These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Damage Control Tiericide

First post First post First post
Author
KickAss Tivianne
Lohengrin Legion
#241 - 2016-02-13 20:09:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ylmar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Its already been shown that the chances of being ganked in a freighter or jump freighter stands at less than 0.1% out of over 2 million jumps.

You keep repeating that. It has not been shown. You don't even have access to the data required to potentially show it. Red Frog Freight statistics do not become representative for all of New Eden simply by you repeating them over and over again.


Feel free to show me another data set gathered over a year and that covers over 2 million gate jumps.


Obviously CCP has the data, and have seen this as a problem. Which is why they are attempting to balance things. Any limited data collection you have done is not the complete data set.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#242 - 2016-02-13 20:11:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
The ships that can't use damage controls should get half the effect of this tank buff.

Pods and shuttles should obviously be exempt from this bonus altogether.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Ylmar
Spontaneous Massive Existence Failure
#243 - 2016-02-13 20:12:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Feel free to show me another data set gathered over a year and that covers over 2 million gate jumps.

I don't have to. Since RFF can only provide data for their own freighter movements, which are by their very nature only a subset of all freighter movements in New Eden, *you* need to prove that the data is a meaningful representation. Since you would need to access the full data available -- which I somehow doubt CCP has allowed you to do -- to offer proof, you're in a bit of a pickle. Blink
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#244 - 2016-02-13 20:14:33 UTC
KickAss Tivianne wrote:


Obviously CCP has the data, and have seen this as a problem. Which is why they are attempting to balance things. Any limited data collection you have done is not the complete data set.


We have the killboards, and this data set. Both show that compared to the number freighters and jumps made by them the number getting ganked is incredibly low. RFF are the largest freighter organisation out there, their end of year results are very detailed and very big.

There is zero evidence any change is needed to freighter EHP.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#245 - 2016-02-13 20:17:14 UTC
Ylmar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Feel free to show me another data set gathered over a year and that covers over 2 million gate jumps.

I don't have to. Since RFF can only provide data for their own freighter movements, which are by their very nature only a subset of all freighter movements in New Eden, *you* need to prove that the data is a meaningful representation. Since you would need to access the full data available -- which I somehow doubt CCP has allowed you to do -- to offer proof, you're in a bit of a pickle. Blink

Where is your proof that they need a buff then.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#246 - 2016-02-13 20:18:32 UTC
Freighters should have always been able to use a DCU, along with a whole bunch of other fittings. Being dramatically limited in fitting to 1 CPU 3 low slots is not interesting or engaging, it's boring and pretty much binary choice. This is however different to the argument of ganker vs gankee balance.

Regarding EHP, no-one was ever ganking the max bulkhead freighters anyway (I'm sure you can post a single KM to say 'look people do' so lets take that argument as written and not be pedantic), so using a max bulkhead freighter to base your EHP changes off is deliberately misleading as to what the real effect of this change is.
Rhamnousia Nosferatu
Out of Focus
Odin's Call
#247 - 2016-02-13 20:20:24 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Feel free to show me another data set gathered over a year and that covers over 2 million gate jumps.

Go to zkill and filter freighter kills in hisec. Then manually remove all the non-ganks one. You'll find out an interesting trend, especially in the light of number of reduced number of active logged-in characters (Hint: the trends in terms of freighter ganking are not downward sloped). All of this is just the kills that are logged, there was a number of accounts which removed their apis from the killboad in order to avoid detection by gankerlookout so real ganking numbers are very likely higher.
Naturally, I expect you to claim that these numbers mean nothing, and that's fine. Wouldn't expect nothing less form you.
Ylmar
Spontaneous Massive Existence Failure
#248 - 2016-02-13 20:20:30 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
There is zero evidence any change is needed to freighter EHP.

Replace "There is" with "I have" and you have made a significant step away from the bad habit of presenting your personal views as facts. I am certain that CCP has treasure chests full of data that made the resistance buff seem like a reasonable idea.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#249 - 2016-02-13 20:22:13 UTC
They didn't actually say there was a problem and no other data is forth coming. But it would be simply idiotic to discount the data from the industry leader concerning thousands of jobs over millions of jumps.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#250 - 2016-02-13 20:22:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ylmar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Its already been shown that the chances of being ganked in a freighter or jump freighter stands at less than 0.1% out of over 2 million jumps.

