These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing bumping and looting mechanics

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#561 - 2016-02-02 01:04:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Or just swing by Uedama and watch, it really would not be hard to see it happen.

Ok, so since evidence that this problem exists to the extent that it needs bumping mechanics changed and looting mechanics changed as a result, I swang by Uedama (with my hauling alt) as you suggested.

This is just the start of a study and I'll continue it to collect as much data as needed to determine one way or the other whether bumping is a problem. The only evidence I have been able to find (which is posted in this thread) suggests it isn't a problem.

I'll upload the raw screen capture video and post a link, but in the meantime here's a screenshot to support the following data (but anyone will be able to verify it by watching the video back if they want):

http://puu.sh/mSumM/1e5bbf1d66.jpg

So I sat on the Sivala gate in Uedama for 2 hours and simply recorded the movement of hauling ships (including industrials, freighters, jump freighters, Orca and Bowhead) through the gate.

Total hauler movement: 221 jumps
No. of bumps: 0

Total ships AFK on the gate for between 1 min - 12 min: 3
Total ships on autopilot: 16
Total number of times webs were used to web into warp: 0

Breakdown by ship:

Charon: 10 (1 AFK for 12 minutes on the gate, 1 autopiloting)
Bowhead: 4
Obelisk: 6 (I autopiloting)
Orca: 6
Providence: 3 (1 autopiloting)
Fenrir: 4

T2 and T1 industrials: the remainer

With 5 gates in Uedama, the total number of jumps by haulers is much larger and not a single bump on any gate in that 2 hour period (but I won't count data I don't verifiably record, so will keep it at 221:0 so far).

In the video, I'll include the full breakdown of the numbers for each ship.

A very limited set of data and I'll increase the dataset significantly before making any conclusions.

I'll do another 2 hours later today.
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#562 - 2016-02-02 01:12:54 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Or just swing by Uedama and watch, it really would not be hard to see it happen.

Ok, so since evidence that this problem exists to the extent that it needs bumping mechanics changed and looting mechanics changed as a result, I swang by Uedama (with my hauling alt) as you suggested.

This is just the start of a study and I'll continue it to collect as much data as needed to determine one way or the other whether bumping is a problem. The only evidence I have been able to find (which is posted in this thread) suggests it isn't a problem.

I'll upload the raw screen capture video and post a link, but in the meantime here's a screenshot to support the following data (but anyone will be able to verify it by watching the video back if they want):

http://puu.sh/mSumM/1e5bbf1d66.jpg

So I sat on the Sivala gate in Uedama for 2 hours and simply recorded the movement of hauling ships (including industrials, freighters, jump freighters, Orca and Bowhead) through the gate.

Total movement: 221 jumps
No. of bumps: 0

Total ships AFK on the gate for between 1 min - 12 min: 3
Total ships on autopilot: 16
Total number of times webs were used to web into warp: 0

Breakdown by ship:

Charon: 10 (1 AFK for 12 minutes on the gate, 1 autopiloting0
Bowhead: 4
Obelisk: 6 (I autopiloting)
Orca: 6
Providence: 3 (1 autopiloting)
Fenrir: 4

T2 and T1 industrials: the remainer

In the video, I'll include the full breakdown at the end.

A very limited set of data and I'll increase the dataset significantly before making any conclusions.

I'll do another 2 hours later today.


I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#563 - 2016-02-02 01:22:44 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:

I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.


So now you basically just hate player freedom.

Because you're crying that the people who decide to take the initiative... get the initiative.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#564 - 2016-02-02 01:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.

Sure. That's why a larger dataset is required.

In my personal view, the RFF data is already sufficient to suggest there is no significant problem that needs a change: 0.11% rate of failed contracts with 2.8 million jumps in highsec annually.

The risk of being bumped to start with is extremely small.

However, since the suggestion was to swing by Uedama and it would be easy to see, then I'll collect the objective data and see, because unfortunately despite several questions about evidence to show it's a problem significant enough to require mechanics changes, none has been provided. So I'll keep looking for the evidence myself and let it determine in a completely objective way whether this is an issue I should support or not.

