These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Burn Okkamon
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#121 - 2014-07-31 12:57:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Epikurus
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Agreed, killboards do not show mining activities or industrial work etc.

Not sure thats the kind of activity i was talking about.


There is plenty more that killboards don't show.

Quote:

Sure there are other factors, like the one person could spend more hours online than an entire corp, but since that statistic is unobtainable it is taken into consideration but ultimately ignored.


Now you're getting somewhere, although it is entirely wrong to say that factors for which data is unobtainable is or should be ignored. Any proper analysis will build in the uncertainty deriving from ignorance, not just pretend it isn't there and make certain claims regardless.

But this only scratches the surface of what the top line numbers on the killboards don't show. Another thing they don't show is type of PvP engaged in. Someone who stalks his prey for half an hour before killing him is not less active in any meaningful way than someone who fires off one shot at each of ten insta-popped targets coming through a gate camp in the same period. What they are doing is engaging in entirely different activities, one of which generates a higher number of killmails than the other. To identify activity with number of killmails tout court simply hollows out the notion of 'activity'.

Quote:

However, if one person is involved with more kills than an entire corp, it is absolutely fair to say that the one person operates in places that have higher levels of activity than the corp. The individuals contribution to that activity is a different matter entirely.


There is another error of reasoning here. Whatever the correlation one chooses to draw between quantity of killmails and activity in a corp and/or an individual, the conclusions about activity in a place cannot be derived from the 'activity' of either one individual or one corp taken in isolation. A case needs to be made for that corp and individual being representative of all the others operating in the place in question otherwise we end up with a dubious induction from the particular to the general of the same form as the claim that because this person has a beard, all people must have beards. Since there are other corps operating in the area in question that have higher numbers of killmails, and many many individuals operating in other parts of the warzone who have far fewer KMs than you, it rather looks like the claim is based on outliers rather than genuinely representative data.

By the way, I'm not at all sure that your conclusion is wrong, just your argument Blink
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#122 - 2014-07-31 13:14:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
TL;DR

Dont need a proper analysis to draw a workable conclusion. My argument is robust enough to be fit for the purpose it was intended.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#123 - 2014-07-31 13:24:11 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
TL;DR

Dont need a proper analysis to draw a workable conclusion. Mt argument is robust enough to be fit for the purpose it was intended.


Your argument is not 'sufficiently robust' - it is fallacious in places, riddled with holes, and grounded on a foundation of sand. The fact that you might be right about your conclusion doesn't help with that, any-more than the claim that 'the fairies will make the dice come up with a double six this time because I have been unlucky in the past' is validated if the dice do happen to roll these numbers. But good attempt.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#124 - 2014-07-31 13:30:49 UTC
Where are Mjolnir and friends living today?

JUSTK is recruiting
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#125 - 2014-07-31 13:31:59 UTC
Epikurus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
TL;DR

Dont need a proper analysis to draw a workable conclusion. Mt argument is robust enough to be fit for the purpose it was intended.


Your argument is not 'sufficiently robust' - it is fallacious in places, riddled with holes, and grounded on a foundation of sand. The fact that you might be right about your conclusion doesn't help with that, any-more than the claim that 'the fairies will make the dice come up with a double six this time because I have been unlucky in the past' is validated if the dice do happen to roll these numbers. But good attempt.


Im not here to connect the dots for you. The argument and conclusion is perfectly acceptable in the context it was presented.

Non of your objections even applies to my argument or conclusion.

"foundation of sand" - lol, you are just mad posting now bro.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#126 - 2014-07-31 13:38:42 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Epikurus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
TL;DR

Dont need a proper analysis to draw a workable conclusion. Mt argument is robust enough to be fit for the purpose it was intended.


Your argument is not 'sufficiently robust' - it is fallacious in places, riddled with holes, and grounded on a foundation of sand. The fact that you might be right about your conclusion doesn't help with that, any-more than the claim that 'the fairies will make the dice come up with a double six this time because I have been unlucky in the past' is validated if the dice do happen to roll these numbers. But good attempt.


Im not here to connect the dots for you. The argument and conclusion is perfectly acceptable in the context it was presented.

Non of your objections even applies to my argument or conclusion.

