Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It is loss aversion.

A risk averse person will look at the following situation very differently:

0.25 chance of losing 1,000,000,000 ISK,
0.75 chance of gaining 750,000,000 ISK.

A risk averse player might jump right into that situation. After all the expected outcome is 312,500,000 ISK. If you could play this game 1000 times (so the law of large numbers kicks in) you have 312.5 billion ISK net!

A loss averse person on the other hand wold weight that loss somewhere around 2x what it actually is, to them it would look like,

0.25 chance of losing 2,000,000,000 ISK even though the actual loss is only 1,000,000,000,
0.75 chance of gaining 750,000,000 ISK.

Now, the gains are only a meager 62.5 million. The loss averse player hates losses and will pass up situations where there is a loss even when there are substantial gains to be made. So even though the net pay out would be the same, 312.5 billion ISK, they'd actually see it as just 62.5 billion after 1,000 trials.

I contend that Mike is loss averse. And that not intended to be an insult. Lots of people are this way. But if a player is loss averse they are, IMO, going to see cloaks as horrible things when used for AFK cloaking. No matter how low the probability of actual loss is, chances are they will not undock.

Also, even the risk averse (which we all are to varying degrees) tend not to like uncertainty--i.e. risk that can't easily be quantified. To me this is where subjective probabilities can come in and help out tremendously. Assign some subjective probabilities and devise a way to update that initial probability assessment.

For example, if you are ratting between say 0500-0800 you can go to the players killboard and start using killmails. This method allows you to re-evaluate the probability assessment. Any kill in that range will increase the probability, any kill outside that range will decrease it. One could even set up a spreadsheet in Excel to do this quickly with as many killmails as you'd like.

Really, I just don't see the problem here. If you are loss averse stay in HS, that is the best place for you. If you are not and are fine figuring things out on your own or with the help of others and want to try NS...go for it. But don't expect the Devs to change things in your favor just because you don't like losing stuff.

Mike,

When you un-dock you basically agree to non-consensual PvP in general. And in general this is true for cloaked ships. If I get caught at a gate camp...I die. My cloak provides only limited safety. When I undock I will not be able to activate my cloak. Again, limited safety. Even in LS with a smart bombing gang of BS my cloak will provide very little safety.

You have picked what is known as a special case and want to make sweeping changes to cloaks. And that is not reasonable. This is why IF the Devs make cloaked ships scannable with the OA I hope it is for ships that have been at the same spot for a period of time, say 20 minutes

Also, here you are going on-and-on about immunity, but one of the major NS/LS "assets" is local. Poeple set up intel systems built around local. And local is totally immune from attack/subversion. You want to keep your "immunity" but want to take away other people's "immunity" Never mind that the "immunity" of local is sweeping, and the "immunity" of cloaks is and extremely limited case.

People still crying over "someone cloaked in here and I can't rat!"
Leave the cloaky AFK as is. Worst thing that will happen is you will need to fight someone

I have removed several post and those referring to them for the above reasons. Please keep the discussion civil.

That's what you are claiming when you say local is an asset for one side and not the other.

It's a condition of the playspace. You may as well claim the color of the nebulae as an asset, because certain hulls might blend in better.

Far greater? You mean that second of load time?

Beyond that it's effects are identicle. You are mutually informed of each others existence.

Then we are talking even footing so long as you can be hunted as well... Face your hunter or leave space.

You don't have to like it. The difference is the ability to be offensive and proactive, or defensive and reactive.

Going on the offensive is how you force actions on another. Being defensive is having it forced on you.


All I have ever argued is that cloaks are too safe. If you are in space you are supposed to be vulnerable to other players actions. Cloaks are not.

You are litterally trying to support the position that you should be safe, but your opponent should remain vulnerable. That's not balanced. It's either ok that everyone be safe, or no one.

One more time. You're not addressing the issue of a docked lowsec player. The present an IDENTICAL effect and whatever works to deter them or protect form them, also works in null.

So based on "safety", I suppose you want a "kickout of station" button too?

And no, you've argued repeatedly that it's not fair you need to do *something* to look out for yourself whilst you rake in isk and over fist.

The philosophical issue relates to if someone "should" be undocked, in hostile space, afk, and safe. Or the 4/4 for short.

In EvE, the answer to that "should" be no.

The projecting issues relate to afk cloaky camper players projecting their perceived need for absolute security and no risk onto others.

For example defending their need for absolute security by pretending someone else wants absolute security.

The practical issue relates to implicit threat or "pretty big psychological effect" as Fozie calls it. The nature of sov null sec has alliances and corps using 2 techniques to remove implicit threats. One is by removing access to staging bases used by cloaky camper support by expanding sov beyond what an alliance can reasonably use to create a buffer zone. The second is blueballing by ordering PvE players to dock up if reds or neuts are in system. In effect dont play until the reds go away.

Neither compensating techniques give desirable game play.

The sum of all this means that 4/4 is going to be phased out of EvE.

Entrenching on a lost position is silly. Seeking compensation based on a sense of entitlement is also silly.

The thread is over for all practical purposes. EvE wins.

Yeah he can, you can watch him in local.

Which is the only way you even know about him, for that matter.




That's all it's about. You crying because you want it to have less effect on you.