Individual opinions of "I think this is a problem and mechanics should be changed" versus "I don't think it's a problem and it shouldn't be changed" don't matter. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But objective data can't be argued with. It shows one way or the other whether something is really a problem, or if the assumptions we all make are not valid.

As to speed of the game being controlled by gankers. Random sampling and a large enough dataset will eliminate that as a variable. I will collect data across many days and many times. That will remove variation around their activity and produce an overall picture.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#565 - 2016-02-02 01:26:06 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.
No, it makes it a PvP centric game. If you don't want others to take control, then you have to be proactive and take it yourself. That's not to say it's guaranteed. But to complain after no effort was made, doesn't indicate a problem or that a nerf is required.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#566 - 2016-02-02 01:29:42 UTC
Its also worth mentioning sivala, by a significant margin, is the most kill active gate in uedama.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#567 - 2016-02-02 01:42:46 UTC  |  Edited by: KickAss Tivianne
Mag's wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.
No, it makes it a PvP centric game. If you don't want others to take control, then you have to be proactive and take it yourself. That's not to say it's guaranteed. But to complain after no effort was made, doesn't indicate a problem or that a nerf is required.


First I am not complaining about that mechanic. I was merely saying, hanging out in Uedama for an hour or 2 is nothing.
Paranoid Loyd
#568 - 2016-02-02 01:50:13 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
hanging out in Uedama for an hour or 2 is nothing.
It's not a valid sample set, however, not only is that acknowledged in the post, it's more evidence than you have supplied.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#569 - 2016-02-02 01:52:45 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.

Sure. That's why a larger dataset is required.

In my personal view, the RFF data is already sufficient to suggest there is no significant problem that needs a change: 0.11% rate of failed contracts with 2.8 million jumps in highsec annually.

The risk of being bumped to start with is extremely small.

However, since the suggestion was to swing by Uedama and it would be easy to see, then I'll collect the objective data and see, because unfortunately despite several questions about evidence to show it's a problem significant enough to require mechanics changes, none has been provided. So I'll keep looking for the evidence myself and let it determine in a completely objective way whether this is an issue I should support or not.

Individual opinions of "I think this is a problem and mechanics should be changed" versus "I don't think it's a problem and it shouldn't be changed" don't matter. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But objective data can't be argued with. It shows one way or the other whether something is really a problem, or if the assumptions we all make are not valid.

As to speed of the game being controlled by gankers. Random sampling and a large enough dataset will eliminate that as a variable. I will collect data across many days and many times. That will remove variation around their activity and produce an overall picture.


Random samplings mean nothing if you come by when Code or Batt Country operation is in effect. You have not been there so I don't expect you to understand. WHy do you think code mentioned earlier in the post about 10million will make it not an issue.

Look.. I don't have to convince you personally to do this. I even tried to compromise some, and nothing. You disagree.. I think its well noted in the posts here. TIme to let others that might have ideas speak.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#570 - 2016-02-02 02:09:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Random samplings mean nothing if you come by when Code or Batt Country operation is in effect. You have not been there so I don't expect you to understand. WHy do you think code mentioned earlier in the post about 10million will make it not an issue.

Look.. I don't have to convince you personally to do this. I even tried to compromise some, and nothing. You disagree.. I think its well noted in the posts here. TIme to let others that might have ideas speak.

You aren't convincing me to do this. I've asked for evidence that it's a problem signficant enough to warrant changes in the mechanics and all I've been told is that it's in the thread, but no links provided to where it is; and when I look, it isn't there.

So I'm doing it because using objective data is the best way to determine whether this is a real issue, or an invalid assumption.

I'm happy to do it. Research is part of what I do daily. so it isn't a problem to collect data and see what conclusions it supports.

On random sampling, it will eliminate a lot of variables that would otherwise affect the results. A big enough dataset over a large number of days and several times zones on different "high risk" gates will really show if this is an issue on those gates, which are supposed to the be ones that are the worst for it.

