Wednesday 29 May 2013

What are buyers looking for in a wormhole system?

This is the same question as what ship does Joe Blogs want?  Is Joe an industrialist, a newbie, a bittervet?

There are different types of wormhole.


Wormholes come in different classes : C1 (easiest) to C6 (hardest).  My personal experience is mostly in a C2 system, and we have travelled through quite a few C1's in our time. 

For more information about what to expect in a wormhole, including site difficulty and typical statics, look at

Newbies, semi-casuals, and those that dabble in reactions want a highsec static.  That is, a wormhole system that will always have an exit to 'safe space'.  These are C1 to C3 wormholes.  You are more likely to have a highsec static in a C1 than a C2 or C3.

The smaller the group, the smaller the wormhole you want; with each class of wormhole increasing the total mass and size of ship that can enter it.  C1 Battlecruisers and smaller.  C2-4; Battleships and smaller.  C5-6 : Dreadnaughts, Carriers, Freighters and smaller.

PVP'ers of any kind want exits that are not safe space.  Small group PVP'ers may want a 'C2' wormhole with a null/C5 static.  Large group PVP'ers might like a C5 system, with dreams of taking on a C6 system.  One does not simply walk into Mordor a C6 system,  though a fleet of 100 battleships and dreads would probably do it.  The problem in selling a good PVP system is that while industrialists are by training OK at logistics, PVP'ers are generally not (though there are some notable exceptions)

More experienced wormholers know that highsec static's mean more pesky highsec intruders.  There are more of them than there are of us (even the hostile kind of us).  Unless you have something specific in mind, the added bother of finding a way to highsec is often considered worth it.

PI planets

Some regular readers may have noticed that I seem to have a consistent theme : planetary interaction.  I prefer a lot of varied planets.  I want to make any kind of planetary interaction item out of a single system; the transport is a pain.  (That said, we do import the cheapest P1 items rather than farm them ourselves).  Gas and Barren planets are everywhere and somewhat boring.  What excites me is the other planet types.  I want to look at eveeye, type in the system name and see a green P4 Prod tick

However, a PI farmer will also want some access to highsec.  I don't mind a C1 or C2 static as I can get to highsec from there easily enough.  As a PI farmer, I would not enjoy only having a null static.

Failing that, getting the blue POS fuel tick is a bonus. Logistics is a pain.  Being able to make stuff rather than haul stuff is easy; even if you don't bother to bash down and replace the horribly expensive interbus customs offices.


Different wormholes have different effects. Apparently no one likes a black hole.  (reduced missile velocity, drone control range, lockrange, falloff; increased ship velocity and inertia).  If I was to find my dream PI system, I wouldn't care.

Not important

From what I have seen, the number of existing anomalies or signatures is not a deciding factor.  These things re-generate over time, and can be blown through quite easily.  If we are going to spend 1B on setting up a large POS, with 1/2 of that per month in fuel, we are taking a longer term view.  It will make a difference to some, but has not been a question I have seen asked.

In summary

Good PI, C1 systems with a highsec static, no bad effects : Ask for the moon.
PVP systems (i.e. lead into other places to get fights); by all means try.
Poor PI, black hole c4 with a c4 static?  Umm.  Good luck.  Someone might want it for the PVE.

Next: How to sell a wormhole.

Tuesday 28 May 2013

How to find a wormhole for sale?

Ok, so you are in a wormhole for either legitimate or nefarious purposes.  Now what is the first thing you do when you enter a wormhole?  Bookmark the entrance.  Second thing? Dscan.  Any force fields?  If yes, your not selling this wormhole today.

Your initial dscan is not enough to show you have an unoccupied system.  Larger systems will have some planets outside your range.  While you probably can scan down towers with combat probes, the far simpler way is to warp to the vicinity of every planet until you (a) have the planet on dscan, and (b) confirmed you can not see a force field.

Anything else you see is potential loot.  A hanger of any kind with an inactive field is an invitation to bring some friends and play loot pinata.  Even someone with as little 'active' pvp as me would play with such a present.

I would not recommend that you spend time simply looking for wormholes to sell.  Finding, then selling wormholes takes time.  I am yet to find someone who enjoys scanning for it's own sake.  Certainly not me.

That said, there are times you will be scanning anyway.  Whether it is looking for a way to empire space for POS fuel or to sell goodies.  Whether it is because you have an overfond liking for wormhole explosions (bad pirates, bad bad pirates - now go sit in the corner.  Or catch me and then blow me up.  Whatever works).

In this market, what most players want to buy is an entrance to an unoccupied wormhole system.  Your potential buyers are after a particular type of system, but that is a topic for a later post.

The majority of wormhole buyers are purchasing an entrance to an wormhole system that has no active towers.

