These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Countering Risk Aversion

First post
Author
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#141 - 2015-05-02 16:39:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
DSpite Culhach wrote:
In this game, time is literally money.

For some people its a lot of money, for some, its few bucks. I think that those who rather see it as "a lot", does not really complein, because they are maximizing their profit in this moment. Some of them are taking risks, larger than sacrificing few merlins in a FW complex.
There are actually some people who would want to play for free even when they have money, meanwhile doing something risky and fun, and they don't have a lot of time. They will have to learn some things too at some time.

People who only complain please kindly go play other game, where you can complain some more or have fun. if EVE Online is not synonymous with this word at all for you, why do you play?

DSpite Culhach wrote:
stupid inevitable losses

I think that drunken roams and other foolery can result in fun if you like your fun to be expensive and involve a lot of ships lost to others. Else, why would you be drunk playing? Maybe you have some other problem and its not EVE?
Other than that, they can be minimized, or avoided completely. Observe, think, practice, learn, observe, think...

DSpite Culhach wrote:
They are not "risk averse", they are averse to "wasting" their free time. This is why everyone is always wanting a free SRP to be available.

Some activity like exploring in low, null or WH space dwelling, can be risky, and profitable at the same time, also fun. Its not wasted time if you can have all three things at the same time. Just:
Observe, think, practice, learn, observe, think...
Jenshae Chiroptera
#142 - 2015-05-02 19:03:34 UTC
Sulai Battasenda wrote:
... Give me a tool to go to any trade hub, load up my last ship fitting and one-click-shop the same setup - that might help shorten the time lost ....
Not quite there but try this:
- open loss mail
- near top right click Save Fitting
- open the list of saved fittings
- open the market (on the left, near the top click the Quickbar tab)
- drag fitting into Quickbar tab
- shopping list now made and you can sort by lowest price in that trade hub

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#143 - 2015-05-02 19:19:22 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:


There is no law that says you have to play like a risk averse hermit. There's no law that says you can't pvp without 3 scouts, 2 logi and a pet falcon, or 20 corpmates waiting on the adjacent gate.

Go play like you want to have fun instead of worshipping little green numbers on zkillboard.


No, the problem is this thread starts off with the presumption that there is one correct way to play...the OPs way.

That and a continuing conflation of risk averse with loss averse.



To be fair, the OP's article was about risk- (or loss-) averse PVPers, not about PVEers not wanting to PVP. Several replies misunderstood that because reading is hard.


True. But still most PvP players are probably risk averse. Nothing really wrong this that IMO. There will be those who are risk loving/seeking.

Gully Alex Foyle wrote:

Feyd wrote:
EvE's PVP community is often mired in a risk-averse culture where many don't engage unless victory is assured.

Teckos, since you seem to know your sh*t, would your gambling example be different if the player had to invest his own money in the gamble? I mean, yes, not taking the 40$ is akin to risking to lose 40$, but not quite the same thing, I'd presume... What do you say?


Well, if the gamble actually requires a bet then things are a bit different. For example, if it is a fair gamble, then you'd have to bet $50, to get $100. Now the gamble is not very enticing since the expected payoff is zero and the sure thing wins for everybody. Gambles like you'd get in Las Vegas are even worse as the payoffs are less than in a fair game. For example in Vegas a gamble there might offer what looks like a great payout, bet $1 and get back $9! Wooohooo going home rich! But your actual chances of winning are 1/10. So you play the game 10 times and you end up down $1. Have 1,000 people play that game ten times each and the casino just hoovered up $10,000.

Now you could have a gamble where the payoff is better than a fair game or the rigged Vegas style gambles (e.g. starting your own business, its a gamble, presumably a calculated one and where it isn't just your money, but also your own effort). In this case, suppose you bet $5 and have a 50-50 chance of winning $100, now we are back to the game providing a $47.5 expected payout and the sure thing with $40 payout. If the person was going to pick the sure thing at a $50 payout for the gamble, they'll still pick the sure thing. Now if both the sure thing and the bet required our own money then it depends on how risk averse the person is.

Not having full insurance does not encourage PvP. Having full coverage would encourage more PvP, in theory. But there is more to it than just isk losses. If I lost in a 1-on-1 PvP match the question is why? Just the wrong ship/fit? If so, respawning me and my ship in station is unlikely to get me to undock and rush right back out there to engage the guy. I'd likely lose again. Was it skills? Were some of my opponents skills just better than mine that gave him the edge? Again...probably will not undock and go back into the fight. At least right away. If the guy and I had very comparable fits and skill levels (the latter based on say age of characters) and he has won several times and I suspect he has an off grid booster, I might stop undocking. He is bait and his friends show up...I'm not undocking again.

While there is confusion over loss aversion and risk aversion going on here, IMO. There is often people being just downright dumb and realizing that undocking into a fight you have no chance of winning isn't really fun either. When that happens the other player is not risk averse and somebody who thinks he is risk averse that person is a dope.

