These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

If null-sec industrialism is broken, it might not be CCP's fault.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#381 - 2013-05-01 20:03:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:


Quote:
Same amount of man hours. You are doing more than 1 action at a time.
…using more men at a time. One character doing something for 1h = 1 man-hour. Two character doing something for 1h each = 2 man-hours.



I'm not going to take the bait of that statement, but you are wrong.

Hour is hour per person controlling the accounts.

Since you suggested me looking up man hour, maybe I better suggest to you looking up a "service hour".

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#382 - 2013-05-01 20:03:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Varius Xeral wrote:
Tippia wrote:
(assuming, of course, that we sort resource collection under the industry heading…).

Yeah, that always bugged me about this line of argument. I think the vast majority of the people involved in capturing and securing moons would laugh at being even remotely associated with "industry".

The "you have moongoo, therefore you can't have anything else" is an extremely weak argument.
Yup. That's where this whole thing ends up. The problem is just that some seem to think that it's such a massive income source that it could be used as some kind of balancing factor. I mean, you could see it as a replacement for L4s or something instead, but that still leaves the problem that the income actually isn't all that great…

Murk Paradox wrote:
I'm not going to take the bait of that statement, but you are wrong.

Hour is hour per person controlling the accounts.
Eh no. Man-hours is hours of work put in by the workers doing the work. Two characters = two workers = two man-hours for every hour the two spend working. It has nothing to do with who's controlling them — it has to do with work done: an amount equal to what to two workers do in an hour.

Again, this whole problem fundamentally comes down to you not grasping what the very simple (and very useful) concept of “man-hour” actually measures. You really should take the time to learn what it is because it will help you massively.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#383 - 2013-05-01 20:04:47 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Tippia wrote:
(assuming, of course, that we sort resource collection under the industry heading…).


Yeah, that always bugged me about this line of argument. I think the vast majority of the people involved in capturing and securing moons would laugh at being even remotely associated with "industry".

The "you have moongoo, therefore you can't have anything else" is an extremely weak argument.





I agree, that is a poor argument. Moon goo might be an unfair advantage, but I am also not a big fan of "balance".

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#384 - 2013-05-01 20:09:29 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:



Which also lends how 500 man hours does not just equal 5bil isk.

Again, so many variables to show the formula being terrible.


Formula is fine. You can still mine up a months worth techmoon isk in 500 hours.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#385 - 2013-05-01 20:13:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Which also lends how 500 man hours does not just equal 5bil isk.

Again, so many variables to show the formula being terrible.


Formula is fine. You can still mine up a months worth techmoon isk in 500 hours.




That part I agree with baltec, and I even mentioned it earlier.

Tippia's standard that ice mining versus moon mining being comparable and interchangeable is where I find fault.

You can mine enough to add up to a month's worth, actively.

Just like as a burger flipper I can work enough hours to make the same amount of money as a doctor... but the jobs are not comparable.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#386 - 2013-05-01 20:16:45 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Tippia wrote:
(assuming, of course, that we sort resource collection under the industry heading…).


Yeah, that always bugged me about this line of argument. I think the vast majority of the people involved in capturing and securing moons would laugh at being even remotely associated with "industry".

The "you have moongoo, therefore you can't have anything else" is an extremely weak argument.




It's not a weak argument, it's a stupid one.

Moon goo is not industry. It's a massive income made passively. Moons are contested so rarely that it is a non issue. There is no standing army waiting for attack. There are a few scouts at strategic locations that are going to be there anyway.

You are more likely to lose the data cores you made passively moving them to your home station than you are to have your moon contested.

But there are those in this thread that rely on creating 'facts' and repeating them so many times that people actually start to respond to them, creating a huge derail from what was intended in the OP.

Mr Epeen Cool
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#387 - 2013-05-01 20:17:31 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:



Which also lends how 500 man hours does not just equal 5bil isk.

Again, so many variables to show the formula being terrible.


Formula is fine. You can still mine up a months worth techmoon isk in 500 hours.




That part I agree with baltec, and I even mentioned it earlier.

Tippia's standard that ice mining versus moon mining being comparable and interchangeable is where I find fault.

You can mine enough to add up to a month's worth, actively.