All the results will be available to everyone to verify themselves, because I'll post them all and the videos. I'm, just not going to bother asking for the evidence anymore only the be ignored. If it can't be provided, I'll go collect it myself.
Iain Cariaba
#571 - 2016-02-02 02:14:54 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.

Sure. That's why a larger dataset is required.

In my personal view, the RFF data is already sufficient to suggest there is no significant problem that needs a change: 0.11% rate of failed contracts with 2.8 million jumps in highsec annually.

The risk of being bumped to start with is extremely small.

However, since the suggestion was to swing by Uedama and it would be easy to see, then I'll collect the objective data and see, because unfortunately despite several questions about evidence to show it's a problem significant enough to require mechanics changes, none has been provided. So I'll keep looking for the evidence myself and let it determine in a completely objective way whether this is an issue I should support or not.

Individual opinions of "I think this is a problem and mechanics should be changed" versus "I don't think it's a problem and it shouldn't be changed" don't matter. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But objective data can't be argued with. It shows one way or the other whether something is really a problem, or if the assumptions we all make are not valid.

As to speed of the game being controlled by gankers. Random sampling and a large enough dataset will eliminate that as a variable. I will collect data across many days and many times. That will remove variation around their activity and produce an overall picture.


Random samplings mean nothing if you come by when Code or Batt Country operation is in effect. You have not been there so I don't expect you to understand. WHy do you think code mentioned earlier in the post about 10million will make it not an issue.

Look.. I don't have to convince you personally to do this. I even tried to compromise some, and nothing. You disagree.. I think its well noted in the posts here. TIme to let others that might have ideas speak.

Or, it may be time to admit you're wrong. You are seriously grasping at straws here trying to justify this. You have no evidence to back up your claim that there is a ptoblem that needs fixed here. In fact, the evidence provided in this thread actually points to the fact that there is no problem with the game, but with the player.
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#572 - 2016-02-02 02:33:26 UTC  |  Edited by: KickAss Tivianne
Iain Cariaba wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.

Sure. That's why a larger dataset is required.

In my personal view, the RFF data is already sufficient to suggest there is no significant problem that needs a change: 0.11% rate of failed contracts with 2.8 million jumps in highsec annually.

The risk of being bumped to start with is extremely small.

However, since the suggestion was to swing by Uedama and it would be easy to see, then I'll collect the objective data and see, because unfortunately despite several questions about evidence to show it's a problem significant enough to require mechanics changes, none has been provided. So I'll keep looking for the evidence myself and let it determine in a completely objective way whether this is an issue I should support or not.

Individual opinions of "I think this is a problem and mechanics should be changed" versus "I don't think it's a problem and it shouldn't be changed" don't matter. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But objective data can't be argued with. It shows one way or the other whether something is really a problem, or if the assumptions we all make are not valid.

As to speed of the game being controlled by gankers. Random sampling and a large enough dataset will eliminate that as a variable. I will collect data across many days and many times. That will remove variation around their activity and produce an overall picture.


Random samplings mean nothing if you come by when Code or Batt Country operation is in effect. You have not been there so I don't expect you to understand. WHy do you think code mentioned earlier in the post about 10million will make it not an issue.

Look.. I don't have to convince you personally to do this. I even tried to compromise some, and nothing. You disagree.. I think its well noted in the posts here. TIme to let others that might have ideas speak.

Or, it may be time to admit you're wrong. You are seriously grasping at straws here trying to justify this. You have no evidence to back up your claim that there is a ptoblem that needs fixed here. In fact, the evidence provided in this thread actually points to the fact that there is no problem with the game, but with the player.


