open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Risk vs Reward is a myth
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author Topic

Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2005.08.02 18:25:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: DrunkenOne
There should be a rule that you aren't allowed to be completely clueless and post sweeping, idiotic statements that you are making without any first hand evidence.

Oh, how utterly dead this forum would be then... :)

ManOfHonor
Minmatar
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2005.08.02 18:28:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: ManOfHonor on 02/08/2005 18:28:11
* prepares to resume the argument *

....

awww f*ck that iv wasted too much of my time on this thread....

Miri, you arnt even worth the words i felt like saying a few minutes ago...

if you cannot see risk vs reward, you must be completly BLIND, and ******ed!


to 0.0 (god dammit im starting again), your 'alliance' risked many many things to secure that space, the reward was the secured space that you now r*pe and take for granted!

research... sure tis unbalanced, but its also rare, iv had a research agent researching for a LONG time now, and hes never offered me anything but money and time consuming missions... the closest risk that is here is the risk in getting the standings to get a decent agent, all the missioning, and NPC hunting, all that time could be wasted, along with the time it took to train your skills for the agent, that too could be wasted... you also run the risk of recieving a BPO you dont want (an unused weapon or ship?)


also, the rewards shouldnt outweigh the risk... potential rewards on the other hand, should..

so what if you run a 0.0 blokade? the risk was that thered be hostiles on the other side, or a warp bubble, to gank you... yr reward shouldnt be a duplicate of the ship you where risking, it should be whatever you ran teh blokade for


anyways im tired of typing....


Miri Tirzan
Caldari
Clan Korval
Posted - 2005.08.02 18:56:00 - [33]
 

Well, in the face of such outstanding arguments I was about to say you were right, but then, all I read was a bunch of flame 'tards that could not put any arguements together in a logical manner.

I started with a concise definition with examples. I conceded that concensual PvP was the only area of the game where I see that there is a true risk vs reward. For the rest....

0.0 alliances ... people were there before the alliances.. the alliance did not have to work to have the space, actually they started stupid wars because they got bored or fell apart because of internal strife

PvE I guess if your a noob and clueless, or just flat unlucky you can get killed by an NPC but it does truely take real effort or a special set up. Look what CCP did for level 4 mission to try and make PvE hard...

So yeah, I have only been playing seen 2003 during the beta's. I have done PvP, mined, chained NPCs, done 0.0, R&D and most anything else but be a pirate, though I have fought a few, and I have not seen risk vs reward. Show me anywhere that I actually have a risk, not a problem to deal with, for a reward, and no, it is not a reward that I get to survive a gate ganking (but I have done that more than a few times too.)

What I do see in this game is that pretty much everything is effort vs reward. The amount of effort needed for a reward goes down as you move from high sec to 0.0 but the risk does not change that much.

Winterblink
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2005.08.02 19:12:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Miri Tirzan
Well, in the face of such outstanding arguments I was about to say you were right, but then, all I read was a bunch of flame 'tards that could not put any arguements together in a logical manner.

Was there a point you were looking for here, Miri? I mean, other than having everyone flat out agree with everything you said, what possible outcome of this thread would you have approved of?

If you were looking to spark a discussion, you were successful. People replied, put forth opposing/alternate viewpoints. A discussion was what you ended up with, but it seemed to me you were focusing more on replying to the more negative-styled posts than anything else.

If you'll accept a critique, your initial examples will be utterly meaningless to most people in the forums, with regards to how they might have anything to do with a point you were trying to make about EVE. You say there's no risk vs. reward, and just leave it at that. How about providing an example of your own of how you would improve an particular aspect of EVE so that it matches what you're envisioning?

Rthor
Gallente
Smugglers Inc.
Posted - 2005.08.02 19:35:00 - [35]
 

I bet there is more worthwhile thread but betting on this is not a risk because it is a certainty.

ManOfHonor
Minmatar
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2005.08.02 19:52:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: ManOfHonor on 02/08/2005 19:52:24
agreed

the friggin 'unerf missiles' threads are better than this one...


you dont even need to READ any of the poster's posts asides from the first one to know what they all say

RUNYOUFOOLS
Dans la visage
Posted - 2005.08.02 19:58:00 - [37]
 

I know of a 3 jump npc trade route that makes you somewhere between 3-4mill all safe space, buying the same goods and traveling 11 jumps and 4 of those are 0.3's will net you about 11 million, and the same goods traveling only 2 jumps but both 0.0 and very camped will gain you about 20million.

