Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:29:12 -
[181] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: Yet here you are, now, expecting explanations from others, when you refused others to ask for explanations.
Nope just you.
No. Its demonstrably just you.
As well as you ignoring on-topic posts and arguments.
If all you have left, is 3 word false responses, you are not far from defeat. You are hull tanking with 1/3 left. Its over soon.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Maekchu
Gunpoint Diplomacy
588
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:35:32 -
[182] - Quote
Zoe Chu wrote:Yeah, yeah, don't fly what you can't afford to lose. So a hauler should wait to fly a freighter (cheapest Charon is currently 1,244,499,895.50 ISK) until you can just say "meh, this one got suicide ganked let be buy ten more." Really? Yes. A hauler should indeed wait to fly a freighter until the person would be able to replace a loss.
Doesn't matter if the ship is 10m or several billions. The golden rule is to always be able to replace those losses.
It can hardly be CCPs fault or a matter of balance, when people get impatient and but all their eggs in a single basket, just to lose that basket when they jump the next system. People are greedy, impatient bastards and is hardly something CCP would be able to fix with a patch.
|
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:36:18 -
[183] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:
If this continues, which I suspect it will, it will suggest that the answer to the OPs question will most likely be no, even when looking at 'griefing' as being an action rather than a mindset.
1) You are presuming that only CODE members gank, which is false. 2) You are presuming that all CODE affiliated players, use only characters in CODE corp, which is also false.
As I explained three times over, the generation of throw-away alts, per the Alpha system, is easier, more SP potential, and avoids the CCP policy on recycled alts so as to avoid repercussions of sec status loss.
There is no way of knowing how many thousands of alts have potentially been created for purposes of HS ganking, to avoid sec status loss repercussions, whilst incubating into 5mil SP toons.
When those incubated Alphas mature and hit the scene, it is rational to deduce HS ganking will reach an all time high, as Alpha accounts are cycled to avoid sec status repercussion.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46568
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:42:02 -
[184] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:1) You are presuming that only CODE members gank, which is false. 2) You are presuming that all CODE affiliated players, use only characters in CODE corp, which is also false. Incorrect.
I only showed the analysis for CODE. in that post. I have run the analysis for all ganking in highsec. I regularly run it for all ganking.
It doesn't matter how many times you state something over and over. Stating it doesn't make it true. The data so far shows a different situation. |
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:44:36 -
[185] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:1) You are presuming that only CODE members gank, which is false. 2) You are presuming that all CODE affiliated players, use only characters in CODE corp, which is also false. Incorrect. I only showed the analysis for CODE. in that post. I have run the analysis for all ganking in highsec. I regularly run it for all ganking. It doesn't matter how many times you state something over and over. Stating it doesn't make it true. The data so far shows a different situation.
Its not incorrect.
Your own submitted data shows a discrepancy between CODE and non-CODE ganker figures, both of which corroborate and support both of my points.
Furthermore you ignored my points on the factual state of the Alpha system promulgating and enabling the generation of an indefinite ite amount of 5mil SP Alpha gank toons, ad infinitum. (As was OPs concern and topic of this thread), so as to avoid the CCP policy on recycling characters inorder to avoid sec status loss repercussion.
Im beginning to have serious doubts about your vested interests in this issue.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46568
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 21:56:55 -
[186] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Your own submitted data shows a discrepancy between CODE and non-CODE ganker figures, both of which corroborate and support both of my points. What? lol
There are no non-CODE figures in that data. It is only CODE. members presented there.
Salvos Rhiska wrote:Furthermore you ignored my points on the factual state of the Alpha system promulgating and enabling the generation of an indefinite ite amount of 5mil SP Alpha gank toons, ad infinitum. (As was OPs concern and topic of this thread) Nope. The theory isn't so far matched by the actual practice. If that changes, then it will be interesting and good to know, but currently the data overwhelmingly shows omega clones (from Weapon Type) are used in ganks.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Im beginning to have serious doubts about your vested interests in this issue. That's ok. I don't care what doubts you have.
