I can’t filter the non-suicide kills unless I find a good way to do it with the ESI so this is not a good representation of reality, but it’s still better than yours :
values are fetched from zkb highsec losses excluding NPC kills, then mapped to ESI kills and filtered to remove wardecs.
a monthly value of kills for a group around 2k means it’s wrong (it’s actually above 2k) , eg the barges in 2016-2017 before I remove the wars
all X is the quantity of distinct X so the sum for the kills but the union for the systems.
As you can see, a single system is statistically place of 5 kills in a month.
If you know a way to filter when a KM is suicide ganking I’m all for it.
Am I correct in thinking that that is an average of kills for typical pirate/ganker targets for all of hi-sec? I don’t think an average for all of hi-sec would be useful data here, but I understand why one might go that way. Its not a problem if one is being honest and understands how averages work. But the number requires extra steps some will be unwilling or unable to take.
IDK where to get accurate information but a post here says there are 1090 hi-sec systems.
Next question is how many of those systems hardly have anyone in them all month. Probably about half or more, IDK.
So if you have a well traveled system with 5 kills a month that’s low, but if you have an almost always empty system with 5 kills a month that’s off the charts rampant. But if we consider that half the systems probably actually have near zero kills for near zero population its more like 10 kills spread over 545 systems. Which gives us 5,450 kills per month of pirate targets spread out over actual used hi-sec. Considering that there are only about 22,000 people online at any time that’s pretty damn rampant.
But there is so much to bicker about regarding definitions of terms like piracy, rampant, and high security. And its clear that some people are not going to be fair regarding those terms, doing things like interpreting “rampant” to mean equally or more rampant than in previous years, which is not how the term works at all.
But we all know who has a bias for the truth and who has a bias for their own playstyle so everyone can just be their own judge.
The only way I see those numbers not being rampant is if in fact high security is equivalent to a lawless frontier, even if it is that way because the authorities are present but are useless crack babies.
Of course it is useful. The claim was that piracy is “rampant” in highsec, which means that it must be occurring frequently across all of highsec. If piracy is concentrated in a few systems and not a factor anywhere else then piracy is not “rampant” and the label of high security is appropriate.
So let’s ask what 5 kills per month in a system means. Let’s assume they are equally distributed across days and timezones, and that our hypothetical player plays for an average of 4 hours per day every single day. 5 kills per month translates to approximately one kill per month during that player’s active hours. Not one kill of that player, one piracy kill per month anywhere in the system that player is in. Our hypothetical player may never even be aware that the kill happened. And if they play a more typical schedule instead of 4 hours per day every day they might go several months between being in the same system as a piracy kill.
TL;DR: by the data provided by the anti-ganker highsec piracy is rare and the “high security” label is appropriate.
No it doesn’t. If someone says they have an ant problem in their house it does not necessarily mean that there is an equal distribution of ants in their house. In fact it usually doesn’t. The person probably and usually does, have a bunch of ants in the kitchen, some in the bathroom, and a few oddballs in the hall and basically nowhere else. Ants, like gankers, congregate more in certain places with a few here and there.
There is common parlance on one hand, and either your trolling or lack of understanding of common parlance on the other.
1a : rearing upon the hind legs with forelegs extended
b : standing on one hind foot with one foreleg raised above the other and the head in profile —used of a heraldic animal
2a : marked by a menacing wildness, extravagance, or absence of restraint rampant rumors
b : profusely widespread
See that “profusely widespread” definition? Or “absence of restraint”? Suicide ganking that is restrained to a short list of systems and virtually nonexistent anywhere else is not “rampant”.
This is not about the average individual player experience. This is about the frequency of piracy in high security space in EVE.
If 10 robberies occurred regularly every month in the lavatory of an embassy no one would believe it when the security guards claimed that the embassy was a high security area. But of course it would take time for some people to figure that out.
One defines the other. To say that piracy is “high frequency” or “low frequency” requires considering how often a person will experience it. And if piracy is so infrequent that an average player will be in the same system as an act of piracy once every few months then piracy is not frequent and “high security” is appropriate.
If 10 robberies occurred regularly every month in the lavatory of an embassy no one would believe it when the security guards claimed that the embassy was a high security area.
They would if 100,000 robberies per month occurred in the street outside the building.
And is piracy happening a lot? No. It happens so rarely that an average player will be in the same system as an act of piracy once every few months, and (presumably) be targeted by an act of piracy even less frequently. From the average player’s point of view piracy might as well not exist.
But let’s not miss the fact that you cut off half the definition: usually in a way that is out of control. Piracy in highsec is not “out of control”, it is largely controlled and isolated to a handful of systems and there appears to be little interest in expanding beyond those systems.
I know I am, because my opinion is correct. I’m not sure why you’re permitted to hold such raving lunacy as opinions but the legal system says that’s how it works so I guess there’s nothing I can do to revoke your ability to have yours.
Everyone can make their own decision from there.
Somehow I don’t think they’re going to side with you, the person who thinks that gankers are sociopaths IRL and can’t separate fantasy from reality.
Hey Aiko, I’m thinking of making a policy that every time Renly makes a stupid anti-ganking post I gank a miner but I’m concerned that I won’t be able to afford that many gank ships. How do you guys fund your ganking?
Hey @Renly_Rohan , what do you think of my ganking plan? Every time you make an anti-ganking post another miner gets ganked. We can make you directly responsible for the thing you hate most! I’ll even make sure to tell the miners that I’m only doing it because you made me so they can direct all of their hate mail your way.