open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Economists researching Eve. What next? Naval warfare, sociology, cons?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Navtiqes
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2008.03.25 12:45:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Navtiqes on 25/03/2008 15:36:57
The sucject header may seem crass, but I intended this seriously.

It's tried and proved that there's a tonn of data for an economist to sink his teeth into in Eve Online and the results of his reports can be entertaining for the rest of us to look at. There's bound to be people who disagree, but I enjoy reading it.

But are there more sides of the game that could keep real world experts/Ph.Ds occupied with researching in the same way?

The first to spring to my mind was looking into fleet wars, which would in theory work like naval warfare in three dimensions, but are the game mechanics deep enough to mimic a real world naval fleet war? And is there room for diversity in strategic and tactical calls there? I'd assume "yes", but I have no idea.

Or for comedy, maybe we could get some experts to look into options for carpooling. All that space exhaust can't be good for the universe. If there was public transport through systems which went slightly faster than solo ships and was pretty cheap, do you think people would wait in line to get on one to shave some time off a 30 jump route? :P Imagine pirates chasing after an Eve-Bus on its way into 0.0

Feel free to brainfart in this thread, but please stay on topic.

Tarminic
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2008.03.25 12:58:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Navtiqes
The first to spring to my mind was looking into fleet wars, which would in theory work like naval warfare in three dimensions, but are the game mechanics deep enough to mimic a real world naval fleet war? And is there room for diversity in strategic and tactical calls there? I'd assume "yes", but I have no idea.

Though this would be pretty cool, I don't think so. Why?

EVE Online, as a universe, is a discreet system. This is fundamentally different from the real world where what you can and cannot do is only limited by the laws of physics. This means that the real world is much more open compared to any virtual world unless it was a virtual physics system - an area where EVE is woefully lacking. Remember that the game mechanics in EVE are supposed to be balanced first, fun second, realistic third. For convenience things like projectile travel time are disregarded, as is accidental friendly fire and a couple hundred other things I could think of that would be more realistic when dealing with combat in space.

Areas where lessons can be learned from EVE involve the people who inhabit the universe, not the universe itself. I think that sociologists might be able to learn interesting things from EVE.

Guillome Renard
Gallente
EVE University
Ivy League
Posted - 2008.03.25 13:02:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Navtiqes
The sucject header may seem crass, but I intended this seriously.

It's tried and proved that there's a tonn of data for an economist to sink his teeth into in Eve Online and the results of his reports can be entertaining for the rest of us to look at. There's bound to be people who disagree, but I enjoy reading it.

But are there more sides of the game that could keep real world experts/Ph.Ds occupied with researching in the same way?

The first to spring to my mind was looking into fleet wars, which would in theory work like naval warfare in three dimensions, but are the game mechanics deep enough to mimic a real world naval fleet war? And is there room for diversity in strategic and tactical calls there? I'd assume "yes", but I have no idea.


Been done. By yours truly if no one else.

Strategic thinking and tactical planning have their place in EVE. The problem is that a lot of people want to try classical strategies and tactics that real fleets use and get sad when they don't apply.

Of course they don't apply, as was pointed out by one respondent already: EVE isn't reality. It has its own unique rules and those rules need to be taken into consideration.

That said, there's plenty of room for out-of-the-box strategic thinking. I have a few friends who work for DoD and some others who are just armchair generals like myself. We're getting into EVE, looking at options, and considering forming a Merc force that specializes in this.

It'll take a while to get some skillpoints, but just remember when we hit the scene that you heard it here first.

Navtiqes
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2008.03.25 15:02:00 - [4]
 

Alright. So the naval thing is a bit ruled out as far as simulating real world conditions are concerned.

You're onto something with the sociologists. It reminds me of what that economist at the end of the American Scientist article said. Something like: "It's just a short-span game where people play for fun." And that has to be a massive understatement of Eve. I know PLENTY of times I don't play for fun, and I play anyway. There's an addiction factor, and a bonding-with-others, and a whole crapload of other things going on Laughing

Maybe we could get an FBI expert to monthly look over the more intricate scams in Eve as they get increasingly clever (or dumber). Then he could present us reports on things like the most successful con-artists, the most useless scams and the most destructive ones. Things like that.

Blazde
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.03.25 15:07:00 - [5]
 

If you mean paid expert, an economist can (and does) get EVE mentioned often in light articles in large circulation magazines and newspapers. So he pays his way by generating quality advertising.

Not sure a military academic could do anything along those lines. Maybe a (geo)political commentator could but geting reliable political data in EVE is hard.

If you mean unpaid/amatuer I've seen at least two sociology undergraduates (I think) doing theses on EVE.

Andargor theWise
Collateral Damage Unlimited
Posted - 2008.03.25 15:26:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Andargor theWise on 25/03/2008 15:27:21

What you need for other aspects of the game is informed speculation, as space fleet combat is not something RL experience can apply to.

