release. [19:18:55] TeaDaze > I would love to be proved wrong and will be involved in the discussions in December [end]

[19:19:59] Mynxee > In addition to telling CCP what you DO want, it is equally valuable to be very clear about what you DON'T want related to Incarna. I'm looking for a link right now to share and will post it here soon as I find it. end

[19:21:11] Dierdra Vaal > While we obviously cant make any promises at this point about what will be in Incarna, I can tell you we've been talking with CCP since june about this [19:21:38] Dierdra Vaal > and as a council we're heavily pushing for 'make sure there is lots of fun and meaningful stuff in it' instead of just walking around and going to the hairdresser.