Who is painting who with a broad-stroked brush now? Believe it or not, I’m starting to warm up to you. Still am, in fact. I’m starting to respect you enough to the point of being honest enough to tell you that I don’t take this proposal seriously enough to give it 100%. I take it seriously enough to put some effort into it - that is, it is not my intention to simply smear you or the proposal. Don’t expect me to give you a 20-page counter-counter-counter-counter-counter-point, because I’m not going to. I’m going to take a sewing needle, and I’m going to poke the balloon, and I’m going to let all the air out. That’s all I’m going to do, because 1. that’s all I care to do and 2. that’s all it takes.
It’s interesting that you say this because in real life I’m a learning specialist and have a background in computer science (and several other backgrounds I won’t go into), so I’m all-too-familiar with logic and rhetoric and rules of argumentation. “Having made ignorance my profession” - I should pin this somewhere.
Just because I don’t care enough to give it my all doesn’t mean I’m ignorant, just saying. Stop talking about world government corruption, it’s just a game, and my caring-factor here is not extrapolated elsewhere. In debate, we call this “slippery slope”.
I didn’t speak on his behalf. I pinged him as a prior participant of this thread to speak TO him not FOR him. Don’t take that out of context. This is one of those ZING!ers that earns you no points on the debate stage.
Oh, and anecdotal evidence (that ONE guy!!!) doesn’t count for horse ■■■■ unless you’re trying to prove the existence of something, or something trivial like that.
Damn, better put down all those mathematics computer programs I’ve written and mathematical software I’ve worked with and better stop tutoring computer science and calculus and discrete mathematics and grad students. Maybe I should get my math-savvy paper unpublished, too, from an academic journal.
I might as well also put away all the fitting modeling and theorycrafting I’ve done for EVE, as well as the custom fitting tools I made for myself. Oh, and I need to take down my EVE Standings Effort Calculator and Change Caculators since they use calculus and I can’t math.
First of all, I didn’t say that it was a foolish fit, I said it was a bad fit. Bad as opposed to good, which are relative terms (as in there are better alternatives the said fit relative to cost and skill levels), as opposed to “sufficient”, which is a more absolute standard (or at least relative to “getting it done”). 150mm Scram Atron is sufficient - is it good relative to alternatives with comparable costs and skill requirements? Falls short by a wide margin.
Second of all, I didn’t make that “less merit” statement at the Atron, I made it at your idea. I’m starting to think you’re taking things out of context on purpose.
You’ve demonstrated that the idea works, yes, I will not take that away from you. Not once did I say your idea doesn’t work. What I have said, however, is that your idea is not better than the status quo - rather, it is significantly, categorically inferior.
Do not take this as a personal attack
Yes, your idea is as appetizing as a plate of horse ■■■■, but that commentary only applies to your idea, not to you. Don’t take it personally.
If EVE was implemented the way you are proposing it, and one day someone wrote a thread saying “hey, instead of having three different CPU/PG pools, maybe we should have just one and it could be shared between the three lots” - then that would be a significant improvement to the game in a very, very, very, very, very great many respects (would you like me to enumerate them all? it would be a very long list and I don’t feel like doing that much typing) in addition to making the game simpler (both as a player experience and code-wise), and CCP would jump on that and code EVE into the way it is now as a major upgrade.
It’s fascinating that you’re pushing this because this is in the complete and total opposite direction that is going in real life IT and Engineering. In IT and Engineering, systems are gearing up for scalability and elasticity so that resources can be pooled, dynamically allocated, and deallocated as needed. Separate systems with their own unshared resource pools are prone to underutilization or overutilization (PG/CPU isn’t allowed to be overutilized in EVE, obviously, excluding use of fitting enhancements), both of which are problematic - having a single resource pool as is the case with existing technology on Earth and in New Eden (yay for Lore!) is the smart way of doing things. It makes systems easier to manage, efficient, more cost effective, easier to design and build and grow.
In real life, would you rather have three weak systems that cannot pool resources, or one strong system with the combined resources? (Single point of failure and concurrency do not apply in this context.) The winner is clear.