"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

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#144 - 2015-05-02 20:28:04 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Sulai Battasenda wrote:
... Give me a tool to go to any trade hub, load up my last ship fitting and one-click-shop the same setup - that might help shorten the time lost ....
Not quite there but try this:
- open loss mail
- near top right click Save Fitting
- open the list of saved fittings
- open the market (on the left, near the top click the Quickbar tab)
- drag fitting into Quickbar tab
- shopping list now made and you can sort by lowest price in that trade hub


Totally off topic...but still I had no idea about this. Thanks.

"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

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#145 - 2015-05-03 02:22:31 UTC
There would be no point making spaceships explode if it was trivial to replace exploded spaceships.

95% insurance coverage would make ships not worth destroying.
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#146 - 2015-05-03 02:44:19 UTC
I have removed a post. Please review the following rules before continuing to post:

Quote:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
Pen Is Out
#147 - 2015-05-03 03:01:33 UTC
I don't think Captain HTFU was seriously advocating for 95% insurance so much as raising the possibility of making insurance slightly more useful (especially for t2 ships) and just generally trying to start a discussion about how promoting risk/loss averse (semantics w/e) playing styles leads to a very boring game. I'm glad one of the "hunters" is finally starting to get it.
Vector Symian
0 Fear
#148 - 2015-05-03 03:15:27 UTC
I would do this by putting your pvpers into Np corps so it doesn't effect your all important kill ratios and letting them fight proxy wars...like all good nations do

- lower plex prices

- create your own ships - bring costs down

- allow for a more relaxed atmosphere in regards to failure (mistakes in eve are often unavoidable and a jump away)

- market manipulation using your numbers (set a day for it and have people come in and make some iskies)

- doctrines and stockpile cheap modules en masse when prices are good
Aoife Fraoch
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2015-05-03 03:16:48 UTC
Perhaps we should just start using SISI for MOBA style consequence less PVP instead? At least sharding won't damage the economy like ramping up the Isk faucets.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#150 - 2015-05-03 03:22:14 UTC
Aoife Fraoch wrote:
Perhaps we should just start using SISI for MOBA style consequence less PVP instead? At least sharding won't damage the economy like ramping up the Isk faucets.


Even MOBAs impose a time penalty on the loser and resource gain on the winner.
Vector Symian
0 Fear
#151 - 2015-05-03 03:35:59 UTC
*hands everyone a puppy*

settle ya T*&ts peeps

another thing is making sure you have awesome diplos..they can herd cats and EVEN eve players Roll
Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#152 - 2015-05-03 03:38:44 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Learning and getting better in eve for the first 5-6 years is done by a training queue ONLY.

You can become content if you log in and do stuff that involves risk, so you will learn new tricks, for which you need another year of skill queue. P

Fixed it for you.

You may proceed with ad hominem as much as you want. No matter how many people are mistaken, it won't make the wrong right, it won't make eve combat pvp accessible to less than 50 million SP toons (without use of SP wall leaping mechanics such as being extra weight or juicy bait in a fleet), it won't make success in such activity anything more than a mere exception of the harsh and undeniable general rule. Of course you all know it, just don't want to admit it, and take it out on people who can. Well, not like I really mind, it's just too funny to see so many supposedly adult people being so childish at something so trivial, like little kids throwing abuse at anyone who denies existence of Santa.

You can become better by learning the ropes, of course, but compared to force multiplication of Skill Points, it's just a drop in a sea. Every step you make can be trivially countered by having more SP, and as long as it is so, SP will remain the cornerstone, the strongest force multiplier, and the absolute wall denying any attempt of successful combat pvp (without use of SP wall leaping mechanics such as being extra weight or juicy bait in a fleet) to any younger toon. And of course, since everyone keeps progressing, the wall will get taller every year, we're lucky we only need 50-70 million SP now, because in a year the wall will probably add another 10 million your competition has gained, and the newbros will be screwed even harder than they are now.

The problem with eve combat pvp is not risk aversion, it's SP wall more than anything else. As long as you lack the SP wall leaping mechanic access, you WILL lose, and since your loss will be certain, it's not a matter of risk-reward equation - there is no risk and no reward in hitting your face against the SP wall, so it should not be surprising that people who don't want to become content won't do it - just because they gain NOTHING by it. 95% insurance, 99% insurance, 99.9% insurance won't solve it, as it's still a loss, and every time you taste it, it's like "haha noob below SP wall trying to pvp lol what a fool" feeling - exactly the one which puts a donkey donger on the dinner plate of player retention. Because why play if you will never (a few years are as good as ever for a typical gamer) win?

Bash this idea all you want, but winning is crucial for player retention, and in eve, it's the double miracle class exception to the iron rule to beat someone over SP wall with a toon below it. Many can certainly say that happened to them and that's because they stayed, which will not only prove the point about winning, but also will show exactly why the retention is so terrible that only people with double miracle class luck can stay, because those are your chances for "winning".

tl;dr The reason of poor retention is because people below SP wall will always lose, people hate losing, and losing less will not help it one bit.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Commander Spurty
#153 - 2015-05-03 03:40:36 UTC
The answer is for people to stop mocking those that lose.