The great thing about the data is anyone can go and download it and analyse it independently. You don't need to take me word for any of it. Go analyse it yourself. The results will be the same, because none of it is changed by me. |
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:01:33 -
[187] - Quote
You stated you follow ganking stats across the spectrum.
Present them then, if you wish to claim that both of my 1) and 2) points are incorrect
Such that you can demonstrate that A) All ganking is done by CODE B) All ganking is not done by alts of otherwise CODE registered members
You cant. There is no way.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46570
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:07:20 -
[188] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:You stated you follow ganking stats across the spectrum.
Present them then, if you wish to claim that both of my 1) and 2) points are incorrect
Such that you can demonstrate that A) All ganking is done by CODE B) All ganking is not done by alts of otherwise CODE registered members
You cant. There is no way. Oh god. I've already agreed that not all ganking is by CODE. It was just CODE. related data presented there because otherwise the data is extremely large and shows just the same outcomes.
But, nothing I present will be taken at face value, so there is no point providing any of it to you, when you can also go and download it and analyse it independently of me. Have at it. Don't take my word for it. Go look yourself and be assured by your own analysis of the data rather than mine. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5699
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:08:33 -
[189] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote: Yet here you are, now, expecting explanations from others, when you refused others to ask for explanations.
Nope just you. No. Its demonstrably just you. As well as you ignoring on-topic posts and arguments. If all you have left, is 3 word false responses, you are not far from defeat. You are hull tanking with 1/3 left. Its over soon.
Oh no!
"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
|
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:10:44 -
[190] - Quote
So you present that my arguments are false, but refuse to provide evidence for it that you claim you have, and based on which you justify your position. That is a fallacy.
You furthermore still refuse to address the central topic, and OPs issue, regardiing the indefinite creation and incubation of 5mil free Alphas as throw-away alts for the purposes of bypassing CCPs policy against avoiding the repercussions of sec status loss.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5699
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:13:06 -
[191] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote: As to the topic, and OPs issue, regarding Alphas providing an unprecedented opportunity to create an indefinite amount of ganking alts to 5mil maturity, and then abandon them so as to avoid sec status loss repercussions, and hence CCP policy against avoiding sec status repercussions, you have offered no counter-argument.
Actually no, this is your hypothesis for which you have no data and yet you label as fact.
"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
|
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:14:35 -
[192] - Quote
Now you are down to 2 word responses, from 3.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5699
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:15:21 -
[193] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Now you are down to 2 word responses, from 3.
Yikes!
"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
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46571
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:27:20 -
[194] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:So you present that my arguments are false, but refuse to provide evidence for it that you claim you have, and based on which you justify your position. That is a fallacy.
You furthermore still refuse to address the central topic, and OPs issue, regardiing the indefinite creation and incubation of 5mil free Alphas as throw-away alts for the purposes of bypassing CCPs policy against avoiding the repercussions of sec status loss. Not quite. The only thing you are wrong about is what you stated I presumed. I didnt presume those things at all. That was wrong.
As to what you've said about the theory of alphas, I have no problem with that. It seems obvious that theoretically it could happen because alphas are free and easy to roll. That may not be the only factor involved in deciding that an omega is better than an alpha though.
However, currently the data I have looked at doesn't show it happening in practice. If that changes in the future then that will definitely be interesting. Until then, it still remains that alphas aren't a 'griefing' issue and are not currently being used from what I can see from the data, as easy throw away alts. The data just doesn't show them being used that way.
But don't take my word for it, go download the data and confirm it for yourself. To paraphrase you from another thread, it's not my responsibility to do your homework. I dont have the fukcs to give you. Anyone else, probably.
