Thursday, February 20, 2014

What is RvB?

RvB is a bunch of fun-loving dudes who just want to have fun and blow up stuff, right? Well, there are two alliances, Red Federation and Blue Republic constantly at war with each other and having free for all stuff. They also have other, random wars to have more fun. Let's check these wars shall we! Before 2013 I didn't see any wars with damage listed, all had zero kills, probably EVE did not gather the data back then. Below you can see every single war from 2013 that Blue Republic choose, either as aggressor or as ally to anyone but Red (that's self-defense). The Red wars are mostly duplicates of the blue wars. Next to the names you can see the billion ISK destroyed by the sides, as it's written in the in-game war history of Blue, in order of date (earliest first):
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Ivy League;41;33.3
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation;144;20
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Baphomets Face;0;0.1
  • War: THE GOD SQUAD vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. THE EVE RAW RANGERS ALLIANCE;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. DMIC II;0.2;0
  • War: Ghost Headquarters vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;1.5
  • War: TinkerTown Terrorists vs. Goonswarm Federation;2.5;2.8
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Cascad Corp;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. The Ponderer;0.6;0.1
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Terra Investment Fortune Fund;0.3;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. ITC Crowd;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Chicken Wings.;0.9;3
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Neutral Talent;0.9;1.1
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Brave Collective;18.6;15.4
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Terrans Group;0;0
  • War: Frozen Shipyards vs. Pro Synergy;0;3.4
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Sleepless Psychos;0.3;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. CASH Bonus Checks;0.2;0.1
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Digital Phenomenon;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Jagged Alliance 2;0;0
  • War: Flaming Moe Consortium vs. Rum Affiliated;0;0
  • War: Illuminacog Corp vs. NEOPHYTE.;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Gemini Federation;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Heavy Fox Corporation;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Invertrust;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Dream Of Imature Trialists;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. The Research Institute of the Asernat Charante;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Tornado Solutions;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Oracion Seis;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Etchion;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. The Vanguard Sentinels;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Indicium Technologies;0.1;0
  • War: Imperium Galatica vs. V Enterprises;0;0.1
  • War: Pizza of the hut vs. Elucidated Brethren of the Ebon Knights;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Scientific Industrial Development;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. semper videlis Corp ;0.1;0
  • War: Call for help vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance;0.7;0.2
  • War: Pulsar Consortium vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance;0;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance;0;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance;13.1;2
  • War: EVE Alliance 123129078 vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance;0.3;0.3
  • War: Flagship Tester Inc vs. New Eden Advanced Research;0.1;0
  • War: P I R A T vs. New Eden Advanced Research;1.2;0.2
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. New Eden Advanced Research;30.2;14.2
  • War: HADAIKUM vs. New Eden Advanced Research;0.1;0.5
  • War: Warmongers vs. New Eden Advanced Research;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Oblivion LLC;0.2;0
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation;9.9;4
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels;0.4;1.3
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. EveryoneVersusEveryone.com.;1.3;1.3
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. THE VERS;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Isk Fountain;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Logictika Group;1.1;0.4
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Chicken Wings.;0.1;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Snucklefruts Corp;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Pod Pop's Corp;0;0
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation;1.5;1.7
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Poor and Unemployeed;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. What goes in this box;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Nerd Rage Eleet;1.7;0.4
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Telestrion Holdings;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. DARK UNI0N;8.3;1.7
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Orbital Systems;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. S I L E N T. ;0;0.2
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. The New Lunar Republic;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Fool Mental Junket;0;0.1
67 wars with 390B ISK destroyed by the participants. That's nice. They attacked small and large, just as they claimed. Nothing to see here. Or is it? Let's order the wars according to the sum of ISK destroyed on the sides. Now we find something strange: 95% of the ISK was destroyed in only 11 wars. The rest of the 56 wars had barely any damage. Let's see the remaining wars:
  1. War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation; 144; 20
  2. War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Ivy League; 41; 33.3
  3. War: The Marmite Collective vs. New Eden Advanced Research; 30.2; 14.2
  4. War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Brave Collective; 18.6; 15.4
  5. War: The Marmite Collective vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance; 13.1; 2
  6. War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation; 9.9; 4
  7. War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. DARK UNI0N;8.3;1.7
  8. War: TinkerTown Terrorists vs. Goonswarm Federation;2.5;2.8
  9. War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Chicken Wings.;0.9;3
  10. War: Frozen Shipyards vs. Pro Synergy;0;3.4
  11. War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation;1.5;1.7
War 7 is a spillover from War 11, as D A R K Homeworld corp joined the DARK UNI0N alliance, let's merge these. War 3 is actually self-defense, as New Eden Advanced Research was member of RvB - BLUE Republic between 2013.11.19 to 2013.11.22, so it's an RvB part. War 2 and 4 are against the newbie-teaching alliances EVE University and Brave Newbies, can be classified as "having fun with fellow newbs". War 9 and 10 I cannot classify, but both hold less than 1-1% of total ISK destroyed in Blue wars, so let's add them to the other low-kill wars. What's left?
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation; 144; 20
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance; 13.1; 2
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation; 9.9; 4
  • War: TinkerTown Terrorists vs. Goonswarm Federation;2.5;2.8
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation;9.8;3.4
These 5 wars hold 62% of the damage of the non-self-defense wars of Blue. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance has 1 system Sov in Vale of the Silent, surrounded by PBLDR systems, so it's a Goon alt-alliance. The rest are the Goons themselves. So the RvB wars are either "for fun with newbies or themselves", "self defense", "dummy war with pitiful kills" or "defending Goonswarm Federation".

RvB didn't start defending Goons with the POCO treaty. They started it years before I cared about Goonswarm, so their official campaign title is a lie. RvB was always defending GSF. RvB was probably created by GSF to protect them from highsec wardeccers (which totally can't harm Goons). They are recruiting "pubbie shitlords" to do the masters bidding and cover their activity with millions of 1-5M frig kills and dozens of dummy wars. They even managed to scam CCP into suggesting new players to join them as politics free newbie-friendly alliance. Clever plan that worked for years. Until now.

The 2014 wars are mostly our wars and RvB claims that they keep them because they don't like me, and normally they don't have such wars. Let's see them:
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. POCO Loco Holding;0.4;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Breast Augmentation Charity Society;0.5;0.5
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. School of Applied Terror;0.3;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. koshaku industrie;0.3;0
  • War: TeraFormers vs. Shinn Enterprises;0;0
  • War: GREAT GOON HARVERTERS vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Citadel investments vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;0
  • War: Eden's Warden vs. -Entropy-;0;0.1
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. angelride RDS ;0.3;0
  • War: Huff Technologies. vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;0
  • War: S-o-S vs. Goon Capital ;0.3;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation;73.2;6.2
  • War: Darwins Lemmings vs. Goonswarm Federation ;33.3;19.5
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goon Capital ;12.8;9.3
  • War: Caldari High Prime vs. Goon Capital ;0.3;0
  • War: F.I.T.H. Industries vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Tails Of Dragons vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: RvB - BLUE Republic vs. Perimeter Industries ;0.3;0
Their sum value is 157.6B, and it's only 1.75 months passed. If this rate goes on whole year, the 2014 war total voluntary war value will be 1080B, which is a nice increase from 345B of 2013 (remember that the New Eden Advanced Research war was classified as self-defense). This is why I'm sure that RvB won't be able to keep this performance up.

98% of the 157.6B fell in 3 wars (Note: Goon Capital is the alt alliance of Mynnna that placed the replacement POCO when we killed a Goon one):
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation;73.2;6.2
  • War: Darwins Lemmings vs. Goonswarm Federation ;33.3;19.5
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goon Capital ;12.8;9.3
I think it's enough proof for everyone who isn't happy to be the puppet of the Goons to immediately leave RvB.

Oh, I promised the terms of Lemmings for peace: don't join as allies in wars against nullsec powers or attack anyone currently at war with any nullsec power. But you won't comply do you?