Check any site you want. Those that lose ships are mocked quite thoroughly

Change that social behavior and you'll get pvp.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#154 - 2015-05-03 03:45:58 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:


tl;dr The reason of poor retention is because people below SP wall will always lose, people hate losing, and losing less will not help it one bit.


While SP can be a contributing factor to the outcome of PvP it is not the only factor. If a high SP pilot shows up in a long range fit and goes up against a low SP pilot who is fit for close range and gets in under his guns...the result is not a forgone conclusion based on SP. There are a number of variables at play in determining the outcome of PvP...of which SP is one variable. To heap all explanatory power on just the one variable is foolish.

"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

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Jenshae Chiroptera
#155 - 2015-05-03 03:49:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
1 - 2 weeks of training into a good T1 frig or destroyer that has a good fit can get you a long way in EVE.

Example: Griffin + knowing how to range tank + good small gang to roll with + having deep tacticals to warp off to + maybe a mobile depot with repair equipment.

Teaching newbies is far more important and more effort than whining about skill points.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Vector Symian
0 Fear
#156 - 2015-05-03 03:50:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Vector Symian
Commander Spurty wrote:
The answer is for people to stop mocking those that lose.

Check any site you want. Those that lose ships are mocked quite thoroughly

Change that social behavior and you'll get pvp.


I like to take noobelahs out and shoot stuff but the truth of the matter is that the biggest problems I have had is when the bittervet of the group just puts crap on peeps over and over driving them away


then

they defend them selves with an eye roll saying "welcome to eve"...um...its a sandbox bro it is more then a griefers wet dream.

find you lemons OP and exile them or fix them
Avaelica Kuershin
Paper Cats
#157 - 2015-05-03 03:55:53 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
The answer is for people to stop mocking those that lose.

Check any site you want. Those that lose ships are mocked quite thoroughly

Change that social behavior and you'll get pvp.


The impression I got is people who fielded very poorly fitted ships get mocked the most, but it is true that getting mocked after a loss does sting.

Now losing, and having the winner help you with why you lost, that's another matter. Not unlike constructive criticism in general.

It's also easier to bear loss if it is shared by a group, and in group vs group fights.

(all, of course, my opinions Smile )
Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#158 - 2015-05-03 03:57:47 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:


tl;dr The reason of poor retention is because people below SP wall will always lose, people hate losing, and losing less will not help it one bit.


While SP can be a contributing factor to the outcome of PvP it is not the only factor. If a high SP pilot shows up in a long range fit and goes up against a low SP pilot who is fit for close range and gets in under his guns...the result is not a forgone conclusion based on SP. There are a number of variables at play in determining the outcome of PvP...of which SP is one variable. To heap all explanatory power on just the one variable is foolish.


Then it's good I haven't done something foolish, which you would've known, if you could read the post before tl;dr

It properly explains why SP is the strongest factor, the strongest force multiplier of all - because even in your example, knowing that a long range ship will lose a brawl and stashing a brawling ship in case enemy will get a brawling ship is common sense - as long as both are in brawling ships, 1 million SP toon will be lucky to last 10 seconds against a 100 million SP toon, demonstrating to everybody and his dog quite clearly what was the winning factor there.

In case of double miracle of higher SP toon having a brain fart and going against common sense, I won't count it as the victory of the low SP toon - going against common sense is the same as self-destruction and the only role a low-sp toon had in it is happening to be there when it happened. This is pure luck, and if wins by pure luck can satisfy you, you might as well go play craps.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#159 - 2015-05-03 04:01:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Basil, I have seen newbies in Atrons beating Garmurs solo
Avaelica Kuershin wrote:
... The impression I got is people who fielded very poorly fitted ships get mocked the most, but it is true that getting mocked after a loss does sting. ...
When I see a horrible loss mail, I send them a better fit (not a perfect fit, I am not an alliance tournament contender but an improvement) the angry replies you can get doing this ..... yeah ...
Though I will say, when Brave were around, they would reply and ask questions, learn more about the fit I send, find out why it is better. There is a healthier mentality there for newbies than a lot of the rest of EVE.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#160 - 2015-05-03 04:02:19 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
1 - 2 weeks of training into a good T1 frig or destroyer that has a good fit can get you a long way in EVE.

Example: Griffin + knowing how to range tank + good small gang to roll with + having deep tacticals to warp off to + maybe a mobile depot with repair equipment.

Teaching newbies is far more important and more effort than whining about skill points.


I underlined the SP wall leaping mechanics used, which proves my point that without it SP wall will smash your face.

And yes, exactly due to believing in crap like this, those Griffins end up on the green side of my alliance's killboard on practically daily basis.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.