These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Where are the pirates?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Famine Aligher'ri
Sheriff.
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#41 - 2014-11-28 01:18:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Famine Aligher'ri
Veers Belvar wrote:
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


Look, I'm a big fan of the lowsec pirates who honor ransoms...I think it adds a very cool element to lowsec. The problem is that the folks who lie, take the ransom, and then blow the ship up anyways ruin it for everyone. Since the victim can't rely on ransoms, he won't pay, and everyone comes out behind.

I'd love to see some kind of "pirate code of conduct" so that the next time a freighter, orca, or blingy battleship gets caught, they can pay the ransom and know that their ship will be spared. Given the current folks playing the game, I'm not very confident.



If pirates played fair, then they likely wouldn't be pirates.

I mean you have to get serious.


You miss the point...both the pirate and the prey would prefer a ransom to needless destruction. What they lack is a mechanism to force both sides to effectuate their long term desires. Game Theory. Prisoners Dilemma. Nash Equilibrium.


Umm, I think you're actually missing the point. Let me break it down for you:

1) Ransom - I can offer a ransom when I snag you right off the bat or get you into hull and then hail you. Choosing this option is extremely risky for me as the pirate. Not only do I spend time getting you into hull, I do not collect my 200 dollars and just pass go. I have to wait to pass because I have to wait until we agree on terms before I can let you go. This gives both you and potentially other foes a chance to get the jump on me and cause me my ship and your ransom.

2) Kill - Can just skip the ransom and go right for the loot. This is much more efficient for me because there is no waiting around to agree on terms of a ransom. I pop you, collect the loot and move on. This reduces a lot of risk on my end as the pirate because it reduces the window of opportunity for your friends or other foes who just want to jump in. However, having the isk from a ransom is better than loot don't get me wrong. I still have to sell the loot, which I could lose on the way to the station. But, most pirates find it's a better trade off just killing you and selling the loot than worrying about a ransom.

3) Kill & Ransom - The third and final option is actually dishonoring the ransom, which you hate. This is as equally risky as just ransoming and not killing the victim because you still have to get them to hull, agree to terms and then pop them. On the pirate end, it's actually better because of the obvious. You have liquid isk and you have loot to sell. Win-win. Likewise, if you ransom, pop ship and then ransom the pod where they actually still pay you. It's win-win-WIN!

So, to ransom or not to ransom? I personally do not ransom because it's a waste of time. I have no idea what is really on the ship to even provide a legit offer.

At the end of the day, most pirates are in this for the ISK. Honor and anything else comes second. If you find someone who claims honor and fair play comes first, then they are just pvping. They are not pirates. They would be better off sitting in one spot waiting for people to engage them 1-on-1.

For me, it's all about that isk and everything I can do to get to your isk. If that means I have to be a scumbag and dishonor our agreement, then I will do it. I could care less about your tears and how you think piracy should be like.

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2014-11-28 01:23:03 UTC
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:


Look, I'm a big fan of the lowsec pirates who honor ransoms...I think it adds a very cool element to lowsec. The problem is that the folks who lie, take the ransom, and then blow the ship up anyways ruin it for everyone. Since the victim can't rely on ransoms, he won't pay, and everyone comes out behind.

I'd love to see some kind of "pirate code of conduct" so that the next time a freighter, orca, or blingy battleship gets caught, they can pay the ransom and know that their ship will be spared. Given the current folks playing the game, I'm not very confident.



If pirates played fair, then they likely wouldn't be pirates.

I mean you have to get serious.


You miss the point...both the pirate and the prey would prefer a ransom to needless destruction. What they lack is a mechanism to force both sides to effectuate their long term desires. Game Theory. Prisoners Dilemma. Nash Equilibrium.


Umm, I think you're actually missing the point. Let me break it down for you from my own personal experience in piracy since like 2004. I mean, you could disagree with this, but keep in mind this is my trade not yours. Here are my options as a pirate:

1) Ransom - I can offer a ransom when I snag you right off the bat or get you into hull and then hail you. Choosing this option is extremely risky for me as the pirate. Not only do I spend time getting you into hull, I do not collect my 200 dollars and just pass go. I have to wait to pass because I have to wait until we agree on terms before I can let you go. This gives both you and potentially other foes a chance to get the jump on me and cause me my ship and your ransom.