Update on commenter demand, the wars from the perspective of Goons. Here are all the wars since 2013. Jan. 1 where Goons were attacked, in the same order as in the in-game war list of Goons. The wars with RvB helping Goons are bolded:
  • War: Failbear Refuge vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;0
  • War: Lfod's Ratting and Salvage vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Tails Of Dragons vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: F.I.T.H. Industries vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Bee Squashers vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Darwins Lemmings vs. Goonswarm Federation ;33.4;20.6
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation;74.8;7.9
  • War: Caldari High Prime vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: TD Corps vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: S-o-S vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Huff Technologies. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Pursuit of Happiness vs. Goonswarm Federation;0.1;0
  • War: United States of Winning vs. Goonswarm Federation;0;0
  • War: Tieran Sovereignty vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Citadel investments vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: 31ST Reliables Division vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.2;2.1
  • War: GREAT GOON HARVERTERS vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Pursuit of Happiness vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.3;0.2
  • War: Elevated Labs Inc. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Grr Goonswarm vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.1
  • War: The Outlaw Pirate Beasts vs. Goonswarm Federation ;4.2;0
  • War: Pod Repo vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.9;0
  • War: 31ST Reliables Division vs. Goonswarm Federation;1.2;1.2
  • War: DARK UNI0N vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.3;0.3
  • War: Guy Fawkes Trust Fund vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: HotzenPlotzGang vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.8;0
  • War: Tactical Carebear Squad vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.5;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Goonswarm Federation ;6;0
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.5;1.8
  • War: Shadows of Vorlon vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation ;9.9;4
  • War: Super Duper Space Alliance vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.1;0
  • War: SwEaTy ArMpIT RaIDeRs vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.1;0.1
  • War: House of Freedom vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.2
  • War: The Lost Legion.S vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: SUDDENLY FAILSHIP EXPRESS vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.4;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Goonswarm Federation ;7.2;0
  • War: EVE Alliance 123129078 vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.5;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;11.1;0.1
  • War: M.H.S.F.P.T.C.P.G.A.W.T.D.O.T.G.T. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Pulsar Consortium vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: FWSchool vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Umbrella Neo Corp vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: E C L I P S E vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.1;0
  • War: Blood Solution vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Raging Bull Inc vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: P I R A T vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.5;0
  • War: Mastercard. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.1;0
  • War: Pod Repo vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.5;0
  • War: Freight Club vs. Goonswarm Federation ;6.6;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;6.4;0.6
  • War: Forsaken Asylum vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.8;1.8
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation;3.2;0.2
  • War: Quality Assurance vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Suicide Therapy vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Notice To Terminate vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Let Us Sleep vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Targaryen Protectorate vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Earl Grey Teabaggers vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: TEMPLAR. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.6;0
  • War: Hunter Killers. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Quality Assurance vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Red Dawn Mercenaries vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.4;0
  • War: Ghost Division Germany 14 vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.3;0
  • War: Pathfinders. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1;0.1
  • War: Pathfinders. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Tightroping Headless Chickens vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Where's the Ketchup vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Koenig Technologies Inc. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: AnitGoons Alliance vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.8;0.4
  • War: Unprovoked Aggression vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.2;0
  • War: Prelate Sends His Regards vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Mentally Assured Destruction vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.1;0
  • War: Facepalm Authority vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Game 0f Tears vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.2;1.1
  • War: Disposition Matrix vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Seductions. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.5;0.3
  • War: The Wings Of Pestilence vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.2;0.2
  • War: SUPER GOOSE SQUAD vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Money First vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Sloth Team Six vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.3;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;7.3;0.5
  • War: Mentally Assured Destruction vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.1;0
  • War: Rebirth. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.9;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;9.9;0.9
  • War: True Heretics vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: True Heretics vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: THE FINAL STAND vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Trial-week-corp vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Inter-Galactic Outrage Division vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.3;0.9
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;18.2;0.4
  • War: Forsaken Drones vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Anarchy. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;6;0.4
  • War: Oblivion. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.3;0
  • War: Smith of Celestial vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Kazakhstan Space Program vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Confederate States of Eve vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.4
  • War: The Last Chancers. vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.1
  • War: German Freakshow vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1.7;0
  • War: The Broken Mechanics vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.7;4.7
  • War: Mortis Angelus vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Noir. Mercenary Group vs. Goonswarm Federation ;4;0.7
  • War: THORN Alliance vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.4;2
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;8.3;1.8
  • War: TinkerTown Terrorists vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.5;2.8
  • War: Ghost Headquarters vs. Goonswarm Federation ;2.4;1.6
  • War: THE GOD SQUAD vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Next Level Alcoholics vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation ;144.2;20.1
  • War: Vendetta Mercenary Group vs. Goonswarm Federation ;4.7;0
  • War: Old Noob Enterprises vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: TAXU vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.5;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;5.7;0.1
  • War: Bladerunners vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.8;1
  • War: The Orca Syndicate vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.5;0
  • War: Whores in space vs. Goonswarm Federation ;8.1;0.1
  • War: TAXU vs. Goonswarm Federation ;1;0
  • War: Statera vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: NukeBroS vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.4
  • War: German Freakshow vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0.6;0
  • War: AVS WES vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0
  • War: Double Dippers vs. Goonswarm Federation ;0;0.2
You can see that these wars are in two groups, at the end of 2013-early 2014 and another group around April 2014. So Lucas was indeed right: RvB doesn't protect Goons constantly. Just when Goons have assets or operations in highsec. My bad.

The big question is of course "how expensive these wars were for GSF and allies" and the answer is 264.4B. How much ISK did GSF and allies lost in highsec wars all together? 423.4B. So 62% of GSF war losses happened while under protection of RvB. Granted, it's not 100%. Bad, bad pets!

69 comments:

Art Hornbie said...

RvB has lost its raison d'etre.

A real shame for its leadership to destroy such a fine institution. I'd hate to go down in history with that on my shoulders.

Anonymous said...

Put some dates on those wars please, otherwise analysis of your claims cannot be performed.

I *can* already tell you that you got an important part of the puzzle wrong though - the nature of Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance. Not understanding that undermines your conclusion.

Lastly, your terms are ridiculous. We couldn't go to war vs BNI again, nor do ganked roams.

LR

Gevlon said...

They are ALL the wars from 2013, do the clickie-clickie yourself if you want extra data.

Anonymous said...

Clickie clickie - are those links? If so they are broken/not showing up.

Aaanyway, onward to the rebuttal. You've done a good job parsing most of those wars and boiling them down to see what they are and which one are "interesting". Unfortunately, that is where you stumbled. As I said previously, I'm not just going to say you are wrong, I'm going to demonstrate why.

War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation; 9.9; 4
War: TinkerTown Terrorists vs. Goonswarm Federation;2.5;2.8
War: D A R K Homeworld vs. Goonswarm Federation;9.8;3.4

These are all POCO wars, and thus are in the Nov-Dec period.

War: The Marmite Collective vs. Blohm and Voss Shipyards Alliance; 13.1; 2

A bit of research would have told you what Blohm and Voss was. It's not me to tell whom these folks are, but your conclusion is wrong. Of course you are correct that Blohm and Voss is in nullsec with the Goons' permission, but you completely misunderstood why RvB joined that war.

War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation; 144; 20

This is the one I really would like to see the date. I strongly suspect it is again a POCO war.

So what do we have here? All very recent action, all of it either POCO war (due to our mutual POCO defence pact) or wars of a defensive nature. This isn't "always"!.

Yet, based on these recent conflicts, you have determined that RvB, an organization that started in 2009, *was created as a goon high sec arm*!?!?

The goons HAVE a high sec arm - it's called Miniluv. Another less known arm is - gasp - the new order, a group you supported a while ago did you not?

These dark conspiracies are built on flim flam. You reach logical conclusions based on flawed premises - ergo not sound at all

LR

Anonymous said...

Well just think about it. A new player tries about eve through some extended free trial link an acquaintance gave him, after hearing about some huge epic battle.

