These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#2341 - 2014-02-05 04:42:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Taranogas 3rd wrote:

There were some pretty good arguments against nerfing high sec, but sadly they have now drowned in the sea of null tears, and ofc the "we have the data just go look it up, but we won't show it to you".




We have shown you, perhaps you should read the thread before you make comments like this.

You havent shown shat. What I have seen is a nerf from CCP to Null. Think they did this for the null bear tears? I would suggest they did it because they had the data to support it not the fabricated shat that us as players could provide.


The latest nerf was done to try to make us want to use the ESS. Its failed.

LMAO you need to stop drinking your own koolaide
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2342 - 2014-02-05 04:59:42 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

As I stated so clearly before on a level my nine year old could comprehend. You data means nothing not because your a goon but because you have zero credibility. I could make a spread sheet and manipulate the test and the data to support any argument.

Even if your data supported my argument (which at this point don’t know don’t care ) it still doesn’t change the simple fact you have zero credibility.

It doesn’t change the fact you lack very specific base controls and key testing parameters.

Are you really that stupid or arrogant to think you could go out and set up any kind of credible test in a few days much less a few hours?

It seems more likely you think the players base or people on the forums are stupid enough to place validity in your so called data.

So please keep your flawed data as its worth exactly as much as the source that prepared it.


You can't tell me why I have no credibility. You can't tell me why my methods were bad. You can't tell me why my data is flawed. I think you are stupid enough and hateful enough lie about not claiming I'm not credible because of my alliance and corporation name.

You're randomly saying things without supporting anything and chucking in crappy insults. You have nothing and you still refuse to look at the data I provided, you know it does show a log of who looked at it.

Proof is here read it and weep highsec pubbie.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqC-BTui2uSGdDlxa2dWOG5ieHB0QXBVWW82bGN5TFE&usp=sharing

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2343 - 2014-02-05 05:02:28 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Taranogas 3rd wrote:

There were some pretty good arguments against nerfing high sec, but sadly they have now drowned in the sea of null tears, and ofc the "we have the data just go look it up, but we won't show it to you".




We have shown you, perhaps you should read the thread before you make comments like this.

You havent shown shat. What I have seen is a nerf from CCP to Null. Think they did this for the null bear tears? I would suggest they did it because they had the data to support it not the fabricated shat that us as players could provide.


The latest nerf was done to try to make us want to use the ESS. Its failed.

LMAO you need to stop drinking your own koolaide


Those in glass houses should not throw stones.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#2344 - 2014-02-05 05:03:43 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
So why do you think null-sec was nerfed? Random chance? Null sec was nerfed because the company (CCP) had the numbers to show it was needed.


Nullsec was nerfed because the bounties from anomalies, sites and rats was far too large an ISK faucet. Having no better tools than "nerf bounties" or "reduce anomaly spawn rate" available to them, CCP nerfed the bounties and the spawn rate. The first instance I remember of this was in the middle of FanFest 2011 when Greyscale made the very unpopular choice of reducing the availability of certain anomalies to certain true-sec with the intent of getting people to fight over "more valuable" space. My memory is cloudy, all I really recall is lots of angry null sec dudes crying into their beer guts.

E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
If you really truly think that hi-sec is better then why in the hell are you in null-sec crying over it?


They're crying about it because the higher income comes from the safer space. They feel that being willing to stake a claim on space and hold it against all comers should entitle them to higher rewards from exploiting PvE in their space. They sometimes characterise this as "risk vs reward" which I feel is a poor statement of the issue.

What I'd like to see is the value of the loot and salvage from those sites that La Nairn posted. 68M ISK/hr just from bounties? You'd expect the loot and salvage to be worth another 60M ISK/hr on top, right? It just takes someone with an all-5s Noctis to pick that stuff up: I salvage The Blockade in a few minutes. It's not like your arse is going to be hanging in the breeze like the ratter's was. A Noctis can even fully salvage the site while being aligned at full speed. You even have the advantage of using salvage tackle rigs and expanded cargo holds rather than trying to tank your Noctis against suicide ganks, thanks to the safety of null sec Bear

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Dun'Gal
Myriad Contractors Inc.
#2345 - 2014-02-05 05:11:11 UTC
Diamond Zerg wrote:
Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

Edit:

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?

