As you probably know, I have the GRR project, a holy war against the evil Goons and their minions. I mosty pay mercenaries to kill their members in highsec and their highsec POCOs were cleansed. Now it's time to go after their most precious ships, their titans!

It's plain and simple: kill a CFC titan for me and you get 20B bounty! The money is held by Chribba, so you can be damn sure you'll get it. He'll post in this thread. To get the money, you must send a mail to me and Chribba with the following:

• link to the API verified Zkillboard page of the kill
• the dead pilot must be in a CFC alliance (no "I swear he is a Goon alt" accepted)
• a link to a well readable screenshot of the fight with the titan still alive but damaged, without any masking (minimize your secret channels). Local channel must be open, readable, with transparent background.
• on the local channel of the screenshot at least 5 people must say "Gevlon Goblin sends his regards"
• The money will be given to the corp of the highest damage dealer.

Spies, titan-logoff-point campers, awoxers, get to work! Death to the titan of Evil! Grr!

People need to be paid to do that?

I find it funny how he invented this crazy ISK-player equivalence. Let's take an example: if I kill some corp member in a shiny pirate BS the following takes place, according to his logic:
* If other corp members loose cheap stuff, I effectively killed the whole corp, despite never touching them.
* If they fly more expensive stuff (like caps), it may turn out I didn't kill anyone at all.

Now that's some quantum **** there.

You can say his Titanic has sunk.

Aren't those bombless bombers (everyone takes a drink!)?

do you realize how horribly you misinterpreted the correlation coefficient in your blog? hilarious.

The correlation coefficient is a measure of the degree to which the movement of two variables are associated, not the degree to which the dependent variable is explained by the independent variable.

You are confusion correlation coefficient, which is [cov(x,y)]/ SxSy

and a linear regression coefficient, which is a slope coefficient on the independent variable (period 1 kills-losses) on the dependent variable (period 2 kills-losses). The slope coefficient would indeed explain how much a net loss in period 1 influences period 2 net losses. It is calculated using the Ordinary Least Squares method, which results in a linear equation of:

Y = a +b*x + e

Y being period 2 kills-losses, X being period 1 kills-losses, b being the regression coefficient you wanted (% of period 2 kills-losses explained by period 1 kills-losses)



Yes, you are missing many, many factors including real life events, wars, in-game events, economic effects, recruitment/alliance switching, deployments, doctrines, logi/scouting/dictor use, and many others.

Your model, and mistaken as it is, is heavily influenced by exogenous factors. Your correlation coefficients don't prove anything, in fact anyone with a brain could have told you that you would have found a somewhat significant result. active players are likely to have been active 6 months ago. However, you cannot calculate the effect of losing a 1bil freighter based on your 'calculations'

Your regression would be incredibly oversimplified, had you correctly performed it. 6 months of pvp activity is influenced by many more factors than a single 1 billion isk freighter loss in a prior 6 month period. Any explanatory power you might have found if you had done this properly, would be a result of the fact that you have excluded countless exogenous variables. I believe if you properly conducted a linear regression, your F statistic and adjusted R^2 would reflect that.




You used the fact that variance is greater than the sample mean (which actually just means that the data is highly varied) to explain that you could make the following calculation:

ganked ship * variance / mean * correlation coefficient = effect on next period kill-loss

What equation is that exactly? I actually lol'd at that. You calculated a correlation coefficient, not a linear regression. Regardless, what the hell is that equation? I'm still giggling. You need the slope coefficient to predict the effect of a current period loss in the next period. You did not perform a regression. The correlation coefficient does not work like this. This equation is not a thing


The higher the correlation coefficient that excel calculated for you (dont blindly use excel formulas unless you understand them to avoid embarrassment like this), the closer the two are to a perfect linear relationship. Logically, that sounds reasonable for your chosen variables.

What you tried to interpret that as, is the regression (or slope) coefficient. The slope coefficient is the extent to which the change in the expected value of period 2 kills-losses is explained by period 1 kills-losses. That is what you were going for, but they are very different in both calculation and interpretation.

Your calculation of the correlation coefficient explains precisely nothing. It has no weight over what you were trying to prove. Try again.

PS: de-whoring kills is ********. Basically only shows small gang and solo kills as a result. de-whored kills - losses will be VASTLY different than just kills-losses

TLRD: A correlation coefficient is not a regression coefficient. Try again with a linear regression and post the F test, T statistics, R^2, durbin watson statistic. You cannot predict the effect of a period 1 freighter gank on period 2 kills-losses using a correlation coefficient. Using excel formulas without understanding the statistic provides great laughs for everyone. Try googling regression vs correlation coefficient next time

There's 2 problems with this

1) Throwing away 100% of your income (when we know you poop-sock this game for hilarious amounts of time per day / week) is worse than just letting an existing pile of money whittle down.
You're basically sitting at your computer, for hours a day / week to make your pretend money, and then you're taking all that time, all that effort, and just throwing it at people who aren't making a difference. Who laugh at you even when you pay them.
You then spent countless other hours, writing blog posts to try to convince people (or perhaps just yourself) that you're having any impact at all, which literally no one, CFC affiliated or not, believes.

