These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A Few Modest Questions for CCP Sreegs

First post
Author
CCP Stillman
C C P
C C P Alliance
#81 - 2012-11-20 10:45:54 UTC
Sgt Napalm wrote:
Sadly, Stillman and Streggs were never seen again after Vegas.

This is actually pretty close.

I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.

I ran the numbers. And if anything, we're seeing a lower number of bots we're catching in high-sec, in favor of 0.0. But I don't think the trend is big enough for it to be more than speculation. To give you an idea, a best fit line on the data I have is like this:

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651


You can sort of deduce from that how low-sec plays out. But regardless, I don't think we can really draw any conclusion from this data.

Just a random dude in Team Security.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#82 - 2012-11-20 10:50:34 UTC
CCP Stillman wrote:
Sgt Napalm wrote:
Sadly, Stillman and Streggs were never seen again after Vegas.

This is actually pretty close.

I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.

I ran the numbers. And if anything, we're seeing a lower number of bots we're catching in high-sec, in favor of 0.0. But I don't think the trend is big enough for it to be more than speculation. To give you an idea, a best fit line on the data I have is like this:

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651


You can sort of deduce from that how low-sec plays out. But regardless, I don't think we can really draw any conclusion from this data.


As a lover of numbers and graphs I have to ask if it is possible to see what kind of impact the two ice interdictions had on bot numbers at the start of the year also what impact the drone changes have had. We know they were raging but we do love our numbers and graphs.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
Executive Outcomes
#83 - 2012-11-20 10:50:47 UTC
+1 for Dev response.

I still think EVE devs are pretty unique in the way they interact with the playerbase, so thank you.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Darth Gustav
Froosh INC.
#84 - 2012-11-20 18:27:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
CCP Stillman wrote:
Sgt Napalm wrote:
Sadly, Stillman and Streggs were never seen again after Vegas.

This is actually pretty close.

I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.

I ran the numbers. And if anything, we're seeing a lower number of bots we're catching in high-sec, in favor of 0.0. But I don't think the trend is big enough for it to be more than speculation. To give you an idea, a best fit line on the data I have is like this:

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651


You can sort of deduce from that how low-sec plays out. But regardless, I don't think we can really draw any conclusion from this data.

Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.

Edit: Thanks for the data, Stillman. Your reply is very well appareciated.

Re-edit: Also, glad you're feeling better. Apparently not everything that happens in Vegas stays in Vegas after all.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#85 - 2012-11-20 18:47:54 UTC
CCP Stillman wrote:
Sgt Napalm wrote:
Sadly, Stillman and Streggs were never seen again after Vegas.

This is actually pretty close.

I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.

I ran the numbers. And if anything, we're seeing a lower number of bots we're catching in high-sec, in favor of 0.0. But I don't think the trend is big enough for it to be more than speculation. To give you an idea, a best fit line on the data I have is like this:

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651


You can sort of deduce from that how low-sec plays out. But regardless, I don't think we can really draw any conclusion from this data.

Sorry to hear about your illness. 4 weeks? Rough, and totally not fun.

Thanks for responding. Questions:

Are Y1 and Y2 the number of bots caught? Per hour? Per day? Per week?
Is this per solar system or for the entire area ? Or is it per 1000 players?

Is x the system security? Or day of the year, or...?

Why the conclusion that most are caught in null sec? in both equations the effect of x is small, so the constant dominates. High sec has this at 0.773. Null sec is about one quarter of that value: 0.1651.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Darth Gustav
Froosh INC.
#86 - 2012-11-20 18:51:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Gustav
Vincent Athena wrote:
CCP Stillman wrote:
Sgt Napalm wrote:
Sadly, Stillman and Streggs were never seen again after Vegas.

This is actually pretty close.

I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.

I ran the numbers. And if anything, we're seeing a lower number of bots we're catching in high-sec, in favor of 0.0. But I don't think the trend is big enough for it to be more than speculation. To give you an idea, a best fit line on the data I have is like this:

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651


You can sort of deduce from that how low-sec plays out. But regardless, I don't think we can really draw any conclusion from this data.

Sorry to hear about your illness. 4 weeks? Rough, and totally not fun.

Thanks for responding. Questions:

Are Y1 and Y2 the number of bots caught? Per hour? Per day? Per week?
Is this per solar system or for the entire area ? Or is it per 1000 players?

