As more as i read in here what Linus is posting as more i remember what kind of person he is, if you dont know he was the one who stole the bombers bar srp wallet and the website and bitched around like a little kid how bad they are not to mention i replaced what he stole almost alone short time later to keep bb running, what i wanna say about is just you can see what kind of mentality he has and the differences between him and me, so im not wondering about his trolling attempts at all…
He sounds like a dude, i’m not really sure what you’re trying to say here?
You might want to get those facts straight. 90% of your post is rumor-mongering based on lies.
- I didn’t steal only the SRP wallet. 5% of the money I took was SRP money. The rest was mostly used for dubious things like buying PLEXes and ships for Nova or it went directly into the pockets of other greedy FCs. The incompetent “FCs” in BB don’t give a ■■■■ about the community, they only care about their own wallets.
- Your “replacement” wasn’t needed to keep BB running. Your money didn’t even end up with BB, it ended up in FC wallets. But keep thinking that you did something good for BB (which died in 2013) instead of just feeding the vultures more easy ISK.
- I had nothing at all to do with the website. Olmeca Gold was the website guy and he rightfully didn’t hand it over to them. He asked for ISK to hand it over, ISK that BB had plenty of, but that would have cut into the personal profits of the FCs and thus they demanded he hand it over for free. The website wasn’t a community asset, it was his personal thing he put his time in and paid for it out of his own wallet with his own hard cash.
- After all that debacle (2 days after they kicked me) these guys you’re defending illegally gained access to Olmeca’s website and committed a felony. A legal investigation is ongoing.
You can keep drinking the koolaid or you can open your eyes and see the shitshow for what it is.
Oh, and all that ISK I took? I didn’t keep anything of it for myself. I gave it away to former BB vets / FCs that were forcefully kicked out because they didn’t want to play along in that scam that BB has become.
This is all very much off topic for this thread though… how do we start a private conversation in here?
we don’t. vOv you’d have to make a thread about it.
is it work?
any links, where i can read more about that?
The value depends on what the alt or alts can do and on subjective value the player puts on the ISK.
You really do not understand this do you? Value in economics is largely subjective–i.e. it depends on the person in question. I might value something you see no value in.
As I indicated it is largely subjective. That is why if we have two players with identical alts one for say PI and the other for cloaky camping one player might pick cloaky camping the other the PI option.
Yes, that is part of it.
Even if the cloaker is an SP farm there is still an opportunity cost, because he could be used for something else to generate ISK over an above SP farming. The SP farming does not negate opportunity cost although it may change the calculus for a given player so that AFK cloaking becomes preferred.
Again, this does not change anything at all. The fact still remains that either that alt, or another alt could be used to generate ISK and that is not possible if the cloaker is logged in at a safe and cloaked.
Yes, he does. Suppose you have a $100 million trust fund and it generates $3,000,000/year in income for you. After taxes lets say you have $125,000/month in income. You can also either spend all day playing video games or go work for say $2,000/month. If you opt to play video games your opportunity cost is the $2,000 in work income. The $125k/month may change the cost-benefit calculus for you, but it does not negate the opportunity costs. It is just that the marginal benefit for additional income from working may not be worth the effort relative to playing video games.
That some people are willing to incur this opportunity cost does not mean it does not exist, it just means whatever benefit they obtain from AFK cloaking is greater than the opportunity cost. Maybe this guy with 25 accounts absolutely loathes grinding for ISK and IRL his income can let him skip it and he can park 25 alts in 25 different systems looking for a fool.
Unfortunately for you I understand very well because I’ve studied probability and statistics, which economics is largely based on, so I’m afraid you can’t use the word ‘subjective’ and get away with it. It’s perfectly acceptable to assign values to subjective circumstances, and as you have studied economics I’m sure you are well aware of that.
I have based the value on general player behaviour, and the fact that players generally are not going to sacrifice a lot in order to AFK cloak. If you dispute this then you actually give a good reason why that is not the case.
I wrote nothing that would indicate one cannot assign a value to something that is subjective. In fact, Bayesian statistics/probability would say that is exactly what you can and should do in many cases. However, you cannot assign a value to my subjective valuation of something. That is, you do not know my preferences when it comes to AFK cloaking and using my alts for that or something else.
“Alot” is subjective. What is “alot” to one player may not be “alot” to another.
But the fact still remains, due to opportunity cost, AFK cloaking is not “free”.
Well by saying everything is subjective and that’s it’s pointless trying to estimate the value of anything you are devaluing your own argument, not mine, because what’s the point talking about opportunity cost if it isn’t useful.
Not in the least. The point of opportunity cost is very useful. It should always given one pause to think, what am I giving up if I do this, especially in a policy discussion. Just recently I saw an article making its way around Facebook about the Universal Basic Income, or UBI. The claim is it would lead to 2.5 trillion in economic growth (for the U.S. economy). I noted that this ignores the notion of opportunity cost and that that money has to come from somewhere. How much economic activity are we giving up to get that 2.5 trillion? What if it is 3.5 trillion or on net 1 trillion? Then the UBI may actually be bad policy.