2) We know it's not true, since your weekly spend is going down. Either you're getting worse at the game, or you've realized you're hurtling towards 0 balance a lot faster than you thought you would* and you're trying to balance the books.

* - I will point out that your original "grrr goon POCOs" plan was to pay some cheap wardecs so that people could RF our POCOs without paying, for small gang (~5 man) PVP. Because you don't understand the mechanics involved, you didn't realize that to stop us taking money from them, you would need to take them from us. Basically, you never budgeted for months of paying 10bil a week, and you know it - you've just doubled-down several times instead of admitting you can't harm us in any way, and have shifted your goalposts from (major changes only):

1 -
Goal: "to Rf goon POCOs to stop money being made"
Result: Fail. Misunderstood game mechanics
2 -
Goal: "to take all goon POCOs in highsec"
Result: Fail. We sold them
Bonus result: Fail. RvB are all goons and still own them
3 -
Goal: "to collapse the CFC by highsec wars"
Result: Fail.
4 -
Goal: "to collapse the CFC by giving small amounts of money to NPC residents"
Result: Fail, no change in their activity
5 -
Goal: "to make CFC titan pilots lose their ships / be disinclined to use them
Result: Fail. None dead, still using them to RF POCOs and kill pods for lols.
6 -
Goal: "to say bombless bombers more than previously thought humanly possible"
Result: SUCCESS. Despite most of fountain, delve, and the south east being ground out by supers and dreads, Gevlon has never stopped saying bombless bomber.

You know what you "hero" didn't say? He didn't say that my results and conclusion is wrong. You believe that they are wrong, based on what he said. But he didn't say it, since he didn't want to get caught lying. All he said is a bunch of math words you don't understand, with the meaning "his methods weren't prudent enough". When you go to get the autogram of your "hero", why don't you ask him if my conclusion was indeed incorrect? Beware! He might blush, stand from one feet from another and say "actually, Gevlon said losing 1B will make a Goonie have half B less activity, while my absolutely perfect calculation says 0.412+-0.213 with 90% confidence, so he was technically wrong". I doubt if many people on this forum even heard the word "regression" before. The question is "does being ganked (preferably in a bountied titan) makes a Goonie decrease his PvP activity or will he just laugh, reship and go on like nothing happened". My conclusion: significant decrease. His conclusion: Gevlon used wrong confidence interval and his data is noisy and didn't account for logies. And the exam season. And used "then" instead of "than" in the foreword.

You know what you "hero" didn't say? He didn't say that my results and conclusion is wrong. You believe that they are wrong, based on what he said. But he didn't say it, since he didn't want to get caught lying. All he said is a bunch of math words you don't understand, with the meaning "his methods weren't prudent enough". When you go to get the autogram of your "hero", why don't you ask him if my conclusion was indeed incorrect? Beware! He might blush, stand from one feet from another and say "actually, Gevlon said losing 1B will make a Goonie have half B less activity, while my absolutely perfect calculation says 0.412+-0.213 with 90% confidence, so he was technically wrong". I doubt if many people on this forum even heard the word "regression" before. The question is "does being ganked (preferably in a bountied titan) makes a Goonie decrease his PvP activity or will he just laugh, reship and go on like nothing happened". My conclusion: significant decrease. His conclusion: Gevlon used wrong confidence interval and his data is noisy and didn't account for logies. And the exam season. And used "then" instead of "than" in the foreword.

The summary of the Goon Lie. It's created to make enemies of Goons waste their time herding cats until they burn out and quit and cause no damage to Goons in the meantime.

Can one person defeat CFC all alone? Of course not. But luckily not just one wants to defeat the Goons. However these people don't have to cooperate or even talk to. An AFK cloaker small corp in Deklein doesn't need any connection to a Deklein roamer, a highsec camper or a hostile coalition. They just needs an AFK cloaker alt and a blops gang.

I don't hang out with Marmite or MoA guys. I don't share channels with them. We don't send each other jokes (besides killmails with fat Goonies). I do my job and they do theirs. That's the message of GRR: do your job, ignore the rest, don't waste time with diplomacy and Goonies will fall.

It's actually a good idea.

Or who started a poorly managed alliance for gullible new players which then collapsed because it wasnt going anywhere?

Actually it's "if it can't be quantified, it's irrelevant". As soon as you come up with a reliable fun meter, we can start caring about fun.

Well this will be a short conversation.

Also something that came to mind when I crossed the fun/quantifiable/irrelevance part on page 39. If I am having fun in this thread, does that make GG relevant?