Is x the system security? Or day of the year, or...?

Why the conclusion that most are caught in null sec? in both equations the effect of x is small, so the constant dominates. High sec has this at 0.773. Null sec is about one quarter of that value: 0.1651.


That "constant" is addative. It's linear algebra. When the line slopes down far enough the "constant" vanishes. It's only there to determine positioning. The "small term" of "x" determines the slope of the line. The "constant" as you refer to it is actually the y-intercept.

So we have orientation of the line from its slope (very gradual reduction in high-sec, very gradual increase in low) and the y-intercept (your costant) basically tells us where to put it.

As it were.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

ctx2007
Wychwood and Wells
Beer needs you
#87 - 2012-11-20 18:57:08 UTC
rodyas wrote:
CCP Stillman wrote:
Salpun wrote:
captain foivos wrote:
Thanks, but I wasn't at Eve Vegas.

Most EVE Vegas presentations come out as devblogs sooner rather then later.

http://lowseclifestyle.blogspot.com./

Is a good location to find otu what was sayed.

I can write it into a dev blog too. But please give us some time, as I'm currently in Vegas still and Sreegs has his hands full right now.


Dead prostitutes? I am guessing.


Hahahahahha! Lol

You only realise you life has been a waste of time, when you wake up dead.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#88 - 2012-11-20 19:22:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Quote:
I got sick in Vegas and was out sick for 4 weeks. That caused me to completely forget about this.


I told you to leave the girls their strictly alone... or was it simply a case of "Gambling Fever"? Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2012-11-20 21:11:24 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:

Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.

Edit: Thanks for the data, Stillman. Your reply is very well appareciated.

Re-edit: Also, glad you're feeling better. Apparently not everything that happens in Vegas stays in Vegas after all.

I still question the idea that the change was inherently bot friendly vs AFK friendly.

To be specific I wonder if things like reduced need for trips to unload and/or increased EHP for gank resistance reduced the gains from bot usage to a point where they were not worth the risk of detection given the revitalization of CCP's bot detection and banning initiatives. At the very least it can probably be concluded that they gains of botting weren't worth risking detection for those not already engaged in the practice as AFK mining got easier.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#90 - 2012-11-20 21:37:22 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:

Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.

Edit: Thanks for the data, Stillman. Your reply is very well appareciated.

Re-edit: Also, glad you're feeling better. Apparently not everything that happens in Vegas stays in Vegas after all.

I still question the idea that the change was inherently bot friendly vs AFK friendly.

To be specific I wonder if things like reduced need for trips to unload and/or increased EHP for gank resistance reduced the gains from bot usage to a point where they were not worth the risk of detection given the revitalization of CCP's bot detection and banning initiatives. At the very least it can probably be concluded that they gains of botting weren't worth risking detection for those not already engaged in the practice as AFK mining got easier.



Mining bots are for kids and stupid, CCP Shreegs did an awesome job at kicking those right in the face and still does, however the most difficult ones to spot, at least it seems, are market bots.

If you realise or at least imagine how much isk trade bots can do, then you should logically figure out the rest of the process.

What are bots used for? -always for real money in the end. Even if the guy starts by just buying shiny ships/mods it ends selling isk for money because there's demand.
Where does this demand comes from? -look at plex prices and do you researches on the internet, search for threads in this very same forum confusing isk with real money, and you should then be able to figure out where's their new "El Dorado".

Bingo, you got it. Yes there are guys around only login in for this reason, because isk for them = money, real money.

1 or 2 trillions of isk, which shouldn't be that difficult to do with a couple market bots in a month x $29/Billion isk (average) I'll let you run the numbers to figure out why some take this isk inflation/deflation so seriously.

The game doesn't need less isk, the game needs more isk, like it or hate it it's a fact.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#91 - 2012-11-21 00:11:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Darth Gustav wrote:
Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.


I think I have said to you some days ago, what now is stated by numbers.

The big cargo hold is all what real (as in, non botting) miners always wanted: since mining is so boring, then make it easy to AFK it.

Big cargo = no need for a bot to empty the ship for you, 1 manual unload per hour allows lots of AFKing without automated programs.
Darth Gustav
Froosh INC.
#92 - 2012-11-21 00:16:30 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.


