| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5293
   |
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:23:17 -
[1] - Quote
Nero Jove wrote:Just curious if a player doing nothing but continually harassing players in a system all day long would be considered griefing by CCP? It was a peaceful system until this guy showed up . First came his 10 toon ice mining fleet. Then came his griefer. He bumps and bumps and bumps. every spawn - every single day. He never misses one. The obvious answer is just leave the system, but that feels like such a cop out. Ideas of how to deal with this are appreciated.
Get some buddies and shoot him in the face.
War dec him, and shoot him in the face some more.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5293
|
Posted - 2016.10.12 17:30:48 -
[2] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Nero Jove wrote:All good advice. Just hard to pick up and leave when you call a system home for two years. Fighting options in high security when he is an NPC corp are pretty limited. errm, guns work pretty well. whats he fly? how does he fit (you know you can scan his fit right) do you know who his main is? if you do id definitly shoot that  Devils abdicate here, Suppose he's in an NPC corp so there's no legal way to wardec him, and thus any attempts to shoot him yield the loss of sec status and ship? NPC corps are the best way to grief bump others continuously, as we are seeing. The game mechanics do not allow for revenge without taking huge penalties over time.
Wait wut?!?!?!?!
Isn't the narrative that there are no penalties to ganking!?!?!?!?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5331
|
Posted - 2016.10.13 04:26:04 -
[3] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote:have you tried ... you know ... doing something about it,
like shooting him in the mouth? WTF does that even mean Ralph?
You get in a ship, fly up to his bumping ship and shoot him....the "in the mouth" is just colorful language.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5359
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 07:48:22 -
[4] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:Regan Rotineque wrote:That or hire someone to grief him back, 10 toon ice mining fleet, sounds like CODE should investigate.... We are not your personal police. Also the OP has no mining permit. Maybe he should look for another Highsec elite-PvP content creator if there is even one left.
Because gods forbid you lot ever do anything useful, right?[quote]
I consider punishing the imprudent useful.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5359
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 08:16:09 -
[5] - Quote
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:So your only options are: - Bump or suicide gank him
- Hire someone to bump/gank him
- Politely ask him to stop
- Give up and leave
Safety sure is inconvenient.
Safety?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5380
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 02:42:10 -
[6] - Quote
pajedas wrote:baltec1 wrote:Would have been nice for CCP to follow this line of thought rather than spend 5 years nerfing pvp into the ground in highsec to keep miners safe. I think the whole, "your tears fuel me" is lame and over used. That being said, you just filled a couple Orca's fuel tanks in HS. I know you're a little slow but let me try to explain something to you. In all societies there are basically two groups of people. "The Haves and the Have Nots". Some of the "Haves" got to where they are by doing nothing. Like Paris Hilton for instance. However, the vast majority have worked to get there. For this discussion, we'll call them "Producers". Which brings us to the other group, the "Have Nots". Unfortunately this group tends to yield unsavory bi-products, like you. The guy that is unable or unwilling to work and acquire goods and services. It's much easier to just go out and take it from the closest and weakest Producer you can find. Don't get me wrong, I can empathize with you. We've all felt like giving into our base (basic) desire. To want or need something so much that our impulse overwhelms our principles. See: "The exception rather than the rule."Your quote up there Gåæ tells me the whole story. You've established such a pattern of taking from the "Haves" that you've become entitled. You honestly believe that you deserve what others have worked to accumulate. You can call it whatever you want, it doesn't change the facts. *OP does not mine and does not own an Orca. *All references directed at baltec1 are limited to his, "in game" persona and are not meant hurt his little feelings. *Gankers are lazy.
Step away from Atlas Shrugged before you hurt yourself.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5380
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 03:12:30 -
[7] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:pajedas wrote:baltec1 wrote:Would have been nice for CCP to follow this line of thought rather than spend 5 years nerfing pvp into the ground in highsec to keep miners safe. I think the whole, "your tears fuel me" is lame and over used. That being said, you just filled a couple Orca's fuel tanks in HS. I know you're a little slow but let me try to explain something to you. In all societies there are basically two groups of people. "The Haves and the Have Nots". Some of the "Haves" got to where they are by doing nothing. Like Paris Hilton for instance. However, the vast majority have worked to get there. For this discussion, we'll call them "Producers". Which brings us to the other group, the "Have Nots". Unfortunately this group tends to yield unsavory bi-products, like you. The guy that is unable or unwilling to work and acquire goods and services. It's much easier to just go out and take it from the closest and weakest Producer you can find. Don't get me wrong, I can empathize with you. We've all felt like giving into our base (basic) desire. To want or need something so much that our impulse overwhelms our principles. See: "The exception rather than the rule."Your quote up there Gåæ tells me the whole story. You've established such a pattern of taking from the "Haves" that you've become entitled. You honestly believe that you deserve what others have worked to accumulate. You can call it whatever you want, it doesn't change the facts. *OP does not mine and does not own an Orca. *All references directed at baltec1 are limited to his, "in game" persona and are not meant hurt his little feelings. *Gankers are lazy. This is why societies form the rule of law because without it producers move elsewhere to where there is the rule of law. Unfortunately this being a game for entertainment, the majority of the productive citizens have moved on to pastures greener and the have nots are now apparently ganking anything that moves. Personally I would like to see a story in the News feed about the head of CONCORD being tried and shot for incompetence. Take Metropolis where the gankers are very active atm or Domain. The kills in Hi-sec are massively higher than in lo-sec. Ganking has become to cheap and easy and the gankers as you pointed out too entitled. The criminals are on a massive spree and the police are completely useless. No society can continue to operate with the levels of crime that are currently occurring in this game and have been occurring since the crime watch and the destroyers rebalance in Retribution, in December 2012. Then to kick miners in the guts again they made Ice mining into anomalies in June 2013. So the miners income fell as the gankers got better organised, risk vs reward was busted for mining and industry and the people left.
There is plenty of "rule of law". If you get into a corporation in Goonswarm I'm sure they'll let you produce all you want. Many of them will even buy it. And there will be a "rule of law" that you can benefit from so long as you are in their sov space.
In fact, even in HS, there is plenty of rule of law--i.e. the law is if you are an idiot you'll lose your stuff....so don't be an idiot.
Do NOT put too much ISK value into your hauler.
Do NOT autopilot through choke point systems.
Do use a scout if you have valuable cargo.
Do NOT try to go through a choke point gankers are active.
Do tank your ship.
Do have an emergency cyno if y ou are using a JF.
Do randomize your trip--i.e. dock up for periods of time in various systems to throw off the gankers...all have you to do is wait for somebody who is ignoring these points.
Do use a blockade runner if you are moving high value low volume cargo.
If you practice all or some of these you'll be less of a gank target than if you just go about your business like a stupid fool.
As for getting better organized...maybe you should stop and think about continuing nerfs to ganking. The more they are nerfed, the gankers innovate and short circuit the attempts to nerf ganking. Ever hear of the law of unintended consequences? Well there you go.