I don't have to admit anything. This is a problem, and it is something that evidence does not come easily. It is not like I have a KM for this. THis is what I, and other people have seen. The fact that everyone is so defensive about this, means that this mechanic means a lot to you. This is not just me. Read the comments again. Your point is also made. I thank you for your insight (Which I actually do mean that). But this is not over.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#573 - 2016-02-02 02:50:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I don't have to admit anything. This is a problem, and it is something that evidence does not come easily. It is not like I have a KM for this. THis is what I, and other people have seen. The fact that everyone is so defensive about this, means that this mechanic means a lot to you. This is not just me. Read the comments again. Your point is also made. I thank you for your insight (Which I actually do mean that). But this is not over.
We know you're not the only one complaining about bumping. Or looting for that matter. But as we keep saying, complaining something is happening, doesn't mean that it's a problem. After all these years, I would have thought at least one of you would have produced evidence, that backs up your claims. Not evidence that it's happening, but that it's a problem.

What you feel or think from what you may or may not have seen, isn't evidence. We've produced evidence, so far you have not.
One of the questions I asked you back in this thread, was an attempt to gather some idea of what you base this so called problem on.

Oh and for the record, I've never been involved in a gank or bump in high sec. I have no axe to grind in that respect. It would be nice if you stopped trying to imply that of us all. Just because I argue against your stance, doesn't mean I have a vested interest in bumping per se. It means I disagree with you, as you offer no facts or logical arguments to back up your stance.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#574 - 2016-02-02 03:07:41 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Oh and for the record, I've never been involved in a gank or bump in high sec. I have no axe to grind in that respect. It would be nice if you stopped trying to imply that of us all. Just because I argue against your stance, doesn't mean I have a vested interest in bumping per se. It means I disagree with you as you offer no facts or logical arguments, to back up your stance.

Same for me. I'm neither a bumper nor a ganker.

I live in nullsec and pvp in both null and lowsec.

I have an industry alt whose activities fund my pvp and as a result, she does a lot of hauling work for deliveries in highsec, lowsec and nullsec.

I have no axe to grind beyond a belief that we should validate our claims rather than arguing blindly that something needs to be changed.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#575 - 2016-02-02 04:09:59 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:


I don't have to admit anything. This is a problem, and it is something that evidence does not come easily.



Quoted for hilarity. If it is such a problem, collecting the evidence should be quite trivial.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#576 - 2016-02-02 04:15:55 UTC
Mag's wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I don't have to admit anything. This is a problem, and it is something that evidence does not come easily. It is not like I have a KM for this. THis is what I, and other people have seen. The fact that everyone is so defensive about this, means that this mechanic means a lot to you. This is not just me. Read the comments again. Your point is also made. I thank you for your insight (Which I actually do mean that). But this is not over.
We know you're not the only one complaining about bumping. Or looting for that matter. But as we keep saying, complaining something is happening, doesn't mean that it's a problem. After all these years, I would have thought at least one of you would have produced evidence, that backs up your claims. Not evidence that it's happening, but that it's a problem.

What you feel or think from what you may or may not have seen, isn't evidence. We've produced evidence, so far you have not.
One of the questions I asked you back in this thread, was an attempt to gather some idea of what you base this so called problem on.

Oh and for the record, I've never been involved in a gank or bump in high sec. I have no axe to grind in that respect. It would be nice if you stopped trying to imply that of us all. Just because I argue against your stance, doesn't mean I have a vested interest in bumping per se. It means I disagree with you, as you offer no facts or logical arguments to back up your stance.


I understand that you disagree with me, And that is your Eve given right.

Evidence... I present to you whiteness who also have see such acts. I have that video I will share with CCP. as far as evidence to satisfy you.... Well, I could probably come up with evidence as much that was needed to change the amount of HP on a wreck. How many really get popped? Why is that a problem? Could they come up with data for that?? Its not like wreck pops are on a Killboard. So how did they give specific evidence was mentioned that sometimes a wreck gets popped. Maybe CCP could, but a complaint or a suspicion of a problem had to be submitted with imperfect evidence and then investigated. Since I am not CCP and I do not sit on the CSM, I can not give you exact evidence, which does not mean its not a problem. Then please CCP look into this. Then look at that, its in a patch!

