CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Roadmap Review With CCP Seagull CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Manfred Sideous * Thoric Frosthammer CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP Seagull * CCP MannBjorn * CCP Scarpia * CCP Delegate Zero DURING THIS SESSION, THE CSM WERE SHOWN THE ROADMAP FOR EVE ONLINE, AND FIELDED QUESTIONS TO THE EXECUTIVE PRODUCER, SENIOR PRODUCER AND LEAD GAME DESIGNER FOR EVE. THE SESSION’S TOPIC INCLUDED ITERATIONS ON SOV, THE CAPITAL AND SUPERCAPITAL REBALANCE, CITADELS AND STRUCTURES, VISUAL IMPROVEMENTS AND GENERAL BALANCE AND OTHER FEATURES COMING OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 12 MONTHS. GIVEN THE SENSITIVE NATURE OF SOME OF THE MATERIAL DISCUSSED, THIS SESSION WILL BE HELD UNDER NDA, AND WAS NOTED AS SUCH AT THE START OF THE SESSION TO ENSURE COMPLETELY OPEN AND FREE DIALOGUE. TO COMPLETE THIS SESSION, HERE IS A SELFIE OF CCP KITTEH CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Player Acquisition CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Chance Ravinne * Manfred Sideous   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP Ingo * CCP Thomas * CCP Xamother * CCP Legion * CCP Delegate Zero * CCP Excel Ingo - Introductions all around. We have people in the room from CLM, our Email specialist, and people from Team Extropy and Team Oomph. Sugar - What are you doing right now to bring people in. Ingo - We're looking at doing stuff close to the heart of EVE right now, and rebuilding the core capabilities of marketing. We outsourced a lot of this in the past and we're now bringing it back in house. Right now we're not branching out to people, for instance who are interested in sci-fi, but don't necessarily know what EVE is, as we're trying to focus more on people directly interested in the game. Sugar - What about the recall program? It kind of vanished? Ingo - We'd like to put it back on the table, but at this stage we don't have the resources for it. Sort - Would you be interested in opening a team that was focused on working with new player groups such as Brave, EVE Uni, Pandemic Horde etc in order to improve acquisition and retention? Ingo - We'd be very interested in this. Falcon – Let’s set up a follow up meeting with regards to this so that we can get you guys in more regular contact. MOST OF THIS SESSION IS UNDER NDA GIVEN THE FACT THAT A LOT OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION WAS COVERED SURROUNDING PRICING AND FINANCE. CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Little things CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Chance Ravinne * Manfred Sideous   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP karkur * CCP Punkturis * CCP Affinity * CCP Mimic * CCP MrHappy CCP karkur - Introductions all around! Mike - Let's do the starting statement and get the first three out of the way! Mass fitting, alliance bookmarks and more overview tabs! CCP Punkturis - When we do little things it's generally a side project, as we're working on feature teams for our regular jobs. We're both going to be very busy with structures and capitals in programming terms, so we'll have less time over the winter. CCP karkur - Sometimes although a change might be viewed as small, it might have wider implications and we need to talk about it a lot, so sometimes things aren't as simple as they seem sometimes. CCP Affinity - Generally, little things are the things that you know will be popular and loved by players. If it's something that will be controversial then it's probably not a good idea as a little thing. CCP karkur - Also, you should continue to use the little things thread on the forums, as we're still reading it, we've just had less time to respond to things recently because of how busy we've been! THIS SESSION WAS STARTED WITH THE CLARIFICATIONS ABOVE. THE CSM AND DEVELOPERS PRESENT THEN WENT THROUGH A LONG LIST OF LITTLE THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED. MOST OF THESE WERE TOUCHED ON, BUT GIVEN THE VOLUME OF CONVERSATION, SOME MAY HAVE BEEN MISSED. THESE ARE LISTED BELOW Steve Ronuken: * Copy and paste blueprint information from the industry window * 'click here to redeem' for the redemption of things in the NES, has to click on the text, rather than the icon. Can we fix this? Sugar Kyle: * Sugar asked for them to define what they consider a little thing to be. * Sugar asked for the minimum courier size to match the increase in cargo capacity for freighters. * Sugar asked for the ability to strip fittings from particular slots (high/lowmid). This will probably come with the changes to the fitting window. Mike Azariah: * Larger font options for us old folks. * Autofill commas on can calculator and other numbers. * Bounty symbol off of character portrait. * A scanning Booster drug. * Multiple jump clones in a station. * Add scope videos to captains quarters. * Be able to alter scroll