And please, you do not understand risk vs. reward here. Not in the least. Ganking miners is rarely a profitable endeavor. The only ones really doing it are CODE. and those who get reimbursement from James 315. As for freighter ganking, the people getting ganked...they are seeking risk.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5380
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 03:14:45 -
[8] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Step away from Atlas Shrugged before you hurt yourself. Sorry, I never saw it.
Apparently as it is a book...although somebody might have made it into a movie.
But you sound just like the main character and your little speech was very much like what an Objectivist would write....
Problem is in this world, what you do not seem to grasp is that without the destruction and mayhem that goes on in the game, industrial players would soon find they have no market.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 06:33:11 -
[9] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
So to sum it up your advice is don't be rich in hi-sec.
So much for the rule of law. As to risk vs reward, I think I understand it better than you. The gankers risk is minuscule in the respect they can continuously do it with no real effects.
No, if you want a quick summary: Don't be imprudent.
If you put 8 billion in your freighter, you are being imprudent.
No, you don't know anything about risk. You see, when you put 8 billion ISK worth of cargo in your freighter and then activate autopilot through Uedama you are seeking risk. You are doing things that make it more likely you will be ganked. To then turn around and complain about risk vs. reward makes you look foolish on top of imprudent.
The ganker's are the one's who understand risk vs. reward. They know if they gank 20 freighters each with 6 billion in loot that they'll end up with about 60 billion. Take away their upside FFS. You whine and complain but do nothing...or worse do imprudent things. If you broke that 6 billion down into smaller loads you'd be a much less attractive target.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 06:56:53 -
[10] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:what you do not seem to grasp LOL. Okay, I lack comprehension. Be that as it may, your thinking is just plain sdrawkcA ssaB. When we meet the threshold of, "(the law of) diminishing returns" let me know. Economic Forces of Oppression wrote:This chapter discusses three main forces of economic oppression: oppressive economic systems (capitalism and socialism), direct forces of economic oppression, and indirect forces of economic oppression. It is argued that while capitalism and socialism are not intrinsically oppressive, both systems lend themselves to oppression in characteristic ways, and therefore each sort of system must take certain steps to guard against their respective characteristic oppressions. Direct forces of economic oppression are restrictions on opportunities that are applied from the outside on the oppressed, including enslavement, segregation, employment discrimination, group-based harassment, opportunity inequality, neocolonialism, and governmental corruption. Direct forces may not always be clearly visible, either because they happen far from the reach of legal authorities or from the view of consumers, or because they are diffused in a large society, and only apparent from a statistical analysis and comparison among social groups. In indirect forces, or oppression by choice, the oppressed are co-opted into making individual choices that add to their own oppression. When this force is at work the oppressed are faced with options that rationally induce them to choose against the collective good of their social group, and in the long run, against their own good as well. But choosing otherwise requires choosing against their own immediate interests, and changing their beliefs or preferences in ways that they may resent. You're wrong, I'm right...get used to it.
No you are wrong.
If we were in the real world where where we were talking about capital accumulation you'd have a point, but we aren't.
Ships in game exist primarily for one reason...to be blown up.
Without that, you as an industrialist would have nothing to do. I do not need 2 or 3 ishtars in that case, I just need 1. Once I have multiple fittings to handle my needs...I wouldn't buy anymore modules either.
Even if we had something like capital (and I mean plant and equipment) we wouldn't have depreciation. POS do not wear out. Things do not break.
So only via ships going boom in cold harsh space keeps the moon goo flowing, the miners munching rocks, and so forth. Without massive ship loss prices would crash.
Yes, trust me, I am well aware of things like opportunity cost, probably far better than you. I have read Frederic Bastiat and his essay That Which is Seen That Which is Not Seen. In fact, that is a good essay, especially this game.
See, in that economy things do wear out and need replacing, that "wear and tear" is what keeps the cobbler and the glazier employed. But in this economy we do not have that. There is no wear and tear on your ship. You can fly an obelisk from Dodixie to Jita 1,000 times and it would not suffer any depreciation. You'd never have to say, "Hmmm, the poor thing needs to be replaced."
So this economy needs ships going boom as it substitutes for that wear and tear. And there is no real innovation of items in game. I can't invent T4 or T5 modules. I can't combing T2 and factions stuff to make a T2 Faction module. So there isn't even the idea of buy an upgrade to the Ishtar. We have to wait to see if CCP provides and if they do, great then we can all buy it...and reprocess our older model ishtars and sell them for a trivial amount of ISK.
Maybe if we had a growing population kind of like in the old Solow-Swan growth models. Then we could have economic growth, but since we currently have a shrinking population that doesn't really work too well either. And look, again depreciation and capital accumulation show up.
So like Bastiat's essay, without ships going boom you'd have nowhere to sell your ore, no reason to build ships. No reason to build modules. We could all just content ourselves building and selling things like ammo, but any margins would be razor thin. No, ships, POS, and stuff blowing up in game is EVEs version of depcreciation.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 07:03:16 -
[11] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:
That lack of options is the price of all the buffs to highsec safety over the years. Carebears wanted to be able to isolate themselves from the other players in this MMO which seemed like a good idea at the time, but of course that means both their rivals and the criminals also enjoy equal immunity to their attacks now.
I love it when the Law of Unintended Consequences bites HS dwellers on their collective asses.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 07:06:30 -
[12] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:I'm surprised the thread went into its 5th page before switching to the old arguments about ganking.
Well, it is the usual mantra of the HS industrialist.
Should I tell them that the fees they'll pay in NS are much, much lower. And in some cases no taxes either? And with a JF you can move your stuff around quite easily and even more safely than with a freighter?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 07:28:30 -
[13] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:I'm surprised the thread went into its 5th page before switching to the old arguments about ganking. Well, it is the usual mantra of the HS industrialist. Should I tell them that the fees they'll pay in NS are much, much lower. And in some cases no taxes either? And with a JF you can move your stuff around quite easily and even more safely than with a freighter? Except in NS you either join some huge alliance and do what you are told or you try it yourself and get slaughtered or spend ages docked up waiting for a blob to go through. A lot of people want casual play and that is what Hi-sec is for, except it is now more dangerous than lo-sec for miners, so it has been killing off Industrialists and miners since the destroyer rebalance and then the Ice going into anomalies. Greater risk, lower income = result no fun = people went else where for fun.
"Doing what you are told to do" is actually not that big a deal. I spent years in HS with alts inventing, producing, and doing PI, and helping the alliance run a reaction chain and made billions.
To be allowed to do all that I had my main get in fleets and shoot ****. I enjoyed both so it was not a high price at all.
And I have had my mining alt out mining in belts in a 0.5 system and have not seen CODE. once. Of course I mine in a skiff. But that is the end game for mining. You either mine in a skiff or procuror or you are foder for CODE. And you can thank CCP for that one. Their horrible tiericide is what lead to that.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 08:24:16 -
[14] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Trevor Dalech wrote: For this discussion, we'll call them "content creators". How about we actually call them what they are. "Freeloaders". Stealing the produce created by the actual "Content Creators" so they can get by with little risk but huge rewards. While the actual "Content Creators" are taking all the risks but getting small rewards.
