And this right here is why I resisted sending you any data in the first place. You’re not interested in the data as even when you’re provided it you just go “nope”. You don’t add anything constructive to any of these discussions, you just sit there foaming at the mouth and lobbing around insults.
1 Like
You need to provide steps to replicate the data collection process. Otherwise it’s just a picture.
What do you mean not really? I provided you some data and told you the sources and scope. You haven’t bothered to verify it, you’ve just dismissed it immediately. That is clear evidence that you had no intention of ever taking any data seriously.
No you didn’t bro. You provided a literal pic and that’s it.
I notice you dodged DC’s post.
We all know why 
I’ll quote it for you so you see it again.
Hmm…
LOL.
I’ll quote it again.
As in break it down. Show us. Data has to be able to be replicated so I’m sure you can literally say, in greater detail, how you did it right?
I mean I know you can’t bro. I know you made it up
Please at least google research methods next time kthx.
Why? I’ve given you all the information you need to replicate it, and since you’ve already automatically dismissed it as false I have no reason to waste more time. You demonstrated you have no interest in data that doesn’t confirm your bias.
You really haven’t. You just said you “scraped all the ganks” and that’s it. I for example have no idea the actual process involved in replicating your exact data set for analysis. You can either provide the steps, or provide an actual dump of the data, so that people like me can peer-review it. Otherwise we have to try to guess at your methodology, which wouldn’t be a scientifically-valid way to confirm/reject your conclusion(s).
1 Like
It’s enough for him to go ahead and check, and as he’s already demonstrated, he’s not interested in data so there’s no point in wasting any more time on him, eh?
We’re not talking about him, we’re talking about me and other people who aren’t Gix. I’d like to be able to replicate the analysis to see how the relevant figures/conclusions were derived.
That’s all well and good, but that data was specifically just for him. Let’s call it a test to see whether or not he was actually interested in data.
On a more serious note though I am looking at a way to get more reliable data and when I do I’ll be providing a full dump of the data (including kill hashes) for people like yourself and @Scipio_Artelius to peruse.
1 Like
Good luck with it. I’m doing something similar at the moment for T1 frigate loss in highsec. It’s a bit of a headache to get data in that ship class reliable enough to draw valid conclusions from, but I’m filtering multiple different ways to pull as much as possible. Whatever I’m able to get, I’ll share with you for your dataset.
Cheers. You going through zkill or ESI?
All of this would be so much easier if CCP just released all the kill hashes for all kills, then we can be sure there’s no (or at least minimal) gaps.
1 Like
This would destroy gankerdom. We cannot possibly survive in a lowsec environment, we are relying on CONCORD and faction police to protect us.
3 Likes
Okay.
They’ve been catering to the Safety Crowd for a decade and it hasn’t increased player retention.
This narrative is 10 years old.
It’s part of the game. Part of the game that a lot of vets remember fondly (I sure do).
2 Likes
Both currently.
Essentially, to get as much data as possible, for each system in highsec:
- grab the summaries for each ship
- pull the killmail of the last summary in the response from the ESI and check the killmail time
** If 2021 is reached, then stop with that ship and move onto the next
** If 2021 not yet reached, pull the next 200 summaries from the api
** If the limit of 2000 is reached, move onto the next ship - pull all of the killmails from the ESI
- pull the ESI public info for the victim
- add the victim birthday into the killmail as an additional field
- save all of the data together
That’s the only way I can come up with in hindsight to get as much of the data as possible (now also subscribed to all data from the websocket killstream where previously I only subscribed to specific groups).
I expect there’ll still be some gaps at the end, but will see. For most ships it should be ok, but for some (eg. Venture, rookie ships) there will definitely still be gaps.
1 Like
Oh OK, yeah I went the other way. I pulled all of the kill hashes from the zkill daily dumps and I’ll build all the data back up from ESI for a block of time.
Once that’s done for 2022 I’ll attempt to link killmails to their killers killmails where concord is involved and then pull in all the character data (which is continuously scraping in the background anyway).
My only concern is that if noone got on the killmail alongside concord and the ganker hasn’t linked themselves to zkill that’s where gaps could come in. Still working on how to resolve that, but for a start I’ll look to see how many non-war highsec kills there were where the victim was not low sec status to get an idea of how big the gap might be.
At least it’s good to see that you guys @Scipio_Artelius and @Lucas_Kell are trying to build a database from public data.
Ideally you would see a correlation between ship loss+age of “victim”+cargo value, name AND age of attacker(s) and a subsequent CONCORD related kill (related because sometimes other people get involved) in a very brief time frame.
Question, fmi: if an attacker has not linked his ESI to a killboard, are his losses to concord still registered in the public data ? (this would close the gap considerably, although you wouldn’t be certain of the type of ship that was ganked or the name of its owner)
Reason: if neither the victim or the attacker has an ESI linked, it would be invisible.
Perhaps I’m kicking open doors in, let me know.
Only if someone who got on his kill is linked, his corporation is linked or if someone manually added it. I can’t remember if killing blow is relevant to which players ESI it shows up on either.
There’s actually someone in this thread (I think) that mentions ganking in perimeter and not being linked to minimise how much they show on the killboard.
Yeah, if neither the attack nor killer (or their corps) are linked and noone that got on their kills is linked, then neither loss will show up. CCP don’t release kill data without it being linked to someone ESI with the exception of wars which are fully public.
1 Like
I would imagine that someone with the intent of griefing (not ganking) rookies would not be linked i.e., be damn near invisible to everyone but ccp, and stay out of the list of “rookie griefing systems” as well. Rookies aren’t linked normally, that’s the issue for closing that gap.