He starts playing the game, and thinks it's pretty neat. He notices he can't do much with a trial account, so he throws down $15 for a full account.

The guy that gave him the free trial, give him half of the plex he got as a thank you for subscribing. Telling him to buy some frigates with the isk and go have fun. This newbie hears that RvB is a great place for newbies to have fun with frigates and learn PvP, which he hears is a pretty important thing to learn.

So he joins RvB, and he's having a bunch of fun, getting all sorts of fights and learning a lot. Most importantly he learns how to listen to the FC, shoot the primary, etc.

Soon though, he's out of the 300m isk he was gifted. He scrambles to find a way to make isk, but he's not sure how to go about it.

Then a blessing! Someone who identifies themselves as a recruiter for Fidelas Constans approaches them and tells them that fcon is looking for PvPers like himself to join them in nullsec. He talks at length about their ship replacement program and all the money making opportunities available in nullsec. This is the solution to all his problems! He'll be able to PvP as much as he wants without worrying about running out of isk.

Except it's not that simple. The isk making opportunities are mostly ratting, and fcon takes 15% off the top of that to fund the alliance. There's also occasional mining, but while the miners make a bit the supercapital producers make way more.

Also the SRP doesn't apply fully to the small gang fights this newbie enjoys, only to ~strategic operations~ which consist mostly of waiting around on titans, shooting structures, and watching capital ships.

He pay not really enjoy these ~strategic operations~ but if he doesn't go on enough of them and click enough "pap links" then people yell at him for being a non participant, and he even risks being kicked out.

Now you may be wondering why I mentioned fcon, instead of some other big CFC alliance such as RAZOR. The answer is because RAZOR recruits from Eve University instead.

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous: they are copied from the in-game war list. Clickie, clickie there.

But just for you: War: The Marmite Collective vs. Goonswarm Federation; 144; 20 is 2013/03/30 - 05/25 Definitely not POCO.

dobablo said...

Why would a random RvBer quit because they are serving a Goon cause. I imagine the average member is mostly apolitical is probably quite happy that they are getting into a real war where there are things to shoot. If they were political is would be a choice between Goon and Gev and I imagine that you rank quite high on some hit list.

Gevlon said...

They joined for "fun, organized, cheap PvP" and not for "being massacred by unfun gankers to slow them down protecting someone else".

maxim said...

The data presented is sufficient to say that RvBs actions have been supportive of CFC interests in 2013.

We don't know if that supportiveness is intentional, in the form of master-pet relationship, or is just a result of two of the more important player entities in Eve independently finding themsevles going with the same larger flow.

Gevlon is trying to discern the nature of this larger flow by essentially saying that a group of high-isk players in CFC are trying to maintain space-importance by - among other things - actively incentivising other players to waste their ISK potential on low scale PvP. And RvB is being instrumental to that goal by supplying said low scale PvP.

The thing that encourages Gevlon to stick with his picture is the notion that RvB is actually spending it's own resources to protect CFC interests, whereas CFC is not exactly keen on blowing it's resources to support RvB. Thus in the larger flow picture, RvB is subservient to CFC.

If people want to "prove" that RvB is not subservient to CFC, and that RvB apparently protecting CFC interests through 2013 is only a result of it protecting it's own interests, they need to provide an alternative explanation of why RvB would be interested in spending its own resources on defense of assets not owned by RvB or relevant to the cozy highsec war that goes on between Red and Blue.

Anonymous said...

Very nice food fore thought.
And again, Gevlon is bringing forward facts that you can cross-check if you'd care (and show them to be false in this blog if you'd care). While his antagonists put forward some cloudy allusions to some obscure nature of Blohm and Voss, but still leave the reader guessing. Which, incidently, is NOT an "important" piece of the puzzle IMHO. If you would leave B&V out of the equation, we would still see that a considerably large portion of RvB war activity benefitted - Goons.
And who here would put all his stuff on a wager that Goons would not have done such a thing...?

nightgerbil said...

Gevlon did you read FallenTitans post on your thread? In case you missed it over 2 parts:

Gevlon,

I’ll make this public, since you’ve decided to make nothing private.

I'm not one for forums so you probably won't see me post a response again, because I actually have a community to manage in game. Apparently you run some blog site too but i'm yet to waste my time on that.

You seem to state a lot of things that RvB leadership are planning, yet you've never asked me, or the other RvB CEO a single thing. I’m probably one of the most chilled easy-going guys you will meet in EvE, so don’t be afraid to simply talk to me rather than spouting haphazard rumours that make you look silly.

I must take my hat off and thank you for creating so much extra content for RvBers. Purple fleets help to solicit the community bond between both teams and they are a hell of a lot of fun (Stick a spy alt in them and enjoy our coms).

RvB obviously thoroughly enjoys PvP combat, and we take all the targets we can get. If you were not such an imbecile at the start, you could have come to us and said "hey would you like to help us shoot *Insert Any Alliance Here* for a week?" and we might have listened if it gave us good fights. We don't really care who we shoot, because we have no null-sec sovereignty to defend or tangible treaties to break. But now after your terrible management of what should have been a diplomatic war, you are left with fewer options and more opposition.

I don't really mind Marmites anymore, we have some fun tussles and they provide our pilots with lots of third party war-target content when some of our pilots want to fly together as purple and bring out the fun ships.
We lose some ships to them; they lose some ships to us. Very surprisingly, RvBers have grown to enjoy Marmite combat because we get to use fun ships that we wouldn’t normally like to explode 10 times a day in normal RvB combat. I'm sure Marmites enjoy the combat just as much, given that we have some silly new members who don’t know how to use instant-undocks (You are welcome Tora). I’ve learned that they are great at camping stations and trade routes; it’s not my idea of fun but good on them for doing what they do best. They also have some of the most entertaining forum trolls that I’ve witnessed.As for a 'deal' with Goonswarm, it's nothing but a mutual agreement and never will be anything more. You know, the kinds of things that two sensible and intelligent organisations perform. After our POCOs were acquired, the conversation went basically like this "If you want to help defend our POCOs, we will help defend yours. There's no obligation to come and we know there are times that you won’t want to if you have other stuff to do".
Goons know full well that RvB likes to remain as neutral as we can. But this mutual agreement makes too much sense for both RvB and Goonswarm. It originally started during the POCO implementation into EvE. Both Goons and RvB wanted as many POCOs in The Forge region as we could each get, it would be silly to spend half the acquisition time fighting each other, so we said we will try and aim for different systems… and we did just that. The whole conversation was over before you could drink a glass of Quafe. was hesitating whether or not it was necessary to help Goonswarm in the last POCO assistance. I was actually leaning against it, to try and find some new third party war-targets… but the response from our members suggested that they really enjoyed the last POCO defence fleets and roams, so as long as RvB members are having fun I don’t mind RvB entering the war again if Goonswarm needs assistance (they really don’t even need our help). If RvB members did not enjoy it, we would not do it; some of the members who lost expensive pods were the most vocal advocates for continuing the war. We laugh at them for losing expensive pods and they laugh too (Just probably not as much).

nightgerbil said...

Part 2

The killboard statistics which you seem to post. We simply don’t care. Posting an RvB war report is like posting a BNI war report. You seem to be the only person in New Eden who does not know that RvB is not playing a risk-averse PvP game here. The only time we post a killboard report is if we win against people who are trying to play an ISK efficiency game, because that stuff both amuses and surprises us.

I've come to the conclusion that you have kept this entire charade going purely because you like the attention... Honestly, that’s my current thoughts. Otherwise, I can not see the benefits from your standpoint.

By trying to crush this 'evil Goon regime' you've gone ahead and proven that goons are not bad guys at all, and at the same time... proven what a rude ignorant person you can be.
The way I see this;
Marmites win. They get their same wars AND get paid.
RvB wins. They get more things to shoot, for free.
Goons win. They keep their POCOs.
Gevlon, you might even win at this, because you get the attention you seem to crave.
It's your new alliance members which I feel sorry for. They appear to be fighting your personal vendetta against Goonswarm… Which has now suddenly shifted to RvB for some nonsensical reason. I could say more on this but I will give you the benefit of the doubt. I will make the precarious assumption that outside of this pointless propaganda posting that you are a sensible and reasonable person.


