CG predictions...

[Disemboweled Ego]

If Frontier can figure out how to get this sort of thing happening every week, it'll be very impressive and very good for the story.

Yeah, I was surprised to see so much initial whining about this, because it's what people were asking for just with poor execution because of how data "gameplay" works.

Data CGs still only accepting T1 mats and it taking 20min of menuing with the material trader to turn in a load of data from Jameson's Crash Site is one of those "Frontier doesn't play their own game" things.

 

[Flossy]

Kietrax vm has turned up normal Thursday time. cleaned up some topics and unsticky the older CGs...
Flossy VM has also been online and does not like combat... So that points to a Non combat or she's messing about..

LOL, didn't realise my forum activity was being so closely monitored until coming across this thread. Yes it's absolutely true that I don't like combat, but that does not stop me from regularly checking the CG forums! Partly in my role as CG forum moderator and also as CG Reporter for Hutton Orbital Radio (Thursdays, 20:30 UTC - you do listen don't you? ) On Thursdays in particular I will regularly check the CG forum due to new CGs usually starting then, but on other days too to check if the OPs need updating as Tiers are reached or if there are any questions etc waiting to be answered/followed up.

My being online around CG start time does not mean it is Non-combat LOL! Simply making preparations for when they do come online. What you saw this week was probably me adding the source lists to the Trade CG before it was actually posted publicly at 13:00 UTC.

Flossy is a good person (i saw the crap given to her in the predictions thread) and not to falt on combat but i understand her wanting to not partake she is really good ppl be nice x....that said the current goal is is nonsense... within 1 hour all the carriers showed up bulk dropping.. negating any CMDR genuinely trading for the CG as a trucker or just a player.

Thanks for defending me, Mindwipe, but I honestly have not seen any 'crap' after scouring this entire thread! The only reference to my dislike of combat that I have found is by GraphiteGB, quoted above - and that is just a statement of FACT! GraphiteGB is only ever extremely helpful in the CG threads, posting helpful information and, this week in particular, letting us know when one of us has made a mistake somewhere - like selecting 'Sell' instead of 'Buy' in EDDB when producing the source lists, which was my mistake!

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Well, this is exciting: 5639144 / 32M = 17.6% ... 8349291 / 48M = 17.3% ... the trade CG creeps into a (very) slight lead overnight.

 

[Factabulous]

Interesting - I was expecting the Data CG to pull away as it had been making better progress all day, but Cargo came right back

Weird difference in hourly contributions - normally CGs are pretty close in time, but differ in magnitude - this one is the other way around - the magnitudes are similar, but with skewed hours ...

Edit: So I'm guessing Data will re-take the lead, but maybe Cargo may just edge it in the end - this one is going to run all week. Still too close to call.

 

[HeIlrider]

Well, this is exciting: 5639144 / 32M = 17.6% ... 8349291 / 48M = 17.3% ... the trade CG creeps into a (very) slight lead overnight.

That's why it is finally some interesting CG.
People can complain, that unfair, unbalanced, orion bias, "bad guys griefed cargo".
But at least, after 3 days it still has similar progress, not "crushing 10:1", or "we won in first 5 hours, kek".
But when I see...50% of time.
17% vs 17%
T4 is 50%
T3 is 25%
Probably both CGs will hit t3. I don't believe, that next half of time will yield 33%, when first yielded only 17.
So...draw, or side with more % (even if it will difference like 0,01%) will win?

 

[Northpin]

Now, that's a bias.

Sure you need to account for profit in trade, but that's something the player can control too. The data one is a no brainer by comparison.

That and the psychology of reward doesn't work that way.

Edit: realistically, many things in the game are often done, without thought to customisation for the specific situation... see the very first meta alloy cg which initially had the same targets as a market- available trade cg.

Almost certainly, FD didn't even look at the reward scales when putting these two into competition.

Well, what bias?

The top 10 for data get 128 millions
The top 10 for trade get 32 millions + 39000t x 7500 profit = that's a minimum of 292 millions >>> so at least a total of 324+ millions for the tenth player, more for the ones above in the top

Even top 10% does it better.
80 millions for top 10% data
vs
20 millions + (10000t x 7500cr= 75 millions) >>> that at least 95 millions for the lowest player in top 10%


The trade profits totally overcome the no-credits from data deliveries, so yea, it's biased but in the other direction.

