Going red on HP, don't fear it

Communications Center General Discussion
145

no, you literally said that there are a few number of optimal solutions, that they are fixed :

So in short were you are wrong :

  • optimization is a never-ending action
  • an optimal solution can become a bad solution later on
  • the values are not static. If your values are static, it means you are wrong.
    example for the conduits : is the salvage worth it ? Is the loot worth it ? Should I bring a friend to increase the gain ? What are the optimal systems to run them ?

If you can’t play eve, you can’t fight.

I actually think optimization in PVE is more fighting. A LOT more than ganking. People have huge wallets and can make choices that do have a lot of impact.
Of course if you think it’s static, without competition, with static results, then … you are wrong !

Indeed, that’s the only thing that I find interesting in Eve.

146

No it isnt.

But given that your come back at any time is “Everyone but me is a stupid”, I feel this is a perfect place to end this conversation.

2 Likes
147

Because you’ve never done it. You’re stuck on the “I can do it so it’s okay”. If you don’t take notes, you can’t compare, and thus optimize.

Also, because you don’t realize that the things worth optimizing are the thing that are the most complex in the game, involving players interactions like market, competition, etc.

Sure one can take his barge and optimize the yield. Then why does he not use faction fit hulk ? What if for a month there is no ganker in his system, will he start using faction modules ?

I think you are mixing the terms “improvement” and “optimization”.

148

I’d slightly disagree with this one - “optimization” in my opinion is a step, step leading towards reaching optimum - the point where optimum is may vary, or even shift over time, but there is always a finite amount of steps needed to be taken to reach it.

The problem Ramona speaks of, starts when someone reaches current optimum, and publish well defined instruction how to replicate it - and people starts to follow those instructions instead of coming to own conclusions. There is no fun in being at optimum, it’s all in the process of getting there :slight_smile:

1 Like
149

Well…

Let’s say it to you this way…

Theory crafter were - in my eyes- always a “special kind of guys” that OBVIOUSLY need psychological help by at least somebody… :slight_smile:

Squeezing out the last bit of dps of a char by optimizing rotations and crap like that and THAN squeeze a little more because it COULD be that something goes is -again in my eyes- something like a mental illness that needs to be cured…

If something works,where is the need to change it to get an additional 0.005% of dps out of it?

Where is the need? :slight_smile:

150

actchually…

There is very little distinction between two terms provided. The issue on communication between You two I notice is the difference between process of optimization, and state of running activity at it’s optimal. :slight_smile:

151

Or maybe that’s our job IRL ? Maybe that ability to rationalize data is what we are good at ?
NVM you are an idiot, why am I answering you.

So as I edited in my previous post : this is improvement, not optimization.
Also, the notion of optimum is not as clear as you make it sound like. It’s gonna be more precise after that :

What they reach is a local optimum, for a specific model.
Does not mean it’s the only optimum.
What’s more, those people will start wrecking down the value of the activity, therefore making this “local optimum” worth less than other “local optima”

The thing is : you can’t prove you reached the optimal unless you’ve explored the whole search space. Which would take some lives to do, even without any patch. And for a static result, which is not the case.

Optimization is the idea that you can always theoretically find a better solution. Improvement is the idea that you can practically and within constraint find a better solution.

Optimization on an unknown field(that is, where you don’t hold all the variables) needs to alternate between the action phases, the evaluation, the modeling, and the decision. Since it needs to keep alternating, it’s by design an never-ending process. Because you can’t find the best solution of a problem from which you don’t hold all the values, and even less when it’s dynamic and you use static data.

152

And you see the optimal as a goal?

Simple example…if i do lvl4 in a navy raven and i can clear a stage in 30 min…why change to a rattle to clear the stage in 25 min?

Why?

Optimization is not for everyone…i for example can do it in 30 min i don’t NEED to do it in 25…

And before someone jumps at me…this was an example…

153

And you HAVE to do “what you are good at” even in a game you play…?

Exactly this is what i mean…

Games should make FUN…they should DISTRACT you from your job and not be a continuation of it…

Exactly this it is not if you do “what you are good at in your job”… :slight_smile:

154

Because.it.can.work.better :stuck_out_tongue:

Some people enjoy that, myself I fall off way before that point - I just have the border where further improvement is no longer worth the effort.

I’d like in here point you out to the definition of word “optimal”.

There is no such thing like “local optimum” for every set of constraints there is only one “optimum”

Now, constraints can shift, for example following your analogies from behind - by one gaining more knowledge of the model upon which we are operating.

Optimal is the goal of the process of optimization indeed. But for me (personally) the fun is the process, not the goal itself.