I belive this is what you would call risk vs reward.
(in a non pvp manner that is)

tho i agree with many of the other posters that risk vs reward is all over eve, just you cant/fail to see it

Miri Tirzan
Caldari
Clan Korval
Posted - 2005.08.02 20:44:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Winterblink
Originally by: Miri Tirzan
Well, in the face of such outstanding arguments I was about to say you were right, but then, all I read was a bunch of flame 'tards that could not put any arguements together in a logical manner.

Was there a point you were looking for here, Miri? I mean, other than having everyone flat out agree with everything you said, what possible outcome of this thread would you have approved of?

If you were looking to spark a discussion, you were successful. People replied, put forth opposing/alternate viewpoints. A discussion was what you ended up with, but it seemed to me you were focusing more on replying to the more negative-styled posts than anything else.

If you'll accept a critique, your initial examples will be utterly meaningless to most people in the forums, with regards to how they might have anything to do with a point you were trying to make about EVE. You say there's no risk vs. reward, and just leave it at that. How about providing an example of your own of how you would improve an particular aspect of EVE so that it matches what you're envisioning?



What I am looking for is some measurable risk other than you might get ganked by another player, or several player(s) are contesting for a reward which only one will aquire. I dont see those in the game. All I see in the game is the random chance that another player will gank a player (if not concentual PvP) but nothing that quaifies as a risk vs reward type situation.

Take the one example listed above... make a delievery in high sec you get one reward, make it in low sec a higher reward, and 0.0 yet a higher reward. It is ok so far, but here is where the risk vs reward arguement falls apart. There are two cases here... player intervention and no player intervention.

In the player intervention case (gate ganking) there are again two options go around or run the blockade:

If you go around, there is no risk, you just spend more time.
If you run the blockade you have the chance of losing everything.

In the no player intervention case there is no risk and you just deliever the product.

Do you see why I am saying that the reward is not based on the risk? The reward was based on the delievery location but there is no inherent risk in making the delievery there. The only risk in the game appears to be the interaction with other players. Based on that, high sec, low sec, or 0.0 does not make that much difference, where the distribution of the players does for risk. However, since the risk is tied to the players and not to the means of producing rewards.... I propose that Eve is not based on risk vs reward. That arguement I have not seen anyone knock down yet. Yes there is risk in the game, but the risk is unrelated to rewards, it is related to the players.

Rthor
Gallente
Smugglers Inc.
Posted - 2005.08.02 20:56:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Miri Tirzan

Do you see why I am saying that the reward is not based on the risk?


No. Get some sleep.

OffBeaT
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:13:00 - [40]
 

Edited by: OffBeaT on 02/08/2005 21:14:41
man, its got nothing realy too do with risk vs reward in this game for me. its this simple, when i hang or live in low sec/00 systems its always a risk at anything i do. so i am not their too reward myself but too get a better thril out of this game i guess. you can make just as much reward hanging in empire nice and safe as low sec systems. Laughing


Xachariah
Minmatar
Starship Fellows
Slammer's Republic
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:14:00 - [41]
 

Quote:
The only risk in the game appears to be the interaction with other players


You´re telling us the one thing that makes eve so grand, and act like this would be a bad thing.

Khargos
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:18:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Khargos
Edited by: Khargos on 02/08/2005 17:59:05
think about it guys if eve was based on risk vs reward would we have a research system based on luck that can make you billions with no risk?

I rest my case.

certianly there are a few elements of risk vs reward in the game(lowsec having better ore is practically the only example). but overall its effort vs reward. hense agent missions.

Also ore theiving defys risk vs reward because the theif risks nothing and comes away with ore.

If ccp was truly makeing a risk vs reward game this would not be possible.


Quoted because im still right

Xachariah
Minmatar
Starship Fellows
Slammer's Republic
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:22:00 - [43]
 

Quote:
think about it guys if eve was based on risk vs reward would we have a research system based on luck that can make you billions with no risk?

Even in this borked system you find risk vs reward. You can buy the RPM skill, which means you risk 40m isk, but have higher chances of success (Yeah I know, marginally higher, not even worth meantioning, but higher)



Quote:
Also ore theiving defys risk vs reward because the theif risks nothing and comes away with ore.

The problem here are the alts, not the ore-theft. If there were no alts, the ore-thief profession would risk being war-declared. Or if they hide in newbie corps, killed by suicide squads.


