EVE General Discussion

Take an average Saturday when numbers on are fairly high. Uedama alone almost certainly sees more isk value destroyed by ganks than any given region of sov sees in ratting losses.

Entry barrier for most people to get in on a freighter kill? X for fleet, be given a catalyst, browse the internet until the order is given, receive bacon.....er kill mail. Two or three people just tipping over exhumers in high works more or less the same way: entry barrier, cost, fuss, is practically non existent, and targets are plentiful, naive, and concentrated.

A casual perusing of freighter kills will show a preponderance of pilots from bored null alliances. Why try to hunt in null when freighters will auto-pilot right into you, rather than docking up the moment you get within 10 jumps?

Ah, so that's your problem. You think that official statistics, collected by CCP's economics team, are “made up”.
Or are you saying that the API-collected numbers — ones that I seem to recall some CCP dev claimed were as close to be fully comprehensive as to not make any difference — are made up? You know, the numbers you offered as “proof” for something you hoped to be the case?

So why did you use them to try to support your stance?

From you.

Some people try to suggest some perceived (but unproved… in fact, largely disproven) epidemic of ganking as a cause for a decrease in the number of players.

You know, after several years of on/off interaction with you in your natural habitat, I still can't figure it out. I would tentatively say that your goal is to stand ontop a mountain of correctness, being stimulated by a few dozen other posters on their respective mountains of correctness, all the while reinforcing your superiority by looking down on poorer posters... but then again, I also have the hypothesis that you're Swedish, which makes you sort of like the Ultimate Answer and Ultimate Question colliding: Each time one might know your agenda, it changes into something weirder (At least, that's what I figured from Nyboder, Copenhagen and Malmö).

But despite your alleged Swedishness, Tippia, if I'm going to be anybodys alt, I'll aspire to be yours. Damn I love what you did to those numbers. There's nothing like taking someones "source" and show how, if anything, it tends towards the exact opposite of what they wanted.

They don't match what he wants to believe lol.

Maybe he just didn't notice the text preceding the table, but it's the data he linked.

So if Tippia is lying because the source of the data is not credible, then ahhhh, oops.

[/quote]

Man I remember when that came out. It was like flipping the light on in a nasty hotel bathroom, cockroaches skittering away everywhere, squeaking that this meant the opposite of what it clearly said, black was white, down was up and CCP better nerf ganking tomorrow if they want to save EVE.

Changes to mining barge EHP seems to have done wonders to those 50 man Skiff fleets sucking up ice belts.

I suspect PVP won't be the death of EVE, its the inability to keep up with emerging technologies and competing products that will.

Which is why CCP is betting big on Valkyrie. It will be their World of Tanks.

Then you misunderstand me. It's admiration, just my own brand - which, because I'm a sarcastic curmudgeon, might be kinda snarky. Still, it's honest praise.
Even if Tippia is Swedish (And based in part on the lack of rebuttal, I think that is plausible), they've managed to be a great force for rational thought and sourcing arguments. If nothing else, it's almost always a pleasure to read their posts. Coming from a Dane, I think Tippia knows how high praise that is.