nope, they will be contextually correct, but generally wrong.
And that’s the inference of the general case that is an issue.
Remove people, solve problem 
I knew Joe was right. Or not. He liked statistics too I recall…
It’s actually a very deep human issue, that allows to manipulate us through our biases.
But are we human without biases ? Is that self conscience which define the human anything more than a big bias ? Can we logically get rid of humanity biases without killing every man ? Does that term of “humanity biases” even make sense before all ?
Can we live without having the hope to be able to comprehend something real ? Can we accept to be puppets of our DNA, being moved by people with a better understanding as wheat in the wind ?
Is there self awareness when we are manipulated by others ? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy )
That’s why, when people claim “data shows very clearly that X” or “a scientific study showed that X”, you most likely are facing bullsh¡t. Remember, Einstein, Newton, Darwin did not prove anything wrt their theory. They just proposed and explained.
1 Like
You might get flak for these musings, but I do enjoy the philosophical questions they raise
Yeah, philosophy of sciences is a very interesting science. At first I did not understand why it was important, but it gives tools to take some distance and realize (afterwards) when you were wrong (does not prevent to be wrong though 
).
Too bad people don’t get some when younger. Or maybe they would just not have the ability to understand it due to their lack of experience ? Maybe it’s better to let people be wrong all the time, rather than feeding them with science they will not be able to refute ?
(I don’t know.)
1 Like
It is very easy to live in high sec and never get attacked, just have to follow certain limits like not flying expensive stuff that has no tank or little tank and so on although you still can by using instant undock bookmarks and 0 dock bookmarks and so on.
1 Like
The problem with arguing with CODE. members is that we all know the code is BS. They are just using it to justify their game play.
So you are basically starting at a point were reasoned thought is pointless, and pretty much a waste of time.
2 Likes
Feed them with what they already know!
1 Like
I know one good game on Steam. It’s called Frostpunk. You are roleplaying a leader of Ice camp where some people is trying to survive. The game itself throws some bad news to you every couple days to make it funnier.
I remember me playing it first time. I was sure that my camp will die and there is nothing i can do than just make survive a little longer. Just couple more days!
Needles to say that i haven’t played it for like a year after finishing two scenarios. I have enough of issues in RL than to log in and have the same in computer game. 
1 Like
Actually this was just a joke, I don’t even know who is in CODE. or not and I don’t care.
1 Like
I went with ‘FW or specific area for PvP’.
I’m fine with PvP in games that are actually designed to support PvP. The sort where PvP doesn’t just amount to ‘people roaming around looking for easy kills and avoiding the hard fights’, which is what EVE PvP seems to mostly consist of.
If CCP had any implementation of PvP that made PvP easier/quicker to access, and didn’t end up so completely one-sided that, as is often said ‘the first shot determines the outcome’, I’d be more interested.
Of course, then they’d have to change some of the combat mechanics too. I think they’re more likely to just fall back on a lot of rhetoric and slogans, with a few programming tweaks and some balance changes.
1 Like
… right. after working my ass off in a stressful environment called a job I want to come home and… turn on another stressful grind. LOL!!! What a moron. I like to sleep with a machine that also keeps my eye-lids open and keeps a very sharp needle within millimeters of my eyeball too. So fun.
1 Like
Yep. The bottom line is going to reflect this very soon. The pro-blackout ‘elite pvpers’ are going to understand this soon and they will have to live with what they wanted… which is i guess less content??
1 Like
If you want more combat and more PVP then ffs lower the ISK costs of items. BS up to Titan should have their material requirements cut down by 75%.
Increase HP for all ships cruiser and up and lower dmg outputs across the board. Make fights last longer than a Mittani intercourse session.
PVP today is one of 3 things. Jumping into a 25:1 gatecamp, ganking industrial ships, and FC who is supposed to hate the other FC but they all share comms and actually organize fights…
Very little symmetric combat, very little welcomed combat, and too much contrived combat.
If I could mine a BS in a few hours, build it in a few more, I’d be pvping with BS all day long.
think for a minute about carrier/super/titan BPOs. To get one to ideal numbers how much of EVE ONLINE’s LIFE did/does that take? Now think about a HUMAN LIFE SPAN. See how stupid the numbers are? If one was to invest in such a blueprint today there is a very real possibility that the game won’t even exist by the time it is properly researched just to start outputting copies…
COST vs REWARD.
Too much cost, time, investment to just give up ships to large ganks.
Want to increase PVP? get more people into larger ships and make fights last long enough to at least form a cognitive thought before you are half way into structure.
1 Like
That would fall under contrived. But hey, take it all out of context.
Its not out of context, its entirely within context.
You are saying the three most common types of conflict in the history of humanity are insufficent in some manner, but youd like non-contrived fair fights.
Please dont reply, I literally cant be bothered knowing how you justify this bafflingly illogical position.
I don’t think PvP is either a choice in EVE, or the place it may happen.
I went with “Not interested in PvP” not because I’m actually not interested, but mostly because EVE PvP isn’t generally interesting. It’s either totally one-sided or it doesn’t happen. There are counter-examples of course but that is the general case.
IMO it’s a typical case of the kind of MMO’s with the “level 80 guy slaughtering level 15’s” problem. Not saying that is what most PvPers do… it’s just that when open PvP is allowed to be that unbalanced, it ends up being bad for PvP.
Killboards make it worse as people who care about stats make sure they only pick fights they can win. Lack of rewards for lower players to engage with higher players makes it worse again. The higher player is almost certain to get a kill and some drops and some stats for his killboard - plus the satisfaction of winning.
The lower player is almost certain to lose ship/gear/implants, but even if he wins, all he gets is some modules he probably won’t use, which he will convert to ISK, and maybe some bounty reward for a bit more ISK. So a small chance for a (typically) small win of ISK vs. an almost certain loss of ISK/resources he put into his ship.
Oh, and a higher level enemy who will be looking to hunt him down and kill him aggressively, in most cases.
So the advantages and rewards are all stacked for the higher SP higher geared more experienced player, the risk and lack of reward are stacked against the newer guy, there is nothing in the game to ‘even the odds’ (in a general sense). This leads to few new PvPers, a bunch of people hanging around who avoid PvP, and a bunch of old PvPers cursing and swearing that “everybody but me and my hunt group is a damn carebear”.
So, yeah, not interested in PvP in a supposedly PvP game because the actual reality of the PvP environment sucks. For new players and old players both.
1 Like
So only 25% are not interested in PvP, so much for the bears claim of numbers.