Witch Doctor
Einherjar Rising
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:27:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Miri Tirzan

The only risk in the game appears to be the interaction with other players. Based on that, high sec, low sec, or 0.0 does not make that much difference, where the distribution of the players does for risk. However, since the risk is tied to the players and not to the means of producing rewards.... I propose that Eve is not based on risk vs reward. That arguement I have not seen anyone knock down yet. Yes there is risk in the game, but the risk is unrelated to rewards, it is related to the players.


Your whole argument boils down to saying that you do not think risks regarding player interaction should be regarded as risks, yet any way of quantifying a reward in a player-driven economy by default requires player interaction.
I buy a Raven BPO. My risk is the 1B of capital outlay. My reward is some amount of cash flow and asset appreciation/depreciation that in aggregate will exceed that investment. The value of the BPO, the Ravens I build, or the BPCs I sell are all determined by players. If Ravens fall out of favor, or there is a mechanics change that causes players to disfavor them, players are introducing risk into my ability to gain my desired reward.
I buy a stack of Trit, betting that its value will appreciate when level 4 missions come out and people stow their mining lasers. I risk that investment if Trit decreases in value because players determine supply and demand.
Everything in the game is driven by player interaction, and there are real risks associated with any reward you may attempt to gain through those interactions.
You yourself admit it but then say that it proves there is no risk vs. reward in the game. It is more accurate to say there is no risk vs. reward as you have defined it (albeit not clearly), which is all well and good, but ... so what? Why would you want risks or rewards that did not involve players? Play Solitaire if that's what you're after.

Khargos
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:35:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Xachariah
Quote:
think about it guys if eve was based on risk vs reward would we have a research system based on luck that can make you billions with no risk?

Even in this borked system you find risk vs reward. You can buy the RPM skill, which means you risk 40m isk, but have higher chances of success (Yeah I know, marginally higher, not even worth meantioning, but higher)



Quote:
Also ore theiving defys risk vs reward because the theif risks nothing and comes away with ore.

The problem here are the alts, not the ore-theft. If there were no alts, the ore-thief profession would risk being war-declared. Or if they hide in newbie corps, killed by suicide squads.




1. buying a skillbook in high security space is not risk, its expensive, but not risky in the least.

2. sorry m8 but alts arnt going away anytime soon, i hope ccp finds another solution tho.

Kaalise
Doomheim
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:42:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Khargos
1. buying a skillbook in high security space is not risk, its expensive, but not risky in the least.

2. sorry m8 but alts arnt going away anytime soon, i hope ccp finds another solution tho.


It's a risk in that you risk losing your initial investment.

Khargos
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:45:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Kaalise
Originally by: Khargos
1. buying a skillbook in high security space is not risk, its expensive, but not risky in the least.

2. sorry m8 but alts arnt going away anytime soon, i hope ccp finds another solution tho.


It's a risk in that you risk losing your initial investment.

thats an expense, not a risk.

Xachariah
Minmatar
Starship Fellows
Slammer's Republic
Posted - 2005.08.02 21:45:00 - [48]
 

Quote:
buying a skillbook in high security space is not risk, its expensive, but not risky in the least.

The risk is, that you might lose isk without benefit. Where is that different to losing a ship (=isk in material form) without benefit?

Gariuys
Evil Strangers Inc.
Posted - 2005.08.02 22:43:00 - [49]
 

Such a interesting discussion, which basically boils down to how you define risk.

The risk vs reward thing boils down to, the greater the potential loss, or the higher the chance of a loss accuring the higher the reward. How that loss comes about or what original possesion is is subjected to the potential of loss is irrelevant.

As in examples of risk vs reward.

I can mine in a cruiser in 0.9 space: lowest possible risk, lowest reward.
I can mine in a cruiser in 0.5 space: some risk from npcs, slightly better reward
I can mine in a cruiser in 0.3 space: higher risk from npcs and pcs, rewards increase a little again
I can mine in a barge in 0.9 space: risk is same as in cruiser, reward is better.
I can mine in a barge in 0.5 space: i stand to loose more then in a cruiser, and the npc threat is higher, rewards are substantially higher as well.
I can mine in a barge in 0.3 space: I stand to loose more then in a cruiser, and the risk of both npcs and pcs is substantially higher then in a cruiser, but rewards are highest of all above examples of situations.

If you haven't gotten the drift by now... And this concept can be applied to a lot of things in EVE, by no means does it apply to everything, but it's close enough and ever improving.