Good lord but you are salty.
Look maybe you should go and watch Lion King again. Pay particular attention where Mufasa tells Simba about the circle of life.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5381
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 08:25:50 -
[15] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Their horrible tiericide is what lead to that. Yep its in the Top 3 stupid ideas from CCP. 1. Greed is Good and all that mess 2. tiericide (making cheap ships more powerful so that smaller characters can join in combat, leading to the slaughter of Hi-sec) 3. Moving Ice into anomalies so that casual players turn up and have no ice to mine. Just look at Eve-Offline peak before the release and a drop afterwards. Retribution, Odyssey and the Rubicons lack of POS update. Those 3 were nails in CCP. Now we have hi-sec minerals double what they were at the games peak, PLEX at over 1 billion and still no hope for hi-sec Industrialists.
I was also referring to the benighted mess that was barge/exhumer "rebalance" not you ether use a procuror or skiff. Anything else and you get ganked.
Oh and no, growth in players online pretty much leveled of in 2010, not 2012.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5382
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 08:46:34 -
[16] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
No player growth died in 2010, it was called Incarna.
But it spiked heavily prior to the release of retribution, then fell a bit, then rose slightly prior to the release of Odyssey then in 2013 they released Rubicon, which created the making of the POSes: I am a small portion of the community, 153 page threadnaught.
As to my use of a skiff/procurer this is not about me, this is about the masses of people who left. Which did include me until recently.
That is some awesome (Bravo Sierra) ex post story telling.
But color me unimpressed.
Look, HS PVP has been routinely ganked and look here you guys are still bitching about it as people become better organized and more specialized.
You'd think you'd learn, but nope. There you go right on down the path to perdition.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5382
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 08:57:37 -
[17] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
No player growth died in 2010, it was called Incarna.
But it spiked heavily prior to the release of retribution, then fell a bit, then rose slightly prior to the release of Odyssey then in 2013 they released Rubicon, which created the making of the POSes: I am a small portion of the community, 153 page threadnaught.
As to my use of a skiff/procurer this is not about me, this is about the masses of people who left. Which did include me until recently.
That is some awesome (Bravo Sierra) ex post story telling. But color me unimpressed. Look, HS PVP has been routinely ganked and look here you guys are still bitching about it as people become better organized and more specialized. You'd think you'd learn, but nope. There you go right on down the path to perdition. Yes HS pvp has been ganked so that now you can use cheaper ships and still suffer bugger all consequences for ganking. So horrible.
Ganking used to be easier in that you'd get insruance payouts.
Maybe you should learn your lesson and STFU about ganking and stop whining so much.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5382
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 09:27:33 -
[18] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Yes you did get an insurance payout now its gotten so easy to gank, you dont need it.
And who do you have to thank for that? Gankers? No, CCP. You are so blinkered you cannot see that CCP has been playing you for fools. If you had just shut up and stopped whining you could autopilot between Jita and whereever so long as you kept the cargo load low enough. Classic case of you got what you asked for dumbass.
Quote:So maybe you should stop acting like it is your right to be able to destroy hundreds of millions of isk ships for a few ratty destroyers, while you pretend that ganking has gotten so hard. Meanwhile most of the industrialists have left this game.
How about you exercise some prudence. Why are you sitting here stamping our foot like an impetuous and spoiled child who thinks the game resolves around them. Stop moving multiple billions of ISK in one fell swoop vs. several low risk trips, or get a JF and just jump past such problem systems?
Seriously you sit here whining like a little ***** that there is nothing you can do when in fact the power has always been with you.
It is well past time you grew up and started acting in a prudent and reasonable matter.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5387
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 17:08:07 -
[19] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
Yes you did get an insurance payout now its gotten so easy to gank, you dont need it.
And who do you have to thank for that? Gankers? No, CCP. You are so blinkered you cannot see that CCP has been playing you for fools. If you had just shut up and stopped whining you could autopilot between Jita and whereever so long as you kept the cargo load low enough. Classic case of you got what you asked for dumbass. Quote:So maybe you should stop acting like it is your right to be able to destroy hundreds of millions of isk ships for a few ratty destroyers, while you pretend that ganking has gotten so hard. Meanwhile most of the industrialists have left this game. How about you exercise some prudence. Why are you sitting here stamping our foot like an impetuous and spoiled child who thinks the game resolves around them. Stop moving multiple billions of ISK in one fell swoop vs. several low risk trips, or get a JF and just jump past such problem systems? Seriously you sit here whining like a little ***** that there is nothing you can do when in fact the power has always been with you. It is well past time you grew up and started acting in a prudent and reasonable matter. So we are down to the cant attack the argument, attack the person part. It does not change the fact that it takes 11 catalysts with T2 guns and Ammo costing 9.09 mill each to kill a freighter empty or not. The gankers are making billions from little to no effort because even a freighter carrying 200 mill in goods covers the cost when half of it blows up. No Industrialists did not get what they wanted, I can't remember any industrialist ever saying :Please buff the destroyers" that was the PvP types. You don't seem to get it there is no low risk trips. Newbie ships are being ganked for fun, hulks and macks for chuckles and freighters for massive profits. And yet you say i am acting like a child because I want risk vs reward reinstated because at the moment the Industrialists are taking all the risks and the gankers are getting all the rewards. While you just want the gravy train to continue.
There is plenty of argument in there and it applies to both RL and the game. If you are prudent you'll be fine, if you are imprudent you won't be fine...well unless you work on Wall Street in which case you'll get a bail out.
That's it. CODE. Miniluv, and the rest impose consequences for being imprudent. That's it.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5387
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 17:39:09 -
[20] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Very nice so proved that older/richer characters are producing more per capital. Industrialists exist but a lot of these are Null alts producing in Hi-sec. Not Hi-sec miner/Industrialists.
How do you know industrialists are NS alts?
Quote:As can be seen here in newer figures, the supplies of Hi-Sec minerals are falling even after the expansion that increased mineral content. While Null/WH minerals are on the increase.
Actually looks like they declined then stabilized. And that change...isn't that when minerals in NS got a major re-work? Not seeing the ganking narrative here.
So? Not seeing the point here.
Quote:So a lot of hi-sec producers exist but not many miners which is what I am referring to as Industrialists. Those who mine and produce in Hi-Sec.
Also if there were so many Hi-Sec miners, how could the value of Hi-Sec minerals double?
And if there are so many casual miners left why is the cost of plex so high?
Miners are industrialists but industrialists are not miners. When I mine it is exactly the kind of casual thing you talk about. I myself do not produce in HS as it is cheaper to do so in LS or NS, and if you know what you are doing moving stuff in and out is not tough or risky.
The cost of plex is related to a number of factors. For example, CCP has been using PLEX for more and more of their services. IIRC it was like $10 to transfer a character between accounts, now it costs a PLEX. Skill injectors also likely played a factor as well. As for the long term trend, that is probably due to the growth in ISK and also the fact that PLEX started out so damn cheap.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5387
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 17:42:14 -
[21] - Quote
PsiMin wrote:
When I used to mine in high sec its annoying as sustained bumping in a system is still classed as harassment and can be logged, however CCP tend not to do much about it.