But this is all going off topic, so I'm not going to go further down this rabbit hole. God luck with your analysis. It will just show the same thing. |
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:38:45 -
[195] - Quote
None of which refutes that:
1l CODE are not the only gankers. 2) CODE involves non-corp participants in their activities
Your representation of CODE activity data is thus systemically unrepresentative interms of participation of non-corp members in CODE operations, much of less the entirety of ganking in HS.
I am glad you acknowledge the systemic potential o free indefinite incubated 5mil SP Alpha alts as a means to avoid the sec status malus, and to avoid CCPs policy of restriction on avoiding repercussions of sec status loss.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5703
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 22:58:46 -
[196] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:None of which refutes that:
1l CODE are not the only gankers. 2) CODE involves non-corp participants in their activities
Your representation of CODE activity data is thus systemically unrepresentative interms of participation of non-corp members in CODE operations, much less the entirety of ganking in HS.
No, this is an empirical question and cannot be answered by theorizing. So go get the data and show he is wrong, or just shut up about it.
Salvos Rhoska wrote:I am glad you acknowledge the systemic potential o free indefinite incubated 5mil SP Alpha alts as a means to avoid the sec status malus, and to avoid CCPs policy of restriction on avoiding repercussions of sec status loss.
There is no telling how many hundreds or thousands of gank alts have been created as Alphas, gaining SP everyday. waiting to be thrown away inorder to avoid sec status repercussions as a result of their activities.
Or that there might only be 7.
"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
|
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:05:05 -
[197] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Blah blah
My post was addressed to Scipio, not you.
Your attempt to proxy an argument through my discussion with Scipio, will not work.
I am under no obligation to respond to you, when your responses to my posts to you have demonstrably resulted in 3, and then 2, words.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Morgan Agrivar
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
779
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:07:06 -
[198] - Quote
Do you and Peckos want to be left alone?
Uh, I will show myself out.... |
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46572
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:08:48 -
[199] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:I am glad you acknowledge the systemic potential o free indefinite incubated 5mil SP Alpha alts as a means to avoid the sec status malus, and to avoid CCPs policy of restriction on avoiding repercussions of sec status loss. I also acknowledge the theoretical potential that I could throw and apple into the air and it won't come down, but will continue to go upwards forever.
Until it happens though, the theoretical potential doesn't mean much. |
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:13:45 -
[200] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I am glad you acknowledge the systemic potential o free indefinite incubated 5mil SP Alpha alts as a means to avoid the sec status malus, and to avoid CCPs policy of restriction on avoiding repercussions of sec status loss. I also acknowledge the theoretical potential that I could throw and apple into the air and it won't come down, but will continue to go upwards forever. Until it happens though, the theoretical potential doesn't mean much.
You can posit that a thrown apple will continue to go upwards forever, but it would also require an explanation from you as to why it would do so.
I have provided a systemic explanation of how and why what I stated is real and possible. You have not provided an explanation for why that apple would suddenly overrule the laws of physics.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5704
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:23:23 -
[201] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I am glad you acknowledge the systemic potential o free indefinite incubated 5mil SP Alpha alts as a means to avoid the sec status malus, and to avoid CCPs policy of restriction on avoiding repercussions of sec status loss. I also acknowledge the theoretical potential that I could throw and apple into the air and it won't come down, but will continue to go upwards forever. Until it happens though, the theoretical potential doesn't mean much. You can posit that a thrown apple will continue to go upwards forever, but it would also require an explanation from you as to why and how it would do so. I have provided a systemic explanation of how and why what I stated is real and possible. You have not provided an explanation for why or how that apple would suddenly overrule the laws of physics.
Because the apple is soooo important to the game.
I hope there is a Dev amusing himself reading this silly thread and our silly posts and next year in our Christmas goodies is Scipio's Quantum Apple.
"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
|
Salvos Rhoska
1927
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:27:43 -
[202] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Because the apple is soooo important to the game.