bar size. * Loot All button closes the inventory windows. * Corp search can be filtered by FW race. * Ability to add an express bonus for quick delivery of hauling contracts. Jayne Fillion: * Persistent ship scanner and cargo scanner results * Refit and unfit "grouped" turrets * Saved refits or "configurations" for easy swapping (max 3?) * Ability to refit to and from the fleet hangar w/o fitting window * Ability to swap character training on an account w/o relogging * Jump clone swapping within the same station w/o timer * Cynos working between fleets, "rebroadcast cyno" * Remove neural remaps and attributes * Distinctive skins for each alliance during the tournament * Official channel listings for LORE and NPSI channels * Cycle time on logistics reps being different (medium vs large) * Keep track of who deleted a corporate or alliance bookmark * Hotkey to launch deployable, possibly a "deployable" bay? * More tabs on the overview * Notifications for directors/managers on pilot leaving corporation * There is no "ctrl+A" option on right click "view contents" on ships * "Member corps" page of the alliance tab should have more info * Change fitting modules that are "one only" or "maxed slots" * Jump bridge modules show "use" on selected item in overview * The contact list limit needs to be increased. * Make list of things/requirements to increase index public * Sort contract availability using checkboxes, not dropdown * Reload and repair persist through gate jump * Watchlists only on mutual approval * Range bonus to hull reps on triage * Restrict from self destructing while inside of a pos * Remove the warp skill thingy * Overheat while cloaked * Graphical "ping" animation when you double click in space * Separate your overview into multiple windows * Option to show timers on long module cycles * If you have colors set for fleet broadcasts, watchlist should highlight * When you click "view market orders" it should also "open market group" * Allow you to save what modules are in the cargo in fitting window * Fit multiple ships at the same time, rename multiple ships at the same time * Remove all restrictions on stuff in the cargo bay while in a SMA. If that isn't possible, make LO and drugs * More ranges and less restrictions for deployables * Custom "tags" for FCs and broadcasts * Alliance Hangars - accessible only by the directors of corporations * Auto-repeat dscan (30 seconds) * FLAG EXEMPT FROM FLEET WARP -> FLAG EXEMPT FROM "WARP TO" * Overview setting for unpiloted ship. Cagali Cagali: * I added my voice to begging for a mass fit button - which turns out is not a little thing * Asked for fittings to include things in cargo - apparently not possible and was asked very shortly before by someone else. * Asked to add the audit from secure containers to corp hangars - seemed to be well received * Asked for the 'Fleet' icon to be added to the neocom by default - again seemed to be well received * Giving corp/alliance bookmarks a more prominent location, or a notification when they're updated - seemed to be easy * Asked to allow contracting for trial accounts - was told no because it's too hard and kind of a security thing * Asked for the personnel manager role to be given ability to kick people as well as invite them to corp - told no, then changed request to be make a new role that allows kicking, was told no because there are no more roles possible?!?! * Asked for the local window to be separate by default, since noobs often miss it and the importance of the window entirely * Asked for the corp inventory to recognise that when I'm trying to accept a "want a gift" contract that the huge pile of skillbooks in my hangar is greater than the single one being asked for, meaning I don't have to manually "de-stack" the book before accepting the contract. maybe - they were going to canvas the idea. * Asked for drag-able notes from your notepad. no, apparently. Sort Dragon: * Would CCP allow stuff such as modules, rigs, and mobile depots be saved in fittings to allow for more easy rapid fittings? * Alliance Fittings. - * Fitting from a corp hangar. * Could we get killmails for mobile bubbles, just like we get for the rest of the deployables? * Making bubbles single use anchorable and die after a certain amount of time. * Alliance bookmarks, please and thank you" * Is the "Corp Auto Remove" feature going to be functional, or it still just a placeholder that for some reason, is in the current build? * Multi Fitting of ships and multi contract of items/ships – * When you have cargo window opened and change ships, make the cargo change automaticlly to cargo of new ship. * Able to save items in cargo in ship fits. * Is there a reason that it's capped at 15 pilots? Is there any reason we can't have 20, or even 30 pilots on our watch list?" * Logi somehow getting on killmails, I know it's difficult but it's a nice quality of life for logi pilots to have pride in that they were there