Yes, because it’s completely unrelated.
You are not making a point, you are showing you know nothing on the topic.
At the same time you did not answer how he did know how to install the game either, so by your own words you are yourself proving my point (which was, ganking is not necessarily hard )
Thank you for proving my two points.
LOL…I asked how he know to gank that specific ship and you call that unrelated…LOL…
More please…keep showing everyone your dishonest…
yeah and therefore you are out of topic.
Knowing what to gank, and ganking what you know to gank, are two different things.
by your own words, you proved my point, thank you.
Need to quote that one…More please…
And so you now go on completely useless blabbering since you have been proven wrong by yourself. Nice.
But yeah, I know you are not used to logic, and that you have a hard time understanding it.
Thank you for proving that “ganking is too easy”. I knew this would be a constructive discussion from the moment I knew you had answered.
More gems on ganking or are are you now purely on ad hominem out of desperation?
Guilty…but thanks to you, proven right…again.
Bye ■■■■■■…
You say this, but all actual evidence says you’re wrong. Suicide ganking and loss of ships doesn’t drive players away. In fact losing ships statistically drives retention. Linked below is some detail of the investigation done by CCP, and why they determined they will not remove suicide ganking.
Here’s the crux, from a Fanfest slide (a presentation by CCP):
No it does not.
CCP literally stated here that your interpretation is wrong. “we can’t say that (…) getting killed is gonna get you to stick to the game.”
Also, this
is wrong. It’s exactly explained why it’s wrong by CCP, too (and it’s basicallyfor the same reason).
What you’re arguing here I’m not entirely sure. Statistical correlation and causation aren’t the same thing and I never stated they were. However the numbers clearly DO NOT indicate droves of players leaving because they were ganked, which is borne out by the exit survey.
You’re building a straw man here, trying to attack something I didn’t claim by suggesting I interpreted something in a way that I didn’t. I didn’t say ganking makes players stay in the game, losing ships correlates to player longevity, and losing ships, including losing ships to illegal action, does not drive drop outs. That is entirely demonstrated in the data provided.
Yes you did. The word “drives” that you use implies a causation.
No it is not. Because correlation does not imply causation, in any way. So if you don’t find a correlation, it does not mean that there is no causation.
You DID interpret it the way I said was wrong.
This is wrong. You are making a causation out of a correlation.
No, nothing is demonstrated in those data.
The only thing that is demonstrated here is : you have no idea how to do logic.
You can have a causation between two elements and not be able to see the correlation in observations, even if you want to and specifically look for it. A correlation is NEVER a proof of anything.
You know , i was thinking , all these w*nkers are probably also Alpha clones , preying on those who are Omega clones…
And since i was getting an Xbox , with 130 games , on Sunday , i could also not resub…
And yet another paying customer , chased away by those who really add nothing to the game…
Not sure about that business model , but aah well i wouldn’t give a toss…
Bye bye…
But you don’t have any evidence at all. You don’t need proof of one thing to exclude another. I think you’re struggling with the logic here.
No evidence of large scale drop outs due to ganking, and a correlation between PvP activity and long term engagement, is enough to kill the hypothesis that lots of players are leaving due to ganking. Because even if there’s no absolute proof of one (which isn’t necessary for decision making by the way), there’s just no evidence for the other.
The hypothesis that ganking is driving away significant players is not supported by the evidence. You can point out that correlation is not causation until you’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t change anything.
So therefore when you claim
You are wrong, because such an evidence does not exist.
No it’s not. If you want to “kill” that hypothesis, you need to PROVE that it is wrong. But nothing PROVES it is wrong.
That’s correct. If you had stopped here, I would have nothing to argue about. Besides the fact that you are making a strawman as the post you quoted does not claim such a thing, instead it says :
, there is no mention of " ganking is driving away significant players". There is just a claim that this will be the case later, which you are right is not backed by any evidence.
Ganking is factually driving away people, and especially noob people.
Ganking is at the same time factually keeping people in the game.
I personally believe that ganking is making the game much healthier than it leads people away, and so “remove suicide ganking from HS” is a bad idea.
But when you claim that data showed that “losing ships statistically drives retention”, then that exactly is wrong, and you are claiming things that are factually wrong. You are making CCP say things they literally said was wrong.
So anyone who dares disagree with you must be a ganker ?
Typical cowardly forum-warrior talk…
Don’t let the door slam on your way out…
@Anderson_Geten - the OP is a clueless person that would probably have trouble doing anything in the game. Even mining is probably difficult for them. (Or, more likely, they are a troll) When Black Pedro told them that ganking was challenging, he was probably referring to the OP and their skills, not yours. Ganking is challenging relative to AFK mining.
No. You can’t have evidence of a negative. Basic scientific principle stuff.
soup of words, unrelated.
What is the negative that you can’t get an evidence of ?