Next: What are buyers looking for?

Monday 27 May 2013

WTB PI wormhole with highsec statics

Foo Holdings has done well in wormhole space, and is looking at expanding.

We will be keeping our existing system, but we are currently looking at a 'casual hauling friendly' wormhole.  That is, something with a high sec static.

We will be doing PI, and lots of it.  As such, I am looking for lots of planets.  'Perfect PI' is desirable, or even the ability to make POS fuel, but I doubt I would reject a system that had a majority of the rarer planet types.

From what I have seen, the higher the wormhole class, the more planets, but we also know that higher class wormholes can have more 'concurrent visitors'.  We would prefer a class 1 wormhole with lots of planets.  If such a system is available, I would pay more.

I am not 'exclusive'.  If you already have such a system, would like to remain in it, but hand over the setting up of poco's to someone else, I am sure that we can come to an arrangement.

Now, we have just bought the bookmark to an empty C1->HS system.  That is, the smallest class of wormhole, with a hisec exit.  For those that don't know, on any given day, we do not know where in highsec our exit will be, just that there will be one.

We paid 100M.  The PI is OK, but I do want better.  I bought the bookmark because it is the best system we have found recently, and wormholes with highsec exits are not offered for sale as often as those with lowsec exits.  If a better wormhole system is offered in the near future, we will buy it and sell this one.

Over the next few posts, I will be talking about where to buy or sell a wormhole, and my understanding of what likely buyers for different types of wormholes are looking for.

Next : How to find a wormhole for sale.

Friday 10 May 2013

How is that Eve blog list of yours

Many of us have our blog reading lists.  Some of us used Google reader, at least until the shutdown was announced (and coming soon).  I have moved to feedly.
My readership sources, in order are:
I get google links on the strength (or lack thereof) of my posts (though I also suspect google reader).

The next most important source of readers, is Eve Bloggers.  It's a great site, and has introduced many readers to my site, for better or worse.  The only problem is that the last blog list update that I can find on it is July 2012.  There is one site on that list that appears to be robot filled once/day.  There are new sites that should be on that list and are not (though I have submitted them on behalf of their authors).

Well, I can either complain, or do something about it.  I try not to indulge in pointless whining when there is something I can do.

So, I will (re) announce yet another blog roll.

I have added (almost) all the Eve bloggers list. I looked again at I have added those that are on my current reading list (which is actually much more than I have on the right hand side of this blog).  I have even started hunting through other blogs that I read, and have added many more blogs.  I also need to go back over the list and find any additions.

I however, have not yet finished even a first pass of looking at other blog lists.  Every so often the blogger interface doesn't want to play nice.  Other times, first life interferes, or I just want to play Eve.
  • 23 blogs with changes in the last 24 hours, plus
  • another 32 blogs with changes in the last week, plus
  • many more with older posts.
This is an open invite to leave your blog URL as a comment, either to this post or to the 'blogroll' website.  This post (read way down the bottom) gives the guidelines for inclusion.

If someone else wants to do a prettier job, or use/build a tool actually designed to handle this type of job, I am willing to point readers in your direction and/or come to an arrangement regarding the blogroll itself.

Thursday 9 May 2013

Breakdown of a wormhole vote part 2

Today's post is in response to Gevlon's post about the CSM; specifically exploring the exclusion rounds of the wormhole candidates : Cipreh and Ayeson.  This is also a follow up on yesterday's post.


  • Random leakage normally doesn't matter, unless someone is already close to a quota
  • Preferences clearly flowing in a direction do matter.
  • Leakage happens when voting 'below the line'.  
  • The wormhole 5 got the seats their vote allowed.

The analysis below pays no attention to where the votes originated from, merely looking at the result of these exclusions.  I also have not spent any time pulling apart the numbers on the null bloc candidates.

First of all I grabbed the votes from Trebor's analysis, grabbing the end of rounds (before and after) any two candidates are excluded.

I then look at the change in votes for all candidates as the candidate is excluded, both in raw terms and then in % of votes terms.

Numbers are available as either (crudely formatted) HTML below, or a google doc.

Exclusion of Cipreh

After this exclusion, 74% of Cipreh's votes remained within the wormhole group.

If you were to treat the WH group as a political party, they would prefer to retain more votes; but groups are leaking votes all over the place for many candidates.

The good news for the wormhole candidate is that the votes leak without strong preference flows to any set of candidates, with the 'preferred' non-wormhole candidate (Roc Weiler) only getting 0.9% benefit. 

I note that Ayeson,  got the least benefit (2.9%) of  the wormhole candidates from Cipreh's exclusion, and James Arget received the most benefit (10.2%)

Exclusion of Ayeson

After this exclusion, 58% of Ayeson's votes remained within the wormhole group.