No it is not harassment. The guy is trying to claim those resources and using a valid in game tactic. Either shoot the bumping ship, try to bump his ships, get to the resources before he does, or move.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5388
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 17:51:24 -
[22] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Galaxy Duck wrote:I guess dozens of combat pilots shouldn't be able to bring down one imprudent guy with no backup, in his philosophy. Correct. Eve is set far into the future. Do not allow "any" weapons into so-called high security space. They have the technology and future bureaucrats would make it happen. You're just afraid you might actually have to "work" for a living.
No. HS is not supposed to be safe space. HS is "safer" space, and you are supposed to take some precautions.
The first rule of EVE has always been, do not undock in anything you cannot afford to lose, and that goes for haulers too.
Your imagination of what the future would be like IRL is irrelevant because in part this is a game balance issue. For example, in the future with advanced technology couldn't I set up a condition so that if my drones take say 35% shield damage they automatically return to the drone bay, and that after 10 seconds they are launched again? Why don't my crew start firing the guns when reloaded. How come I can't issue a "weapons free" command? I supposedly have a crew but not a damn one of them can think for themselves?
And you keep implying that ganking is lazy, but they set up comms, they have scouts, they have cargo scanners, somebody is probably plugging it into evepraisal and checking the value. Then there is the bumping ships, the logistics of getting ships and ammo into staging systems. Then there is all the work of reimbursing people for ships, or assembling the ships and handing them out.
But you do not take even the slightest of precautions and they are the lazy ones?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5388
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 17:55:29 -
[23] - Quote
pajedas wrote:I don't have to dodge anything.
I've seen hundreds of lame ducks like you come and go over the years.
Fact: CCP has ran the game down so far that they're having to give it away.
I guess they listened to the wrong voices.
Except ganking has gotten harder not easier. So much for your narrative.
So in way you are right, they listened to the wrong voices...and tried to make HS have a broader appeal and looking at the numbers it has failed miserably.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5388
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 18:36:03 -
[24] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Except ganking has gotten harder not easier. So much for your narrative.
So in way you are right, they listened to the wrong voices...and tried to make HS have a broader appeal and looking at the numbers it has failed miserably. Your childlike interpretation of the facts is almost cute. For the record, you're saying that "ganking is hard"?
I said it was harder. Now you have have to have a fleet with more players, a bumper, and so forth. Before it could be done where you'd pretty much take advantage of people using auto pilot.
And the amusing thing is you insisting that imprudent play should be rewarded.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5388
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 18:39:22 -
[25] - Quote
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:pajedas wrote:
Correct. Eve is set far into the future.
Do not allow "any" weapons into so-called high security space.
They have the technology and future bureaucrats would make it happen.
You're just afraid you might actually have to "work" for a living.
I seriously don't want to get involved in this clown-show, but I do feel the need to point out that EvE is supposed to be a DYSTOPIAN future. --Supposedly Evil Gadget
No, no! Don't you see with the wonderful technology and the wonderful bureaucrats of the far future will take care of people in HS like they are little children who need their hand held all the time. Via technology and benevolent leaders who are kind and caring people will remove all risk and concerns for everyone. Utopia will have finally been achieved. 
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5388
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 18:41:14 -
[26] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:pajedas wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Except ganking has gotten harder not easier. So much for your narrative.
So in way you are right, they listened to the wrong voices...and tried to make HS have a broader appeal and looking at the numbers it has failed miserably. Your childlike interpretation of the facts is almost cute. For the record, you're saying that "ganking is hard"? Its a hell of a lot harder than it used to be.
Which is why ganking has become something alliances and groups are dedicated too. Yes freighter ganking has always been in game, but the groups like Miniluv and CODE. formed later. Why? Why did it take so long for such groups to form?
Why has there been no Hulkaggedons in years?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5389
|
Posted - 2016.10.19 18:53:40 -
[27] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Ye gods, there's some people posting in this thread that have absolutely no clue about the kind of game that they're playing. Truth (RMS 2011.05.31)
He was talking about you.
EVE stands for everyone vs. everyone.
EVE is in a dystopian future. Try reading some of the fiction articles about what life is like in the game. Even in the democratic Gallente Empire there are some pretty grim stories....and the Caldari...
And capsuleers are...well our immortality has made us out of touch with our fellow humans who are still planet side.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5392
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 03:06:55 -
[28] - Quote
Penance Toralen wrote:baltec1 wrote:Penance Toralen wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Why has there been no Hulkaggedons in years? Because the Goons elected to change from a week long competition into a lame perpetual cash cow they wanted to milk. Pff a mere ten million bounty per exhumer - when the moon minerals for exhumer put a hundred million into the Goon coffers through moongoo sales. The first four hulkgeddons were a success without the Goons. Why bother organising a new Hulkaggedon when there are already existing structures in place such as Code? The familar has breed the comtempt so many seem to crave. Mining ganking has devolved to the point were it is longer distinguishable from rescuing the Damsel. Ganking is supposed to be chaos, but Code has imposed order and structure on it. Hulkageddon was never run by goons, they just donated to the prize pool a few times. Code are a direct result of all of the nerfs CCP have made. They started out as a protest group to nerfs being made 4-5 years ago and are now the only people left ganking miners. Miner ganking used to be even more organized than today. Bollocks - Hulkageddon 5; http://www.machine9.net/?p=663 the Unholy Union. Goons ran the kill board. No, Code was a direct result of a player getting salty over the 10,000 CSM votes getting pissed up against a wall by Mittens. James315 tried multiple methods of being a serial pest, before the GMs gave a pass to bumping. Which is why this tripe exists; Quote: The New Order of Highsec continues to recognize The Mittani as the legitimate Chairman of the CSM. This determination remains the rule in all New Order territories.
You know drinking deep of the kool-aid will not only mess up your ability to think, but will also give you diabetes.
Might want to switch to water.
Anyone else remember the days when it was BoB that were the assholes in game?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5393
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 06:55:37 -
[29] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
So to sum it up your advice is don't be rich in hi-sec.
So much for the rule of law. As to risk vs reward, I think I understand it better than you. The gankers risk is minuscule in the respect they can continuously do it with no real effects.
No, if you want a quick summary: Don't be imprudent. If you put 8 billion in your freighter, you are being imprudent. Just noting: you love to repeat this but lossmails of empty freghters do not help you
And how many loss mails are there for empty freighters. How many loss mails are there were several billion worth of cargo? And how many freighters are moving stuff and not getting ganked?
If you want to autopilot your empty freighter you can, but there is a chance it will get ganked. Not much of one, IMO, but a non-zero probability. So autopiloting your 1.3 billion capital ship...yeah kind of imprudent too. Don't do it, unless losing 1.3 billion is no big deal.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5394
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 07:10:53 -
[30] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:That shows the extent of the imbalance better than words could. A single crappy destroyer in a lot of cases destroying a ship that is meant to be designed for the dangers of hi-sec. Even tanked they dont stand a chance.