without having to bring combat drones or a whore gun * "Clicking 'fit' on T3s currently is buggy/doesn't work because it tries to fit the subsystems too and as such won't fit any modules or rigs. *not really a question just something CCP should be aware of, quality of life" Corbexx: * Increasing corp bookmark limit to 1k. CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Customer Support CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Chance * Manfred Sideous   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * GM Lelouch * GM Grave * GM Fox GM Fox - Introductions all around! GM Fox - We'd like to start off by going over some of the concerns you guys had last summit. One of the things you guys talked about was transparency on policy and procedures, which isn't public. GM Fox shows confluence page detailing how Customer Support deal with exploits, and what is and is not classified as an exploit. GM Lelouch - We're looking to clean up messaging as there's a lot of old announcements out there that are no longer applicable, as the issues have been fixed. Mike - You do need to communicate that the rules area very fluid thing, and they will of course change over time. Corbexx - Is this something you could put on the help center as a link for reference? GM Lelouch - Yeah, this is something we're looking at doing as we'd like to be way more transparent. GM Fox - Moving on to how we deal with player feedback, we wanted to show you how we deal with the feedback we grab from players in tickets, and how we process feedback and get it to development. GM Fox shows the JIRA page that shows player feedback for development, listed and categorized. GM Lelouch - We have a team within Customer Support called team hangover that processes all this feedback and delivers it to developer. Sion - Is there somewhere that players can see the process for delivering feedback, where they can see this kind of thing. GM Fox - This isn't the official procedure for delivering feedback, it's just an additional way that people can give feedback, however people should always come to the CSM and go to the forums to talk. Endie - What about the "unsubscribe reasons that are put in when you cancel your account, how are those dealt with Falcon – Those actually go to our CLM (Customer Lifecycle Management) team, who look at the reasoning, document it and make sure that it becomes part of our overall metrics for reference. GM Lelouch - We're always looking for feedback, and people can always go to the forums and put up their opinions and suggestions, they do get read, and getting a lot of people behind your idea can make it more prominent. Cagali - There was an issue with support earlier in the year related to yahoo email addresses where a lot of emails were lost, what was the problem there? GM Grave - Third party software issues, our new software wasn't pulling in emails from yahoo email addresses, but that's fixed now. GM Fox - That brings us into a nice segway to the next subject, our new software for customer support. GM Grave - We've introduced a new help system, and a new help center that we're in the process of localizing and we're pretty happy with the uptake on it. A lot of people are using the reference pages there, but there's a big backlog to get updated and localized, so that's something we're working on. GM Grave shows graphs that detail views on the helpdesk and views on helpdesk articles. Mike - What the hell happened on July 21st? GM Grave - That was the big skillpoint reimbursement and people looking at the help center to see how to use them. Corbexx - How many articles are in right now? GM Fox - 170 at present, and we have a big backlog that we're putting up as we work through it. GM Grave - We feel it's a better service for us just to answer questions for you in the help center and get you the help as fast as possible, then if you have more detailed issues you can file a ticket. We want to make sure that people get help as fast as possible. GM Grave - We generally get a great deal of tickets taken care of within a reasonable time. 34% of our tickets are answered within an hour, mostly high priority issues and stuff that's essential, but some tickets take longer. GM Fox shows a graph that details ticket response times. GM Lelouch - Our average replies per ticket is somewhere around 1.4-1.6 replies per ticket. We're working as hard as we can to make sure that we bring times down. GM Grave - We're working toward the target of giving 80% of tickets a first reply within 24 hours That's what we're staffing for right now, and that's what we're aiming toward. GM Fox shows another graph that shows tickets filed and satisfaction rate. Mike - There's a trend where things are going up at the end of the graph, what's that about? GM Grave - We're working through a bit of a backlog of tickets at present, three days or so, due to summer vacation and the rollout of the new support system, we're