This sounds like a wonderful new version of Eve.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2346 - 2014-02-05 05:11:44 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
So why do you think null-sec was nerfed? Random chance? Null sec was nerfed because the company (CCP) had the numbers to show it was needed.


Nullsec was nerfed because the bounties from anomalies, sites and rats was far too large an ISK faucet. Having no better tools than "nerf bounties" or "reduce anomaly spawn rate" available to them, CCP nerfed the bounties and the spawn rate. The first instance I remember of this was in the middle of FanFest 2011 when Greyscale made the very unpopular choice of reducing the availability of certain anomalies to certain true-sec with the intent of getting people to fight over "more valuable" space. My memory is cloudy, all I really recall is lots of angry null sec dudes crying into their beer guts.

E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
If you really truly think that hi-sec is better then why in the hell are you in null-sec crying over it?


They're crying about it because the higher income comes from the safer space. They feel that being willing to stake a claim on space and hold it against all comers should entitle them to higher rewards from exploiting PvE in their space. They sometimes characterise this as "risk vs reward" which I feel is a poor statement of the issue.

What I'd like to see is the value of the loot and salvage from those sites that La Nairn posted. 68M ISK/hr just from bounties? You'd expect the loot and salvage to be worth another 60M ISK/hr on top, right? It just takes someone with an all-5s Noctis to pick that stuff up: I salvage The Blockade in a few minutes. It's not like your arse is going to be hanging in the breeze like the ratter's was. A Noctis can even fully salvage the site while being aligned at full speed. You even have the advantage of using salvage tackle rigs and expanded cargo holds rather than trying to tank your Noctis against suicide ganks, thanks to the safety of null sec Bear



After the ESS test I can run another test salvaging and looting. We have the maths on our forums that shows its better to just jump straight to another anomaly and loot the dread gurista if there is one. We prefer to save the salvaging for newbees who don't have the option of running anomalies on their own.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#2347 - 2014-02-05 05:32:53 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

I would place my faith in CCP to have accurate data over anything that could be manipulated by a player looking after their own interest.


There is nothing obviously wrong with La Nariz's spreadsheet. He ran anomalies with a T2-fit heavy drone Ishtar. With that setup he managed to make 60M ISK/hr. His methodology was sound: waiting for "the next" tick of bounties after ceasing aggression to ensure that income from one site was not confused with income from the next.

The issues are not in the numbers: you need to look at the ship he flew, what other income was sourced (or abandoned) from those sites, and whether those anomalies represent a significant crossection of the available PvE in the space that La Nariz occupies (one could easily bias the findings by running the anomaly with the lowest bounties and highest loot/salvage value, for instance).

On the other side of this specific argument, I do not dispute the figures claiming to demonstrate "over 100M ISK/hr" from blitzing missions based on the assumption of 3k ISK/LP while flying a ship optimised for the task. The issues are not with the figures collected. The issues are the assumptions about the environment: is that level of blitzing and mission denial sustainable? Can you really maintain 3k ISK/LP? Is the ship used to run those blitzes representative of what a sensible hi sec missioner would use? How often does that ship get replaced due to ganking due to it being so bling-fit?

It is not fair and balanced to demand that a hi sec mission-runner limit their ship fittings to T2. You would simply look at what the typical ships used by mission runners are, especially the population of mission runners who engage in blitzing to maximise ISK/hr.

The same kind of study would be needed for null sec ratters.

But I digress. The important issue is that you correctly identify what is being manipulated. What if the numbers and the facts surrounding them are correct, and it is your perception of the issue that is being manipulated? What if this whole argument is trying to distract you from the real problem which is ISK faucets granting ISK for shooting NPCs?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#2348 - 2014-02-05 05:34:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
After the ESS test I can run another test salvaging and looting. We have the maths on our forums that shows its better to just jump straight to another anomaly and loot the dread gurista if there is one. We prefer to save the salvaging for newbees who don't have the option of running anomalies on their own.