The point of the above EXAMPLE is I don't need to come up with perfect evidence. I need people to verify my claim, give additional information, clarify my statement and give other solutions. All of which are happening. So now I hope CCP will take some of the suggestions and they will be able to validate them tweak them if need be or come up with other solutions. I don't have an ego and I don't care if its my idea that gets put into play, I just hope for a detailed discussion with hard data.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#577 - 2016-02-02 04:17:48 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Or just swing by Uedama and watch, it really would not be hard to see it happen.

Ok, so since evidence that this problem exists to the extent that it needs bumping mechanics changed and looting mechanics changed as a result, I swang by Uedama (with my hauling alt) as you suggested.

This is just the start of a study and I'll continue it to collect as much data as needed to determine one way or the other whether bumping is a problem. The only evidence I have been able to find (which is posted in this thread) suggests it isn't a problem.

I'll upload the raw screen capture video and post a link, but in the meantime here's a screenshot to support the following data (but anyone will be able to verify it by watching the video back if they want):

http://puu.sh/mSumM/1e5bbf1d66.jpg

So I sat on the Sivala gate in Uedama for 2 hours and simply recorded the movement of hauling ships (including industrials, freighters, jump freighters, Orca and Bowhead) through the gate.

Total movement: 221 jumps
No. of bumps: 0

Total ships AFK on the gate for between 1 min - 12 min: 3
Total ships on autopilot: 16
Total number of times webs were used to web into warp: 0

Breakdown by ship:

Charon: 10 (1 AFK for 12 minutes on the gate, 1 autopiloting0
Bowhead: 4
Obelisk: 6 (I autopiloting)
Orca: 6
Providence: 3 (1 autopiloting)
Fenrir: 4

T2 and T1 industrials: the remainer

In the video, I'll include the full breakdown at the end.

A very limited set of data and I'll increase the dataset significantly before making any conclusions.

I'll do another 2 hours later today.


I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.


OMG....even the lack of evidence is turned into evidence.

I'm sorry but that is just complete Bravo Sierra. You are a person with an agenda and are simply...well...bad. Somebody makes an good faith effort to collect data on bumping and you poo-poo it.

Seriously, STFU and go sit on the gate as well to collect data in a different time period than Scipio.

"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
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#578 - 2016-02-02 04:18:49 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:


I don't have to admit anything. This is a problem, and it is something that evidence does not come easily.



Quoted for hilarity. If it is such a problem, collecting the evidence should be quite trivial.


Wrong. But thanks for playing.... a lovely Chia-Pet parting gift for you.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#579 - 2016-02-02 04:19:37 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:

I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.


So now you basically just hate player freedom.

Because you're crying that the people who decide to take the initiative... get the initiative.


No it is even worse than that. KickedAss is trying to turn the lack of data in favor of her hypothesis into data in favor of her hypothesis. It is an intellectually bankrupt position she is working from. Her position is so right, so unassailable, that when the facts do not fit her narrative they must be twisted to fit that narrative.

"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
#580 - 2016-02-02 04:23:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
Mag's wrote:
KickAss Tivianne wrote:
I appreciate the attempt. This is what makes it a Ganker's game. They control the speed of the game.. target, and when to do it. You can spend a day there, and unless you are fed intel you might not see anything. Even if you are fed intel it could be a slow day, or week. People who have been doing this for a year or so know.
No, it makes it a PvP centric game. If you don't want others to take control, then you have to be proactive and take it yourself. That's not to say it's guaranteed. But to complain after no effort was made, doesn't indicate a problem or that a nerf is required.


First I am not complaining about that mechanic. I was merely saying, hanging out in Uedama for an hour or 2 is nothing.


1. It is better than nothing...and better than anything you got.
2. Scipio said it is just the start of something he plans on doing.
3. You blatantly tried to turn his data into something that supports your position.

You are, literally, intellectually bankrupt. You should have not posted anything in reply to Scipio, or just said thanks for the effort keep it up for as long as you can. But nope, you had to try and twist the data to suit your agenda. You have just proven Kaarous correct when he calls your honesty into question. Good job. Roll

"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