working on being back between 1000-1500 tickets in the queue. GM Grave - We're very happy with the satisfaction rate right now, it's the highest it's ever been. At one point it was around 80%, now it's up at 95% and we're very proud of that and are trying to maintain it. GM Fox - You still can't have your Tengu back though. Corbexx - With regards to reimbursing in wormholes, is this still an issue because there was difficulties and less leniency in doing so from what I gather? GM Lelouch - We try to reimburse into a station wherever possible, as dropping ships into space can be an issue, it's a limitation in our tools. Sort - What about new structures? GM Lelouch - We have requests in for tooling to make this happen, yes. In the meantime we work with players on a case by case basis to make sure that they get what they need in terms of reimbursement. GM Grave - One more thing to talk about is ticket creation. We used to have this old way of filing a ticket through the F12 menu. Now we have an SSO page that takes you to an out of game browser window where you can submit a ticket. We've actually seen a downturn in ticket creation for smaller issues like namecalling. GM Lelouch - We're doing a lot more than just ticket responses and support now too, we have a lot going on in terms of relations with development, and are speaking to them more actively now. In most cases we'll pass on defects and won't ask players to file bug reports any more. We're working on making things easier for players. Corbexx - What about putting out Flight Academy videos that show how to file a ticket or a bug report? GM Grave - We're probably going to do that once we get the new UI cleaned up and when everything's working smoothly. GM Lelouch - We're also looking at ways we can turn support tickets into bug reports in order to streamline things, and we're working more actively with development on new features and making sure we have the tools to support them more than ever now. We have very good relations with the developers. GM Lelouch - We're also super close with game design in particular for exploits and issues, this can lead to a little bit of a delay in response but it gives more consistency. GM Grave - We also have a lot of plans for the future. With our new software we have lots of plugins and we're looking at rolling out live chat support towards the end of the year. It'll be limited initially, but we're looking to expand on it to improve service further. Mike - How do tickets work? Does the next guy who's free just pick up the top ticket on the list. Are there specialists on subjects? GM Lelouch - Yeah, there are specialists who deal with certain areas of the game for sure. Sion - It's very clear to me that you guys took our feedback from the last summit and went away and actioned it. Your work is awesome, and its very much appreciated, you guys are doing a great job. CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Purpose of the Council CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Manfred Sideous * Thoric Frosthammer   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP Seagull * CCP MannBjorn * CCP Scarpia * CCP Delegate Zero Leeloo – I’d actually like Sion to start this one, as he has a lot to say and a proposal for change. Sion - There's been a lot of issues that have come up over the course of the last few years in relation to the relationship between the CSM and CCP, and how we all interface with the players. This has been everything from relationships with development teams to disagreements over the purpose of the council, along with the fact that sometimes members of the CSM advocate for things but no one knows about it because there’s no transparency. Sion – This brought up the compelling question “why does the CSM exist”. Sion - I've been looking at how people deal with crowds, communities and focus groups, and how people use their collective intelligence. The aim was to see how we could harness the group we have for the best. Sion – The primary things I’ve identified are Relevance, why are we here. Engagement, meaning the voter turnout, and whether we can make a case for the CSM existing on that basis. Sion – We are not collectively a representation of the playerbase if 10% of people vote. The vast majority of the playerbase are those who haven’t voted. A couple of fanfests ago someone asked the question “how many of you voted” to the audience. Mike – I asked that, and about 10% of the crowd who came to fanfest and were in the room for the CSM panel raised their hand. Leeloo – There are some people who are just like “CSM? What is a CSM?” These are the people we need to engage. Mike – Yeah, there were people in the panel who didn’t even know what CSM stood for. Sion – When you have a situation where people know what this is, and they choose not to vote, it’s clear that they don’t feel like they’re getting anything out of it, so why engage with it? Sion – There’s also the question of what value we’re providing to CCP, and what service we’ve provided to justify any budget expenditure on us whatsoever? I’ve had this question for both of my terms on the CSM. Sion – You can qualify but you can’t quantify the value of having face to face meetings with people, and the value that those meetings bring. Sion – The next thing is the NDA. While I respect the NDA and the fact that there’s a lot about the company that shouldn’t be public, the reality is that as a group, we need to be able to talk to our people and get you the feedback that you need. Sion – The reality is that I don’t represent the sum total of Goonwarm’s knowledge, I can help filter it, but I’m by no means an expert in everything we do. No one is an expert in the whole of EVE. Sion – The NDA, historically, has proven to be an artificial contention point. In reality, what’s the problem with is discussing things? All it does is impose an artificial limit on who knows what, and when? Sion – It makes a lot of sense to me that you don’t want business information to be out there, however I don’t see the sense why you would want to hide, for instance, the fitting requirements on interceptors. We should be able to talk about it. Sion – In addition to that, there’s been little about the CSM that’s changed to come with a change in company culture and release cadence, and the csm has become this little archaic institution that is struggling in a lot of ways to meet the challenges. Sion – That’s not the fault of CSM members, it has everything to do with the structure of the CSM. This structures does not at all allow us to meet the new goals in the new situation. Sion – The proposal I have is simple, but maybe has wider reaching implications. Rather than us existing as “hey, you guys need to tell us stuff and we need to filter it, then you can feed back to players” we need to change the CSM to harness the best resource CCP has. Its players. Sion – There’s an immense amount of players we know that we would love to bring into conversations and talk to about this, and we can show them what we do as CSM members. We can have discussions in a moderated setting that are moderated by the CSM, so we have an actual purpose. Sion – It removes some of the necessity for you guys to keep going to places like reddit, TMC or anywhere where you don’t have control to look for feedback. Crowds are not often the best for feedback, or solutions, but they’re better than a single person. This is seen anywhere you look. Sion – It’s all about how you manage it, and this organization is the management tool, and doesn’t add any administrative overhead for you. This isn’t a unique idea to use customer focus groups, but it is unique to have customers run it to reduce overhead for admin. Sion – It also helps to make it part of the EVE Universe, and lets us create an efficient dialogue between players and CCP, which over the last year hasn’t been there. Sion – You guys have communicated more in the last year than ever before, it’s been great, but it hasn’t been targeted, and it feels like its lost direction, and it doesn’t seem like you can really gather feedback from it and build a reinforced community sentiment. Sion – The idea is to change the structure of the CSM so that we can bring our power to bear as delegates and bring our communities along with us. For instance, create a locked forum, and what gets put in that forum, I don’t know, the kind of target areas would be where feedback is desired. Sion – This is so you can have a conversation with high level players who don’t want to sit at this table and don’t have the time to be on the CSM but do want to give a lot of really good input. Rookie trainers, FCs, all the people with a deep knowledge you need to tap can be here, and the CSM can harness this. Sion – For instance, if there was this venue and we had a process for this, there’d be a closed forum for sov, where people could discuss this, and I’d have a group of everyone who has an interst in sov, not just my leadership who have my bias, but everyone. There’s a lot of people who know about sov, and it’s a place where CCP can go without the toxicity, and look at solid feedback. Sion – With this kind of system you’d have the accountability that we don’t have right now. You’d take away the noise and give clear signal, because we’d be accountable for the people who were in these discussions. Sion – Let’s assume the worst case scenario too, that I decide I only want goons in this discussion, there would be some kind of CCP check, where you could say “we’re going to veto this person, we’re not going to deal with the rabble rousing this person creates, but we’d like to add this really smart person that you didn’t include and we don’t really care what you say.” Sion – Sugar and corbexx already do a great job of this. They run townhalls and bring huge binders to the summit. I’m not doing this, I’m