For somebody who was talking about knowing something about statistics this statement of yours is very revealing.
How many retrievers were out there mining in HS during the time covered by the first page of those kills (and after removing NS and LS kills)?
That is if you copy and paste the first page of kills, remove the LS and NS kills we have retrievers killed in HS from 05:28 Oct 19 to 02:37 Oct 20.
How many retrievers in that time frame were out mining and did not get ganked?
After all if we are to get an idea of how bad the ganking problem is we need to know:
Ganked Retrievers/Total Retrievers Mining.
By my count during that time span 36 retrievers were ganked. If there were 72 retrievers out mining in total that day, then the rate of ganking is 0.5. But if there were 360 then the rate is 0.1.
You are only looking at one part of the picture and yet you can confidently make such a statement?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5395
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 07:32:11 -
[31] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
It is not the probability of a ship being ganked that I have a problem with. After all this EvE and no where should be completely safe.
It is the crappy little cheap destroyers. They mean that the gankers risk little on the side of isk up for the gamble when they gank someone. It also means reduced risk on the other side of anti-gankers ganking them are going to get less because they are such crappy little ships.
This also impacts on another side which is demand for minerals. Being able to use such crappy little ships means that only small numbers of minerals are destroyed and small numbers are needed to create a new destroyer.
I do not want to see ganking ganked. Just those stupid destroyers. If you had to use the equivalent number of cruisers then that is more on par with risk vs reward.
Also I do worry that either a lot of players of this game have never learned how to tank a ship or we just have a lot of complete morons.
Seriously?
If there are 1,000 retrievers out in the belts and 36 get ganked that strikes me as very different than 36 retrievers were out in the belts and 36 were ganked.
The former indicates little to no problem, the latter suggest you might have a leg to stand on.
Since you don't know the total number of retrievers in the belts...you kinda don't have a leg...not even a stump.
Talking about risk for gankers is also really revealing. How can you talk about risk when the probability of ship loss is 100%? If you face a loss of 100% there is no risk, but certainty. It is with certainty that the ganker is going to lose 8 million ISK. For the miner the probability of loss is actually less than 100% if they are paying attention. If you see that guy land in the belt in a catalyst and you are not warping off...well you are doing it wrong. Even another ship warping in....I'd be a bit inclined to change position or even align out. After all he could be providing a warp in.
Like I have been saying, play prudently and you'll be fine. CODE. aren't going after the prudent, but the imprudent.
Oh, and BTW, with that kind of effort, why not look into moving to a NS rental alliance?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5398
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 17:22:15 -
[32] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:[quote=Ima Wreckyou]
Why can you assume that a company with no statistical back ground is a credible source?
Let me guess you are one of these people who buy things because they are advertised as new and improved or the best around.
You believe what they have said because it is what you want them to have said. Nothing more.
My opinion is exactly that my opinion but I do not hold up unproven statistics as if they are the bible either.
And physicist's model? physicist's models are designed to test if a theory is false, not if it is true and it is not like there have not been numerous that were just plain out wrong. God I really hope you are some pimply teenager still at school.
I wouldn't be so sure about the lack of understanding about statistics. You were just bashing "us" about assumptions regarding the analysis and the 80,000 players being a random sample. Now you turn around and make an assumption too.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5398
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 17:28:00 -
[33] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:I am obviously joking. We even get that in the same thread. 'There is no more neutrality in the world. You either have to be part of the solution, or you're going to be part of the problem.' T. Siedner, London NW2When you named your character you announced to the world that you wanted to be part of the problem. I'm fine with that. Where I draw the line is when you try to force yourself on other people.
How can you have been playing this game since 2005 and not know that this game is predominantly about "forcing yourself on others"?
Quote:I guarantee that in life you are more a mouse than a lion. And before you go crying to the moderators saying, "the big scary man was mean to me" consider this. Why are gankers ALWAYS the first to cry for moderation?
There it is, now because one ganks in game one must be a coward IRL. And I think it is safe to conclude nobody here thinks of you as a big scary man.
Quote:
I'll start a blog outside of here "free" of moderation and see how you fare...
In other words, you'll moderate it so those who have a view different than yours won't be allowed. Coward.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5398
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 18:28:24 -
[34] - Quote
TL;DR: If you are imprudent you are actually risk seeking, you are looking for risk. If you are a hauler and think the risk vs. reward is out of whack...change the ******* reward you nimrods.
Session 1 wrote:As a new (returning, under 5m SP) player it is quite obvious that the high sec gank/grief mechanics are cancer to this game. Please note I have never experience ganking or greifing as ive always been in null or low sec myself (pvper).
Really? How much ganking is there? As I have brought up before all you have is half the picture. You only see the ganked ships, you do not see the ships not ganked.
This can lead to totally wrong conclusions and was pointed out about 150 years ago by Frederic Bastiat. Maybe you are right, but when CCP actually did some analysis it pointed to exactly the opposite conclusion. That it is a feature not a bug. Again, maybe this is wrong, but you are arguing with incomplete information.
Quote:"Player freedom" doesn't mean you should have the ability to harass/gank players in the lawful areas of the game. And the NPC faction should project their power to stop wars in areas they control, in reality these wars would be bad for their stability and economy.
CCP has stated time and again, that HS is just that "high security space" not "safe space" but "safer space". That is so long as I am willing to accept the consequences I can shoot you in HS.
Now groups of players have gotten together and decided, "Yes we are willing to accept such consequences." And on top of it when it is freighter ganking they can also pick and choose which freighters to shoot and...they pick the imprudent players. Freighter gankers are like predators culling the weak and sickly from the herd. Gankers are culling the imprudent from the herd.
To be honest, I wish a version of this could happen IRL. I wish during the financial crisis the imprudent were culled from the herd (allowed to fail) to send a clear message, "If you are imprudent and take on too much risk, and it goes bad you are SOL."
The Bank of England did that back in 1866 with Overend, Gurney and Company. Up until that point the bank of England would bail out imprudent banks, so England went through periodic financial crises. Finally the Bank of England, in a nutshell said, "Nope, we will no longer bailout the imprudent." Overend Gurney got into trouble went to the Bank of England, the Bank of England said, "Sorry, we weren't joking." Overend and Gurney failed, there was a banking panic, a few other banks failed, the directors of Overend and Gurney were tried for fraud, however the judge found them guilty of grave error instead of fraud. But the key point is that the financial system in England was free of financial crises from that point forward until WWI. Rewarding imprudence is NEVER a good thing. All you get is more imprudence.
Quote:In a game with respawns, "player freedom" should not mean "ability to do whatever you want with no real consequences".
Gankers/griefers are bad for the health of games...just look at gaming history.
****when I say gankers/griefers I am talking about those preying upon people that want to play in safe(low reward) areas and have no desire for pvp.