All I can further say is that you have a lot to learn when it comes to the area of PR and running a community appropriately. If you would like to respond to me Gevlon, I’m happy to listen to your private chat in-game or on Skype.
Otherwise your future public posts and questions directed at RvB command will sadly be falling on deaf ears.


Thank you again for all the PvP content,
FallenTitan
Blue Republic CEO

Gevlon said...

@Nightgerbil: muhaha! I wish I could see the face of the guy after today's post.

"you could have come to us and said "hey would you like to help us shoot *Insert Any Alliance Here* for a week?" is probably true. Shame on us that only the Goons (and Blohm and Voss Shipyards) took on that offer.

"We don't really care who we shoot" as long as he is hostile to our master.

On a more serious note. It's possible that this FallenTitan is just a dumbass (he actually admits that "I'm one of the most chilled easy-going guys you will meet in EvE") who really did not see what's going on right under his nose. Probably Professor Clio was the Goon contact who approached him once a month saying "hey, I found a war that might be fun, shall we jump on it"? And he said "why not" without having a list to realize that it's yet another "defend Goons from Marmite" war.

I mean there are hundreds of thousands of wars in New Eden. What's the chance of randomly finding the Marmite vs Goon wars?

nightgerbil said...

Possible Gevlon. I'm reading up on wormholes atm. Can't join yr darwins as I only have 733k skill points. Im annoying miners atm and planning a few mining hit and run ops in my venture into wormholes and low sec. If I do it right I think I can get enough kermite to buy catas to blow up folk in 0.5 for a lot of laughs. I plan to fraps it for my future entertainment.

Lucas Kell said...

@maxim
"We don't know if that supportiveness is intentional, in the form of master-pet relationship, or is just a result of two of the more important player entities in Eve independently finding themsevles going with the same larger flow.

Gevlon is trying to discern the nature of this larger flow "
No, he isn't. He already has a conclusion. He had that conclusion before there was any data. He will find any an all data that supports his conclusion and ignore all data that goes against it. For example, he ignores the times RvB have attacked members of the CFC. The thing is you could take certain subsets of data and pretty much prove anything if you already have a conclusion in mind, but that doesn't make the conclusion correct. If RvB are pets of the CFC based solely on data that supports that while ignore all data to the contrary, then so are BL, PL, and even TEST, as they can all be shown to have at some point had cooperative dealings with the goons. I'm pretty sure you could even dig up enough killmails with Marmite and a CFC member on it to prove that Marmite are a CFC pet if we ignore everything that proves they aren't.

Gevlon said...

@Lucas: sorry for my carelessness. Please help me and point me to the wars where RvB attacked CFC elements.

I believe I processed EVERY SINGLE highsec war since 2013 Jan 1 and they are listed here. Could you give me a screenshot or other info to find these RvB-CFC wars?

Lucas Kell said...

@Gevlon
"sorry for my carelessness. Please help me and point me to the wars where RvB attacked CFC elements.

I believe I processed EVERY SINGLE highsec war since 2013 Jan 1 and they are listed here. Could you give me a screenshot or other info to find these RvB-CFC wars?"
Thanks for proving my point. Not all wars go through the war dec system, in fact, most people who want to actually damage goons don't bother since they know they just have to fly into null, where wars are meaningless, to attack them. Why would someone pay half a billion a week and give them 24 hour notice just to go and attack them in a place where combat is allowed?

Honestly, can you not see how ridiculously flawed your arguments are? You've announced a clearly biased conclusion, then you bang on about it, finding any scraps of data you can to support it ignoring anything that goes against it. And for what? So RvB line members can say "what a pleb", since they actually know what's going on, since they are actually there. This whole propaganda thing, you're no good at it.

Gevlon said...

@Lucas: so your point is that RvB is protecting GSF in highsec, but in nullsec the fearsome roams of RvB are killing Goons?

Instead of arguing over this (pretty unlikely) situation, I go and get the whole 2013 (= before Lemming) RvB kill database. Then we'll see how many Goons died, how many Nulli and so on.

Want to bet on the outcome?

nightgerbil said...

Hey lucas hows the soli trade hub project going? might be an inappropiate place to ask, but curious and wouldnt if/how I could help? I'd link my first sucide gank, but I think thats really only of interest to me. Btw any readers who dont play eve? yeah thats really the best bit: killing yrself killing someone else. Welcome to eve.

Lucas Kell said...

@ nightgerbil
"Hey lucas hows the soli trade hub project going? might be an inappropiate place to ask, but curious and wouldnt if/how I could help?"
It's going alright. It's running dormant at the moment while I work on building some out of game tools and while null stuff is on full swing, but the station has broken into the top 10 for orders and is 17th for value across the region at the moment, and transaction rate is drastically increased.

As for helping, live and trade in Solitude out of Maire. The main issue is getting enough people to keep the market cycling. As Solitude population is relatively low, both supply and demand are an issue. I'm focussing on supply to start with then I'll be aiming to increase demand down the line. A promising sign is that competition has appeared a few times now, which is very healthy for a thriving market.

Anonymous said...

Gevlon is a scientist. If you want to demonstrate he is wrong about something, you need to present third party data, an analysis and a conclusion. I think he is a reasonable fellow. He will accept and consider proofs. Coming here with anecdotal data, hunches, your world view, etc. is not going to get far with him.

Anonymous said...

You know RvB has the most lax recruitment policies. If RvB are such goon pets, and hold CTAs to rep POCOs, there would be evemails and all sorts of communications with the line members requesting fleet form ups and such.

Why not just put an alt into RvB and post such mails, chat logs, and comms?

Anonymous said...

@ Lucas Kell

Back your claims with numbers please. It's not enough to say "you're wrong".

I believe you had said in some earlier posts that you have a number of years experience in statistical analysis. Saying "I can't be bothered to do your fact checking" is the chicken way out.

@ Gevlon

Thanks for the post, and I'm glad you are going to search through all 2013 RvB kills instead of leaving this post incomplete (with only Highsec wars data).

@ all

There will always be a difference between the data and the interpretation. Love him or hate him, Gevlon attempts to get beyond the interpretations and look more closely and the numbers and how to manipulate/maximize playing the game according to that. This is the one of the "secrets" of his trading successes.

Anonymous said...

Instead of arguing over this (pretty unlikely) situation, I go and get the whole 2013 (= before Lemming) RvB kill database. Then we'll see how many Goons died, how many Nulli and so on.

You presuppose that "attack" equals "kills" but sure, lets see how you twist this analysis.

Anonymous said...

this little recruitment story has 2 flaws...

1: The goons often recruit newbies, people completely new to EVE

2: This story *might* have made sense a year ago, when being in RvB was a pure isk sink. But now you can be in RvB and have access to isk-making opportunities. And because of the POCO money (why we have a defensive pack with the goons) we offer much more hull replacement than we use to.

But please, don't let facts get into the way of another grr goon conspiracy!

LR

Anonymous said...

@LR
"The goons HAVE a high sec arm - it's called Miniluv. Another less known arm is - gasp - the new order"

Thanks for showing Goons have multiple highsec arms, including unsuspected ones (I wasn't aware about the new order being one, thanks). Including RvB which has been waging wars for Goons in highsec. I didn't suspect that either. No wonder RvB barely reacted when they were called "Goon pets", they were already used to the fact.

Lucas Kell said...

@Anon
"Gevlon is a scientist. If you want to demonstrate he is wrong about something, you need to present third party data, an analysis and a conclusion."
Well clearly he's not. I'm not sure ho much you know about the process of proving a scientific theory, but you don't just dump down a handful of data that supports your claim and state "if nobody can offer evidence why this isn't the case, it's FACT.". There's nothing to disprove because his analysis is flawed. He takes only high sec war data and claims that as evidence that RvB are pets of goons, even though a cursory glance at the killboards would show you RvB members killing goons in null sec (where wars don't matter).