doing things differently. Sion – I think this is is the best solution to make us feel like we’re not shouting into the wind. I think there are barriers, but I don’t think that they can’t be overcome. I think I’d like to see the CSM become the wranglers of this feedback so that we can filter this feedback. Sion – This way lets us gather solid feedback, and it will clearly show to other members of the CSM and CCP if we’re just here to troll. It has a lot of self checks in, but these are on the community side, so we hold ourselves accountable and you don’t have to. Sion – We’re never going to have full agency against CCP, and are never going to be able to day “You cannot release this feature”, that’ll never happen. So we have to have agency somewhere and this goes back to principles of play that build an experience that’s relevant to EVE. If you get elected you can then say “I can help my friends be represented to CCP and can do some good” It also lets us do some actual work that we’re accountable for. Leeloo – I’ll start by saying that there are communication issues, however I don’t want to take a crack in the wall and add another layer by putting wallpaper over it. In the long term this will be bad, and we need to find a solution to the communication issues. Leeloo – The big problem with the CSM and why people stay away from it is because it’s so complex, I had a conversation with a player at fanfest and told him about the CSM, suggested he read the whitepaper and he was like “oh my fucking god, this is a 16 page document and I don’t understand what the hell everything is about”. Leeloo – It’s hard to understand what value you get from it as a player, and it’s hard for you guys to see any tangible effect you’ve had on decisions at times, because most of the time you can’t say “that’s because of me that they’re doing it this way” Leeloo – I’m very against adding an additional layer of people that will complicate things even further, although I do like the idea of having experts we can talk to. We also need to reach out to our localized communities too. Corbexx – So I’m an expert on wormholes, but there’s still so much I miss. I talked to a few people before the summit about wormhole and got six pages of feedback I knew nothing about. This kind of thing is already happening to an extent with sounding boards, townhalls and such. Corbexx – There’s already experts that the devs are going to outside the CSM, and that’s fine, it’s not our problem, but doing something like this will mitigate a lot of the problems because you won’t have devs talking to 8 people individually. You’ll have devs talking to groups and you can control and document the discussions way better. Leeloo – That’s what I don’t like. I love having the experts, but I don’t want to lock things into one forum, or one medium for discussion. I don’t want to add another layer of NDA to all this and complicate things further and I don’t want to create some elite group, we’ve already done that by having the CSM elected, we don’t need a larger, wider council. Thoric – I think what is being said is that there are topics that don’t need to be under NDA, that we can talk about them and discuss them with people and get way better feedback. The current structure of the CSM doesn’t work, and needs to be changed. Sugar – I want to talk to people. I want to go out and talk to the masses and get feedback, but you have to be very careful not to breach the NDA. Sion – I think that what needs to be understood is that when you put likeminded people together they’ll naturally start to argue, debate, and give feedback on a subject they’re passionate about. That’s seen in EVE, it’s seen all across society. It’s about putting the right people in the room and harnessing the information that comes out of it. If you don’t put the right people in the room you just get the noise. Sion – With the wrong people you get the reddit threads, you get the disastrous townhalls. If you take me, with 5 years of experience in EVE, Endie with 10, and a few others, and you add up the raw human computing power you bring to a problem. This is tough to manage, and there’s problems in being able to manage a group like that. Sion – There is however a solution, right here. Us. We’re not picked, we’re elected to be here, and we’re supposed to be here. All we’ll be doing is bringing our constituents with us. You now have a reason to vote and show up. Leeloo – What I’m saying is that we should not hand pick who the CSM should be interacting with. CCP should not be involved in that, and we should not limit it to one platform. You should have agency, and this is something that we should look at. Leeloo – This is why I wanted Falcon and Seagull in the room, to listen to these problems. If we start talking about things sooner, and don’t keep them under NDA, you can go out and talk to people, you can have the agency to get feedback. Seagull – Isn’t there just a fast