There are consequences. Unless ganking is going to be subsidized (e.g. James 315's little crusade) for ganking to be sustainable, it has to be the case that ganking turns a profit. But for ganking to turn a profit, then target selection is important. Just to break even you need to take into account the number of catalysts in your fleet and then double it. That is the minimum value you can gank. So if you have 40 dudes in catalysts and catalysts cost 9 million each, then we are talking the cargo value has to be at least 720 million ISK. In that case, over time you'll break even. Now if you want to also hand out some ISK to your pilots as an added incentive than the minimum value goes up from there. For example if you need 720 million for the ship replacement, and you want to give each pilot 4.5 million ISK on top of the ship replacement, you'll need a freighter with 1.44 billion ISK worth of cargo.
What does all this mean? Haulers can have an influence on the level of risk they take. Let me repeat that...
Haulers can have an influence on the level of risk they take.
Haulers can have an influence on the level of risk they take.
Haulers can have an influence on the level of risk they take.
You exercise this influence by....not putting too much value in your freighter.
It is not like diversifying an investment portfolio. Why do you diversify an investment portfolio? Well, if the risk of the various investments going down in value are not correlated....well then you reduce your risk of losing everything.
Same thing with hauling. If you put 6 billion in your freighter you are a much more gank-worthy target than if you put 1 billion in your freighter. The gankers who gank for profit will be looking for much more profitable targets. In fact, that 40 man fleet will not want to gank you as they are much more likely to incur a loss.
Yes, yes, this is not a guarantee against ganking...but then I never said it was. Some might do it just for the luls as has been indicated. But you can still reduce that risk too. Use a scout. Do not autopilot. Tank your freighter, especially when empty so they need more guys.
This is why I find people who complain about freighter ganking contemptible. They are literally no better than than those on Wall Street who thought a bailout for their own imprudent and even fraudulent behavior was a good thing.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5398
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 18:29:34 -
[35] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:baltec1 wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
How can you have been playing this game since 2005 and not know that this game is predominantly about "forcing yourself on others"?
The answer to that is simple. They haven't. Oh well played, especially as he was making a thing about the age of posters characters.
Figured....nice one baltec1.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5407
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 21:49:07 -
[36] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Session 1 wrote:There is no risk (FOR THE GANKER) in highsec grief/gank play. It goes directly against what this CCP guy just said...
Funny that the ganker/griefers don't want there to be risk vs reward for them, just the "carebears". (wasting cheap ships is not real risk)
Ironic. Wrong. There's a risk that nothing will drop, there's a risk that the gank will fail, there's a risk that other players will interfere; that's 3 examples of the risks that gankers face straight off the bat. If you want to see increased risk or more consequences for gankers that go further than those provided by the game engine, then it is up to other players, which includes you, to provide more risk and consequences for them. It's a shame that most of their prey are too damn lazy, or too scared of "the lack of consequence" that Concord provides, to do so Eve is not a game that holds your hand while you play; on the off-chance that it does hold your hand, it is to steal your finger and wrist jewellery.
Yes it is amusing when they wail...there is no risk. But at the same time are unwilling to incur the consequences of CONCORD.
That in and of itself reveals that their position is entirely bankrupt.
And despite being shown that they can in deed change the risk vs. reward calculus of the gankers....instead of doing it, they simply repeat the claim: There is no risk, there is no risk. there is no risk, as if they were Dorothy and by repeating this while tapping their mouse on the desk will somehow solve the problem.
Lazy, ignorant, and arrogant. A very potent combo that keeps freighter gankers in the loot. Truly ironic.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5407
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 21:49:55 -
[37] - Quote
Session 1 wrote:Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Session 1 wrote:There is no risk (FOR THE GANKER) in highsec grief/gank play. It goes directly against what this CCP guy just said...
Funny that the ganker/griefers don't want there to be risk vs reward for them, just the "carebears". (wasting cheap ships is not real risk)
Ironic. Wrong. There's a risk that nothing will drop, there's a risk that the gank will fail, there's a risk that other players will interfere; that's 3 examples of the risks that gankers face straight off the bat. If you want to see increased risk or more consequences for gankers that go further than those provided by the game engine, then it is up to other players, which includes you, to provide more risk and consequences for them. Eve is not a game that holds your hand while you play; on the off-chance that it does hold your hand, it is to steal your finger and wrist jewellery. I said risk VS reward. Anyone can name millions of trivial risks. Try again.
Then change the reward.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5408
|
Posted - 2016.10.20 22:01:06 -
[38] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Then change the reward. Or the amount of effort required to collect it.
Yes either way works or even better, both.
It is amazing the level of deliberate obtuseness.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5412
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:23:10 -
[39] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:baltec1 wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
No you assume they are right, without knowing the facts of how they got their conclusions. That is no more scientific than religion. You have faith that they CCP, the creator is all knowing and all powerful.
And if the all knowing CCP had said ganking is bad, you would have disavowed your God.
Why would CCP say this after spending 5 years nerfing highsec PvP into the ground? They literally admitted that the last 5 years of changes were bad for the game. What can they possibly gain from that? The inability to do statistics correctly, does not change the fact that people release figures as facts. The statistics they released were done by a company with no prior history in statistics, with no published documentation. Subsequently you can either have faith that they did them right or skepticism at the fact the results cannot be verified. Faith is exactly that. The belief in something without proof. Also just the very basis they used for the general population, not the NPE for new players was flawed. To determine if ganking was harmful to subscriptions of older characters you would not go by peoples exit comments as to many of them would be non-responses. You would analyze kill mails, vs play styles. For example the amount of time spent mining, which could be achieved by indexing the amount of minerals added to an account by the system in the case of mining of the amount of time an account spent in any type of ship, if that was unavailable, then ammunition destroyed and NPCs killed by an account. There initial study into the NPE showed promise, it is just we cannot take the results as anything more than a belief as we cannot validate their figures and its not as if you can point to CCPs ability to get things right over the years. Edit: Add to this the well known bias shown by some CCP Devs and the figures are automatically in doubt.
Given your own grasp on statistical analysis seems tenuous at best, and you are assuming the people at CCP have no background in statistics you really don't have much going for you here.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5416
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:26:40 -
[40] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:baltec1 wrote:
So you are saying they hand picked those 80,000 trial accounts?
I am saying we don't know how they got those 80,000 people. Subsequently we cannot determine the validity of the sample.
Well at least you finally got the right number now.
So, you are insinuating, without evidence, that CCP cherry picked those 80,000 accounts to prove a point that is bad for their business?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5416
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:28:21 -
[41] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:I am not sure why you are so obsessed with their statistic skills. It's not like this is some magic tool, it just basic math skills every software engineer learns. Because the figures don't match his preconceived ideas. The only logical conclusion in the face of compelling evidence contrary to a view, is to claim there may be something wrong with the figures.
Bingo.
People who often claim to be empiricists, data driven, etc. are those least likely to change their minds when presented with data that goes against their preconceived notions. "What this contradicts what I already believe!?!?! No that can't be right, the data must be bad, the analysis flawed, oh look something shiny!!!"