 

[Kryxix]

Interesting.
I would bet on the traders:

• Sunday players, will participate in CG, stays back in the 50%, but dont want to waste their free time to grind relog in Horizons
• already +40% more participants and it will increase (+50%?)
• small player groups working with each other at carriers
• participants registered for all sides to maximize credit rewards.

Profit is low, and the 9 mins travel is very exciting to Oramus, but not like endless relogs.

 

[Jmanis]

Well, what bias?

The top 10 for data get 128 millions
The top 10 for trade get 32 millions + 39000t x 7500 profit = that's a minimum of 292 millions >>> so at least a total of 324+ millions for the tenth player, more for the ones above in the top

Even top 10% does it better.
80 millions for top 10% data
vs
20 millions + (10000t x 7500cr= 75 millions) >>> that at least 95 millions for the lowest player in top 10%


The trade profits totally overcome the no-credits from data deliveries, so yea, it's biased but in the other direction.

The answer is in what you quoted:

Sure you need to account for profit in trade, but that's something the player can control too. The data one is a no brainer by comparison.

That and the psychology of reward doesn't work that way.

It doesn't matter that the trade profits overcome; it's not the headliner here, but honestly I cbf'ed going into all the details on that one. But just to emphasise, I don't think a bias is necessarily a bad thing anyway.

You and me know the trade profits are better... Joe Muck just sees (at this point in time) 128m vs 32m.

Rather, my comment was more directed at people suggesting there was some sort of imbalance in the commodities/quantities needed, whereas this is a proper (albiet, psychological only) bias, noting that any moral comparisons between the two causes clearly didn't matter, since Orion led to begin with.

Edit: That is, a bias reinforces a prejudice, and a prejudice (much like a bias) need not be factually correct. That the reward does not outstrip trade profits does not mean it's not a bias.

 

[Disemboweled Ego]

Weird difference in hourly contributions - normally CGs are pretty close in time, but differ in magnitude - this one is the other way around - the magnitudes are similar, but with skewed hours ...

If you're doing data hand-ins with a macro you probably wouldn't do it during your usual playtime, but when you can go afk for half an hour and do something else while handing in.

 

[Northpin]

. But just to emphasise, I don't think a bias is necessarily a bad thing anyway.

oh, sure - i dont think it's a bad thing either.
I just wanted to point out that the trade CG gives the opportunity of a better cash reward, but that is of course valid mostly for carrier owners (or for long range cutters / t9s)

however, the small ship players have the opportunity to make some cash, even tho by relogsky in Horizons, with the help of the data CG which is a rather nice thing (not the relogsky part tho)
and the cash bias might switch back or at least get even by Tier 4 - if it gets there (it doesnt seem so)

 

[rgrocott]

Well, what bias?

The top 10 for data get 128 millions
The top 10 for trade get 32 millions + 39000t x 7500 profit = that's a minimum of 292 millions >>> so at least a total of 324+ millions for the tenth player, more for the ones above in the top

Even top 10% does it better.
80 millions for top 10% data
vs
20 millions + (10000t x 7500cr= 75 millions) >>> that at least 95 millions for the lowest player in top 10%


The trade profits totally overcome the no-credits from data deliveries, so yea, it's biased but in the other direction.

That's only if you think about it purely in terms of the total credits earned, and not about the effort involved in earning those credits. In terms of credits per hour, I think there's a huge bias towards the data CG.

For example, I'm currently top 25% on the trade CG, with approx 8k (almost all from carriers in-system). I also loaded around 10k onto carriers at the source stations, for which I made a small profit but earned no credit for the CG. I'm fine with that, because those carriers aren't gonna load themselves, and if all I cared about was credits I wouldn't touch either of these CGs with a bargepole

However, doing that took hours. When you factor in time wasted going to carriers where the cargo has mysteriously dropped from 10k to 0 in the space of a couple of minutes, or those who've decided to go private to prevent griefers (my fault for not checking the status in-game, admittedly), or the joy of a 30k supercruise if loading direct - there's simply no way to do this fast if you're an independent.