You keep repeating that. It has not been shown. You don't even have access to the data required to potentially show it. Red Frog Freight statistics do not become representative for all of New Eden simply by you repeating them over and over again.

Actually, there are plenty of online sample size calculators that you can plug any confidence figures into you like and see for yourself whether 2.8 million jumps in highsec in a year is likely to be a representative sample or not.

Here is an Australian Government one for example (just because I'm in AUS, but there are many others):

http://www.nss.gov.au/nss/home.nsf/pages/Sample+size+calculator

So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.

I'm amazed that a discussion of Damage Control balancing has so much talk of freighters and ganking. Until CCP has linked them here, those 2 subjects had absolutely 0 in common. Seems a very strange way to go.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#251 - 2016-02-13 20:28:08 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.

If it were a random sample size it might be.
However in this case we have a sample which is already biased by Red frogs contract rules. Which limit the size/value of the cargo dramatically, and therefore significantly skew the sample.

And even with this limitation which 'makes them safe' they still suffer a 0.1% gank rate, which quite frankly when talking haulers is huge. Haulers can do hundreds of jumps a day, which means that gank rate means a red frog hauler can expect to lose a freighter once a fortnight. And that isn't 'one freighter across all of red frog a fortnight'. That is a freighter per pilot.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#252 - 2016-02-13 20:28:34 UTC
Ylmar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Feel free to show me another data set gathered over a year and that covers over 2 million gate jumps.

I don't have to. Since RFF can only provide data for their own freighter movements, which are by their very nature only a subset of all freighter movements in New Eden, *you* need to prove that the data is a meaningful representation. Since you would need to access the full data available -- which I somehow doubt CCP has allowed you to do -- to offer proof, you're in a bit of a pickle. Blink


Why is it that I am always having to go hunt around for any evidence? And why is it that every single time I do you lot can only ever reply with "no that doesn't count" Meanwhile you lot spout blatant lies that have been shown to be wrong thousands of times and never back up anything you say and then demand I go and find prove you are wrong.

I have given you a data set so ******* large its measured in the millions and you say no no no its not enough, red freight don't count. Why? Why do they not count? Is it because they actually use the mechanics given to them to make themselves 99.9% safe? Or is it because I have dumped a fact so large you simply cant counter it so you just want to ignore it?

Well too ******* bad, I have shown that without doubt freighters are 99.9% safe if you use the tools given to you. I have pointed out that a ship class that was only balanced recently around not being able to fit a DCU does not need a 33% buff to its structure resists to compensate for CCP nerfing a mod it cant even fit. The more you put your fingers in your ears and vomit your baseless comments over this thread the more of a window licker you look. We get it, you are bad at this game and you want daddy CCP to hold your hand and expel an entire playstye from the game. But let me tell you, your grade 1 shitposting is telling and the fact that only one side in this thread is posting numbers and working out what the changes is going to do to fitting is the info that will stand out.

So lets have it, show me the thousands of freighters that are getting ganked per month.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#253 - 2016-02-13 20:30:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Which limit the size/value of the cargo dramatically, and therefore significantly skew the sample.

How much?

Of course, if you want to work at >1 Billion ISK collateral figures, then you can always use the Blue Frog statistics, which show even lower levels of gank risk achieved.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#254 - 2016-02-13 20:30:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Scipio Artelius wrote:
So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.


You are abusing stats. Please stop.

RFF stats are not representative because it would be like doing a survey by calling only women. It doesn't matter how big your sample size if the sample has an inherent selection bias. RFF operates under a specific set of policies, some of which are designed carefully to reduce ganking. You simply can't take their data and apply it carte blanche to freighter ganking in general without a lot more analysis of data we don't have access to.

I'm not saying the RFF number's AREN'T representative. They very well might be (bias, after all, doesn't always cause inaccuracy). But anyone saying they necessarily ARE representative is simply spin-doctoring or ignorant about basic statistical principles.
Ylmar
Spontaneous Massive Existence Failure
#255 - 2016-02-13 20:31:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Ylmar
Scipio Artelius wrote:
So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.

That would be the case if the samples were not taken from an organization that has rules regarding maximum cargo value and other strict procedures - very reasonable, as I mentioned earlier. I would like to hear from CCP Quant or colleagues on this matter.