2) Kill - Can just skip the ransom and go right for the loot. This is much more efficient for me because there is no waiting around to agree on terms of a ransom. I pop you, collect the loot and move on. This reduces a lot of risk on my end as the pirate because it reduces the window of opportunity for your friends or other foes who just want to jump in. However, having the isk from a ransom is better than loot don't get me wrong. I still have to sell the loot, which I could lose on the way to the station. But, most pirates find it's a better trade off just killing you and selling the loot than worrying about a ransom.

3) Kill & Ransom - The third and final option is actually dishonoring the ransom, which you hate. This is as equally risky as just ransoming and not killing the victim because you still have to get them to hull, agree to terms and then pop them. On the pirate end, it's actually better because of the obvious. You have liquid isk and you have loot to sell. Win-win. Likewise, if you ransom, pop ship and then ransom the pod where they actually still pay you. It's win-win-WIN!

So, to ransom or not to ransom? I personally do not ransom because it's a waste of time. I have no idea what is really on the ship to even provide a legit offer. For all I know, my offer is way below the amount of isk that drops in loot regardless of the fact I'm just giving my victim more time to call for reinforcements. Likewise, if I felt I could ransom, I likely would dishonor the ransom because I get double the payout.

At the end of the day, most pirates are in this for the ISK. Honor and anything else comes second. Honor is not the name of the game with piracy. So, crying that we should have a code and honor is a very silly request being our rotten core as pirates.


Game theory, man. It's a philosophy that only applies when the proper rules are followed. Hence, it's remarkably worthless outside of a theoretical vacuum.
Famine Aligher'ri
Sheriff.
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#43 - 2014-11-28 01:25:30 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:


Game theory, man. It's a philosophy that only applies when the proper rules are followed. Hence, it's remarkably worthless outside of a theoretical vacuum.


You're going to have to explain that one to me because you just lost me on that use of terminology in this context.

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#44 - 2014-11-28 02:04:23 UTC
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:


Game theory, man. It's a philosophy that only applies when the proper rules are followed. Hence, it's remarkably worthless outside of a theoretical vacuum.


You're going to have to explain that one to me because you just lost me on that use of terminology in this context.



Game theory makes sense if you assume that everyone puts predictable values on various possible outcomes and acts rationally.

We don't.

The moment I found most fun in my EVE history involved losing a 300m Ishtar to what I believe was a 40m Vexor fit in a very, very close fight. Game theory says my result was negative on multiple metrics - my killboard looked worse, my wallet was worse off, etc.

However I 'irrationally' value fun higher than that and so consider that fight a big positive, not a negative at all.


Another example is CODE.'s campaign of slaughtering empty freighters and podding the pilots. On most metrics it's a negative EV action - it might sell the odd permit and help our Charon building arm, but nothing that covers the expense of doing it. Thing is, it's *hilarious fun*.


Save game theory for the poker table.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2014-11-28 02:14:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ned Thomas
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:


Game theory, man. It's a philosophy that only applies when the proper rules are followed. Hence, it's remarkably worthless outside of a theoretical vacuum.


You're going to have to explain that one to me because you just lost me on that use of terminology in this context.


"Game theory" is a philosophical argument that attempts to explain all human interaction as a series of contests ("games"), generally speaking. The major problem with the philosophy is that as it gets more specific, it becomes more exclusive. So a theoretical scenario presented in game theory would ONLY apply to an identical scenario in reality.

