They were watching a presentation on one of the alternate comm channels about hisec law enforcement and whether it should change. Scotty had insisted that they watch it and then spent more of the time watchign Mike for reactions. “I need to know how you respond to something like this . . . if you are serious about running in the election.”
how many heinous acts of criminal ganking* occur on any given evening? 10? 25? 50? 100? 200? Let’s say there’s 200** such acts (which I feel is probably on the high side of any estimate, but I’ll go with this number to keep everybody happy). Those heinous acts account for only 1% of the total highsec population on any given evening.
“Be difficult to be accurate with that sort of number but I’ll not fault him for trying.” Mike murmured.
So, basically, 99% of the highsec population gets along just fine on a nightly basis, yet, according to some, we should continue down the path of the themepark, move towards consensual highsec PvP all for the sake of a mere 1%.
Sounds downright silly to me.
Mike frowned. “Wow. He makes a nice simple argument that completely misses everything, don’t he?”
“So you are in favour of protecting the carebears, making it impossible to gank?” Scotty asked.
“Didn’t say that, said his arguments have huge holes in them. First, he makes the assumption that his 20,000 pilots in hisec are all in space, gankable. We both know that ain’t so as your hangers will attest. That means his number game is already questionable . . . the fewer pilots in space the higher the percentage chance that each FLYING pilot will be ganked.” He pointed at the side chat. “Look, there is the next part of his math argument shot down . . . .
if you quote numbers, please quote the relevant one. In the scenario you are describing the survival chance (experiencing no gank-attempt) follows an exponential decay law. A 1% per day chance of being subjected to a gank means that 26% of all players (all other things equal) will (on average) experience a gank in their first month (30days). After two months this rises to 45% and to 97% after a year.
I will leave it to others to judge if these numbers are high or low. -Chira
“No way the same new pilot can afford to get ganked in a decent ship each night so the damage spreads about. If you assume that I am right about the percentage being low for the ‘flying pilots’ and chira is right about the damage spreading then we are looking at a lot of folks getting hit over the space of a month. Most of us agree that a lot of ganks are on new pilots, people who need an education.”
“I do recall a certain pilot thinking double tanking and mixed guns made a lot of sense.” Scotty said in an innocent voice.
“I did and I eventually learned better. But the thing is, starting out we need better information for the pilots before they run into the math of ganking. We also MAY need more protection for those same pilots before they decide to quit and go back to commercial atmospheric flights.” Mike held up a hand, forestalling Scotty’s answer. “I am not saying that space shouldn’t be dangerous . . . just that we want to retain the pilots and/or give them a fighting chance to survive until they learn better. THEN if they become one of the ‘percentage’ they will have a chance of understanding why it happened.”
“So where do you stand on making ganking harder?”
“Balance . . . it always should be about balance. If the new pilot wants to fly safe he should be connected to recommended fits for frigates that have a solid tank. It should be explained, right one the fitting page, that while this ship might be tougher it is not invincible AND its other roles will be diminished as a result of the effort made to protect it. There could also be a gunship with the same explanation in reverse. ‘You can dish it out but you cannot take it.’ These options would help the pilot see how fittings can vary, would help the battle fleets in quick ‘instafit’ ships for fun roams. I’d wager Red and Blue would love to see quick one stop ship purchases, even if there was a small premium attached.”
“But standardized fits mean the gankers would . . . oh, since the same ship would have options the gankers would have to look to see which fit they were facing.” Scotty nodded.
“Xactly. I don’t think we need to wrap the new pilots in bubble wrap and laws, we need to train them, teach them, and still let them die, now and again. But when they die they need to know it was because they messed up or they had a bad night, not because it was their turn or because the other guys felt like it. If you let them be victims without recourse then you risk them returning to civilian life. None of us want that.”
I teach Math IRL
Poetics article was triggered a knee-jerk response. I had to answer.
But the thing we all need to keep in mind is that CCP is watching a different set of numbers. Player retention. If we cannot keep the new players then the game will die, slowly. If changes need to be made to the game they have to walk the tightrope of . . . change this and the old players leave, change that and the new players won’t stay.
If you don’t think they have tested the edges of that sort of balance then you have already forgotten the summer of rage. You find the edges so you can find the sweet spot in the middle. (if there is one)
Do I want a pvp option flag? Hell no.
Would I like CCP to provide a few better stats so we could actually see what is happening? Hell yes. But I understand once we look at the real world side of a business model the numbers are a bit more . . .carefully managed and guarded.
I want the game to grow, to be bigger and have more people playing it. If we have to adjust a few things to do so, then so be it. As long as the adjustment does not include the addition of Orcs, Elves and some Lich King.
fly it like you won it