I think I have said to you some days ago what now is stated by numbers.

The big cargo hold is all what real miners always wanted (since mining is so boring, then make it easy to AFK it).

Big cargo = no need for a bot to empty the ship for you, 1 manual unload per hour allows lots of AFKing without automated programs.

I operated under the impression prior to Stillman's comment, that because AFK mining only required one input per hour it would favor botting because bot activity would not be distinguishable from normal gameplay due to infrequent inputs.

I suppose it's possible that I'm more right about that than I realized and that the speculatively lowering trend is due to decreasing ease-of-detection. But I sincerely doubt that, so I'm taking Stillman at his word.

They're catching marginally less botters than they used to catch in high-sec post-barge buff.

Enjoy your "I told you so's," I guess, if that's what you need to do.

This changes nothing about my opinion of the barge buffs and their negative impact on Eve's economy. Those points remain clearly valid.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2012-11-21 00:31:05 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Darth Gustav wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Lin was right then, apparently, and I'll admit that my presumption was speculatively wrong (as even Stillman mentions the trend isn't big enough to be more than speculation).

Strangely, bot-friendly game design appears to have slightly reduced the number of bots caught in high-sec.

I've got to admit I didn't see this coming. I stand corrected.


I think I have said to you some days ago what now is stated by numbers.

The big cargo hold is all what real miners always wanted (since mining is so boring, then make it easy to AFK it).

Big cargo = no need for a bot to empty the ship for you, 1 manual unload per hour allows lots of AFKing without automated programs.

I operated under the impression prior to Stillman's comment, that because AFK mining only required one input per hour it would favor botting because bot activity would not be distinguishable from normal gameplay due to infrequent inputs.

I suppose it's possible that I'm more right about that than I realized and that the speculatively lowering trend is due to decreasing ease-of-detection. But I sincerely doubt that, so I'm taking Stillman at his word.

They're catching marginally less botters than they used to catch in high-sec post-barge buff.

Enjoy your "I told you so's," I guess, if that's what you need to do.

This changes nothing about my opinion of the barge buffs and their negative impact on Eve's economy. Those points remain clearly valid.


Or in other words revert the barge EHP buffs to the Hulk and Mackinaw instead of waiting until some horrible economic disaster occurs to do something.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#94 - 2012-11-21 03:46:32 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
I operated under the impression prior to Stillman's comment, that because AFK mining only required one input per hour it would favor botting because bot activity would not be distinguishable from normal gameplay due to infrequent inputs.


Bots are used to automate repetitive, mechanical activities. AFK mining doesn't involve repetitive, mechanical activities. AFK mining in a mackinaw is within the capacity of a human operating their mining ship on a laptop to the side of their work computer, without feeling too guilty about shirking work.

Mackinaws have degraded mining to the level that you don't need a bot to do it for you.

Darth Gustav wrote:
This changes nothing about my opinion of the barge buffs and their negative impact on Eve's economy. Those points remain clearly valid.


No argument from me on this issue. In fact, I agree wholeheartedly.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#95 - 2012-11-21 10:10:05 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Enjoy your "I told you so's," I guess, if that's what you need to do.

This changes nothing about my opinion of the barge buffs and their negative impact on Eve's economy. Those points remain clearly valid.


I don't exactly enjoy being right, I try figure out why other people did not think I was right.

I think a big part of people disagreeing with me is that they talk without prior having extensive experience in what they discuss.

As trader with some research alts, I found out I can pad the pockets if I put both the trading alts (remote trading trained) and the (otherwise unused) research alts onto mining. So I know what really affects miners and I also listen all day long what they tell each other.

Also, despite I have been heavily and negatively impacted by the mining buffs, I am not sure it had a negative impact on EvE's economy. The ISK inflation imo has worse effects by far and the drone regions should be deprived of perma bottable ISK faucets. CCP could have just risen minerals requirement on every built item so they'd made minerals less depressed (back at the time of course) while not introducing the next, unchecked, bottable ISK faucet.
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#96 - 2012-11-21 12:08:05 UTC
I am bad with maths. Does the data show anything else that CCP catches even less bots now after the changes that make bots indistinguishable from bot-aspirant AFK miners?
Hazen Koraka
HK Enterprises
#97 - 2012-11-21 13:23:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Hazen Koraka
SaKoil wrote:
I am bad with maths. Does the data show anything else that CCP catches even less bots now after the changes that make bots indistinguishable from bot-aspirant AFK miners?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%3Dmx%2Bc

What screegs posted was the equation for a linear graph.