@Anon 2
"Back your claims with numbers please. It's not enough to say "you're wrong"."
I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through pages of killboard stats and years of historic diplomacy to try to prove something to a conspiracy theorist that has no interest in the facts. By next week he'll have moved onto some new propaganda to try to make members jump ship, just like how last week it was "Goons are using the CFC!".

"There will always be a difference between the data and the interpretation. Love him or hate him, Gevlon attempts to get beyond the interpretations and look more closely and the numbers and how to manipulate/maximize playing the game according to that."
He doesn't at all, lol. He's just trying to find data to back a ridiculous claim, because he feels that if he can convince people these things are true, masses of people will quit RvB/the CFC and he can dance around victorious. It's just not that easy to effectively use propaganda.

Anonymous said...


I sit with my pop corn as a neutral watching this debate unfold, but I have to be honest; I am becoming less and less impressed with the CFC/RvB 'nothing to see here defense'

@Lucas you state:-
"Gevlon is trying to discern the nature of this larger flow "
No, he isn't. He already has a conclusion. He had that conclusion before there was any data. He will find any an all data that supports his conclusion and ignore all data that goes against it"

I agree with you that Gevlon has already reached his conclusion, but we already knew that; He made it abundantly clear by funding costly wardecs against CFC, and by extension RvB.

I also agree with you when you say he is doing a fine job of finding data that actually does support his conclusion. You on the other hand allude to all this "data that goes against it" yet have failed to actually produce any of in amongst your perpetual walls of text.

Oh and trying to derail the thread with nightgerbil with waffle about some trade hub is just weak.

Like I say I was neutral, but after this shabby defense from CFC (and also RvB leadership) that consists only of rhetoric and denial I am inclined to look Lemmings up in game.

@Lucas et al - you are doing a fine recruitment job for Lemmings, I am sure Gevlon approves!

Anonymous said...

question to some dataminers.
is there some raw zkb id list export for like kills and losses page?
I rather don't want to go trough thousands of pages each providing only 50ids per 200kb+ file. feeding them into /raw/:zkbid like for example https://zkillboard.com/raw/36936262/

zkb doesn't zip and I'm to derp to see some other way to lower the bandwidth footprint.

Phelps said...

even though a cursory glance at the killboards would show you RvB members killing goons in null sec (where wars don't matter).

Which you have never bothered to actually SHOW, rather than simply ASSERT without any evidence.

That's why I'm leaning towards Gevlon. You have every characteristic of a disinformation agent.

Phelps said...

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through pages of killboard stats and years of historic diplomacy to try to prove something

Didn't you JUST say in the SAME comment that it only takes a "glance"? Now it takes "pages"?

This is why you are losing the argument.

Dvorak said...

@FallenTitan
>> It's your new alliance members which I feel sorry for. They appear to be fighting your personal vendetta against Goonswarm… Which has now suddenly shifted to RvB for some nonsensical reason.

Waging war against said new alliance members for the third time might have something to do with it. Just a thought...

>> and we might have listened if it gave us good fights. We don't really care who we shoot, because we have no null-sec sovereignty to defend or tangible treaties to break.

The whole "we don't care who we hurt, as long as we can hurt someone" attitude simply amazes me.

I still shake my head in disbelief that rvb line members go along with this. Once upon a time rvb used to be about some fun consensual PvP, wasn't it?

Anonymous said...

Go to the rvb killboards and search for "goonswarm federation". You'll see thousands of kills from both sides. Purple.rvbeve.com

Anonymous said...

@Lucas
"He takes only high sec war data and claims that as evidence that RvB are pets of goons, even though a cursory glance at the killboards would show you RvB members killing goons in null sec (where wars don't matter)."


OK, maybe you could figure out that some RvB killing some Goons in null doesn't disprove anything.

Goon/RvB leadership couldn't care less if their respective unaware plebs occasionally shoot each others. They already want to pewpew and explode anyway. You can't compare individual kills with the fullon political wardecs RvB have been serving for Goons.

Druur Monakh said...

The problem with throwing out all the low-damage wars from the analysis is that it ignores the realities of corp/alliance sizes.

If a small (100 people or less) corp is wardecced by RvB, and is not completely stupid, they won't undock, or at least not fly where RvB is around. And since such SOPs are easier to enforce in smaller corps, such wars will consequently show hardly any damage.

In short: your data shows correlation; but you haven't shown causation.

Lucas Kell said...

@Anon
"I also agree with you when you say he is doing a fine job of finding data that actually does support his conclusion. You on the other hand allude to all this "data that goes against it" yet have failed to actually produce any of in amongst your perpetual walls of text."
I realyl can;t be bother to compile a whole bunch of data which shouldn't need to be compiled since it's already freely available. Go to ANY major killboard. Look up RvB on goon kills. The magic is complete.

And part of it isn't data, it's just common sense. He's looking at only war data. Well why would RvB pay 500m to wardec goons for a week when they can (and do) just fly into nullsec and kill them. All he's provided evidence of is that RvB have allied in goons wars. That's all. That doesn't in any way shape or form prove his conclusion.

Honestly, I can't be bother to argue with you about it. If you want to believe it, go right ahead. It has no effect on anything.

"Oh and trying to derail the thread with nightgerbil with waffle about some trade hub is just weak."
lol? I responded to a question I was asked directly. Sue me.

"Like I say I was neutral, but after this shabby defense from CFC (and also RvB leadership) that consists only of rhetoric and denial I am inclined to look Lemmings up in game."
Go right ahead buddy. Go join them. Nobody in the CFC cares even remotely. Neither the CFC or RvB should need to respond to ridiculous, unfounded and badly supported claims with anything beside a swift denial and a good shrugging off, otherwise we'd spend all of our time processing data whenever some butthurt nub cried at us. If Gevlon presented a sound argument not just "I picked out only the wars supporting my claims, and LOOK WHAT I FOUND!" we might consider a more thorough response, but until then... *shrug*

Lucas Kell said...

"Which you have never bothered to actually SHOW, rather than simply ASSERT without any evidence."
I simply don't care enough to do your work for you. If you want to take what you are told at face value, that's your problem.

"Didn't you JUST say in the SAME comment that it only takes a "glance"? Now it takes "pages"?

This is why you are losing the argument."
It would take pages for me, since if I presented low volumes of data it would be dismissed as "pretend kills made to hide the conspiracy". You however can look yourself then you can take in as much or as little information as it takes to satisfy you.

Either way, no flying fucks are given.

Gevlon said...

@Lucas: "All he's provided evidence of is that RvB have allied in goons wars." Actually I've provided evidence that RvB have ONLY allied in Goon wars. They never allied anyone else (in wars where actually ships were killed)

"Either way, no flying fucks are given." Really? Then I made another statistics, which I don't show since it's surely just "misleading".

This statistics contains 2 numbers, I leave it to your experience, insight and common sense to decide which is bigger:
- Number of characters typed on Gevlon's blog this week by Gevlon
- Number of characters typed on Gevlon's blog this week by Lucas Kell

Druur Monakh said...

@Anon "Gevlon is a scientist."

No, he isn't. A scientist would discuss alternative interpretations of the data as well, and why he considers those interpretations invalid.

Anonymous said...

http://purple.rvbeve.com/?a=corp_detail&crp_id=84

RvB have been involved with the destruction of 2 trillion ISK of Goon assets...

You'd think the masters wouldn't allow the slaves to do that...

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous: on that page it seems RvB killed 21 titans. I'm not sure it's reliable.

Or, if they whored on 21 titans, the data is irrelevant.

Lutz said...

@Anonymous

>http://purple.rvbeve.com/?a=corp_detail&crp_id=84
>RvB have been involved with the destruction of 2 trillion ISK of Goon assets...

Have a closer look at:
http://purple.rvbeve.com/?a=corp_detail&crp_id=84&scl_id=26

Whoring on titan kills..