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5416
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:30:44 -
[42] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:I am not sure why you are so obsessed with their statistic skills. It's not like this is some magic tool, it just basic math skills every software engineer learns. Because the figures don't match his preconceived ideas. The only logical conclusion in the face of compelling evidence contrary to a view, is to claim there may be something wrong with the figures. Please show me this compelling evidence. A simple statement of CCPs showing how they determined the sample, why they excluded factors such as recruit a friend and the raw data they used will be just fine. That is compelling evidence. Not because they said so. I have not said something is wrong with the figures I have said the figures are useless because they cannot be proven to be statistically valid or not.
Thanks for proving Scipio correct.
You do realize you where going on and on about 8,000 players when in fact it was 80,000...right? And that they did not use a random sample. You do realize that the opposite of a random sample is a sample that is selected with a goal in mind--i.e. cherry picking the data.
So...why would CCP cherry pick the data?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5417
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:37:12 -
[43] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:I am not sure why you are so obsessed with their statistic skills. It's not like this is some magic tool, it just basic math skills every software engineer learns. Because the figures don't match his preconceived ideas. The only logical conclusion in the face of compelling evidence contrary to a view, is to claim there may be something wrong with the figures. Bingo. People who often claim to be empiricists, data driven, etc. are those least likely to change their minds when presented with data that goes against their preconceived notions. "What this contradicts what I already believe!?!?! No that can't be right, the data must be bad, the analysis flawed, oh look something shiny!!!" What data goes against my preconcieved notion? Maybe newbies in their first 15 days need to be ganked more. As I have not been in that period of time and neither have 99% of the players of this game, it is hardly something I have a bias for. As to the analysis being flawed that is easy, you test it like everyone does to prove it is valid. Oh wait you can't, you have to rely on belief.
CCP's data, or are you just that dense.
Look, could CCP's data be "bad"? Sure. They could have just gotten a bad sample. Maybe they did, for some completely unfathomable reason, cherry pick the data.
But they have data and analysis and results. You do not like the results and have posted dozens of posts claiming that CCP are either incompetent or liars in an attempt to discredit the analysis.
I get it. Looking at data and saying, "Crap, I was wrong," is not easy. I know I have had a few times where I have had to do just that and it is not easy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5417
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:38:20 -
[44] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
How funny when above you have actually quoted me saying 80,000 people.
As to a chery picked sample....Duh.
Please go back to your crayons.
Yes, after my lengthy post pointing out why your going on about CCP's incompetence was largely unfounded you shifted over to 80,000.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:44:28 -
[45] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
Given your own grasp on statistical analysis seems tenuous at best, and you are assuming the people at CCP have no background in statistics you really don't have much going for you here.
And you are assuming they do. That is the problem with these statistics assumptions. Unprovable assumptions. I must admit this is like talking to Jehovah's Witnesses. Complete and undying faith in their God. In this case CCP. Have you considered moving to Star Citizen, there are a lot of people like you over there. Complete undying loyalty, no matter what.
I think that what CCP did was construct what can be called a natural experiment in the literature. These are not without their problems, but they can help get around the problem of not having the counter-factual to some degree. So either:
1. Somebody at CCP is pretty bright.
2. They have some familiarity with academic articles that use these kinds of approaches.
And I have already admitted that maybe they are wrong on ganking. This is just one look at the issue, it is far from comprehensive, but it does go against your narrative. And I have been highly critical of CCP in other areas. So spare me this Bravo Sierra rhetoric about dogmatism.
Also, I'll point out that CCP Rise and the others working on that analysis were surprised by the results. That is, if anything, their prior beliefs were more in line with yours. But like good empircists when they got the results that challenged their prior beliefs they updated those beliefs.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 05:54:09 -
[46] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Wrong. Wrong and Wrong.
I have stated that CCP have no background in statistical analysis and he findings are not verifiable.
1. CCP is not going to give you customer data. Ever. You are just some blowhard on the forums like me. Where I work we never, ever give out customer data without making the people asking for it jump through a number of hoops like signing non-disclosure agreements. We don't even give out customer data that has been cleaned of identifying information if the sub-group of customers is small enough that the people getting that data could possibly guess even one customers identity.
2. You have been stating that CCP has no background in statistical analysis which is just a flat out bald face lie. CCP Quant puts together the economic reports and look what is in those...various economic indices. Those are statistical measures.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 06:05:46 -
[47] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:
So you do agree that for the timeframe of the first 15 days in the life of a player the study is more likely to be accurate than your plain gut feelings which is based on no data at all and a known strong bias against gankers?
Yes it is more likely. If you have two horses in a race and one is more likely that could be 51% to 49% are you going to bet the farm on it being more likely? As to gankers I have no feelings one way or the other as to their actions in relation to players within their first 15 days of play, if anything I lean towards the concept that new payers should be ganked more during those 15 days. Ok, well done, progress. However implying that a study conducted by people with the data and a strong motivation to get it right compared to a simple gut feeling with a strong bias is somehow like two horses with a 51/49 chance of winning is a really bad comparison. Wouldn't you aggree that the probability of CCP getting it right by actually looking at the data compared to your personal feelings is not really 51/49 and actually far more in favour of CCP's study? Actually without being able to study there methodology that is about all you can say and even that might be stretching it. But hey you seem to believe that anyone can perform a statistical study if they are determined enough.
Okay, so...you think NOBODY at CCP understands the importance of using a random sample? That CCP Rise's presentation was not gone over by others?
The only thing I can conclude is you have never done statistical work in a professional setting. Last time I gave a talk, in front of a room full of math and stats nerds, my presentation was reviewed by my boss, and my co-presenters boss and their director, and other people in our department. And we got quite a bit of feedback and suggestions....and not all of them were stats people by training, but the nature of their work they had learned alot of the fundamentals.
So this little narrative of yours just smacks of a desperate attempt to cling to a prior belief...which ironically makes you the dogmatist here. When you set your prior probability for a hypothesis to 1 no amount of empirical data will budge you from your belief.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 06:14:08 -
[48] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Which is well done for them and I do hope they learn more and create better studies in the future. A full study into ganking might be very helpful to guide their future thinking, same as getting players to Null or even if they want to and will allow the use of resources properly, rather on those who can vote to get people on the pretty much now useless CSM or scream the most on the forums.
My narrative on the ganking of miners is one thing which this study has neither proved nor disproved. I believe that we have lost large numbers of subs who are Hi-sec primarily, being miners and industrialists. Not primarily Null characters who use Hi-sec to gain isk or a break. As you can see this study did not go near my assumptions at all.
To be honest I hope they do some how increase the ganking on new players as that may help their subscription rate and god knows they need it.
My problem is those that are taking this study as if to prove that all of Hi-sec ganking needs to be increased and calling it a fact. It is a very limited study that CCP may or may not have gotten right.
As to the Jehovah's Witnesses that was not so much aimed at you. That would be for those who keep using the word "fact", for an unprovable study. It is what it is, a concept, an idea.
Well...if that sample was indeed randomized then you could very well be wrong.