Read a bit of Larry Niven. Together with Jerry Pournelle, they have demonstrated that the technological innovations greatly impact space combat strategy.

In N-Space, Mr. Niven explains the Langston Field and Alderson Drive as the primary drivers for the development of CoDominium and Spartan Empire naval strategy.

For example, the strong defensive capabilities of the Langston Field drives the need for larger ships, since the Field area is exponentially proportional to the amount of energy needed to breach it.

If the Field didn't exist, weapons as simple as kinetic missiles could too easily destroy ships. Large ships wouldn't be cost-effective, so the navy strategy would be a large force of smaller mobile ships.

Looking at Eve's recent development, this can be seen in the tendency of capitals taking the place of battleships, especially since the HP boost. Maybe reducing HP would render small ships more favorable?

Another thing economically is that navies need to maintain their ships. In Eve, other than building costs, there are no penalties for owning larger ships, which further drives that tendency. Perhaps a maintenance cost should be introduced to reflect this and provide another ISK sink?


The Commissioner
Gauntlet of Omerta
Posted - 2008.03.25 17:51:00 - [7]
 

Yea, the worlds armed forces have been looking into the node crash defense for quite some time now.

pyschosis
Posted - 2008.03.25 18:00:00 - [8]
 

wont happen for the basic reason that Eve is not Simulation of any form of combat. All combat is Eve is approximations and abstractions in the name of game balance and the limits of network technology.

It is however a good simulation of market economy.

As such it has value to economists and social studies but pretty much none to military theory and practice.


Little Katsuragi
Posted - 2008.03.25 18:45:00 - [9]
 

Eve does not have to be a simulation in order to benefit from real world expertise. A lot of the things players experience in Eve have counterparts in the real world. This isn't to say that CCP should hire an expert in every field they can think of, but that if they were to hire an expert in "field x", that person's expertise wouldn't be lost on the game.

pyschosis
Posted - 2008.03.28 21:49:00 - [10]
 

read again and train comprehension to II

it is useless for RL experts to study 'Eve Combat' because it has no bearing to RL combat. Because EVE is a simulation of Market and Economic forces there is value in Economists studying Eve.

Rabbitgod
Beyond Divinity Inc
Excuses.
Posted - 2008.03.29 00:37:00 - [11]
 

EvE economy 101

More or less the eve economy in a nut shell. Simple easy to understand.

Ka Jolo
The Tuskers
Posted - 2008.03.29 04:06:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Navtiqes
But are there more sides of the game that could keep real world experts/Ph.Ds occupied with researching in the same way?


Terra Nova and The Daedalus Project are a couple of websites that answer your question in the affirmative.

Overwhelmed
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2008.03.29 06:37:00 - [13]
 

<---Sociologist.

I may even write a little piece on how beautifully the societies in EvE work together. I'm reluctant to since there would be many implications that you are all wrong.

Overwhelmed
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2008.03.29 06:43:00 - [14]
 

Speaking of which, this would be an appropriate place to post an interesting little blog by Richard Bartle (a "father" of MMORPGs) regarding the CSM:

Originally by: "Richard Bartle"

The panel I was on this morning is now over. As insulting your hosts go, I think I did well (sigh).

Basically, CCP (the EVE Online developers) want to democratise their virtual world because they have so many players that they're being overwhelmed by suggestions for ways to change or improve their virtual world. They want a council of players to put the best ideas to them, with the council-members decided by popular vote. I told them that this wouldn't work because CCP still had the final say (they're gods, not a government), so the players actually had no new powers at all. However, using the word "democracy" would give them the impression they did have power, so it would all end in tears when they discovered that they didn't.

Telling CCP this in private is one thing, but unfortunately I said it on a panel in front of 50 of the hardest of the hard core of EVE's players, which was embarrassing for CCP in a way I didn't really intend. The thing is, it's actually a nice idea and CCP want to do it for all the right reasons; it's just that the way they're planning it, it won't work. I don't want to see them come out of this badly, so felt compelled to tell them where its weak points were so at least they had a chance to address them before implementing anything. It's just hard to say that without appearing to be critical, mainly because it is being critical. OK, so they asked for criticisms they're smart people and wanted an informed debate but still, it's a bit insensitive of me to come here at their invitation at their expense then proceed to ride roughshod over their proposals.

Groan ... Oh well, at least I did manage to tell them how much I admire EVE's design, which I do. Sadly, that was just in private, not in front of the players. They're lucky that CCP is in charge of their world, not someone else, but I didn't get to say that.

Maybe I'll try make the point at the round table this afternoon...

Apocryphai
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.03.29 06:48:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: pyschosis
wont happen for the basic reason that Eve is not Simulation of any form of combat. All combat is Eve is approximations and abstractions in the name of game balance and the limits of network technology.

It is however a good simulation of market economy.

As such it has value to economists and social studies but pretty much none to military theory and practice.




"approximations and abstractions in the name of game balance" - this is exactly what the EVE economy is too.