Just like as a burger flipper I can work enough hours to make the same amount of money as a doctor... but the jobs are not comparable.


Times the 500 by the amount of tech moons.

Nobody wants to mine that much ice.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#388 - 2013-05-01 20:21:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Which also lends how 500 man hours does not just equal 5bil isk.

Again, so many variables to show the formula being terrible.

Formula is fine. You can still mine up a months worth techmoon isk in 500 hours.

…in fact, just to be pedagogical, let's run through the argument in its entirety again:

- How much do you earn from a tech moon in a month?
- 5bn ISK?! Omgz! That's massive! How could you ever compete with that?!
- Well, you could mine ice for 500 hours… or, perhaps more reasonably, have 250 people mine ice for 2 hours (or 125 for 4h or any other combination of miners and hours that you'd prefer).
- Oof! That's 500 man-hours worth of work, isn't that a lot?
- Nah… after all, say that the moon is attacked and requires a 2-hour op from a 250-man fleet to stay alive — that's 500 man-hours spent right there.
- So, really, moon income is fairly equal in terms of effort:income to ice mining.

Murk Paradox wrote:
That part I agree with baltec, and I even mentioned it earlier.

Tippia's standard that ice mining versus moon mining being comparable and interchangeable is where I find fault.
So you agree with the argument but find fault with it (since what he said is the same thing I've been saying). Interesting…

So, again, could you explain how the two are not comparable when we're looking at man-hours to achieve a specific income in both cases? How are they not interchangeable (I suppose you mean by this that you could do one instead of the other?) when it's well within the realm of reasonableness that you'll have to spend the same amount of effort to gain the same income in both cases?

Quote:
Just like as a burger flipper I can work enough hours to make the same amount of money as a doctor.
…except that, in this case, we're comparing flipping burgers with mowing lawns (can you tell which is which, btw? Blink).
Liz Laser
Blood Tribe Inc
#389 - 2013-05-01 20:31:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Liz Laser
Varius Xeral wrote:
Tippia wrote:
(assuming, of course, that we sort resource collection under the industry heading…).


Yeah, that always bugged me about this line of argument. I think the vast majority of the people involved in capturing and securing moons would laugh at being even remotely associated with "industry".



try manufacturing and selling, without moon-goo or it's other forms. Industrialists highly covet that industrial product.

Varius Xeral wrote:


The "you have moongoo, therefore you can't have anything else" is an extremely weak argument.



It is all part of industrial "balance".

And it also relates to whether high-sec will be vital to, or even be able to profit from, demand from null-sec (and of course whether they even deserve to), and whether they'll continue to pay subscriptions to support our favorite addiction anyway.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#390 - 2013-05-01 20:37:14 UTC
Tippia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Which also lends how 500 man hours does not just equal 5bil isk.

Again, so many variables to show the formula being terrible.

Formula is fine. You can still mine up a months worth techmoon isk in 500 hours.

…in fact, just to be pedagogical, let's run through the argument in its entirety again:

- How much do you earn from a tech moon in a month?
- 5bn ISK?! Omgz! That's massive! How could you ever compete with that?!
- Well, you could mine ice for 500 hours… or, perhaps more reasonably, have 250 people mine ice for 2 hours (or 125 for 4h or any other combination of miners and hours that you'd prefer).
- Oof! That's 500 man-hours worth of work, isn't that a lot?
- Nah… after all, say that the moon is attacked and requires a 2-hour op from a 250-man fleet to stay alive — that's 500 man-hours spent right there.
- So, really, moon income is fairly equal in terms of effort:income to ice mining.

Murk Paradox wrote:
That part I agree with baltec, and I even mentioned it earlier.

Tippia's standard that ice mining versus moon mining being comparable and interchangeable is where I find fault.
So you agree with the argument but find fault with it (since what he said is the same thing I've been saying). Interesting…

So, again, could you explain how the two are not comparable when we're looking at man-hours to achieve a specific income in both cases? How are they not interchangeable (I suppose you mean by this that you could do one instead of the other?) when it's well within the realm of reasonableness that you'll have to spend the same amount of effort to gain the same income in both cases?