way to try this with the current CSM? With citadels, or a couple of other features? Why don’t we ask you guys to form these groups and talk about a few features after loosening the NDA and see how it goes? These topics are such that there shouldn’t be these big secrets and we’re not going to chasing after someone for an NDA breach when we’ve asked you to speak to people. Leeloo – But you need to pick the people, not CCP. This is my biggest problem with your proposal. You need to have the agency to do this. Cagali – Well, you guys could have veto power, if we suggest someone who’s not going to be constructive, then you could just say “no, you’re out”. Falcon – I don’t think we even need to do that. I think it should be on you guys, and you should have the agency and ability to invite who the hell you want, and say “you’re the guy who’s been sat shitposting on reddit or the eve online forums for the last six months so we don’t want you to be a part of this discussion because you’re not taking it seriously. When you demonstrate you can mature and sort your attitude out, you can come take part.” Leeloo – But then you get the question “why didn’t you include this guy or that guy?” Falcon – Then the agency the CSM has comes into play, and they say “look at his posting history, he’s unproductive and not taking this seriously” Cagali – You also have another layer of information though about people’s history with EVE, if they’ve been banned or whatever. Falcon – That shouldn’t mean anything, so long as people can keep themselves under control and have a reasonable discussion. You guys should have the agency to do this and select people based on their conduct for reasonable discussion, and you should be accountable for it. If it turns out this guy doesn’t vote for you in the next election, then that’s his call, and you’re accountable, so you have to think about the decisions you make. Falcon – Putting the power in your hands to go out and do this is the best thing we can do. Sion – If we bring people in who’re terrible, we’re accountable for it. Falcon – Exactly, this is the whole point. If a member of the CSM goes out and says “I want to have a focus group on x subject” and then a guy they’ve invited turns up and makes a dick of himself in front of everyone and ruins the discussion, then people immediately as “hey, CSM dude, why the hell did you invite this guy?”, and that person is then accountable. Sion – Seagull, would you be happy to encourage this among devs, and make this happen so that devs would attend and we could do this? Seagull – Absolutely, but I don’t want elite cliques and groups forming, we need to know what groups would make sense for what subjects. I don’t see any reason not to try this on the current CSM. Leeloo – I’m fine with that, but I don’t want to change up the whitepaper with this. Sort – It has nothing to do with the whitepaper does it? Mike – Sion is propsing a change to the CSM as a whole, so yeah it does. Falcon – It affects the whitepaper quite drastically. Leeloo – Let’s use it as a test first, see how it goes, before we look to write it into the whitepaper. Falcon – It’s something that’s going to be fluid anyway, it’s going to be super flexible in terms of format and style depending on the topic and the number of people attending. A loose set of guidelines, or a best practice, and around that the CSM have the freedom to choose the venue and forum for the type of feedback that they want to bring us us. Leeloo – I think the biggest issue we have for this is the localized communities who won’t have their voices heard. Corbexx – If localization could help, we could pull off different languages. Falcon – That’s something we could look into. THE REMAINDER OF THIS SESSION WAS MORE OF A BRAINSTORMING SESSION ON HOW EXACTLY TO ADAPT THE CSM IN THIS WAY FOR THIS FUNCTION. FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE RELEASED GOING FORWARD AS WE FLESH THIS IDEA OUT. COMMENTS ARE WELCOME IN THE CSM MEETING MINUTES DISCUSSION THREAD. CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Nullsec CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Manfred Sideous * Thoric Frosthammer   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP Fozzie * CCP Masterplan * CCP Bettik * CCP Delegate Zero * CCP Larrikin * CCP Mimic * CCP Seagull * CCP Nullarbor * CCP Scarpia As Nullsec had been discussed at length during the Sovereignty sessions the previous day, the floor was opened by CCP Fozzie asking the CSM if they had any further points they wished to discuss. Sion opened a dialogue in which the relationship between development and the CSM over the past several months, and in particular with the sovereignty feature, was discussed. Several points were made by Sion, Endie, Jayne and Sort discussing both mechanics, communication and experiences the CSM had with the community at large, which were answered by Team Five-0 (Fozzie, Larrikin, Bettik and