And when it comes to AFK cloaking, most players are indeed as you suggest, they are not willing to forego the income that their alts would generate. As such the OP’s over wrought burbblings can be dumped in the rubbish heap. In other words why is not every system in sov NS camped? Because of opportunity cost.
BTW, when I said you cannot assign a subjective value to MY views on AFK cloaking that is nothing more than a variation on Mises and later Hayek’s notion of the knowledge problem. That is you cannot make a statement about my preferences because you are not me and you cannot see my preferences. Heck, my preferences could change so even if I told you the value of AFK cloaking to me is 150 million ISK/alt/month tomorrow that could change. Maybe an alliance pops up on the Sov map I really really dislike and my preference ranking switches. And given this lack of knowledge, “AFK cloaking is free” should in absolutely no way be a basis for CCP to make any sort of in game policy decisions.
And again, this does not mean that CCP can’t change the game so AFK cloaking goes away…just that the argument, “AFK cloaking is free” is not a valid argument at all, let alone one on which to base in game policy.
Take myself, I used to rat in a carrier and made over 150mill an hour when I did it, now I barely even log on for anything apart from fleet PVP. I could log on in the morning and go AFK cloak a system, leave the computer on and do what I normally do during the day.
What is the actual cost to me doing this? The opportunity cost clearly means very little here. It’s quite evident apart from the time I lose to travel to the system, I’m not losing anything. This is what I mean when I say negligible, and hence free.
The real problem with AFK cloaking is the comparison between the act of AFK cloaking and the effect you have on other players. While AFK cloaking costs basically nothing but a small amount of time to the cloaking player, it can cost multiple players a lot of time trying to find out the level of danger posed by the enemy player.
Just imagine how many players I could disrupt by AFK cloaking for 1 month in an active system. I spend 20 minutes to fly there, I’m not using the account for anything else so I don’t lose anything being sat there for a month. Every time a new enemy logs on or travels to that system to do something, my mere presence would cause each player to have to find out who I am and what my threat level is, and then decide what to do, which can collectively add up to a vastly larger amount of time than the time I spent cloaking up there. That balance is completely screwed up in favour of the cloaker.
If you are going to log in and AFK camp for just those hours where you cannot normally log in the the opportunity cost is probably very low. However, the usual refrain is 24/7, so not just those hours you normally can’t play, but also those hours you can.
Again the costs are relative and nobody can say this. All they can say is that the opportunity cost, for those who do AFK cloak, are less relative to AFK cloak camping. And that relegates AFK cloak camping to a subset of players–i.e. it is not going to become endemic.
Yes, you do. You lose whatever else you could use that alt on that account for. Maybe for you that cost is “low” but that is not true for everyone. That is the point.
If you want to argue against AFK cloaking, go for it. Just do not use arguments based on nonsense.
Even in those hours I could play the opportunity cost is just as low because I have no intention of using the account anyway, so the time is indistinguishable from the time where I can’t play. The only time I’d ever chose to AFK cloak is if I had nothing else to do with the account, it will be the same for the vast majority of other players, so as you say, the cost is very low.
sure it’s a subset of players, but there is no reason for AFK cloaking to exist in it’s current state, it’s nothing more than a griefing tool.
I don’t lose anything if I have no intention of using the account for anything else. The choice is between sitting in a station or sitting cloaked in a system, not between earning ISK or AFK cloaking.
You provide a proper reason why I would be the exception to the rule in having a low cost, because as far as I’m concerned, trying to push it as a choice of sacrificing income to cloak is nonsense.
So you AFK cloak then?
And this is just for you. It is the height of hubris to assume what is true for you, must be true for everyone else.
And there we have it. How did I know that you’d trot out this tired old argument. The usual response is HTFU, so…HTFU.
You keep missing the point, which is that you could. You could use it for something else so there is opportunity cost. Or are you going to tell us due to some cosmic law or some other such idiocy you cannot use your account for anything else than AFK cloaky camping?
And out of curiousity…which systems do you AFK cloaky camp?
I don’t AFK cloak out of principle. It is not my aim to be a giant asshole.
Provide a believable reason why a low cost is the exception to the rule, otherwise admit that for most players AFK cloaking is low cost.
The benefit to AFK cloaking is larger than the cost. That is all that is needed.
…and the benefit of AFK cloaking to the player is? It’s very safe to assume not much, which implies the cost must therefore be low. So thanks for agreeing with me.
Again it depends on the player. They might hate the alliance they are camping and like screwing with them. They might be hoping for a kill and despise PvE activites. There are more possibilities. The point is that AFK camping merely has to provide some sort of benefit. You may not agree it is a benefit…to you…but then that is not the point. The point is that each person values different things differently.
If you deny this, then you are nothing short of a moron.
I’ve never denied that, but all you are doing is listing niche examples. Generally speaking, players are only going to AFK cloak with accounts they have no interest in actively using anyway, in which case AFK cloaking doesn’t need to provide much benefit. It’s moronic to deny that.