Warfare & Tactics

the hilarious part of Battleclinic's ranking system is that you get a massive amount of points for sabre+falcon vs. haulers, more points than killing 2 or 3 dudes in a 5 on 5 small gang fight.

Speaking from my experience (as little as there is), personal isk efficiency is borked. Alliance/corp efficiencies are less borked but still borked if you run with big coalitions.

Why? Kills are credited fully. I get as much credit on efficiency on kills that I whored on as a kill I made solo. Alliance A gets the same credit for killing my nyx as Alliance B which had a Rifter shoot just once at it.

Battleclinic is somewhat borked, but less borked than eve-kill or other boards for looking at PERSONAL efficiency. KM whoring is much less effective with that system.

I really like the word borked.

However, at the same time you can get ridiculous stats if you do nothing but suicide gank hulks (which we have done) and flip missioners in highsec (which I hope to try at some point).

Ultimately though, killboards do nothing but show a summary of the events that occured (between xxxx time and yyyy time) and are at most an approximate means judge how good or bad an entity is at pvp, especially as you reach the higher ratios. I will agree with the above poster who stated that KB stats will show you how bad someone is.

Anyway, I rant alot.

He didn't say he won ISK you fool.

Eh, if you don't like it, put your hand over that part of the screen when looking at the KB.

This guy nailed it.

A similar flaw on most killboards, which arbitrarily assign points to various ship classes, related to defenceless assets such as JF's, Rorquals (though you can make a Battle Rorq), Orcas (my fave), etc, where points are arbitrarily assigned. BC also moves the goalposts and Lukka follows; you used to get lots of points for soloing POS's on BC, and now you don't - which makes my AFK POS bash alt cry in his sleep.

BC's ranking vs other players is based on points, ofc. But points are calculated by the damage done to the enemy as well, meaning you can solo a drake in a wormhole but if he's tanked 190K damage from sleepers and you do the usual 23K, the points awarded are abysmally low.

Then again, you can do a lot of damage to yourself by having a hulk in hisec get a drone on your command ship lossmail when you herp a derp at 2 a.m. + wine and get CONCORDOKKENED.

ISK efficiency is important to some.

For me it is.

I know this is going to sounds ANAL, but this is how I break it down for myself.

My only source of income in EVE is PVP. This is gathered from Target Drops, and Ransom.

I use Griefwatch since it just keep a hell of a lot of info with regards to kill ratios and ISK ratios. More info is good.

I have 2 ships that I fitted up with one goal in mind, shoot and kill as many ships as I can find. Both these ships total amount was 62 Mil ISK to fit.

I lost both these ships with a total loss of 62 Mil, but they did just under 3 Billion isk Damage. I still loose 62 Mil, but the drops from the almost 3 Billion isk not including ransoms... (Yes I do not Honor Ransoms since I don't care. I am here to have fun) was just shy of 140mil. I lost 62mil but made back almost 80mil, not including ransoms.

I look at everything, just KB ISK efficiency does not matter, there is more behind that number than meets the eye. For Example: This engagement i got out with Structure in my cruiser.

That is a 31mil fiited ship. The drops alone in this engagement replaced the cost of the ship.

http://kane.griefwatch.net/?p=engagement&kill=1038

a Good KB ISK efficiency means fokol if you lost 1Bill to Kill 2 Bill but did not make that Loss back. It means your still 1 Bill out of pocket.

Am I putting to much thought into it... Probly, but a good KB ISK efficiency means fokol if I have no ISK left. What then, Mission? Mine? PLEX? Hell No...

PVP to make ISK is hell of alot more fun.

I measure what I do in Carebear tears Best Efficiency

isk effeciency works fine. it's a great way to figure out if you're dealing with a good pilot or a bad one.

ISK efficiency is pretty dumb as a measure of success. When I was flying with a corp that demanded 90% or better efficiency it was pretty easy to accomplish. Just lock every enemy and fire a single shot at it during the engagement. Ta-da, I'm on all the mails, my isk efficiency is great even if I contribute nothing.

A point system is better, but the point systems I have seen are pretty flawed. Killing a Rifter often gives the same points as killing a Dramiel, because "both are T1 frigates".

What we need is a mathematician with some good statistics skills and a computer designed for number crunching. Gather 250k kill mails or so, and do a bunch of Cool Math Stuffs to generate a new point system.

Solo, if a ship is on a lot of kills and isn't killed very much, it should be worth more points. If a ship tends to lose fights more than it wins, it shouldn't be worth as many. And different point values for small gang engagements, for example - though as we all know, it's hard to get a complete picture of a fight, because off-grid boosters and logistics don't make it onto KMs unless they die.

With this kind of method, point values could be updated over time automatically as people change tactics / CCP changes ships / people adapt.

Any math majors want to make an independent study class out of this?