Even funnier is that the RvB KB books PL titans as GSF losses and the loss of a Goon titan as RvB loss.

Michael LeBlanc said...

Goonswarm had hundreds of wars last year. If RvB is being used to protect them, then they're doing a pretty terrible job, joining only a small handful of them.

The ISK destroyed numbers posted aren't RvB destroyed numbers, but the overall war numbers. I can't find a single kill in game in the Marmite vs GSF war that has RvB as either a victim or getting the killing blow. So weighting by these numbers seems arbitrary and obfuscatory.

Finally, you eliminate all the wars that you are ok with, and then are surprised that what's left is what you don't like?

Gevlon said...

Michael: GSF has only a few wars that had significant highsec aspect. Nullsec powers don't declare CONCORD wars since there is no concord in nullsec.

I eliminated:
- self defense wars (as they aren't chosen by RvB)
- The Red versus Blue war, the E-UNI and the BNI wars as they are indeed non-political
- Dummy wars with pitiful kills.

Can you point to a war which is not one of the above and I ignored?

Lucas Kell said...

"Actually I've provided evidence that RvB have ONLY allied in Goon wars. They never allied anyone else (in wars where actually ships were killed"
And as pointed out, All but 1 of the wars were POCO defense, covered by the treaty, and that 1 outlier was Burn Jita. It's also been pointed out that RvB haven't been on all goon wars (not even close). You have taken huge leaps to conclusions and now that all the flaws are being pointed out, you are just scrambling to back your ideas up regardless of how desperate it sounds. All for what is an obviously incorrect conspiracy theory.

""Either way, no flying fucks are given." Really? Then I made another statistics, which I don't show since it's surely just "misleading"."
If you reread the context of that post no flying fucks are given about how much a poster who doesn't even play EVE wants to take on board from the publicly accessible killboards.


"I eliminated:
- self defense wars (as they aren't chosen by RvB)
- The Red versus Blue war, the E-UNI and the BNI wars as they are indeed non-political
- Dummy wars with pitiful kills."
So now eliminate:
- Wars as part of the treaty
- Wars for Burn Jita

What you'll be left with is 0 wars.
Sure, if you selectively eliminate wars, then you can make up whatever results you want.

Michael LeBlanc said...

GSF has hundreds of CONCORD wars in 2013. RvB joined only a handful.

> - The Red versus Blue war, the E-UNI and the BNI wars as they are indeed non-political

If you get rid of the non-political wars, you'll be left with ones that look political. There's no surprise there.

> Dummy wars with pitiful kills.
As I said, the kill amounts are inflated for wars they are allying in, sometimes grossly.

Did RvB actually do/take any damage in the wars where they 'defended' GSF? I took a cursory glance and didn't see any.

Gevlon said...

@Lucas "wars in part of a treaty" is merely rewording of "wars while being Goon pet", as "pet" is an offensive term for weaker ally.

@Michael: but all political wars are on one side. If they attack randomly, they should have protecting PL, Nulli, TEST, SOLAR and so on. But they always, ALWAYS protected GSF

Lucas Kell said...

""wars in part of a treaty" is merely rewording of "wars while being Goon pet", as "pet" is an offensive term for weaker ally."
No, it's not. It's wars under the current treaty. The one that you and Marmite already cried about. So all of those wars are essentially the same thing. Now if your post was "Goons and RvB have a POCO treaty" it would be spot on. But to stretch that to some huge conspiracy is ludicrous. And the thing is everyone can see it's ludicrous, so why are you wasting your time trying to push the idea? It's not going to work. RvB line members aren't going to suddenly start jumping ship. All you are doing is guaranteeing that when you do finally say something that makes sense, more people will automatically assume you are talking out of your ass.

"But they always, ALWAYS protected GSF"
No, they didn't ALWAYS protect GSF, otherwise GSF would have no wars without RvB, of which there are thousands.

Michael LeBlanc said...

Today I learned ALWAYS means a single time.

If RVB regularly joined GSF wars in 2013 you'd have an argument. But instead you have a single data point. You basically rolled a d20, got 12, and now arguing that if it wasn't weighted you should see 11s, 15s and 4s, so clearly the dice was bought with Goon RMT

As for the POCO wars and RvB being pets, show me when RvB POCOs were attacked and GSF ignored it, and you might have an argument. Until then you're basically claiming that anyone who claims insurance created the plan in the first place to scam the other contributors

Anonymous said...

Had you attacked some other assets of the goons that weren't POCOs, we wouldn't have helped.

LR

Anonymous said...

I like how Gevlon is under attack for lack of common/political sense here, and now the word is "well if you say ALWAYS why isn't RvB involved in ALL Goon wars?"

Themselves now ignoring the obvious and common/political sense - you deploy assets where they are relevant. You don't deploy RvB assets for a nullsec war, you deploy highsec assets when highsec attackers come and you 'have better things to do' (IE, get someone else to do the work for you so you spend your time [ISK] elsewhere, IE use your pet).

I like the strategy overall, its good management practice, good use of resources. It's delegation.

Nice try to derail the conversation about how if Gevlon proves RvB only helps in GSF wars they should be helping in ALL GSF wars, Null, high, or otherwise. Let's totally float the RvB ships out to fight titans in the big battles, what a big help that will be.

Anonymous said...

To claim Gevlon's approaches are scientific because he provides numbers is wrong.

Gevlon makes a common mistake when it comes to analysis. He puts forward a hypothesis (this is ok, all good science starts here), and then he collects data (also ok), and then he removes data he deems irrelevant (this is a problem), and then he looks at the remaining set and picks out data which supports his hypothesis (this is a BIG problem), and then finally concludes that his results are infallible, irrefutable fact.

This is indicative of a "my side" bias, or confirmation bias. It is natural to have one.

The problem comes when people start throwing around the fact that you can't disprove it without your own numbers. To be clear there are 2 common ways to DISPROVE something. First is to find contrary evidence, the other is to dismantle the reasoning. If the reasoning is flawed you do not have to find evidence contrary to the claim. The claim itself is fallacious. This is what Lucas is doing and it is entirely valid.

Gevlon should make efforts to insure he avoids confirmation bias. This can be done in a number of ways. Firstly, being open to alternative view points. Claiming that people are "trolling" for pointing out flaws in reasoning is NOT a reasonable position to have. Secondly, avoid removing information from the data set (I could remove information from the RvB kill history which would indicate they must hate goons. Or must love goons. Or must do nothing but shoot newbies in E-Uni. Or do nothing but die all the time to RnK smartbomb fleets. The "data" is there in the kill record to support each of these but they are all false statements if treated as absolutes). Finally, avoid making statements of fact when they are interpretation. Good science never deals in absolute irrefutable fact. It is always open to skepticism and changes in understanding.

Anonymous said...

In the traditional master / pet relationship, the master provides security and provisions for the pet. The pet provides companionship or in the event of farm animals something snuggly on a cold winter's night. Perhaps looking at the relationship in that way will clarify who is the pet in this supposed relationship.

Arrendis said...

Gevlon:
" "wars in part of a treaty" is merely rewording of "wars while being Goon pet", as "pet" is an offensive term for weaker ally."

No, it's not. Maybe it's how you choose to use it, but you know, if you choose to use the word 'green' for the taste of salt, that's not gonna make it correct.

'Pet' is not an insulting term for a weaker ally. It's an insulting term for a subservient entity. A weaker ally can still be self-determinate - for example, CFC members are largely autonomous, except when participating in coalition-level activities, and at the coalition level, I can tell you from direct experience that operational command is not limited to GSF. These are not 'pets', this is a coalition.

RvB has made a commitment to render aid. Voluntarily. They continue to honor that commitment. Voluntarily.

That is not a 'pet'. Nobody is giving them orders. They're simply choosing to meet the obligations they've chosen to take upon themselves.

Most people call that being 'an adult'. That you view that so scornfully is very, very telling.

Anonymous said...

Lucas said: " All he's provided evidence of is that RvB have allied in goons wars. That's all. That doesn't in any way shape or form prove his conclusion."