Personally I’d swap to rattle just for the sake of flying cooler boat :stuck_out_tongue:

buuuut…

point is some WANTS to see how far they can push it - and the process of pushing it is where the fun is :slight_smile:

That’s true, as with any other branch of gameplay :slight_smile:

AH you anderson with yer edits xD

Well yes, but actually no. If you go by the fun version of the process - research and try - indeed proving it will be virtually impossible.

But once one manage to learn whole of current status of the model it is not so difficult to mathematically find and prove that optimal - at least until constraints shift - for example due to market prices shift. But it’s saping all the fun from it :confused:

Improvement is altering solution to be better. Optimization is a process of changes to make your solution closer to the optimal.

The main difference to be honest in here is that “optimal” includes more variables to play with - cost efficiency for example is often taken into consideration when determining optimal, which can rule out better - but prohibitively more expensive solution out.

Well, except variables have been extensively researched and are available to public quite easily. Now sure if you go manually for it - as in start with example and then test it and improve upon it you can make the process virtually never ending - amount of steps will still be finite - it’s just you’ll run out of lifetime before you reach the count :wink:

1 Like
155

Some people are blessed with jobs they enjoy.

I have no doubt Anderson enjoys analysing everything before acting.

Theres no reason for this to be a point of conflict.

She is talking about the game as a whole how she likes playing. And her intellect aids that way.

To ask her not to is like asking me not to make salvage Myrmidons.

1 Like
156

Your process of improvements is made of incremental modifications, therefore it can reach a local optimal (because it assumes the model is continuous within the range of the modification)

Those two definitions are the same. If it’s closer to the optimal, it’s better, and reciprocally.

Your definition of improvement is correct, however your definition of optimization does not fit. In a dynamic system, which Eve is(market, players change), optimization is a dynamic process. In an unknown field, which Eve is(we don’t have all the models, especially since the formula are too complex and need simplifications), optimization is a dynamic process.

I am part of the people who search for those variables. And I tell you, they have not been. Remember the words of Lord Kelvin, as the beauty of physics was obscured by two clouds. People like to walk on the emerged part of the iceberg, while divers will notice something much bigger remains to be explored.

Except that when you accept to do 30 instead of 30, you therefore have no idea what you actually can achieve, and that’s why we have idiots on the forum who claim that doing 100M/h in HS is difficult. They don’t improve, therefore they can’t optimize.
They don’t try to search for better, therefore their knowledge is limited. But they talk as if they knew everything in the world, that they had gone to the limit of the universe and had spoken with God himself. What a bunch of ignorant retards …

157

Self-perception and the reality…sometimes two totally different,even opposite approaches to the truth :slight_smile:

158

That’s not healthy,not at all…

You HAVE to have spots where you can switch off or you will have a heart attack with 40…

159

This makes literally zero sense. Absolute reality does not exist, every one perceives the world and makes his own “reality”. A blind man will not have the same reality as a non blind one. Who are you to say you are not blind to any specific dimension ?
Also claiming that there is one universal truth is a nonsense, for the same reason. Because we all have our own perception of reality, even words which are made to allow us convey our ideas, convey different experiences . eg in my case, optimization is a very specific process, while for other people it is the same as “improvement”.

People who do not have the experience of realizing optimizing things just can’t understand this. It’s not looking down at them, it’s just how it is. So when people judge other based on something they can’t understand, like “PVE is plain and there is no interest in it”, it’s just a proof of their ignorance and lack of intellectual capacities.

160

If you are enjoying it, why would you have a heart attack at 40?

161

There is only ONErelaity…it’s defined by a sub-atomic particle beeing in that specific state at this specific moment…and this is the same for everyone.

Not even the chaos theory denies that :slight_smile:

162

40 bpm is quite low I think. I can understand this can be an health concern.
Just saying.

Except that what you wrote is again complete nonsense.
sub atomic particles are not defined by their state. They are defined by a range of state we can perceive them in, which is not the same as “their state”.

According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, there is no fundamental reality that the quantum state describes, just a prescription for calculating experimental results. There is no way to say what the state of a system fundamentally is, only what the result of observations might be.

1 Like
163

Well ask my dad for example…he goes off into his job 24/7.
He was the “oh i’m here,let me do this and while i’m here i can do that also” kind of type…
And online and reachable 24/7 naturally…

Result first heart attack with 42,second with 45,died at 49…
But he enjoyed and loved his job right?.. :slight_smile:

You see i know what i’m talking about :slight_smile:

164

Did he? Theres nothing that states that in your example.

Now, if sportsmen and women were dropping dead at 40 youd have a point.

Are they?

1 Like