"foundation of sand" - lol, you are just mad posting now bro.


Argument by assertion ... nice. I guess simply repeating 'I'm right' is easier than responding to the points I made.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#127 - 2014-07-31 13:48:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Epikurus wrote:
Argument by assertion ... nice. I guess simply repeating 'I'm right' is easier than responding to the points I made.


I presented the only required supporting evidence in my initial argument that triggered your inane posting. Just because you buried it in a very indulgent stream of irrelevant objections and spurious redefinitions of what is generally considered activity in the context i used the word, doesnt mean i am simply asserting im correct.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#128 - 2014-07-31 13:59:09 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Epikurus wrote:
Argument by assertion ... nice. I guess simply repeating 'I'm right' is easier than responding to the points I made.


I presented the only required supporting evidence in my initial argument that triggered your inane posting. Just because you buried it in a very indulgent stream of irrelevant objections and spurious redefinitions of what is generally considered activity in the context i used the word.



"evidence"
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#129 - 2014-07-31 14:03:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Kills = activity
More kills = more activity
669 is a larger number than 432.

Hope that clears things up for ya.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#130 - 2014-07-31 14:05:25 UTC
If you don't want to compare a single player to a corp then by all means, compare our corp to theirs.

JUSTK is recruiting
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#131 - 2014-07-31 14:10:52 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
If you don't want to compare a single player to a corp then by all means, compare our corp to theirs.


Lets see.

44 members with 432 kills vs, 47 members with 3625 kills.

Im sure there will be a reason this doesnt illustrate activity levels lol.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#132 - 2014-07-31 14:21:20 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
If you don't want to compare a single player to a corp then by all means, compare our corp to theirs.


Lets see.

44 members with 432 kills vs, 47 members with 3625 kills.

Im sure there will be a reason this doesnt illustrate activity levels lol.


No, that's a far more reasonable place to start from than your initial attempt. At the very least it is comparing things of the same type, which is a great development.

Let's leave aside the question of whether a crude equation of quantity of killmails with PvP activity is warranted, for the moment, and move on to explaining why data about these two particular corps should be taken as representative of the regions in which they live and fight. Are they both the top corps in their respective regions? Or, if we chose different corps for our illustration would this dramatic difference in kills disappear, or at least be mitigated?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#133 - 2014-07-31 14:50:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Epikurus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
If you don't want to compare a single player to a corp then by all means, compare our corp to theirs.


Lets see.

44 members with 432 kills vs, 47 members with 3625 kills.

Im sure there will be a reason this doesnt illustrate activity levels lol.


No, that's a far more reasonable place to start from than your initial attempt. At the very least it is comparing things of the same type, which is a great development.

Let's leave aside the question of whether a crude equation of quantity of killmails with PvP activity is warranted, for the moment, and move on to explaining why data about these two particular corps should be taken as representative of the regions in which they live and fight. Are they both the top corps in their respective regions? Or, if we chose different corps for our illustration would this dramatic difference in kills disappear, or at least be mitigated?



Reasonable in the sense that even though it still makes them look like a dead corp, at least it doesnt show their entire corp is less active than a single player.

However, that was my original point, so....

I dont need to explain why their activity levels are representative of the activity in their area, do i? I mean if being pedantic is what this boils down to then i guess we are posting for completely different reasons.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2014-07-31 15:47:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Epikurus
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Reasonable in the sense that even though it still makes them look like a dead corp, at least it doesnt show their entire corp is less active than a single player.

However, that was my original point, so....


Really? You could at least stick to a consistent story:

Crosi Wesdo wrote:

Nah, he thinks its my ego. Im just saying its pretty dead down in the OMS area. Well, if you ignore the sac guard gangs and UCF zergs.





Quote:

I dont need to explain why their activity levels are representative of the activity in their area, do i? I mean if being pedantic is what this boils down to then i guess we are posting for completely different reasons.


Actually, that is exactly what you need to do if you want to infer from their number of kills (I still don't know who we are talking about, btw) the general amount of activity in the area. But you really aren't helping yourself at this point. You're getting tangled up by having two separate agendas - 1) trying to make a corp look bad, and 2) making a claim about activity in an area. You want to show 2) by way of 1) when in fact crapping on this corp is getting in the way of demonstrating the level of activity in the area. If you think that this is a dead corp then comparing it to one of the most active Gallente corps is hardly illustrative of anything about the area they live in. Differences in kill levels could be explained by corporate culture, leadership, focus on non-PvP activities, etc etc etc.