For instance, the "prisoner dilemma" as presented by our good friend Veers here. Essentially, the "rules" of this scenario are that two people can harm each other equally, do no harm to each other equally, or attempt to have no harm done to themselves while greater harm is done to the other. Read more if you'd like. As a theoretical exercise, it's an interesting construct. However, it is very dependent on one thing: that there is no way for either of the "prisoners" to control whether or not they can be rewarded. As such, for any scenario where a "prisoner" could have full control over their own benefits, the "contest" as presented doesn't apply, making any conversation about it incredibly useless. So, as an example, ransom scenarios in Eve. The captor has full control over the outcome of the situation, and it is entirely up to them whether honoring the ransom or getting the killmail is more valuable. There is no way for the captive to affect the outcome, and therefore the Prisoner's Dilemma is not applicable.

tl;dr - game theory is amazingly useless. Don't bother arguing it.
Famine Aligher'ri
Sheriff.
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#46 - 2014-11-28 02:25:20 UTC
Still makes zero sense in this context because while you can assign value and predictability to those following the rules, you can equally apply the same value and predictability to those not following the rules. Or if you will, those who irrationally value things the game does not value such as fun or your gameplay experience.

So, still losing me here.

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2014-11-28 02:30:55 UTC
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Still makes zero sense in this context because while you can assign value and predictability to those following the rules, you can equally apply the same value and predictability to those not following the rules. Or if you will, those who irrationally value things the game does not value such as fun or your gameplay experience.

So, still losing me here.


That's my point. "Game theory" only works if you follow the rules of a certain scenario. If you don't follow the rules, then the scenario doesn't matter.

Game theory is a joke. Just laugh at it, k?
Famine Aligher'ri
Sheriff.
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#48 - 2014-11-28 02:51:26 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Still makes zero sense in this context because while you can assign value and predictability to those following the rules, you can equally apply the same value and predictability to those not following the rules. Or if you will, those who irrationally value things the game does not value such as fun or your gameplay experience.

So, still losing me here.


That's my point. "Game theory" only works if you follow the rules of a certain scenario. If you don't follow the rules, then the scenario doesn't matter.

Game theory is a joke. Just laugh at it, k?



I responded when you posted. I was responding to the previous example.

I see what you are saying now in response to Veer. But, not so much to me being I was only explaining my one-side of the game and the reasoning I choose the options that I assume are available to me. Outside of those options, there is always more options available to the captive. That's because human is putting too much weight on what options are available outside of a fourth, fifth and hundred option that has not been consider yet such as killing a guard, stealing a gun and shooting his way out to freedom.

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2014-11-28 03:06:58 UTC
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Famine Aligher'ri wrote:
Still makes zero sense in this context because while you can assign value and predictability to those following the rules, you can equally apply the same value and predictability to those not following the rules. Or if you will, those who irrationally value things the game does not value such as fun or your gameplay experience.

So, still losing me here.


That's my point. "Game theory" only works if you follow the rules of a certain scenario. If you don't follow the rules, then the scenario doesn't matter.

Game theory is a joke. Just laugh at it, k?



I responded when you posted. I was responding to the previous example.

I see what you are saying now in response to Veer. But, not so much to me being I was only explaining my one-side of the game and the reasoning I choose the options that I assume are available to me. Outside of those options, there is always more options available to the captive. That's because human is putting too much weight on what options are available outside of a fourth, fifth and hundred option that has not been consider yet such as killing a guard, stealing a gun and shooting his way out to freedom.


Just go with your side of an equation. Everyone else can go with theirs. We'll see what happens :)
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#50 - 2014-11-28 04:53:01 UTC
The point is by failing to reach the nash equilibrium piracy becomes relatively unprofitable and hence scarce. If it is to make a rebound, the pirates themselves must commit to honoring ransoms and severely punish any who do not comply. Then the tackled ships will be able to pay a ransom resting secure in the knowledge that they will in fact be spared. It's that or #bankruptcy.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2014-11-30 15:04:23 UTC
Veers, you're so cute when you're so narrow minded. I know what makes you think piracy in EVE has anything to do with profit, but one day you're going to learn how to have fun, and you'll understand so much more.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Domino Vyse
FeedingMachine
Good Sax
#52 - 2014-11-30 15:52:14 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
The point is by failing to reach the nash equilibrium piracy becomes relatively unprofitable and hence scarce. If it is to make a rebound, the pirates themselves must commit to honoring ransoms and severely punish any who do not comply. Then the tackled ships will be able to pay a ransom resting secure in the knowledge that they will in fact be spared. It's that or #bankruptcy.