This shows that Ayeson's supporters have a majority preference for other wormhole candidates, but only just a majority.

However, again the leakage is largely random with the preferred non wormhole candidate (Ali Aras) picking up 1.4%.   This compares to Nathan's 2.9% boost, and James 13.6% boost.

Common items from both exclusions

There is a high correlation between the strength of each candidate and the benefit they get from random leakage.  If you had a high vote before the exclusion, then you were likely to get more votes of the leakage.

When would this have mattered?

For this election, the random leakage would have only mattered if there was already a 'rival' candidate close to a quota. For example, if the quota was 2260 at the exclusion of Ayeson, then Ali would have been elected at that round.  However if a rival candidate was this close, they would have most likely been elected anyway.

In real life, I have however once seen this kind of leakage deliver a seat to a 'hostile' party.  It can happen, but not normally.

Below the line voting

This election was what we would call in Australia, 'below the line'. Read for a description of 'above the line' or 'below the line'.

In CSM 8, voters may have been given instructions on how to vote, but they had to select their their own candidates.  There will be leakage under these circumstances, but in the two excluded candidates I have looked at, there was no advantage to any candidate outside the wormhole group.

Now, if CSM bring in a 'simpler' form of voting, where, while notionally, votes are still STV, but you delegate the allocation of preferences to a group ticket ('above the line'), the leakage outside the ticket will be almost negligible.  In Australia, where the choice is given, the more candidates that someone has to vote for, the more likely they are to vote above the line, or not simply not cast a valid vote.

Leakage applies in both directions, both in and out.  Reduce one, and the other is generally reduced as well.

Real life comparison.

Even in real life, voters are notorious for not following ticket instructions.  Parties in Australia often will advise on who to send preferences to.  For 'below the line' elections, these are nearly as often disregarded as observed.  Party instructions matter, but voters will do their own thing.

Gevlon's claim that the WH group could get 3 candidates.

The wormhole group had less than 2 quota's of first preference votes. For them to have received a third seat would have taken an incredible flow from non-wh candidates, requiring over a quota of leaked votes from elsewhere.  While observations on previous elections are not laws to be followed, it would have been truly remarkable for that to occur.  Getting as close as they did was remarkable enough.

Initially, the wormhole group had 1.9 quotas; when Nathan Jameson was eliminated (the last eliminated candidate)  they had 2.4 quotas (or 1482 votes past the quota to elect the 2 seats they got)  The next candidate (Mike Azaria) had 0.9 quotas (or 2885 votes).  For the wormhole candidates to get the third spot, they have to get their third vote in front of Mike.  That is, pick up another 1404 votes.

There was a leakage from Cipreh of 154 votes, and a leakage for Ayeson of 311 votes; totalling 465 votes.  If the wormhole block had kept every single vote on their ticket, they still would have missed out on their third seat by 939 votes.

In my opinion, the wormhole candidates simply did not have the first preference votes to support a third seat, this time around, and had more than enough first preference votes to get the second seat.

[edit: see Gevlon's clarification below.  I may have misrepresented his position]

Table of results. (also available as a google doc)

candidateWith CiprehExclude CiprehChange%changeWith AyesonExclude Ayesonchange%change
Ali Aras21712178.647.640.35%2211.832242.1230.291.37%
Awol Aurix670.11670.190.080.01%000
Chitsa Jason1690.171847.8157.639.33%

Greene Lee1688.691691.963.270.19%1706.041718.7112.670.74%
James Arget1667.351837.76170.4110.22%
Kaleb Rysode608.22610.031.810.3%000
Kesper North2955.752960.494.740.16%33053300-5
Mangala Solaris2787.692802.8815.190.54%2876.052905.3829.331.02%
Mike Azariah1811.841814.772.930.16%1840.661854.1713.510.73%
Nathan Jameson1652.241744.1891.945.56%
Psychotic Monk1560.431566.76.270.4%1599.921617.5217.61.1%
Ripard Teg33133309-433053300-5
Roc Wieler833.54840.967.420.89%863.783874.07410.291.19%
Sala Cameron1563.761564.841.080.07%1892.331913.6521.321.13%
Sort Dragon3299.073301.212.140.06%33053300-5
Steve Ronuken1307.121308.311.190.09%1326.061337.0510.990.83%
Travis Musgrat966.43966.680.260.03%979.716980.8861.170.12%
Trebor Daehdoow2187.452204.5717.120.78%2242.122258.3916.270.73%
Unforgiven Storm970.69973.112.420.25%1298.451311.1512.70.98%
wormhole total6321.456167.2-154.246234.185922.91-311.27

PS.  Shameless ads for Eve posts are welcome, especially when on topic.  See tomorrow's post.