Actually, Gevlon has provided data that shows the RvB wars have a strong tendency to coincide with GSF interests. While Gevlon reaches a "conclusion" - which is okay since he is openly a lobbyist for his cause - for many of us readers he has provided data-backed indications; indications that make RvB a "suspect". And you, sir, have failed utterly to shake the suspicion.

Trying to sell Gevlon's argument as "proof" and then trying to "disprove" by showing his conclusions are not compelling is faulty itself. Just because his reasoning is not compelling, it is not necessarily wrong.

And since for the reverse no equally-supportive data has been brought forward (in spite of it allegedly being easily available), chances are higher he is right than wrong.

An Anonymous said: "To be clear there are 2 common ways to DISPROVE something. First is to find contrary evidence, the other is to dismantle the reasoning. If the reasoning is flawed you do not have to find evidence contrary to the claim. The claim itself is fallacious. This is what Lucas is doing and it is entirely valid."

But to disprove only means to show that the argument is not compelling. It does _not_ show that the conclusion is necessarily wrong. It can still be right. E.g.: Even though no one has yet compellingly proven to me that North Korea's government is a brutal regime that suppreses large parts of its population (I was not there, I have not talked to witnesses, I have seen little footage from the country etc.), I find the supportive data quite convincing. I have little reason to believe it is not true. I have also so far little reason to believe Gevlon is wrong. I have much more reason to believe Gevlon is right.

Anonymous said...

I feel like you are clutching at straws here. This just comes across as a poor propaganda piece.

In the end, I fail to see the point. Even if RvB are "pets". Why should the line members care? If the line members are getting the fights and content that they enjoy, then why should they care about the politics that are leading to those fights? I feel like you are misunderstanding the RvB culture entirely.

Anonymous said...

"RvB has made a commitment to render aid. Voluntarily. They continue to honor that commitment. Voluntarily.

That is not a 'pet'. Nobody is giving them orders. They're simply choosing to meet the obligations they've chosen to take upon themselves.

Most people call that being 'an adult'. That you view that so scornfully is very, very telling."

Fulfilling one's obligations is in itself okay. However, entering into such an obligation in the first place can serve certain interests. What Gevlon is pointing out that RvB seems to have entered into an obligation that coincides with GSF interests, and at the same time has acted also on other occasions in a way that coincide with GSF interests. And he has voiced his opinion that that this is not coincidental, because chances are there should also be a somewhat equally-weighted behaviour that contravenes GSF interests. Which is yet to be shown to us.

That you fail to see that and only reduce your argument to the "adult" thing is very, very telling.

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous: I fully understand RvB culture. Let me describe it to you:
- 348M/year ship loss
- 14M average ship value
- 35-40% ISK ratio against totally randomly invited people

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous you support Lucas Kell by saying
"The problem comes when people start throwing around the fact that you can't disprove it without your own numbers. To be clear there are 2 common ways to DISPROVE something. First is to find contrary evidence, the other is to dismantle the reasoning. If the reasoning is flawed you do not have to find evidence contrary to the claim. The claim itself is fallacious. This is what Lucas is doing and it is entirely valid."

Whilst this may be true, Lucas has repeatedly claimed that whilst Gevlon reaches conclusions that he(Gevlon) supports using data and analysis Lucas believes there is a volume of data to counter Gevlon's analysis. To make this claim and then not produce the data dramatically undermines one's own argument.

@Lucas says
"I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through pages of killboard stats" an interesting admission when you base your argument on data you will not (can not?) provide.

Saying you don't have time, when you have spent a great deal of time reading through Gevlon's argument, then producing long winded, but un supported rebuttals does not make sense.

An efficient defense would be to put in the time, produce the data, defeat your opponents argument finally and totally and and then move on. The payback in time is not having to continually revisit the argument. The fact you do not do this seems just a little odd to me.

Gevlon is winning the debate!

Guerdon Malpheron said...

It frustrates me when people try to obfuscate other’s words for purposes of disinformation and it seems to happen here in replies quite often. Given that EVE has an international participation I’m going to hope this is done unintentionally and done out of stupidity. I will attempt to clarify the issue. Granted, my fields of focus are math, science, engineering and technology. However, I’m a native English speak, born and raised by two English teachers; I’ve studied 4 languages and used to be fluent in 2. Sadly my German is not what it used to be due to lack of practice.

Languages use something called verb tense to express a sense of time. Not all languages use the same tenses. In English there are differences between Present Simple, Past Simple and Future Simple. For example:
Present Simple: I declare victory.
Past Simple: I declared victory.
Future Simple: I will declare victory.

Most confusion seems to be happening between the Simple tenses. I understand it’s hard to figure out sometimes as in some situations there’s only 1 letter difference distinguishing between the two. However, it is important when trying to understand and analyze who’s words to pay attention to such minut details.

In the context of this blog, I have yet to see Gelvon speak of victory in the past tense. I have seen him speak in the Future Simple and Future Continuous (i.e. “I will be victorious” or “I will declare victory.”) I wanted to help dispel that confusion. To give a real life example this not something he has done:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/Bush_mission_accomplished.jpg

Guerdon Malpheron said...

Also on a general note I’d like to point out there is a difference between qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data includes such things at experience, group thinking, colloquial “common sense” and intuition. Qualitative data is data that relies on observation and interpretation as opposed to numbers, and may be depicted using a variety of media. Quantitative data is anything that be numerically measured and quantified. Quantitative data" is data based strictly on numerical measurements.

Both are important for the Scientific Method, the scientific process of reaching a conclusion based on factual evidence. The Scientific Method begins with a hypothesis, which is influenced by Qualitative data. Then, through experimentation and testing, factual, quantitative evidence is gathered and analyzed. The evidence and analysis is then used to reach a conclusion that either proves or disproves the hypothesis.

In his posts Gelvon does indeed rely on quantitative, factual evidence to support his claims and hypotheses. Often however, in the rebuttals counter arguments rely solely on qualitative data. So really when you argue with Gelvon using experience and “common sense” you’re not arguing with his conclusions. You are arguing with his hypotheses. No one is going to blame you for coming here to state your opinion on the matter, but trying to disprove him in the manner described is inherently nonscientific and inherently illogical.

@Lucas
Don’t try to pull the “I don’t care” card. That’s just tripe. You post here way too much and way too often in a fervent and zealous manner for anyone to believe that.

@Gelvon
“This statistics contains 2 numbers, I leave it to your experience, insight and common sense to decide which is bigger”
Nice . I got quite the chuckle when I read that. I was wondering though if you’ve done any studying into RvB’s sources of income. Perhaps right now, due to either lack of numbers or coordination, you are unable to attack the POCOs directly. Is it possible to damage their revenue in other ways?

roigon said...

Gevlon, instead of fighting a war of propaganda why do you not simply take RvB on their word?

Heck offer to sponsor the RvB ganked roam with prizes if they take it to goon space. There is a element of gambling in it, the average roam does between 1-10B in damages which is a fairly large spread.

If you say promise a billion in prizes the worst that can happen is that you "paid" a billion for a billion in damage, but more likely you get a much higher amount of damage per isk paid.

It also sends a message to goons that RvB aren't loyal pets, and not to be trusted.

Gevlon said...

@Roigon: ganked roams are consensual PvP. I mean you really have to be asleep to not notice the fleet incoming on intel channels. They don't RF structures to force a fight, so if you fight them, it's your call. Therefore they kill no one who don't want to be killed.

roigon said...

@Gevlon: There is some truth to that, but I'd firstly contest that not everyone who willingly enters battle with the RvB fleet expects to die. Quite a few actually expect to survive because they think they are better pilots or better equipped. They are more often then not mistaken.

And secondly the RvB scouts who are often in alt corps or at least non-RvB corps make it a point to look for mining operations or Pve ships. Many a shiny ratting ship or mining barge has found himself at the wrong end of a long point.

And even for those pilots who do look in intel channels and dock up to avoid losing their ship. It costs them in opportunity. While they are docked up they aren't ratting or mining.