EDIT: Lena Lazair beat me to it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#256 - 2016-02-13 20:34:02 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:

So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.

If it were a random sample size it might be.
However in this case we have a sample which is already biased by Red frogs contract rules. Which limit the size/value of the cargo dramatically, and therefore significantly skew the sample.

And even with this limitation which 'makes them safe' they still suffer a 0.1% gank rate, which quite frankly when talking haulers is huge. Haulers can do hundreds of jumps a day, which means that gank rate means a red frog hauler can expect to lose a freighter once a fortnight. And that isn't 'one freighter across all of red frog a fortnight'. That is a freighter per pilot.


They can expect less than 0.1% chance of loss over 2,786,739 jumps through highsec gates.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#257 - 2016-02-13 20:35:39 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lena Lazair wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.


You are abusing stats. Please stop.

RFF stats are not representative because it would be like doing a survey by calling only women. It doesn't matter how big your sample size if the sample has an inherent selection bias. RFF operates under a specific set of policies, some of which are designed carefully to reduce ganking. You simply can't take their data and apply it carte blanche to freighter ganking in general without a lot more analysis of data we don't have access to.

I'm not saying the RFF number's AREN'T representative. They very well might be (bias, after all, doesn't always cause inaccuracy). But anyone saying they necessarily ARE representative is simply spin-doctoring or ignorant about basic statistical principles.


They are representative of how safe you can make it to operate using the current mechanics. I will also pointt out the 0.1% is the number of failed contracts, this includes contracts failed due to late shipments and so forth.
Crackforbreakfast
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#258 - 2016-02-13 20:36:58 UTC
Personally I think the change will put a lot of older fits back up for debate, as it should. Furthermore it prevents a DC being an almost mandatory module which allows for more variety in fittings, can only be seen as a good thing in my opinion.

On the subject of freighter EHP (given this seems people's biggest point of opposition, even bulkhead fitted freighters at this moment can be quite easily killed relative to their value; for example https://zkillboard.com/kill/51998102/, imo this pilot was just waiting to be ganked but that aside.

Added to this is the fact that not all freighters seem to be able to fit bulkheads these days when moving low value high volume goods, such as ore/cheap minerals, this being an issue since CCP created the ability to fit freighters but lower their base stats.
A solution to this would be that people who put up public contracts take this into account and start splitting them into smaller stacks to follow an unwritten rule of a maximum m3 per contract, this will of course never work as it means extra transport costs for the poor average miner, especially with CODE farming them on top of that.

The problem is that it at this point in time is viable to gank almost any freighter carrying some form of cargo, due to the relative low cost of a swarm of Catalysts at roughly 8 mil a pop and the risk free action of bumping a freighter in a Machariel. The standard hull resist change will give the run of the mill freighter pilot some well deserved protection whilst still allowing high value targets to be profitable for ganking.

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#259 - 2016-02-13 20:37:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ylmar wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
So if you want to work out roughly how many jumps in highsec each year total for haulers there might be, then calculate a sample size, at max it will be around 20,000 jumps needed for a high level of confidence. 2.8 million as a sample size is exceedingly good.

That would be the case if the samples were not taken from an organization that has rules regarding maximum cargo value and other strict procedures - very reasonable, as I mentioned earlier. I would like to hear from CCP Quant or colleagues on this matter.

EDIT: Lena Lazair beat me to it.

Then add in the Blue Frog Freight statistics and the risk of being ganked that they achieve drops further.

CCP's data is not going to be any more accurate than what RFF/BlueFF/BlackFF publish. There's is a subset of the CCP data and totally representative of the level of risk that they achieve.

What risk other lazy pilots expose themselves to is going to be different, but then that's a philosophical issue on whether they deserve the game to save them, or they should be responsible for their own safety.

Happy to discuss sampling all day and put as much evidence as needed to demonstrate the relevance of data. The difficulty will always be gaining common agreement on what is important to consider and while some will see relevance in some stats, others will see no relevance.

It will always just come back to whether the data meets preconceived ideas, because the ability to objectively look at the issue is clouded by personal feelings about ganking that mean we all have a bias. That's why data is valuable, but also why data will always be dismissed if it doesn't help an individual persons argument.
Stefan Silviu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#260 - 2016-02-13 20:40:21 UTC
best tiericide ever

best parts of it are the base 33% base hull resists on all ships and making it pasive module