Stick to what you know, mate.
Famine Aligher'ri
Sheriff.
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#53 - 2014-11-30 15:56:11 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers, you're so cute when you're so narrow minded. I know what makes you think piracy in EVE has anything to do with profit, but one day you're going to learn how to have fun, and you'll understand so much more.


Well, any trade in EVE needs to make profit. Piracy by far is pretty big on profit, that's what leads to the fun IMHO. That doesn't mean that fun is irrelevant, after all we are all playing a game. Fun should be mandatory for all professions. But, to have any trade in-game with little to no profit to keep people sticky to said profession regardless if it's piracy or not is a shame.

Anyways, piracy can still make a great deal of profit from ship loot at the core without ransom isk. Obviously, pirate corporations have been doing this through brute force methods such as gate camps and blob roams where they destroy everything in their way.

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#54 - 2014-12-01 04:40:57 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers, you're so cute when you're so narrow minded. I know what makes you think piracy in EVE has anything to do with profit, but one day you're going to learn how to have fun, and you'll understand so much more.



Wait.

He thinks space pirates are in it for the money?!?!

Madness!!!!

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
Formerly Known As AC
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#55 - 2014-12-01 04:59:45 UTC
I am mending my sails due to a holiday, but once I recover I shall set sail like normal.

The Artist Formerly Known As AC. 

The terminal end of the digestive system. 

The Best CSM Candidate
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#56 - 2014-12-01 06:34:42 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Mike Adoulin wrote:
I always honor ransoms except, of course, in the case of Veers, who I would gleefully pod and then put his frozen corpse up for auction.

I expect I could probably clear at least 500 million for it.....


Do it Mikee!! Try the elite PvP tactic of wardeccing me like our buddy max did. Just don't send me a profanity laced Evemail after losing, please. Thanks!



For starters im not the CEO...i did not try a dec nor would of thought it doing so. Second i dont know who that mike is. So kiss my Arse!!!
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#57 - 2014-12-01 06:39:36 UTC
CODE Agent AC wrote:
I am mending my sails due to a holiday, but once I recover I shall set sail like normal.

Hope they mend well and you are able to fill them with the hot air of miners.
emylie ramstein
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2014-12-01 10:22:36 UTC
Another example is CODE.'s campaign of slaughtering empty freighters and podding the pilots. On most metrics it's a negative EV action - it might sell the odd permit and help our Charon building arm, but nothing that covers the expense of doing it. Thing is, it's *hilarious fun*. .......

The CODE. is.......

creates an alt to pew pew 20 vs 1 ... that's the challenge lol =
it is said pro "pvp" but lament 20 cata full T2 vs mining barge or exhumed (ship PvE) = lol
it is said pro "pvp" but you never crosses the "solo" in low sec = ......... lol
it is behind an alt while their hands safe and well in PvE or even a farm ....... minner
cancer "WOW" is even spreads Eve and this and shame to see more and more people follow suit or challenge no longer exists ...... it makes me think of this guy who starts 15 on the poor guy ..... but for solo finnir and to hide behind the alt is that it is the finnal that frustrate poor and disrespectful of others who prone a "pseudo code" hiding right behind alt them to avoid taking "risk" on their hands .......... personal ironic then criticize how to play the other playing the way ......
Lord Drakandu
LowSechnaya Shpana
#59 - 2014-12-01 11:03:55 UTC
piracy in null sec is profitable, I tell you from experience
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#60 - 2014-12-01 15:14:35 UTC
Max Deveron wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Mike Adoulin wrote:
I always honor ransoms except, of course, in the case of Veers, who I would gleefully pod and then put his frozen corpse up for auction.

I expect I could probably clear at least 500 million for it.....


Do it Mikee!! Try the elite PvP tactic of wardeccing me like our buddy max did. Just don't send me a profanity laced Evemail after losing, please. Thanks!



For starters im not the CEO...i did not try a dec nor would of thought it doing so. Second i dont know who that mike is. So kiss my Arse!!!


Your corp member decced, and when I responded with a crushing 30-1 victory and gloat e-mail to you, your replied with a profanity laced tirade. Keep it classy Maxxie, no shame in losing to your betters.