These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Risk vs. Reward

Author
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#41 - 2012-12-26 05:04:04 UTC
Zen Sarum wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Zen Sarum wrote:
3. So say you are a combat pilot in a massive coalition, if you lose a ship it gets replaced. The coalition holds all of its space and pays the SRP as well as super and other funded programs by using static income (tech). This moons have no real risk as the coalition holds most of it and controls its price and it has reached a point where noone can ever take. The moons use resources and require maintenance but this is minimal in comparison to the income generated. So the pilot may buy new ships with this 'free' isk and this creates inflation. He may even be able to rat in a system + 50 jumps from any enemy mitigating nearly all risk. Other then buying stuff they dont need and plex.. what is the point however?

So were is risk and were is the activity in the above.

Yes, ask all the people who lost their tech moons. It clearly was riskless for them Also, it needs to be nerfed more.



Erm kinda obvious none of them were lost, you effectively made them all part of your extended coalition?

Yes it needs to be nerfed so that all income is activity based from the players and is completely risk vs reward, highest of both being 0.0, which to be honest has never been so safe as it is now.

We beat the crap out of some people and then our blues took over the space and the moons, yes. But there was sure some crying when we were hurting the owners.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2012-12-26 08:57:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Glathull wrote:
Okay, so the sense I'm getting is that risk vs. reward is a meaningless phrase that people throw around because it sounds like an argument. But when you try to get people to quantify that argument, no one is interested.



Just because you can't EFT human behavior doesn't mean one's motivations are meaningless. The point is that much of the fun and frustration in this game is not quantifiable. -- despite people's claims they collect tears. Twisted

On paper, someone who is not so great at PvP (suffering many losses), but loves it, would defy logic and any formula, for example.

You can't measure their adrenaline rush (reward), for instance, vs. the isk lost (risk) and time invested to gain such.

On a broader scale, formulas for Isk/Hr. will only satisfy your answer partly and few will agree on what's good.

So, again, you can't stuff this into a math equation expecting a result that will satisfy the majority until the risk/reward ratio is so low that it becomes nearly meaningless. Just look to other MMOs for this formula.

We can make an educated guess though: Such that we can derive the average player's game time and calculate this against the time and tools required to pay for a subscription, given that is a common goal.

Then you can adjust this figure for people who aim their goals higher or lower, giving players choices on how to achieve the sought out rewards: be it a move to Null, investing more hours in the game or adopting different tactics, for example.

But Meaningless?

At the end of the day, if people are playing another game because EvE ceases to be fun, (the essence of the X sucks threads) I think not -- nor for the people that love EVE as their risk/reward ratios are equally valid. In either case, people tend to risk more when they enjoy what they are doing -- which may have little or a lot to do with Isk/Hour.

And if you could reduce successful MMO design to mere formulas you wouldn't see so many MMO failures ...some quite expensive ones, too.
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#43 - 2012-12-26 09:19:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
P.S. I'm not saying formulas are useless but rather that they are limited. I think CCP would do well to run well-designed surveys that answer this (risk vs. reward) and other questions. And then take this feedback into consideration for future game development. This rather then relying on the squeakiest wheels for feedback.
Dave Stark
#44 - 2012-12-26 11:01:53 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
P.S. I'm not saying formulas are useless but rather that they are limited. I think CCP would do well to run well-designed surveys that answer this (risk vs. reward) and other questions. And then take this feedback into consideration for future game development. This rather then relying on the squeakiest wheels for feedback.


most players don't read patch notes, let alone know where to find some kind of feedback form that most wouldn't even be able to give a coherent answer to.
Higgs Maken
The Metal Box Company
#45 - 2012-12-26 12:21:10 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
P.S. I'm not saying formulas are useless but rather that they are limited. I think CCP would do well to run well-designed surveys that answer this (risk vs. reward) and other questions. And then take this feedback into consideration for future game development. This rather then relying on the squeakiest wheels for feedback.


The Big Mac index Is an article written by the economist. I have extracted 2 paragraph which I believe is an essential for anyone game developers/policy makers.
Quote:
But will consumers buy the healthier meals they claim to want? There is the cautionary tale of the McLean Deluxe, a less fatty burger that tested well in the 1990s but failed miserably in the market. “They said they wanted it, we gave it to them and they didn’t eat it,” says Greg Watson, McDonald’s vice-president for menu innovation. Consumers still love the core McDonald’s menu. When executives went on a listening tour earlier this year to hear consumers’ thoughts, many mothers asked McDonald’s to improve nutrition but also told the company not to change the recipes for favourite foods such as Big Macs or French fries. “Some items just need to be left alone,” says Mr Watson.