Quote:
Just like as a burger flipper I can work enough hours to make the same amount of money as a doctor.
…except that, in this case, we're comparing flipping burgers with mowing lawns (can you tell which is which, btw? Blink).


I find fault with the fact you claim you need 500 man hours "guaranteed" in order to receive 5bil isk from moon mining.

You take an "if" and apply it as an absolute.

That's terrible.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#391 - 2013-05-01 20:38:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
I find fault with the fact you claim you need 500 man hours "guaranteed"
…which I don't.

Liz Laser wrote:
try building tech 2 modules and ships without it. Industrialists highly covet that industrial product.
By that reasoning, combat pilots are industrialists — they highly covet the industrial product too…
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#392 - 2013-05-01 20:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I find fault with the fact you claim you need 500 man hours "guaranteed"
…which I don't.

Liz Laser wrote:
try building tech 2 modules and ships without it. Industrialists highly covet that industrial product.
By that reasoning, combat pilots are industrialists — they highly covet the industrial product too…



You just did not more than 5 posts up!

Quote:
when it's well within the realm of reasonableness that you'll have to spend the same amount of effort to gain the same income in both cases?


You and your faull back of "average" where you want to use a specific.... don't bother trying to scapegoat, it's unseemly.

There is no absolute in moon mining to equate it to ice mining. You CAN say that it would take 500 man hours mining ice to equate to 1 month of moon mining, but you cannot use it in reverse.

That's why "comparing" is bad.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#393 - 2013-05-01 20:47:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
You just did not more than 5 posts up!
Eh, no. I (rhetorically) asked whether “it's well within the realm of reasonableness that you'll have to spend the same amount of effort to gain the same income”.

This has been verified by the people who do these kinds of things on a regular basis.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#394 - 2013-05-01 20:48:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
You just did not more than 5 posts up!
Eh, no. I (rhetorically) asked whether “it's well within the realm of reasonableness that you'll have to spend the same amount of effort to gain the same income”.



When comparing ice mining and moon mining... no it isn't. (not rhetorically =p)

Next question.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#395 - 2013-05-01 20:49:43 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
When comparing ice mining and moon mining... no it isn't.
Oh? How so.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#396 - 2013-05-01 20:50:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
When comparing ice mining and moon mining... no it isn't.
Oh? How so.



Because of the varied variables you spoke of before.

You CAN equate an amount of ice mining man hours to a month's worth of moon mining. But it ends there.

There is no 500 man hours of pos defending to equal 5bil.

The word "same" is where you destroy all reason.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#397 - 2013-05-01 20:52:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
Because of the varied variables you spoke of before.
Which ones? And how do they make it unreasonable that, say, 500 man-hours are spent in a month on keeping a tower up and running?

Quote:
The word "same" is where you destroy all reason.
How so? What's unreasonable about comparing man-hours for ISK to man-hours for ISK?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#398 - 2013-05-01 20:55:07 UTC
Also the reason trying to compare the 2 is because while you mention it takes 250 pilots 2 hours each to equate to that 5bil a month... the rate of comparison is by farrr different when applied to ice mining.

All those logistical arguments you made do not apply to ice mining, the risks, coordination etc can all be done with 1 multiboxer over the course of a month.

+ or - it still negates the comparison

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#399 - 2013-05-01 21:00:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
Also the reason trying to compare the 2 is because while you mention it takes 250 pilots 2 hours each to equate to that 5bil a month... the rate of comparison is by farrr different when applied to ice mining.
“Rate of comparison”?! Wtf does that even mean?! Ugh

Quote:
All those logistical arguments you made do not apply to ice mining, the risks, coordination etc can all be done with 1 multiboxer over the course of a month.
…and still requires 500 man-hours to yield a 5bn ISK income.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#400 - 2013-05-01 21:00:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Tippia wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Because of the varied variables you spoke of before.
Which ones? And how do they make it unreasonable that, say, 500 man-hours are spent in a month on keeping a tower up and running?

Quote:
The word "same" is where you destroy all reason.
How so? What's unreasonable about comparing man-hours for ISK to man-hours for ISK?



I already answered the question in the post before you quoted me from.

Perhaps you shouldn't skip over.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.