For the data CG, I could do 12k in about an hour. If I'd put the same effort in on that side, I'd easily be in the top 10%, and I would have contributed far more to the success of the CG.

IMO the only reason the CGs are tracking closely is because people are putting in way, way more time on the trade side, because we've decided Orion are mean and nasty

 

[Ian Doncaster]

So...draw, or side with more % (even if it will difference like 0,01%) will win?

"then the one with the highest proportional tier completion will be considered victorious."
Side with more % wins, if they're the same tier.

Don't know what they'll do if the data CG happens to get exactly 50% more raw units than the trade CG, but that would be incredibly unlikely.

IMO the only reason the CGs are tracking closely is because people are putting in way, way more time on the trade side, because we've decided Orion are mean and nasty

Yes - the in-story presentation of the two sides prior to the CG starting makes a massive difference to the participation levels, and is probably one of the most significant factors overall.

At the moment the sum of all the various factors - lead-in story, CG types and targets, CG rewards, supercruise distances, etc. - is somehow balancing out incredibly closely. The gap between the two CGs is less than the efforts of a single "top 10%" CMDR - it's quite literally possible that one person out of the thousands participating switching sides could make the difference.

I'm not expecting Frontier to be able to get them that close every week! But, as with Ackwada, it's close and exciting precisely because Frontier have included the qualitative factors (story, etc.) as part of their assessment of the overall balance, rather than solely balancing on the quantitative factors and getting a 5:1 walkover in the first six hours stay pretty much stay like that all the way through.

 

[Northpin]

or the joy of a 30k supercruise if loading direct - there's simply no way to do this fast if you're an independent.

I sort of disagree. There is a certain joy in doing long range hauling

And it's not really that faster.
Relogging is not really fast and it can be way more taxing in time spent actually performing an action (and way more mind numbing) compared with long supercruise ferries in which people can do other stuff in between runs

Spoiler

For example:
I ferried 102,080t for the Alliance expansion in WHN, to a station that was 162,000 LS, with the mention that we had no carriers at the time.
Took some extreme dedication tho.

 

[rgrocott]

I sort of disagree. There is a certain joy in doing long range hauling

And it's not really that faster.
Relogging is not really fast and it can be way more taxing in time spent actually performing an action (and way more mind numbing) compared with long supercruise ferries in which people can do other stuff in between runs

Different strokes for different folks, I guess

I find long-range hauling to be every bit as boring as the data relog grind, with the difference that if I walk away from my computer during the data relog, nothing bad can happen

 

[maehara]

Co-sign on the Zen appeal of long-range hauling, be it long super cruises or 50-jump round-trip jobs. Carriers have killed the latter entirely, I suspect...

 

[Mrat13]

Co-sign on the Zen appeal of long-range hauling, be it long super cruises or 50-jump round-trip jobs. Carriers have killed the latter entirely, I suspect...

And the former if they get a good parking spot.

 

[maehara]

And the former if they get a good parking spot.

Have to admit. my carrier's parked near Lewis because I figured it might be better to use it for this CG. But loading / unloading the things to full capacity is a real PITA and it's more fun to do the 8-jump round trip, even if that makes me less money overall. Call me strange.

 

[GraphiteGB]

Data CG has not been recovering activity its remaining behind and the higher activity that started at 13:00 on saturday has failed to arrive sunday so they must have all moved there play time to later in the day...

 

[Mrat13]

Have to admit. my carrier's parked near Lewis because I figured it might be better to use it for this CG. But loading / unloading the things to full capacity is a real PITA and it's more fun to do the 8-jump round trip, even if that makes me less money overall. Call me strange.

I never said people couldn't play the way they wanted, I was just talking about if efficiency is the goal, then what I mentioned would be the most efficient. This then means it doesn't apply to you as you aren't playing to be the most efficient anyway.

 

[Amata Lirein]

Just to make myself clear: I said...

ooof.... that looks highly unbalanced oO

...emphasis on "looks".