Is that like a null-sec version of Pro Synergy?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#2349 - 2014-02-05 05:36:35 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:


What I'd like to see is the value of the loot and salvage from those sites that La Nairn posted. 68M ISK/hr just from bounties? You'd expect the loot and salvage to be worth another 60M ISK/hr on top, right? It just takes someone with an all-5s Noctis to pick that stuff up: I salvage The Blockade in a few minutes. It's not like your arse is going to be hanging in the breeze like the ratter's was. A Noctis can even fully salvage the site while being aligned at full speed. You even have the advantage of using salvage tackle rigs and expanded cargo holds rather than trying to tank your Noctis against suicide ganks, thanks to the safety of null sec Bear



Mara if I had the choice between shooting another anom or salvaging, I'd shoot another anom, AND if I wanted to get salvage, I'd go scout relics, or in my case, I'd just wait for one to spawn. I cart more than 1b of salvage to market monthly and almost of the small portion of the salvage that was derived from spaceships came from the gurista officer, or dewak humphries, and none of it from anom wrecks.

As far as having piles of T1 loot 23 jumps from jita in the midst of dead market null goes - forget it. The isk cost to get it hauled from the closest station to jita is 300isk/m3. Likewise the only reason I'd want the minerals out here would be for capitals, because its easier to just get subcaps JF'd out.

Also hilariously the "copasetic" meta4 (afaik most valuable meta4 in the game), of which I sell a couple of a month, drops on overseers, not in the shitpile of gurista BS wrecks left behind after clearing an anomoly. ie that dice you aint rolling with a noctis in an anomoly wreckpile.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#2350 - 2014-02-05 05:38:19 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

As I stated so clearly before on a level my nine year old could comprehend. You data means nothing not because your a goon but because you have zero credibility. I could make a spread sheet and manipulate the test and the data to support any argument.

Even if your data supported my argument (which at this point don’t know don’t care ) it still doesn’t change the simple fact you have zero credibility.

It doesn’t change the fact you lack very specific base controls and key testing parameters.

Are you really that stupid or arrogant to think you could go out and set up any kind of credible test in a few days much less a few hours?

It seems more likely you think the players base or people on the forums are stupid enough to place validity in your so called data.

So please keep your flawed data as its worth exactly as much as the source that prepared it.


You can't tell me why I have no credibility. You can't tell me why my methods were bad. You can't tell me why my data is flawed. I think you are stupid enough and hateful enough lie about not claiming I'm not credible because of my alliance and corporation name.

You're randomly saying things without supporting anything and chucking in crappy insults. You have nothing and you still refuse to look at the data I provided, you know it does show a log of who looked at it.

Proof is here read it and weep highsec pubbie.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqC-BTui2uSGdDlxa2dWOG5ieHB0QXBVWW82bGN5TFE&usp=sharing

Its painfully obvious by now you posses zero scientific back ground that you claim. If you did I wouldn’t have to keep giving you even the basic areas where you fail in testing parameters much less the very specific areas you choose to ignore.

Should you want the answer to this question that you keep asking and that I keep answering please go back to the posts where I provided those areas. I have answered this multiple times for you but like your testing you fail to comprehend.

There are to many variables that you have no control over to allow you provide accurate data. If I wanted to waste my like you have I can produce a spread sheet that will clearly show I make more isk/hr in Null (which I already know to be the case).



To many uncontrollable variables, no base data, lack of specific monitoring and testing parameters and like I have posted previous there are very specific missing parameters. All these are only a testing level that you are missing.

All that aside even if you over look all the specific areas that you fail to address with your so called test the biggest road block for me is your total and complete inability to conduct a test not only from a proffesional and knowledge level but from your inability to conduct any test from an unbiased perspective.

Nothing you could say…nothing you could do would grant you the credibility that you lack. This lack of credibility isn’t something that someone has done to you but its something you have done to yourself.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#2351 - 2014-02-05 05:50:24 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
All that aside even if you over look all the specific areas that you fail to address with your so called test the biggest road block for me is your total and complete inability to conduct a test not only from a proffesional and knowledge level but from your inability to conduct any test from an unbiased perspective.