Today McDonald’s introduces new items cautiously, trying them in just a few restaurants or markets for a limited period. An experiment to add blueberries to its oatmeal will not be repeated next year. Dan Coudreaut, the head chef, is more optimistic about an egg-white sandwich on a wholegrain bun. One benefit of healthier items, explains Mr Watson, is that they make customers feel better about the McDonald’s brand. Some of them will order the healthier food and some will still order their favourite burger but be happier about it, in the knowledge that the company also does salads.


Listen but don't believe everything your consumer tells you. Sometimes they are telling what they really believe but others they are simply paying lip service. Your survey won't collect any meaningful data.

BTW here's a risk v reward model for EvE
Let say I'm non-profit insurance dealer for Hulk pilot in high sec, and every hour there 1 is X Hulk destroyed., thus I would be charging 1/X* Current Hulk price/hour. The same calculation would apply to low and null. The reward is straight froward: total amount of ore mine in an hour. Only problem is 'X Hulk destroyed', 'Current Hulk price' and 'mineral price' are player determine, thus the out of sync 'Risk vs Reward' which low and null players love to talk about is meaningless because it's dynamic. Furthermore 'Risk vs Reward' can be control via market operation i.e. when price of high-sec mineral crash, reward of high-sec miner would reduce while they are undertaking the same amount of risk( assuming gankers continue to blew up as many Hulk in high-sec; while price of Hulk might reduce because of a drop in mineral price, but high-sec mineral isn't 100% of Hulk BPC.)
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#46 - 2012-12-26 13:12:02 UTC
Higgs Maken wrote:
Amarra Mandalin wrote:


Listen but don't believe everything your consumer tells you. Sometimes they are telling what they really believe but others they are simply paying lip service.


True.

[quote] Your survey won't collect any meaningful data.


False.

Surveys involving "experiments" and clinical research both often show major discrepancies with a product that has gone to market. This, for the most part, is an apples/oranges comparison with evaluating current customer satisfaction.

Market research is not a perfect science but is a viable tool used by most all successful companies.

There are many ways to implement control questions, minimize bias and misconception about the game, as well as eliminate fringe categories.

If you dislike the idea, that's fine. But in my opinion it would serve better than run-of-the mill forum rants and might be revealing as to how the silent majority / forum defectors feel about the game.






Higgs Maken
The Metal Box Company
#47 - 2012-12-26 16:45:37 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:


False.

Surveys involving "experiments" and clinical research both often show major discrepancies with a product that has gone to market. This, for the most part, is an apples/oranges comparison with evaluating current customer satisfaction.

Market research is not a perfect science but is a viable tool used by most all successful companies.

There are many ways to implement control questions, minimize bias and misconception about the game, as well as eliminate fringe categories.

If you dislike the idea, that's fine. But in my opinion it would serve better than run-of-the mill forum rants and might be revealing as to how the silent majority / forum defectors feel about the game.



How question is phase affect the answers, for a demo watch the first 10 mins of this video. Like it or not we are all bias in our own way, whoever design the survey can affect the out come of the survey!

Even that don't render your data meaningless, players own self interest will. Human are interesting, instead of directly admitting it is for their self-interest, they are going to reason righteously about balance, risk vs reward and so on. If you did a survey on world of Warcraft before PvP rating system was implement, PvPers would all agree they love such a system. What they didn't tell you is why did the support such a system, simply because their own self-serving bias is telling them they are totally going to win this. Now instead lying to themselves how 1337 they are, hard facts of they suck is being thrown at them.

There is just too many point of failure built into a survey, I doubt you can weed it, and yield meaningful data.
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#48 - 2012-12-27 08:06:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Higgs Maken wrote:
[quote=Amarra Mandalin]

How question is phase affect the answers, for a demo watch the first 10 mins of this video. Like it or not we are all bias in our own way, whoever design the survey can affect the out come of the survey!


Sorry. I'm not all that interested in an elementary education, if it is even that. With over 20 years in the journalism field, and several in marketing, I forget what is included in a Bias 101 education these days.

And I have a rule I live by: I don't debate people who presumptively -- and often, passive-aggressively - link to wiki articles -- except on the Paradox forums where you're a scrub if you don't know important historical facts such as the color of Napoleon's favorite underwear.

But your point is noted: Survey data in meaningless. See: Faulty Generalization
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
#49 - 2012-12-27 09:02:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Glathull
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
P.S. I'm not saying formulas are useless but rather that they are limited. I think CCP would do well to run well-designed surveys that answer this (risk vs. reward) and other questions. And then take this feedback into consideration for future game development. This rather then relying on the squeakiest wheels for feedback.