The economist CCP have hired is a conventional academic, knowledgeable in capitalist economies. EVE is not a capitalist economy in any true sense of the word.

At best it's a limited representation of some small fragments of a strange form of an industrialised manufacturing system with many key components (most notably, labour) missing.

If there's a case for hiring a real-world economist to study such an artificial and limited economy as EVE's then there's an equally analagous case to be made for other real-world experts having something just as useful to offer. Sure, EVE's combat may bear little to no relation to the complexities of real world combat but there are aspects of it that are very similar.

Communication and human interactions for one. Small unit tactics, leadership techniques, delegation of responsibilities, intelligence gathering, logistical issues - all of these things are important in EVE and in real-world warfare.

Ka Jolo
The Tuskers
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:20:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Apocryphai
The economist CCP have hired is a conventional academic, knowledgeable in capitalist economies. EVE is not a capitalist economy in any true sense of the word.


Are there any capitalist economies in the true sense of the word? If you answer yes, please provide your definition of a true capitalist economy and an example of one such.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:26:00 - [17]
 

Although Im no admrial, im in the navy and know enough that, there is stark enough difference between naval wafare in eve and naval warfare in real life.

Navy is exceptionally defensive minded but has the full capabilities of striking first but doing so may weaken the integredy of the defensive formation. The logistics is FAR Heavier in the RL navy than the eve's navy,

Carriers are attack platforms and fleet centers as they can carry so much firepower and has one of the greatest reaches of most naval ships. The only logistics they provide is for the onboard fighters and craft, they do not support smaller vessels usually its the other way around.

Destroyers are rolled to destroy all sea born threats of things that are on the surface or below it, eve destroyers are only threats to ships thier size or smaller.

Cruisers which are almost the same size of the destroyers are doing the opposite defending the fleet from every threat on or above the surface, more mordern cruisers are now in long range support.

Transports/Tenders provide logistics to the fleet providing fuel food parts and ammo.

Battleships used to be the grudgematch ships of the fleet but they where reduced to close range support when the US navy's dominice wasnt challenged with anything near the same firepower since ww2, most are retired or reserved now. Eve ships have never been rolled into support really and have provided a large amount of grudging firepower and are one of the most common ships used to atempt to hold domincance in the fleets.

'Dreadnaughts' havent existed since ww2 but they are basically the same as battleships.

Frigates are just multiple role ships tooled to do many tasks but thier usefulness is quickly being replaced in the navy by cruisers and destroyers.

Although Eve tatics commonly used wont provide a good bit of training for real navy stuff the revese however can be applied and with disciplined captains you can expect a fleet of rl naval experinced to kick some major ass.

As for tech ideas practically everything is being looked into or already done, shields, drones, lasers, railguns already in the works.

Leadership however can be taught here, I can see that being possible.

Apocryphai
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:52:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Apocryphai on 29/03/2008 11:53:56
Originally by: Ka Jolo
Originally by: Apocryphai
The economist CCP have hired is a conventional academic, knowledgeable in capitalist economies. EVE is not a capitalist economy in any true sense of the word.


Are there any capitalist economies in the true sense of the word? If you answer yes, please provide your definition of a true capitalist economy and an example of one such.


I'm not an economist or historical expert myself, but I've always understood capitalist economies to be based upon the concept of surplus value from mass proletarian labour using industrial capital owned by a minority ruling class. EVE has none of those things.

Edit: as "an example of one such" then the economy of the world, you know, Earth, the real one, is a capitalist economy and every single nation state that exists is part of a capitalist economy.

Apocryphai
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:56:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Nova Fox
Although Eve tatics commonly used wont provide a good bit of training for real navy stuff the revese however can be applied and with disciplined captains you can expect a fleet of rl naval experinced to kick some major ass.


Originally by: Nova Fox
Leadership however can be taught here, I can see that being possible.


^^ This :)

LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:58:00 - [20]
 

I would love to see a psychologist and a social science professor take a look at eve. Would be very interesting.

Stakhanov
Metafarmers
MeatSausage EXPRESS
Posted - 2008.03.29 11:58:00 - [21]
 

How do I tackle boat ? v0v

RL cons must find the Eve world a dream , unfortunately for them 3/4 of Eve's scamming methods are absolutely illegal in most countries. However , this could as well be a nice training ground for industrial spying. Thus , when CCP grows large enough they can use their own game to practice RL infiltration YARRRR!!

SoftRevolution
Posted - 2008.03.29 12:05:00 - [22]
 

I've come back to uni to do sociology and I find online games fascinating in that respect.

I've got to a dissertation next year and I've got at least two or three ideas relating to EVE.

Tobias Sjodin
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.03.29 12:30:00 - [23]
 

I'm conducting an academical report partially about EVE-Online in the subject of Sociology. It's a study in virtual realities and their influence over identity, and anonymity in relation to the making of identities and how virtual realities to some are preferable to real realities (touching on people who get addicted to things like this).



 

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