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651

The y is the vertical part of the graph, the x the horizontal part of the graph.

The numbers above -0.0011 and 0.0008 are the gradient (i.e. the steepness) of the graph.

Anything positive shows the graph is increasing gradient (i.e. the line is increasing in y as x increases).
Anything negative shows a decreasing gradient.

tldr;
What these numbers show, is that in Hisec, the number of botters has decreased slightly, and increased in null.

I'm not sure what the graphs represent exactly (I think the y part is number of bots, x is time?), but that's my take on it.

Edit: Less in highsec, i.e. less being caught, as that was the context, more being caught in null.

Exploration is Random. Random is Random... or is it?! http://docs.python.org/2/library/random.html

SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#98 - 2012-11-21 17:33:11 UTC
Hazen Koraka wrote:
SaKoil wrote:
I am bad with maths. Does the data show anything else that CCP catches even less bots now after the changes that make bots indistinguishable from bot-aspirant AFK miners?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%3Dmx%2Bc

What screegs posted was the equation for a linear graph.

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651

The y is the vertical part of the graph, the x the horizontal part of the graph.

The numbers above -0.0011 and 0.0008 are the gradient (i.e. the steepness) of the graph.

Anything positive shows the graph is increasing gradient (i.e. the line is increasing in y as x increases).
Anything negative shows a decreasing gradient.

tldr;
What these numbers show, is that in Hisec, the number of botters has decreased slightly, and increased in null.

I'm not sure what the graphs represent exactly (I think the y part is number of bots, x is time?), but that's my take on it.

Edit: Less in highsec, i.e. less being caught, as that was the context, more being caught in null.


Yeah, so CCP catches less bots in high-sec now as the average bot-aspirant AFK miner is indistinguishable from a bot?
Darth Gustav
Froosh INC.
#99 - 2012-11-21 18:50:33 UTC
SaKoil wrote:
Hazen Koraka wrote:
SaKoil wrote:
I am bad with maths. Does the data show anything else that CCP catches even less bots now after the changes that make bots indistinguishable from bot-aspirant AFK miners?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%3Dmx%2Bc

What screegs posted was the equation for a linear graph.

High-sec: y1 = -0.0011x + 0.773
0.0: y2 = 0.0008x + 0.1651

The y is the vertical part of the graph, the x the horizontal part of the graph.

The numbers above -0.0011 and 0.0008 are the gradient (i.e. the steepness) of the graph.

Anything positive shows the graph is increasing gradient (i.e. the line is increasing in y as x increases).
Anything negative shows a decreasing gradient.

tldr;
What these numbers show, is that in Hisec, the number of botters has decreased slightly, and increased in null.

I'm not sure what the graphs represent exactly (I think the y part is number of bots, x is time?), but that's my take on it.

Edit: Less in highsec, i.e. less being caught, as that was the context, more being caught in null.


Yeah, so CCP catches less bots in high-sec now as the average bot-aspirant AFK miner is indistinguishable from a bot?

Humans don't provide inputs precisely on-schedule down to the millisecond once per hour like a mining bot would.

I think the issue is what's already been posted above: Mining requires so little effort now that bots are no longer required to do the job for hours on-end without going insane.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#100 - 2012-11-21 19:22:19 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
SaKoil wrote:


Yeah, so CCP catches less bots in high-sec now as the average bot-aspirant AFK miner is indistinguishable from a bot?

Humans don't provide inputs precisely on-schedule down to the millisecond once per hour like a mining bot would.

I think the issue is what's already been posted above: Mining requires so little effort now that bots are no longer required to do the job for hours on-end without going insane.

I think even the worst-written bot will include some kind of random wait between actions.

So the conclusion here is that mining bots and bot-aspirant miners have truly merged into one faceless mass of non-players. It is very sad to see that CCP caters to this non-playing non-person crowd, even if by accident. This is what you get when you listen to miners about their "needs".

At least the real bots rarely post on the forums for more buffs for their nigh-invulnerability.