Deja Thoris
Invicta.
Rooks and Kings
Posted - 2005.08.02 23:09:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Khargos
Originally by: Kaalise
Originally by: Khargos
1. buying a skillbook in high security space is not risk, its expensive, but not risky in the least.

2. sorry m8 but alts arnt going away anytime soon, i hope ccp finds another solution tho.


It's a risk in that you risk losing your initial investment.

thats an expense, not a risk.


In that case losing your ship is an expense, not a risk.

Having your pod popped and losing your implants is an expense not a risk.

Rolling Eyes

MaiLina KaTar
Posted - 2005.08.02 23:20:00 - [51]
 

Avon's point still stands.

Juding by your own definitons Miri, there is very much "risk vs. reward" in the game.

My personal impression is that you just fail to realise because you expect the entire playerbase to play the game exactly the way you do, which is not the case, fortunately.


Hans Roaming
Body Count Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2005.08.02 23:45:00 - [52]
 

Hey I live in 0.0 and low sec with constant risk of being ganked and to be honest I could not handle moving back to empire as I would quit out of boredom in a week.

Oh I've made isk in 0.0 that I would only dream about in Empire.

So to me that means high risk, but high reward in terms of isk but also high reward in being entertained which is after all the whole point of this game.

Miri Tirzan
Caldari
Clan Korval
Posted - 2005.08.03 00:08:00 - [53]
 

Your still missing the point. I agree that other player in the game are the only real risk. I agree that there is a real risk from other players.


There is no reward associated with this risk.


If I get by a gate ganker... I dont get a reward... I just dont get a loss.
If I get away from a gank squad in low sec or 0.0... I dont get a reward... I just dont get a loss.
If I survive a sucide ganker in high sec... I dont get a reward.. I just dont get a loss.

I agree players are the source of risk in the game... where is the reward that comes from not letting them gank you... all I see is you get to keep what you already had, which is not a reward. Thus, no risk vs reward.

Sleazy Cabbie
Posted - 2005.08.03 00:12:00 - [54]
 

0.0 is safer than .4, and its definitely safer to mine in than 1.0 with 10x more profit.

Risk vs Reward in Eve isn't just a myth, it's what keeps noobs herded in "high security" ripe for picking by suicide pirate squads. They figure if empire is that dangerous, 0.0 must be out of freakin control, but its just the opposite.

Between the experienced players enjoying 0.0 and the noobs getting exploited mining veld for peanuts in 1.0 with more risk, you have the stretch of .1 to .4 space that is the most dangerous in the game, this is where people tell noobs to go "to take some risks" but it's basically suicide during most hours of the day.

As far as pirates are concerned, the vast majority are grief players. People don't pirate for money, they pirate for fun, for every Verone that tries to roleplay the "honorable pirate" there are a hundred Ginger Magicians camping .4

2 years ago you used to be able to take a hauler into Venal and have a 50/50 chance of actually making it during prime time, now you'll be lucky to make it past torrinos, heck you might get ganked in .9 by a suicide squad.

The game is alot more dangerous now than it ever was, and its pretty much as dangerous in Empire as it is in 0.0, anybody can just declare you, or suicide gank you, so really who are you safe from.

Anytime someone asks me what they should do for isk, I tell them "don't mine." Just let the price of veld blow up because it is justified, if empire is gonna be blood red then the ores that get mined deserve to be expensive.

The guy buying that newbie's veld is using the trit to build the BS for the guy who camps .4 killing rookieships so f*ck em, let them mine their own veld, just do agent missions and hunt, at least if you get attacked you will have something to shoot back with instead of being the butt of someone else's griefplay for personal enjoyment.

Miri Tirzan
Caldari
Clan Korval
Posted - 2005.08.03 00:26:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Witch Doctor
Originally by: Miri Tirzan

The only risk in the game appears to be the interaction with other players. Based on that, high sec, low sec, or 0.0 does not make that much difference, where the distribution of the players does for risk. However, since the risk is tied to the players and not to the means of producing rewards.... I propose that Eve is not based on risk vs reward. That arguement I have not seen anyone knock down yet. Yes there is risk in the game, but the risk is unrelated to rewards, it is related to the players.