Nothing you could say…nothing you could do would grant you the credibility that you lack. This lack of credibility isn’t something that someone has done to you but its something you have done to yourself.


You'll have to explain in more detail to the numbskulls like myself. Publish your methodology and experimental results and show us why La Nariz is using a flawed methodology producing nonsensical results.

Show, don't tell.

Because if telling is enough to go on, I have three Erebus titans to sell you for the paltry sum of 50B ISK each, payable in advance.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2352 - 2014-02-05 06:06:05 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

Its painfully obvious by now you posses zero scientific back ground that you claim. If you did I wouldn’t have to keep giving you even the basic areas where you fail in testing parameters much less the very specific areas you choose to ignore.

Should you want the answer to this question that you keep asking and that I keep answering please go back to the posts where I provided those areas. I have answered this multiple times for you but like your testing you fail to comprehend.

There are to many variables that you have no control over to allow you provide accurate data. If I wanted to waste my like you have I can produce a spread sheet that will clearly show I make more isk/hr in Null (which I already know to be the case).

To many uncontrollable variables, no base data, lack of specific monitoring and testing parameters and like I have posted previous there are very specific missing parameters. All these are only a testing level that you are missing.

All that aside even if you over look all the specific areas that you fail to address with your so called test the biggest road block for me is your total and complete inability to conduct a test not only from a proffesional and knowledge level but from your inability to conduct any test from an unbiased perspective.

Nothing you could say…nothing you could do would grant you the credibility that you lack. This lack of credibility isn’t something that someone has done to you but its something you have done to yourself.


You aren't giving me any basic information though you're just literally doing "you're wrong because you're wrong." There is no reasoning or logic to what you are saying. There is no actual criticism of what I have done just a bunch of you're wrong. You won't say how or why I am wrong. You won't backup your assertions. You make up random crap and decide that is the be all end all determinant.

Above all of that, you still have not looked at the spreadsheet. You are attempting to criticize something you have not even read.

The italicized portion should be something that concerns you. I could literally show you the truth but, your own hatred of anything goon related would prevent you from acknowledging it.

You are the living embodiment of a ~~~~o7o7o7o7m8m8m8m8 Highsec Tantrum m8m8m8m8o7o7o7o7~~~~.

If you want to prove that is not the case you can answer these questions in complete sentences keeping only one question answered per sentence:

What variables am I unable to control for that affect the experiment?

How does the experiment lack "specific monitoring?"

What specific parameters of the test are a problem?

What makes me bias?

Where is the bias in this experimental procedure?

Why am I completely devoid of credibility?

How is this method not reproducible?

How is this method not precise?

How is this method not accurate?

No statistical methods were used so how is it invalid for statistical errors?

Nothing is stopping you from performing the same experiment I did, why have you resorted to poop flinging instead of actually attempting to discredit me?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2353 - 2014-02-05 06:10:19 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
After the ESS test I can run another test salvaging and looting. We have the maths on our forums that shows its better to just jump straight to another anomaly and loot the dread gurista if there is one. We prefer to save the salvaging for newbees who don't have the option of running anomalies on their own.


Is that like a null-sec version of Pro Synergy?


No its glorious communism! More on topic we have private forums devoted to this and people far more economically inclined than I have run the maths and experiments to show that Forsaken Hubs are the best hub for isk/hr as well as the highest isk/hr comes from killing everything while only looting dread spawns. Which is why I chose the method I did, VNI/Ishtar ratting is the most optimized style of ratting.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#2354 - 2014-02-05 06:10:32 UTC
I guess La naz what I am trying to say in a nut shell is......You lack the knowledge and skill and ability to conduct any test from an unbiased position.

Should your data show better than CCP data that you can make more isk/hr in Hi-sec then go where you feel you need to be.

All the arguing testing and fabricated numbers wont change the fact null-sec was nerfed.

It is what it is and should they nerf hi-sec or nerf null-sec again its on me to find the part of the sandbox where I want to be. Its not on me to cry to CCP to change a part of the sandbox that I think makes more isk/hr because I cant adjust or adapt to change.

You guys seem unable to accept the truth. The truth as it is with no numbers from anyone they nerfed null-sec.... sorry they did because I lost isk just like every other null bear.

