The CSM Minutes – Seen through newb eyes
The CSM Minutes from the December summit have finally been released here, and at a whopping 44 pages there’s a lot to read.
Rather than dissect every angle of the minutes because that’s long and boring and I’m bad at stuff like that, I’m instead going to examine the small section on Wormholes and explain why I want to throw something heavy at the CSM.
I’ve been in wormholes for a couple of months now, and I thoroughly enjoy them. I am nowhere near an expert (oh dear no), but I’m going to give my opinion anyway. That’s kind of the point of a blog, is it not?
First up, the minutes state that some CSM members pointed out that Wormholes are working well, and that the issues lie with living out of a POS. Very true. CCP states it’s hoping to make some changes. As long as these improve the ability to live out of a POS (let me change my Tengu’s subsystems, CCP!) then I’m completely in favour.
The next paragraph starts to make me rage a bit.
CCP and some of the CSM members brought up the difficultly of invading a large established group in a wormhole as one of the biggest current issues with w-space. The idea was raised of having some sort of ship or module that would allow more mass to pass through a wormhole.
Nonononowhatisthisno. Invading a Wormhole is difficult, yes. That’s the idea. Moving large forces through Wormholes is made to be difficult because that is how wormholes work. Working as intended. A dedicated force can and will find a way to get their ships into a Wormhole if they truly want to.
A ship/module that would increase a Wormhole’s mass is a really nice concept, but ultimately I have to call it idiotic. I, and many others, enjoy WH-Space because it limits ship movements. To allow a way to bypass that would ruin it. There’s simply no need. Whilst I support the concept of new role-specific ships, a WH Mass one is not one I agree with.
Next up, we have a line that causes me to froth with rage.
One of the CSM members explained the defensive mechanic of leaving your static wormhole at critical mass and collapsing it when invaders were close to entering.
The fact that this even had to be explained to most of the CSM indicates that they probably shouldn’t be talking about ships and modules that could completely alter Wormhole warfare. Of course, this can be applied to a whole host of things within the CSM Minutes, but I’m sticking to the WH stuff.
One CSM stated that “If you build a fortress in there it is impossible to invade”
It’s really not. As I said above, a dedicated force will find a way. It would be difficult, but isn’t that the idea of establishing a Fortress in the first place? What the hell is the point in a Fortress that can be taken out by a solo Rifter on a day trip?
Next up, we have Two Step giving some smaller WH fixes, such as being able to use a Rorqual’s clone vat bay.
THANK YOU TWO STEP
It’s extremely nice to see a specific CSM member being named and actually doing something that makes sense for WH dwellers. I sincerely hope that he was able to counter-argue some of the idiocy earlier on. Also, I’ve just noticed a post he made here. Pretty much sums it up.
There was some final discussion about making sleeper (and Incursion) spawns more variable, which CCP agreed would be a good thing. Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people
I agree with the change to sleeper spawns. A bit more variation would make it that little bit more exciting. Not that constantly watching d-scan with a probe up isn’t engaging enough, mind you.
With regards to sleepers attacking POS/Pods, I’m completely undecided. If the pod is sat in a Sleeper site, by all means have it attacked. POS Towers, on the other hand, I can’t decide. It makes sense from a lore/gameplay perspective, but I’m unsure on a personal level. If this was ever implemented, CCP would have to be very careful with the mechanics and numbers of said Sleepers. Spawning 20 Sleeper Battleships overnight would be completely over the line, for example.
That’s pretty much it. The Wormhole section was fairly short, and that’s probably a good thing. I’m glad to see some decent changes being discussed but remain unnerved that some of the CSM seem completely oblivious to Wormhole space. This is no different to the “ABC Ore” discussions of earlier 2011, though.