Your whole argument boils down to saying that you do not think risks regarding player interaction should be regarded as risks, yet any way of quantifying a reward in a player-driven economy by default requires player interaction.
I buy a Raven BPO. My risk is the 1B of capital outlay. My reward is some amount of cash flow and asset appreciation/depreciation that in aggregate will exceed that investment. The value of the BPO, the Ravens I build, or the BPCs I sell are all determined by players. If Ravens fall out of favor, or there is a mechanics change that causes players to disfavor them, players are introducing risk into my ability to gain my desired reward.
I buy a stack of Trit, betting that its value will appreciate when level 4 missions come out and people stow their mining lasers. I risk that investment if Trit decreases in value because players determine supply and demand.
Everything in the game is driven by player interaction, and there are real risks associated with any reward you may attempt to gain through those interactions.
You yourself admit it but then say that it proves there is no risk vs. reward in the game. It is more accurate to say there is no risk vs. reward as you have defined it (albeit not clearly), which is all well and good, but ... so what? Why would you want risks or rewards that did not involve players? Play Solitaire if that's what you're after.



While you missed that I do see players as the only source of risk in the game. This is the best arguement I have seen to date. My point is the risk is tied to players in the the risk vs return arguement that is tossed about on why people should have to go to 0.0 to make ISK. What I am pointing out is that the source of ISK is largely tied to either time or location within Eve and the risk is tied to players. These are not interdependent so you can have risk with out reward (which is what the game has now) or you can have reward with out risk (which is also in the game), but there is no place that I have seen risk vs reward. Well, other than your arguements which are, I agree valid, and the ones I do to determine what I am building, selling, etc. But your risk is the oppertunity cost of the strategy you selected, which while I consider a vaild risk, is not what most who chant "risk vs reward" as to why anything done in Empire space is bad were thinking of.

Xachariah
Minmatar
Starship Fellows
Slammer's Republic
Posted - 2005.08.03 00:28:00 - [56]
 

Edited by: Xachariah on 03/08/2005 00:33:12
Originally by: Miri Tirzan
Your still missing the point. I agree that other player in the game are the only real risk. I agree that there is a real risk from other players.


There is no reward associated with this risk.


If I get by a gate ganker... I dont get a reward... I just dont get a loss.
If I get away from a gank squad in low sec or 0.0... I dont get a reward... I just dont get a loss.
If I survive a sucide ganker in high sec... I dont get a reward.. I just dont get a loss.

I agree players are the source of risk in the game... where is the reward that comes from not letting them gank you... all I see is you get to keep what you already had, which is not a reward. Thus, no risk vs reward.




So it is no reward to be able to mine better ore, get higher bounties from npcs and get higher rewards if you´re running missions there?

What exactly do you think should the reward be? 1m isk transfered to your wallet when you get through a blockade?


Quote:
These are not interdependent so you can have risk with out reward

I don´t agree with this one. They depend on each other.

The place, where you can get better ore/ higher bounties / better rewards is the same place where PvP is enabled. This is no coincidence.

You risk being shot by players if you want the better ore. That *is* definatly a risk, by all means. And you are rewarded with better ore. This *is* a reward.

Of course the risk and the reward are not directly connected to each other. The pirat doesn´t sit right to the asteroid. But you risk being shot on the way to the asteroid (the reward).

R31D
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2005.08.03 01:00:00 - [57]
 

Here's another example of risk v reward. 3/10 serpentis complexes.


Risk - practically none unless you are a nublet pilot

Reward - Multiple Gistii items (Shieldboosters, AB's, MWD's)


Sound fair? I've even been able to run this thing in a frig

Sphalerite
Applied Eugenics
Posted - 2005.08.03 01:08:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Miri Tirzan

I agree players are the source of risk in the game... where is the reward that comes from not letting them gank you... all I see is you get to keep what you already had, which is not a reward. Thus, no risk vs reward.



So if you buy an indy full of Zydrine in 0.0, and you fly it back to empire, do you honestly think that every blockade you jump through is a risk without a reward, and that when you finally sell it at the end of your trip, it is reward without risk?

mavskji
Caldari
Posted - 2005.08.03 01:31:00 - [59]
 

risk: wasting time on the intarweb

reward: laughing at the antics of all u crazy NPCs that CCP have create for my enjoyment... <3 CCP

Olivin
Gallente
Aquarium
Posted - 2005.08.03 04:45:00 - [60]
 

Miri,

I am not sure why you bother discussing such sensitive and religious topic. Risk vs Reward is sacred foundation of Eve. It''s like theory of everything - for idiots. You don't know what to say -- you say risk vs reward. You want to nerf something -- you say risk vs reward. You are moron -- simply keep repeating risk vs reward and everything will be peachy.

Olivin.

PS. BTW, my risk vs reward rules are copyrighted. Laughing


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only