Nothing La Nazi can say or Baltec can say or I can say or any nothing any of us can fabricated is changing that.

Deal with it or dont. I am done talking to people who refuse to see and accept things for how they are instead of how they want them to be.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2355 - 2014-02-05 06:18:44 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
After the ESS test I can run another test salvaging and looting. We have the maths on our forums that shows its better to just jump straight to another anomaly and loot the dread gurista if there is one. We prefer to save the salvaging for newbees who don't have the option of running anomalies on their own.


Is that like a null-sec version of Pro Synergy?



No that is how you roll

Stopping to salvage is MUCH less income over all specially when there is NO market for t1 crap at hand, you have to haul it back to hi sec or pay someone to haul it for you. Period. HUGE time sink, and time is money.

So sell the bookmarks to a newbie for a couple mil, he makes more than the sell price and you get more than if you just left the field everyone wins.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2356 - 2014-02-05 06:20:54 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
I guess La naz what I am trying to say in a nut shell is......You lack the knowledge and skill and ability to conduct any test from an unbiased position.

Should your data show better than CCP data that you can make more isk/hr in Hi-sec then go where you feel you need to be.

All the arguing testing and fabricated numbers wont change the fact null-sec was nerfed.

It is what it is and should they nerf hi-sec or nerf null-sec again its on me to find the part of the sandbox where I want to be. Its not on me to cry to CCP to change a part of the sandbox that I think makes more isk/hr because I cant adjust or adapt to change.

You guys seem unable to accept the truth. The truth as it is with no numbers from anyone they nerfed null-sec.... sorry they did because I lost isk just like every other null bear.

Nothing La **** can say or Baltec can say or I can say or any nothing any of us can fabricated is changing that.

Deal with it or dont. I am done talking to people who refuse to see and accept things for how they are instead of how they want them to be.


You're moving goalposts and talking in circles at this point, I'm going to going to respond with this until you answer these questions.

Quote:

You are the living embodiment of a ~~~~o7o7o7o7m8m8m8m8 Highsec Tantrum m8m8m8m8o7o7o7o7~~~~.

If you want to prove that is not the case you can answer these questions in complete sentences keeping only one question answered per sentence:

What variables am I unable to control for that affect the experiment?

How does the experiment lack "specific monitoring?"

What specific parameters of the test are a problem?

What makes me bias?

Where is the bias in this experimental procedure?

Why am I completely devoid of credibility?

How is this method not reproducible?

How is this method not precise?

How is this method not accurate?

No statistical methods were used so how is it invalid for statistical errors?

Nothing is stopping you from performing the same experiment I did, why have you resorted to poop flinging instead of actually attempting to discredit me?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2357 - 2014-02-05 06:23:33 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
[
There is nothing obviously wrong with La Nariz's spreadsheet. He ran anomalies with a T2-fit heavy drone Ishtar. With that setup he managed to make 60M ISK/hr. His methodology was sound: waiting for "the next" tick of bounties after ceasing aggression to ensure that income from one site was not confused with income from the next.

The issues are not in the numbers: you need to look at the ship he flew, what other income was sourced (or abandoned) from those sites, and whether those anomalies represent a significant crossection of the available PvE in the space that La Nariz occupies (one could easily bias the findings by running the anomaly with the lowest bounties and highest loot/salvage value, for instance).

On the other side of this specific argument, I do not dispute the figures claiming to demonstrate "over 100M ISK/hr" from blitzing missions based on the assumption of 3k ISK/LP while flying a ship optimised for the task. The issues are not with the figures collected. The issues are the assumptions about the environment: is that level of blitzing and mission denial sustainable? Can you really maintain 3k ISK/LP? Is the ship used to run those blitzes representative of what a sensible hi sec missioner would use? How often does that ship get replaced due to ganking due to it being so bling-fit?

It is not fair and balanced to demand that a hi sec mission-runner limit their ship fittings to T2. You would simply look at what the typical ships used by mission runners are, especially the population of mission runners who engage in blitzing to maximise ISK/hr.