So, again I ask, why do you think that this corp, rather than one of the corps with more than twice the number of kills, can appropriately be compared to Black Fox to identify comparative levels of activity in their respective areas? For the comparison to be appropriate you would have to pick two corps that are as alike as possible in terms of everything except the areas they operate in. Do you think that is the case with these two corps?

Frankly, I think a far better strategy for claiming that one area is more active would be one that simply examined the number of kills (or jumps) in the area and did away entirely with the overlay of corp data. The chances of finding two sample corps that are adequately comparable are low and too much work would need to be done to adjust the data for other environmental factors (esp. if you pick one from the Caldari side and the other from the Gallente side, when it would be much more appropriate to compare two Caldari corps living in different areas). The downside would be that you would lose the opportunity to dump on people which, lets be honest, is really your priority here.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#135 - 2014-07-31 16:14:26 UTC
another tl;dr

Im going to go ahead and assume you finally agreed with me.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#136 - 2014-07-31 16:27:09 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
another tl;dr

Im going to go ahead and assume you finally agreed with me.


You do that. Reading is hard and rational discussion is harder. It's a whole lot easier to invent a world in which you're right.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#137 - 2014-07-31 16:31:53 UTC
Heyd, 5244 jumps in the last 24
Nisuwa, 1565 jumps in the last 24

You may want to look at how many jumps apart they are as well before you decide that has a giant difference. It isn't like we are comparing FW lowsec to non-fw lowsec corps, or corps that live more than a handful of jumps away from each other.

The entire bit is just ridiculous when all that is getting pointed out is taking Heyd/Lad/Deven is, and can be, done anytime we want. We don't get more decent pew pew out of doing so, it is just blobbing the system, taking it, then letting them take it back in a week or two since no one but them wants to live there. Taking Okkamon was harder than taking Heyd, and got us more pew.

JUSTK is recruiting
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#138 - 2014-07-31 16:36:41 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Heyd, 5244 jumps in the last 24
Nisuwa, 1565 jumps in the last 24

You may want to look at how many jumps apart they are as well before you decide that has a giant difference. It isn't like we are comparing FW lowsec to non-fw lowsec corps, or corps that live more than a handful of jumps away from each other.

The entire bit is just ridiculous when all that is getting pointed out is taking Heyd/Lad/Deven is, and can be, done anytime we want. We don't get more decent pew pew out of doing so, it is just blobbing the system, taking it, then letting them take it back in a week or two since no one but them wants to live there. Taking Okkamon was harder than taking Heyd, and got us more pew.


This is all pretty much because i told him to not quit his day job. Hes insulted so hes gonna keep posting how wrong i am no matter how right i am.
SmokinJs Arthie
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#139 - 2014-07-31 16:38:52 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
. . .taking it, then letting them take it back in a week or two since no one but them wants to live there.

We are generous gods.
Epikurus
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#140 - 2014-07-31 16:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Epikurus
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Heyd, 5244 jumps in the last 24
Nisuwa, 1565 jumps in the last 24

You may want to look at how many jumps apart they are as well before you decide that has a giant difference. It isn't like we are comparing FW lowsec to non-fw lowsec corps, or corps that live more than a handful of jumps away from each other.

The entire bit is just ridiculous when all that is getting pointed out is taking Heyd/Lad/Deven is, and can be, done anytime we want. We don't get more decent pew pew out of doing so, it is just blobbing the system, taking it, then letting them take it back in a week or two since no one but them wants to live there. Taking Okkamon was harder than taking Heyd, and got us more pew.


This is all pretty much because i told him to not quit his day job. Hes insulted so hes gonna keep posting how wrong i am no matter how right i am.


You flatter yourself. My main has been making over-long analytical posts designed to make the reader commit suicide for five years or so. I think I'm somewhere around 4000 posts and 1.2 million words on the eve-o forums now. My posts in this thread are nothing unusual.