As I pointed out, when you want to use a sample to determine some summary statistics for a population you do not need 80,000 if your total population is say a few million. You could probably do well with say 1,000. But when you want to break that sample down into smaller sub-groupings, unless you want to use stratified sampling, you should increase your sample size.
Maybe 80,000 isn't enough to answer your questions, but we'd need to see what those sub-groupings looked like.
And yes, this analysis should make you less strident in your claims, IMO. It does suggest that being exposed to PvP leads people to stay longer. Is that true of HS miners? Good question, but if it were me, and being the good Bayesian I am, I'd have to move more towards "ganking is not detrimental" than further away....and so should you.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 06:25:25 -
[49] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
Okay, so...you think NOBODY at CCP understands the importance of using a random sample?
You completely screwed it there. You are making an assumption. You are not saying CCP such and such is a statistician, you are saying one of them must understand statistics surely. That is a massive error and exactly why statistics that are non-verifiable are considered rubbish.
Excuse me, but aren't you making an assumption that NOBODY at CCP understands statistics?
Did you not write,
Quote:I have stated that CCP have no background in statistical analysis....
Link
You are the one making an assumption.
Here let me help you out here. I work for a utility. We have lots of engineers, linemen, and even customer service reps....but also alot of people who are very familiar with statistical analysis. We use plain old vanilla regression models, time series models, monte carlo simulations, bayesian probabilities, non-linear regression, and that is just the stuff I've been involve with.
My point is, which apparently went right over your head, that while CCP are not a government statistical agency, that does not mean there are not people at CCP capable of doing good solid statistical analysis.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 06:40:07 -
[50] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
However it does not make it a fact or alter its use in areas outside the study. That is literally all I have been saying. That and I think they should ask Statistics Iceland to help them. the better their statistics the better the game will become and the longer it will live.
Do you...by any chance work for a government statistical agency...and thus think only good statistical work is done in such agencies?
There is alot of complicated math underlying the various in-game effects. For example, when I first started playing I was training Gallente and thought I'd give electronic warfare a try so I looked at sensor damps. I was trying to figure out how they worked and it wasn't making much sense. I knew about stacking penalties, but could get anything solid on how such penalties worked. So I went to the University of Google...and found an interesting pdf.
Some guy had gotten some sensor damping ships and ran a bunch of tests collected the data and ended up reverse engineering the underlying math. The analysis was pretty damned impressive. What was also impressive was the complicated math that was used to come up with stacking penalties.
So I'm pretty sure many of those guys at CCP are, generally speaking, pretty math literate, and being that statistics is a sub field of math....pretty sure that they can figure out how to do statistics if they need too.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5418
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 07:01:02 -
[51] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Actually a lot of great statistical work is done by private companies and especially universities.
The problem as I am sure you are aware with statistics, the correlation and causation effects on a study and their inclusion, exclusion and modelling. So while it is a sub branch of mathematics, it is rather specialised, much the same as economics is.
Yes, I am very aware of the issue with causation, but there was no claims of causation by CCP. They merely reported the statstical findings and noted that they were surprised by a number of findings and that one cannot rely too much on their preconceived notions. In the presentation CCP Rise did some informal polling of the audience and I'm guessing many in the audience were surprised by the findings too.
Was it a definitive analysis of ganking? No. But it is pretty much the only analysis of ganking I'm aware of, and it points to the direction of ganking not being a problem for players less than 15 days old.
Again, if your initial belief is that ganking is bad, this should move you away from that view at least to some degree. In fact, if your initial view is "Ganking is Bad" then this result, if true, should do more to move your posterior beliefs because it would be "more surprising" to you than to someone who felt "Ganking is Not Bad".
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 08:28:04 -
[52] - Quote
So there I was passing through Uedama in my crane passing a bumping macherial. I see a guy in a freighter in Sivala so I thought, I'll be nice I'll warn him. So I convo him and the message comes back, I have been added to his blocked list.
See, you guys complaining about freighter ganking...you damn well deserve it. Every last bit of it.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 10:26:05 -
[53] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:deleted
Hahahaha....
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 10:26:51 -
[54] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:baltec1 wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
Wrong. Wrong and Wrong.
I have stated that CCP have no background in statistical analysis and he findings are not verifiable.
Its a building full of people with degrees in mathematical subjects, a huge number of them have done degrees that involve physics, they even have people who used to work in the banking sector. They are a hell of a lot more qualified to run statistics than you are. You forgot to add "All praise CCP, the great and all knowing"
Maybe you can not be a deick?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 10:28:22 -
[55] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:baltec1 wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:baltec1 wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
Wrong. Wrong and Wrong.
I have stated that CCP have no background in statistical analysis and he findings are not verifiable.
Its a building full of people with degrees in mathematical subjects, a huge number of them have done degrees that involve physics, they even have people who used to work in the banking sector. They are a hell of a lot more qualified to run statistics than you are. You forgot to add "All praise CCP, the great and all knowing" So people with degrees in mathematical subjects cant so statistics? Is that what you are saying? I had a nice discussion with Teckos Pech, why don't you toddle off and read that.
Where I work, the one guy who usually gets my more...mathematically esoteric comments is the guy with the computer science degree. I say something, and he's is nodding while the engineers are sitting there going "Wut?"
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 10:37:11 -
[56] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:
Well I could but given the last 3 pages and the fact he did not bother to read them. I must admit I was not in the kindest frames of mind.
How about this....guys with CS degrees are also pretty good at math. Hell, the CS guy where I work is not only good at math he is good at economics. I mean shockingly good for a non-econ guy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 10:53:40 -
[57] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
Well I could but given the last 3 pages and the fact he did not bother to read them. I must admit I was not in the kindest frames of mind.
How about this....guys with CS degrees are also pretty good at math. Hell, the CS guy where I work is not only good at math he is good at economics. I mean shockingly good for a non-econ guy. Lets say a high propensity for maths. I have several friends who are CS lecturers at universities, One of them is brilliant at maths, most are pretty good and there is one I would not want to calculate the cost of a take out order.
Can we then also extrapolate that the people at CCP are not idiots? This does not preclude that CCP does dumb things, but the individuals are not dumb....maybe?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 11:58:44 -
[58] - Quote
pajedas wrote:Message Received. Cancelled Account 01It's funny that I got THIS when I went to log and to go to my next account for cancellation. Guess I'll have to finish later today. Cheers!
Can you just unsub please. We'll all be better off for it.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
5419
|
Posted - 2016.10.21 12:00:40 -
[59] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:
Well I could but given the last 3 pages and the fact he did not bother to read them. I must admit I was not in the kindest frames of mind.
How about this....guys with CS degrees are also pretty good at math. Hell, the CS guy where I work is not only good at math he is good at economics. I mean shockingly good for a non-econ guy. Lets say a high propensity for maths. I have several friends who are CS lecturers at universities, One of them is brilliant at maths, most are pretty good and there is one I would not want to calculate the cost of a take out order. So you are saying everyone in the CCP building, most of them having high level mathmatical degrees are no good at maths, to the point that they cant even do simple statistics?
Yup. They be dumbies.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
| |
|