I'd kind of given up on this for the moment, but you are bringing some good thoughts to the table so I'll try some more.


I agree that a well-designed survey would be good for CCP to do. In fact, Market Research is my job and creating models like the one I'm talking about in this thread is something I do on a daily basis.

I don't think that there is a single model that can work, and I certainly wouldn't try this out on a message board. A survey or poll here would be as pointless as was suggested above. But message boards are valuable as qualitative research that can direct the development of a good quant study.

My point with this thread was to find out if there is any agreement within the community on even an extremely low level.

Again, the reason for my original post was that I've read a ton of people saying that EVE is all about risk vs. reward and that that relationship is off re: high sec/null sec.

My assumption is that if people think that relationship is off, there must somewhere be at least a vague notion of what the right relationship is.

There are all kinds of problems with a simple equation, and the problems only grow when you try to complicate the formula to account for those problems.

Bump Truck's attempt was a good example of that. Already, in his approach, he is trying to account for the fact that Reward doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. So he's trying to quantify value. In an exhaustive attempt to reduce the EVE experience to a formula, those kinds of permutations would be necessary.

But this is not an attempt to exhaustively quantify EVE. It's an attempt to find out if there is any fundamental starting place that a large number of people agree is correct, even if severely lacking in granular, descriptive detail.

Perhaps I should've tried this as a True/False exercise:

Reward = Time * Activity * Risk

For now, let alone the fact that everyone has their own definition of Reward, Activity, and Risk. Is that statement in general True or is it False? The point of a thought experiment like this is to take subjective stuff out of the argument and find out what people really disagree about. Because right now, everyone seems to disagree about everything. And I just don't think that's the case.

For example, I think we can agree that Time is not really all that subjective and that how much of it you put into the game should play a factor in how much Reward you get out of it. But I could be wrong about that. There could be strong disagreement there. One could argue that Time is really relative to the amount of Real Life time that you have to spend on the game, and therefore absolute numbers of hours shouldn't have anything to do with reward.

There are lots of interpretations of even this very simple relationship, which is why I'm not trying to come up with one ring of numbers to rule them all. Just a general rule of thumb that we can go back to in the discussion about balance.

That's all I am looking for here.

I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#50 - 2012-12-27 09:46:49 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
Higgs Maken wrote:
[quote=Amarra Mandalin]How question is phase affect the answers, for a demo watch the first 10 mins of this video. Like it or not we are all bias in our own way, whoever design the survey can affect the out come of the survey!

Sorry. I'm not all that interested in an elementary education, if it is even that. With over 20 years in the journalism field, and several in marketing, I forget what is included in a Bias 101 education these days.

And I have a rule I live by: I don't debate people who presumptively -- and often, passive-aggressively - link to wiki articles -- except on the Paradox forums where you're a scrub if you don't know important historical facts such as the color of Napoleon's favorite underwear.

But your point is noted: Survey data in meaningless. See: Faulty Generalization

The whole forums are pretty much worthless, compare the small fraction of goodposts to the rubbish, the optimal strategy is to ignore it and buff the rat AI.

Also, freighters need more EHP, it's clearly all the gankers' fault.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

psycho freak
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-12-27 12:27:08 UTC  |  Edited by: psycho freak
RvR is a myth whiners tell themselves when they cry themselves to sleep

there is only

easy way to make isk
fastest way to make isk
most afkable way to make is
most convient way to make isk
lazyest way to make is

every now and again you get some nutter pull some random numbers out they @ss but i just take at face value

EvE is game i play for lulz i couldnt give two f##ks about anyone els tbh when i make isk i want the fastest way less time drunk grinding = more time drunk killing

so thats my RvR
drunk grinding time Vs drunk killing time

my spelling sux brb find phone number for someone who gives a fu*k

nop cant find it

Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#52 - 2012-12-27 15:33:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Glathull wrote:

I'd kind of given up on this for the moment, but you are bringing some good thoughts to the table so I'll try some more.



I think I was a bit too hard on you to start, my apologies. I'm allergic to tin-foil and despise over-generalizations.

But it sounds like you have good intent and experience. I hope you manage to further a decent discussion as a result.

Right now, I just don't have the motivation. When Alavaria Fera starts to make the most sense on threads, habitually (meant as a compliment -- brilliance in simplicity doused in sarcasm and all Bear), I really need more fresh air myself.
Previous page123