I hope there is a Dev amusing himself reading this silly thread and our silly posts and next year in our Christmas goodies is Scipio's Quantum Apple.
I see I have hit a nerve.
Interesting.
The apple is not the issue in this game. Nor did I posit it. Scipio did.
And again, no refutation of arguments made by me (and to another person, not you). You disappoint me.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3056
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:29:48 -
[203] - Quote
Hakawai wrote: If you read the first reply to my post you'll have seen why I didn't take the trouble to carefully define "griefing".
The first thing an expert on self-justification does with an exact definition is to search Google for a definition that suits them better, and you're instantly involved in a stupid "dictionary war" which is a moderately effective way to derail a topic. I don't do that.
Instead you just make up whatever terms and definitions you like whole cloth, right?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5705
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 23:40:44 -
[204] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Because the apple is soooo important to the game.
I hope there is a Dev amusing himself reading this silly thread and our silly posts and next year in our Christmas goodies is Scipio's Quantum Apple.
I see I have hit a nerve. Interesting. The apple is not the issue in this game. Nor did I posit it. Scipio did. And again, no refutation of arguments made by me (and to another person, not you). You disappoint me.
No, no. You are totally right. I too demand that Scipio explain why that apple won't come back down? After all, he isn't claiming that it won't, but that it is at least a theoretical possibility and that...why yes, that is totally important. In a game. A game where the physics are based on being underwater.
"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
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46573
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 01:07:18 -
[205] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:No, no. You are totally right. I too demand that Scipio explain why that apple won't come back down? You are both right. I should have by now realised that an analogy would be analysed beyond it's intent and I should have used a simpler example. That was my error, and my apology for it.
What I should have instead said was:
I appreciate that there are many things that are theoretically possible. However if the theory doesn't turn into practice, then it doesn't necessarily mean much. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
5706
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 01:30:09 -
[206] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:No, no. You are totally right. I too demand that Scipio explain why that apple won't come back down? You are both right. I should have by now realised that an analogy would be analysed beyond it's intent and I should have used a simpler example. That was my error, and my apology for it. What I should have instead said was: I appreciate that there are many things that are theoretically possible. However if the theory doesn't turn into practice, then it doesn't necessarily mean much.
Ahhh yes, but you admit to a theoretical possibility and therefore there is an epistemic possibility which clearly demonstrates your bourgeois semantic nihilism within this dematerialistic conciousness we call EVE Online.
So take that Scipio!
"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
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46573
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 02:06:09 -
[207] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:So take that Scipio!
Amen |
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite CODE.
3426
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 06:49:42 -
[208] - Quote
Zoe Chu wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:Zoe Chu wrote:Suicide ganking miners and haulers in high sec or extorting ISK from them is allowing other players to dictate how those miners and haulers play. Especially when the cost to the gankers is so extremely low. A few million for a desty suicide ganker vs. 18 mill just for the hull of a mining barge, let alone an exhumer or freighter. No other game allows one customer to completely dictate how another customer plays the game, and this is why EVE struggles to attract and retain new blood. Have you any evidence for this other than your gut feelings and the imaginary friend you will cite? Because CCP looked into this and they found that new players who where ganked are actually the most likely to stick with EVE and those who did not die at all where most likely to quit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A92Ge2S8M1Y That is a poor attempt at understanding the retention on new players TBH. 15 days? really? What kind of investment do you have in 15 days? Unless you spend a grip load of real money you aren't flying much more than a T1 cruiser semi-effectively in 15 days. Not too many newbies getting suicide ganked for their shiny new T1 cruiser or Venture loaded with T1 modules. Wait until that newbie has 90 or 120 days in and they have actually invested time and effort into the game and see where they are. I agree with "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" yet at the same time miners and haulers work up to the expensive ships to allow them to make more ISK/hr. Wait until that same newbie has just had 3 months of investment blown out from under them cause some random player(s) jumped into system in a desty or two and blew their 200 mil ISK exhumer out from under them while they went to get a Coke. Same for the hauler who finally got to fly their new freighter, finding themselves out a billion ISK plus collateral. Nowhere near the same thing as a 15 day old player. Players often quit after the loss of significant investment. See the OP for example, he quit after his corp lost the investment they put into null sec. They should be looking at 30, 60, 90, and 120 days and check to see if people who have suffered a major loss of capital are still playing and how likely they are to keep playing. Some people can take it and keep going but a lot cannot. So even those who lose significant investments though legit means (war, corp theft, low or null sec life, etc.) may not be able to handle it and leave the game. Those who lose big through the entirely broken risk vs. reward system of suicide ganking may be even more likely to quit.
