EVE General Discussion

Or I can say buying a gank ship is the same thing as buying fuel for your pos. Which shows it isn't risk, but a cost.

Price of entry in order to continue.

The payout has nothing to do with the fact that as soon as you press that agress button, you're going to die.

Because even if you did win and ganked that victim, your ship is gonna get blown up. If you lose and did not make a wreck out of the other person, you are gonna get blown up.

You are not getting that ship back. It's blown up.

When you, to use your most awesome asinine metaphor, put money in a "pot", and you win that pot, that money (literally that chip/coin/bill) comes right back to your stack.

This does not happen in Eve. You might make enough to replace the ship, you might not. That's the chance. The fact your ship is blown up is not a chance. It's a certainty. Hence, it's a cost.

If you want to use a metaphor, be relevant please.

I'll even give you one.

When you set up a pos(edit sorry said pi), or moon mining operation, you need fuel in order to make it happen. Whether that pos gets reinforced, or blown up, or works successfully, you have to buy that fuel. No matter what. It's a cost. It's also gone as soon as you apply it.

You know that fuel is not going to come back, because you aren't wagering or risking it. You are spending it.

You are however, taking a chance that the pos might not survive long enough to return that investment based on the actions of someone else.

But that fuel is used no matter what.

Just like a gank ship.

Gankers don't risk ships because they don't see risk. They see cost.

They are the Merovingians (Matrix reference) of Eve. Gankers apply a vision of opportunity and cost to their risk assessment of what they do, how they do it. They know their ship is not coming back.

Doesn't mean they automatically win, but you definitely need a certain eye to become successful at highsec piracy.

Yes you are. See, Murk has his own definitions of what words mean, so by his definition you are exactly using "metaphors".

LOL

"A metaphor is a figure of speech that describes a subject by asserting that it is, on some point of comparison, the same as another otherwise unrelated object."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor

I don't think I'm wrong in my assertion.

They aren't MY definitions. I don't make this **** up. I simply spent in my time in school learning.

You should try it.

yep, it's boring in high sec, but you make money. so essentially if we nerf high sec nobody can make any cash without having to wade through a bunch of gank boats in .3 space, while they whine about how hard it is to camp with a hurricane since the "nerf".

Lets face it, there's safer areas for a reason where people can go, grind out some veldspar mining for example to pay for all the inevitable gate camps they run into when trying to go into some people's "beloved" low sec

Just to troll a bit-

http://ask.yahoo.com/20030623.html

Dear Yahoo!:
What's the difference between a simile, a metaphor, and an analogy?
Peter
Columbus, Ohio
Dear Peter:
While these three terms are related, their meanings are subtly different. To help understand the distinction, we consulted a number of sources -- American Heritage Dictionary, the Yahoo! Grammar, Usage, and Style category, and web search results for the three terms.

The dictionary defines a "metaphor" as a figure of speech that uses one thing to mean another and makes a comparison between the two. For example, Shakespeare's line, "All the world's a stage," is a metaphor comparing the whole world to a theater stage. Metaphors can be very simple, and they can function as most any part of speech. "The spy shadowed the woman" is a verb metaphor. The spy doesn't literally cast his shadow on the woman, but he follows her so closely and quietly that he resembles her own shadow.

A simile, also called an open comparison, is a form of metaphor that compares two different things to create a new meaning. But a simile always uses "like" or "as" within the phrase and is more explicit than a metaphor. For example, Shakespeare's line could be rewritten as a simile to read: "The world is like a stage." Another simile would be: "The spy was close as a shadow." Both metaphor and simile can be used to enhance writing.

An analogy is a bit more complicated. At the most basic level, an analogy shows similarity between things that might seem different -- much like an extended metaphor or simile. But analogy isn't just a form of speech. It can be a logical argument: if two things are alike in some ways, they are alike in some other ways as well. Analogy is often used to help provide insight by comparing an unknown subject to one that is more familiar. It can also show a relationship between pairs of things. This form of analogy is often used on standardized tests in the form "A is to B as C is to D."