PPS.  I will not be writing about the CSM election for at least 2 days.  I have time to write posts such as these or time to play eve, but apparently not both.  Tomorrow's (non CSM) post is written and scheduled.  I also appear to fail terribly at writing short posts.

Wednesday 8 May 2013

Breakdown of the wormhole CSM vote

Some background reading.

In Australia, where preferential elections (or STV) are common place, a preferred method of a 'quick and dirty' analysis is to look at first preferences, then see where they leaked in previous elections.  Now, we did not have previous elections to look at, but just counting first preferences is still useful.

Taking Trebor's quota of 3314, the wormhole candidates had a first preference total of 6207 votes; or 1.9 quotas.  Up front, this is as close to a guarantee of one wormhole candidate, and an exceptional chance of 2 seats.  Conventional Australian voting 'wisdom' would suggest 2 candidates; with little likelyhood of any other result.

Interstellar Privateer has suggested "The wormholers got lucky this time."  I disagree, thinking they got exactly the candidates that the 'first preferences' of the vote suggested.

For the wormhole candidates to get a third seat, there would have to be massive haemorrhaging from other candidates.  For these candidates to get less than 2, they would have to be exceptionally unpopular with 'out of bloc' voters.

My technical recommendation for wormhole candidates for CSM8 is to attract additional known candidates; anyone that can bring 200 votes.  If you recall, there was a mittani post suggesting "You have 3000+ votes worth of power to bring an outsized wormhole candidate list".  The wormhole primary vote was over double this.

For comparision, I took the 6 Null Bloc candidates from Poetic Stanziel nullsec bloc ballot post.  These six got 13106 first preference votes or just shy of 4 quotas.  Again, traditional analysis says they get 4 seats and no other result is likely.

Remember fellow voters; this is no longer 'first past the post' where we need to concentrate the vote in just one or two candidates.  Within reason, anyone that brings votes to a 'ticket' is valuable to that ticket.  Just be a little careful about attracting the 'wrong' votes, eg certain candidates that caused enough trouble to be removed from the candidate list.

There is value in suggesting a voting list order; with your 'strongest' candiates at the top of the list, and your weaker candidates lower down.  The wormhole candidates missed out on this, and could have done with some (informal) primary to suggest a consistent order.  That said, there is nothing wrong with using your own personal appeal, and on any candidate's personal ticket, putting themselves first.
  • At a minimum, you should have sufficient candidates so that if everything goes your way you have everyone elected + 1 spare.
  • At most, you should have one candidate for every seat.
  • Everyone on your ticket should be capable of attracting votes in their own right.
  • Apart from your 'own' name on top, agreeing on the order of names is to a bloc's benefit.
I style myself a bit of an amateur psephologist.  I know very little about 'first past the post' elections, but I do follow the local (preferential) elections and commentary fairly closely.

For the next election, we have some better analysis tools (assuming they keep the same voting system).

We know roughly the corp/alliance sizes of various factions, and rough readership of various blogs; and how that turned up in votes this time around.  We know where votes ended up, both in first preference and how those preferences played out.  We can use this to extrapolate likely winners.

There were surprises; for me they were: congratulations to Ali Aras for such a strong showing - better than many thought; and maybe consolations to Nathan Jameson who surprised some by not getting in. 

The has been a large degree of acceptance, with the only grumbling seeming to be either the mechanics of voting or a general cry that those that could organise voters got a few more seats.

This was going to be a quick and short reply to Intertsellar Privateer's post.  Umm... I don't seem to do quick and short very well.

Saturday 4 May 2013

Imagine a tower defense mini game in eve

I am not talking (just) about structure bashes.

Imagine a game where the defenders have a choice between resource yield and defensive ability; defenders also get to choose the delay before offensive retaliation - again trading resource yield vs delay in retaliation.

Now for the attackers, the smart ones will chose targets that have picked maximum resource yield, minimum defensive ability, and long delays before offensive retaliation.

I think there would be corporations formed to play such a game; both on the defensive and offensive sides.  As either defender or attacker, do it right and riches can be yours.

Of course, there will be some that say such mini games are not possible in Eve, but I disagree.

I would call such a mini game Caldari Ice Fields; or maybe the Niarja gauntlet.  I hear that some play 'catch the WH planet gooer'  (I might be at keyboard but after the umpteenth planet I am not always aware)

Now the trick is to extend this form of gameplay : i.e. afk 'tower defense' into other regions of space.  Possibly an drone that appears from a distance to be a mining drone but in reality is a long latency; high alpha retaliatory weapon.

Bashing AFK farmers has been popular lately. Dual meaning fully intended.