As for not RF'ing. You'd be hard pressed to get RvB ganked to shoot a POS, it simply takes too much time. But there is still possibility to be disruptive. Tag alone in a cloaky hauler with SBU's and/or EES's.

The EES especially has proven to be a good method of forcing PvE players to do something, and it's an inherently dangerous structure to remove for them while RvB scouts are still zipping around in interceptors.

Lucas Kell said...

@Anon
"Actually, Gevlon has provided data that shows the RvB wars have a strong tendency to coincide with GSF interests."
I could provide you data that shows that a nromal coin when flipped will always be heads. If I get to choose which data is irrelevant, then I can show anything. But when you look at the data as a whole you would see that it's only sometimes heads. In the same way, if you are ignoring all other RvB activity and look only at a handful of wars, which when combine into their sets show as 2 (1 for burn Jita, and the rest are part of the POCO treaty, all grouped around the same time), it shows what he wants it to show. If you expand that and look at their political decisions in the past, their other wars and their null sec combat, you'll see that it's false.

@Anon2
"an interesting admission when you base your argument on data you will not (can not?) provide.

Saying you don't have time, when you have spent a great deal of time reading through Gevlon's argument, then producing long winded, but un supported rebuttals does not make sense."
I've explained where you can find the data. As previously explained, I don't have time to collate the data and even if I did, I'm a CFC member thus my word counts for nothing. This is why looking up data yourself on public killboards where RvB kills billions of isk in goons ships (hardly the activity of a goon pet). As for the time, I often post on the move or at work. It takes very little time to read or respond to these posts, but considerably longer to collate enough data to produce a reasonable conclusion. By looking it up yourself, you can not only verify it is independently sourced, but you can collect as much or as little data as you see fit.

@Guerdon
"In his posts Gelvon does indeed rely on quantitative, factual evidence to support his claims and hypotheses. Often however, in the rebuttals counter arguments rely solely on qualitative data"
Actually, in this instance we've also question his quantitative data. He's deemed most of the data irrelevant, and is only looking at a small subset of data to begin with. He's then looking at only 2013, and declaring a conclusion dating back to RvBs creation, and only looking at the wars they have in high sec.

"Don’t try to pull the “I don’t care” card. That’s just tripe. You post here way too much and way too often in a fervent and zealous manner for anyone to believe that."
I post in a lot of places without having to actually care about the subjects. This entire conclusion is in my opinion false, yet even if it was true, would not affect me. Since the lemmings creation, I've been unaffected, and will remain unaffected. And that's just in game. Considering it is a game and I play it for fun, propaganda about a pretend world is hardly going to rate high on a care meter.

@Gevlon
"ganked roams are consensual PvP. I mean you really have to be asleep to not notice the fleet incoming on intel channels."
Pay them to incite non-consensual PvP then. You can't get them to attack POCOs in high sec, but that's the limitations of their treaty. It is likely though that your lack of diplomacy has made a deal like that impossible now however.

Fade Toblack said...

Actually roigon has a good idea, I've been on a few RvB Ganked roams and they also kill targets of chance - not unlike the targets that Lemmings are killing in high-sec.

Eg I'm sure this guy: http://rvbganked.co.uk/kills/index.php/kill_detail/5782/ didn't want to be killed by the RvB Ganked roam.

Offer to pay the roams a percentage of kill values in prizes to be handed out to the fleet.

To be honest this is a no-lose situation for you. If RvB accept the offer, then you're effectively paying them to shoot Goons in null-sec - exactly the same as you're paying Marmite and Lemmings to shoot Goons in high-sec. Eg you've found somebody that will go disrupt Goon activity in their home systems. If RvB don't accept the offer, then this is more evidence that they're actually Goon Pets.

Anonymous said...

@Lucas

"I could provide you data that shows that a nromal coin when flipped will always be heads. If I get to choose which data is irrelevant"

Are we really stooping this low. A coin has no choice in the matter, it will land on heads due to the law of averages. Conversely, RvB must actively make the decision to opt into wars, therefore a data point shows intention, whereas a coin toss demonstrates random chance.

@Lucas
"I've explained where you can find the data. As previously explained, I don't have time to collate the data and even if I did, I'm a CFC member thus my word counts for nothing."

As Anom stated - you have already spent huge amounts of time on this issue - you can't allude to the existence of evidence, then persistently offer excuses when people call your bluff and ask you to produce it.

As I understand it, it is perfectly reasonable for people to defend their own organizations, so you are wrong - it would be perfectly valid for a CFC member to defend the CFC using the evidence and data you say exists.

I and others have repeatedly called upon you to produce your data, since you are so quick to criticise Gevlon when he produces quantitative evidence to support his viewpoint. We are still waiting.

Lucas Kell said...

@Anon
"Are we really stooping this low. A coin has no choice in the matter, it will land on heads due to the law of averages. Conversely, RvB must actively make the decision to opt into wars, therefore a data point shows intention, whereas a coin toss demonstrates random chance."
You missed the point entirely. That being that he has selectively chosen a single data point, ignoring all data that goes against what he is saying. that is akin to me flipping a regular coin, disregarding all tails results then claiming that coins always land as heads.

It's already known than RvB signed a treaty over POCOs so they could claim the lions share and goons wouldn't interfere, and in the case that either came under threat, the other party would be available to assist. That's why most of those wars he's selected exist. The other was Burn Jita, where a lot of people joined in, not just RvB. So he's taken purely that data, and come to the conclusion that means that RvB ALWAYS protect goons and must have been created by goons. I'm truly shocked there are people this needs to be explained to.

"As Anom stated - you have already spent huge amounts of time on this issue - you can't allude to the existence of evidence, then persistently offer excuses when people call your bluff and ask you to produce it."
It's not excuses, I don;t have the time or the inclination. If you want to take that as evidence that his single datapoint is proof, go right ahead. What you think really doesn't affect anybody. I'd told you where you can get the data though, and explained the flaws in his reasoning. If that's not good enough, I doubt me dumping a bunch of figures into a post would really make the difference.

"As I understand it, it is perfectly reasonable for people to defend their own organizations, so you are wrong - it would be perfectly valid for a CFC member to defend the CFC using the evidence and data you say exists."
And if there were a reasonable argument aimed our way, I'm sure we would defend. This is a conspiracy theory and is clearly (to most normal people at least) incorrect. Don;t mistake this post for something it's not. His aim is to cause RvB members to leave, which they won't. It's propaganda, and it's not very good.

"I and others have repeatedly called upon you to produce your data, since you are so quick to criticise Gevlon when he produces quantitative evidence to support his viewpoint. We are still waiting."
By all means continue to wait. I'm not going to get dragged into producing volumes of data for something so ludicrous. When Gevlon wants to put the effort in for proper analysis and realistically respond to criticism rather than just yelling "pets!", "grr goons" and "but the dataz!" over and over, perhaps that will change. As usual he wants low effort high impact results. That's just not realistic.

Anonymous said...

Whilst this may be true, Lucas has repeatedly claimed that whilst Gevlon reaches conclusions that he(Gevlon) supports using data and analysis Lucas believes there is a volume of data to counter Gevlon's analysis. To make this claim and then not produce the data dramatically undermines one's own argument.

The evidence is clear in the data that has been rejected as relevant by Gevlon.

Actually, Gevlon has provided data that shows the RvB wars have a strong tendency to coincide with GSF interests. While Gevlon reaches a "conclusion" - which is okay since he is openly a lobbyist for his cause - for many of us readers he has provided data-backed indications; indications that make RvB a "suspect". And you, sir, have failed utterly to shake the suspicion.

And we're saying the data is cherry picked and falsely interpreted. If you are gullible enough to continue believing it as "data-backed indications" when it is so obviously manipulated to fit a presupposed conclusion then that is your problem.

Gevlon is failing at basic "science"... basic *reasoning*. If that makes the argument compelling in your eyes then that says a whole lot about your character.

Subscribe to the goblinish wisdom