And now that it's clear as a bell, you're ready to try the Analogy of the Day.

So the asinine ANALOGY would be to say Concord is a Protector.

Enjoy.

None of that has anything to do with any sort of risk to losing a ship. That ship will be lost. That only has risk to your success rate.



If you win, you get your money back with gambling. So that's a risk. Not a cost.

Gambling has nothing to do with the fact you lose your ship when you agress. If you win, the payout is -ship cost if you decide to SPEND money on that ship AGAIN.

Here's the math.

You buy a gank ship for 10m. You agress. You lose 10mil. Period.

If you win the gank, you lose 10mil. If you lose the gank you lose 10mil.

If you win the gank and get 50mil, you have 50mil. Not 40mil. 50.

If you decide to spend another 10mil on another gank ship, you spent 50mil of your ill gotten gains to purchase it. As a cost. An investment. But that cost is spent unless you decide to try to resell the ship back, but that's a variable for a different discussion.

With gambling, you ante up with $25 chip. That 25 is gone UNLESS YOU STAY IN. IF someone raises are double the big blind and you don't like your hand, you don't get your 25 back. It's gone byebye so long.

If you stay in, and win, and that pot was 100, you don't have 100. You have 100-ante-subsequent bets.

BUT YOUR 25 IS RETURNED TO YOU.

The risk is that you don't lose your ante when you throw it in the pot. There's a variable someone will go all in and buy the blinds.

When you gank in eve, that doesn't fit.

Your word comparison to decribe ganking versus gambling does not fit in relation to cost of the ship versus ante'ing up.

Hence why it's asinine to pretend otherwise. It is not spot on.

It is wrong.

Gankships are a cost, not a risk. You will lose that gankship no matter the outcome. It's a cover charge to get into the club. Admission fee if you will.

1. A gambler doesn't lose his bet unless he loses. A ganker loses his ship as soon as he agresses.

2. If the loot fairy is kind, you get a decent portion of the other guys' stuff. Your stuff doesn't magically get put into his hold.

3. When you put your money into the pot at a table, you DO get your money back if you win. The very same money that has your personal fingerprints on it. When you try to gank, you lose your ship. What you do to recupe your loss is up to you after the fact, regardless of outcome. Using horse racing or bets isn't related to ganking, unless I was to bet that baltec would be successful in his next gank and bet 100mil isk with you.

Gamblers at the races do not have any input on the outcome of the event, and their money placed on those bets directly impact the odds. You already stated that you cannot mitigate the loot fairy. So what you said has no meaning.

4. Wikipedia and dictionary say otherwise. Go read them. Disprove it if you like.

5..It is a covercharge to get "in". You can't gank without having a ship. If you want to gank in a free ship, cool. If you purchase a ship specifically for ganking, that's the "cover".

Do you get your coin back when you win at a slotmachine? No, you do not, you get your winnings. Do you get the money you bet on, say, horses or dogs back + the winnings when you win? No, you do not, you get your winnings.

Does he bet money on getting a bigger payout? Yes. Does the ganker bet money on getting a bigger payout? Yes. Are either of them guaranteed a bigger payout? No. Might they as well consider the money they bet as lost the instant they bet them? Yes.


Does any of this detract from the fact that ganking is a gamble? No. The ganker is gambling that he'll get a bigger payout than what he puts in. That's something he's risking for a reward.


I did read them, and I did disprove it, repeatedly.


Just like buying a chit is the "cover" for gambling at a table in a casino. They're still something both the ganker and the gambler risk losing to get a bigger reward.

So, since every type of gambling has a wager (the thing that is put at risk), what is the ganker's wager?

The ganker bets that he can blow up his victim before he gets blown up by Concord. That the victim will not survive his attack.

He isn't in any sort of agreement with the victim if that's what you mean. It's not a duel with stakes. That would be a "bet" or a "gamble" in the true sense of the word you are trying to use.