Its fair and balanced that he isn't factoring breaks do to roaming gangs, gankers, or hot droppers. You REALLY don't want to get into that argument. When I'm doing rated I use a pair of spider tanking Domi's. Don't count the carrier and fuel I uses to move them ....over three regions....or the cyno accounts, or time wasted moving a carrier, cyno accounts AND two combat toons over three regions.

Anomolies only pay off when uninterupted, again, a rare thing in my neck of the woods. All told I make more per hour in high sec for the time spent, its that close.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2358 - 2014-02-05 06:27:06 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
E-2C Tardeye wrote:
All that aside even if you over look all the specific areas that you fail to address with your so called test the biggest road block for me is your total and complete inability to conduct a test not only from a proffesional and knowledge level but from your inability to conduct any test from an unbiased perspective.

Nothing you could say…nothing you could do would grant you the credibility that you lack. This lack of credibility isn’t something that someone has done to you but its something you have done to yourself.


You'll have to explain in more detail to the numbskulls like myself. Publish your methodology and experimental results and show us why La Nariz is using a flawed methodology producing nonsensical results.

Show, don't tell.

Because if telling is enough to go on, I have three Erebus titans to sell you for the paltry sum of 50B ISK each, payable in advance.


Before I forget there is something you can do to help out here if you're willing.

I need something similar to what I've done in nullsec for highsec mission running: one run blitzing without salvage/loot, one run blitzing with salvage/loot, one run full clear without salvage/loot, and one run full clear with salvage/loot.

If you can do any of those it would be great.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2359 - 2014-02-05 06:27:49 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:


There are to many variables that you have no control over to allow you provide accurate data. If I wanted to waste my like you have I can produce a spread sheet that will clearly show I make more isk/hr in Null (which I already know to be the case).



To many uncontrollable variables, no base data, lack of specific monitoring and testing parameters and like I have posted previous there are very specific missing parameters. All these are only a testing level that you are missing.


Way to make the argument you frigging brainiac Roll

THAT is the point, there are to many uncontroled variable to keep up with in null to keep up with get a T1 BS with a T2 fit and just grind in high.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SAYING!
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#2360 - 2014-02-05 06:43:50 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
All that aside even if you over look all the specific areas that you fail to address with your so called test the biggest road block for me is your total and complete inability to conduct a test not only from a proffesional and knowledge level but from your inability to conduct any test from an unbiased perspective.

Nothing you could say…nothing you could do would grant you the credibility that you lack. This lack of credibility isn’t something that someone has done to you but its something you have done to yourself.


You'll have to explain in more detail to the numbskulls like myself. Publish your methodology and experimental results and show us why La Nariz is using a flawed methodology producing nonsensical results.

Show, don't tell.

Because if telling is enough to go on, I have three Erebus titans to sell you for the paltry sum of 50B ISK each, payable in advance.

Start here look these words up and their definition as it pertains to testing. This is just a few item.

Establishment/Desirability of repeatability/Attribute Agreement Analysis for Defect Databases/Accuracy/Accuracy and Precision/Reproducibility.

Not only this and the credibility issue but any test done can never be done under a controlled environment.

Example: Your ratting in null-sec and roaming gang comes thru you have to pos up.
Example: Your ratting in null rare drops or you get an escalation.
Example: You can chain belts or run anomalies or combo of both.
Example: You can scan sites run 10/10 sites with friends etc….

Example: You can get griefed can flipped ganked while in hi-sec etc.

Control of the testing environment is not there.

Next just briefly look at the endless scenarios for SP and ship set up and modules.

The average eve player can fly xyz with abc SP etc…. All variables you cant account for or test for.

So even though I work for a week in Null and look at my wallet then work for a week in Hi-sec and look at my wallet I see I made more isk per week per hr in Null I know there are to many variables to provide reliable repeatable data. I can average the two over a span of time to get a better average but its just that.


So what do we have? CCP because they have access to the data can look at total isk earned and where it was earned and have total average numbers from all the players in EVE.

CCP took that data and nerfed null-sec. They may make more nerfs or adjustments regardless I will continue to seek out that part of the sandbox where I can make the best isk/hr not sit here and cry for the game to change to meet my needs.