Mimic). The conversation touched on several points, but in particular the recent community feeling towards the Aegis Sov release and some of the issues brought up by the Community and CSM, such as trollceptors, Jump Fatigue, the balance between attackers and Defenders. Although many of these points had been discussed in the previous sessions they were brought up again in particular reference to community opinion and a perceived lack of direct communication between the CSM and the devs. This led the conversation on to what could have been done to prevent this, as well as future plans for ongoing work on Capitals and Structures…. Future plans regarding upcoming feature work, communication plans and high levels goals set by the development team were discussed and plans were made for improved updated video meetings following a point brought up by Bettik: “It's often hard to get a point across through text, or it can be taken out of context, and you get communication issues.” The CSM were happy to have further discussions in a less formal format. The conversation then moved to Brain in a Box and the plans for this aspect of development. Sort Dragon asked : With regards to brain in the box, is that still coming? Is it going to improve performance? Will we see closer, more condensed fights? Masterplan explained that Brain in a box is more related to jumping, and session changing, and is more designed to stop the lag from moving and session changes, so that should be more smooth. Fozzie further explained that General fleet fight lag won't be fixed by this, such as firing guns, and activating modules, but any lag after lots of deaths, jumping, cynoing in etc will be better. CSM X – Summit One 2015 / 09 / 15 Session : Individuality vs Uniformity CSM ATTENDEES: * Sion Kumitomo * Sugar Kyle * Sort Dragon * Endie * Corbexx * Steve Ronuken * Mike Azariah * Jayne Fillion * Cagali Cagali * Gorski Car   REMOTE ATTENDEES: * Manfred Sideous * Thoric Frosthammer   CCP ATTENDEES: * CCP Leeloo * CCP Falcon * CCP Seagull * CCP Manifest * CCP MannBjorn * CCP Scarpia * CCP Delegate Zero Sugar – So I wanted to bring this up from a few players about how EVE is defined. Is EVE really a dark, dystopian place, or is it somewhere that’s dark, dystopian and desolate, but some people go to Hawaii and other people are goth? Sugar – This is something that I’m asking because there’s a lot of conflict around the use of color, alliance logos, all kinds of things. Players are defining EVE based off of very old guidelines, and need new definitions. Sugar – Stuff like the colors of the UI are an issue, people have lost the sliders for colors, and don’t have the ability to customise their UI because EVE should “look like EVE no matter where it’s viewed from.” Seagull – I’m sure that on request some of these things could be clarified but we’re also sitting on fifteen years of decisions on top of decisions where we might also not be able to tackle all of the instances where old definitions are available for us to make judgement on a given situation. Seagull – Right now, there aren’t a lot of answers to stuff like this, but maybe we can set some new guidelines. Sugar – People are angry because they can’t customize things. We’re starting to do that with SKINs now. To the point where the UI stuff was taken away, and people would like it back. MannBjorn – There has been talk of customizing the UI, all kinds of things, but these are very expensive in terms of development time and focus is elsewhere. I can’t say this about blue vs pink for instance “oh no, blue is more expensive!” Endie – We get this a lot where our guys say “I’d throw money at CCP if a corp could go out and create their own corp skin colors and show their identity” MannBjorn – I’d love to get more customization, it has real value, being able to customize your experience but it has value and we have to say “how much can you customize, how much can you tear things apart and re arrange them how you want?” Can you color everything different? Corbexx – Stuff like being able to mod your UI. Falcon – Well, it would be cool but the EULA prevents that to any extent more than messing around with overview colors. Manifest – I think what sugar is looking for is kind of a style guide. Falcon – I think most of the art team would kill me, but I’m of the opinion that if someone wants to fly a bright pink ship, then they should be able to. You’re a capsuleer. The power of that alone means you should be able to do whatever you want with your ship’s hull. Falcon – You’re supposed to be these super rich, eccentric people who’re top of the food chain in society, why not? Delegate Zero – It’s a harsh and dark universe, but there is always a little bit of hope, there should always be. Mainfest – Maybe it’s a good idea for Falcon and Delegate Zero to sync up with the EPs on this to clarify things, as this is a big way we talk about EVE. >> END OF MINUTES FOR DAY TWO <<