If you pay attention to what he actually says during the presentation then you notice that they did look at older players too. There are two parts.
The main reason for the study was to find out if suicide ganking has a detrimental effect on the new players. The questions they asked themselves where "how wide spread is ganking for new players" and "what is the retention rate for never, legally and illegally killed new players". The answers where basically that it is a non issue despite the sentiment of the community and that it almost seams to have the complete opposite effect of what they expected.
The reason for this may be (and this is my opinion) that it suddenly introduces a mortal enemy into the world of the new player which gives it meaning and a goal to reach for revenge in an otherwise rather bleak surrounding of missions which get repetitive after two hours and staring at rocks while shooting them with lasers. There may be other factors which play a part in the outcome. But no matter what the reason is, the finding was that ganking new players makes it more likely they subscribe at the end of the 15 day trial period.
The second part got only mentioned in one sentence. They looked at all the reasons ALL the players state when they unsubscribe (trial members can not unsubscribe). And the result was that only ~1% state ship loss and harassment as a reason.
So, there may be a few people who actually quit because of ganking. But the study shows that they could not find any shred of evidence for that and that at least in the first 15 days the effect of ganking was more in the direction of retaining the players instead of driving them away.
They started from the very same position you are at, they expected that ganking is detrimental to retention. This "carebear hypothesis" was proven wrong when they actually looked at the evidence. This is how science works.
Now you come along and start all over with the very same wrong assumptions and completely ignore that people actually looked at this with more than just a whim and a gut feeling and proved those assumptions wrong. Also you don't even bring any evidence with you, just your personal feelings and an uninformed opinion.
What you did is point out that EVE is declining, and then construct a correlation with ganking out of thin air. A correlation which has shown to be absent already in the cited study.
There are a ton of reasons why EVE was declining and we can speculate all day what the reason was. But one thig is sure, because CCP actually checked: It ain't ganking
the Code ALWAYS wins
Elite PvPer, #74 in 2014
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3060
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 07:02:34 -
[209] - Quote
Zoe Chu wrote: If I spend the money, time, and effort to train to fly a Hulk or Mackinaw and then get the ISK to buy and fit the ship and stay in high sec why should someone in a few million ISK desty be able to destroy my efforts in under 30 seconds?
So your position is that a little bit of training time and a completely mundane expenditure for a T2 ship should render one immune to their own idiocy?
Precisely how invincible should a supercap be in this design paradigm?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Salvos Rhoska
1936
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 07:19:01 -
[210] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:
I appreciate that there are many things that are theoretically possible. However if the theory doesn't turn into practice, then it doesn't necessarily mean much.
It is not theoretically possible.
It is actually possible, in practice.
When CCP introduced Alphas, they changed the systems of EVE.
It is now actually possible (not theoretically possible) to create 10/100/1000 throwaway alts, incubate them to 5mil SP, for purposes of avoiding the CCP recycling policy regarding avoiding sec loss repercussions.
It is furthermore a practical reality, not a theoretical possibility, that not all HS suicide ganking is conducted by CODE corp members.
It is furthermore a practical reality, not a theoretical possibility, that when you throw an apple up on Earth, it will drop to the ground as a result of gravity.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |