Jumphole Overhaul

[Batavia]

Unlike him I never claimed to have done any math on this.

Yeah, that's pretty evident.

You're proposing to modify what looks like a small-world network into a scale-free network while it's actually an Erdős–Rényi random network (by design). Your proposed changes are merely cosmetic and don't address the topology of the network. The weight of individual vertices remain the same and the statistical likelihood of a player being in any given location at any given time remains roughly the same, barring small local shifts that represent only a tiny fraction of all possible states. This remains the case, ceteris paribus, regardless of the amount of edges you add and remove as long as vertex weight remains homogeneous. To create a scale-free network, you actually have to increase vertex weight heterogeneity. In order to create distinct, balanced clusters of vertices, graph modularity has to be increased as well to approach a hierarchical network.

I'm arguing clear cut cause and effect. If the same number of people have to go through one system instead of having the choice of three they could pass through, more people will encounter in the one system than will encounter in the three combined. It ain't rocket science.

If three routes individually facilitate 1% of traffic, cutting two of them still makes the third one have only 3% of traffic, which is a negligible increase. Players would not notice the difference. Your error lies in comparing only the three routes to each other, rather than comparing them globally to all routes. In reality, you wouldn't even get triple the traffic because previous destinations are no longer valid. That's what's meant by "cutting content".

Discovery isn't a real economy

It is. The Discovery economy being virtual doesn't mean that it doesn't obey economic principles. There isn't a separate set of rules that sets virtual economies apart from physical ones. Why? Because players are real people, with real motivations, using the same kind of cost analysis.

Throwing around jargon, a picture that has nothing to do with how discovery really works, claims of numbers without showing where they come from, and calling people ignorant doesn't change that.

p.s: the point is that there aren't any papers that refute claims that microbiology is applicable to travel in discovery freelancer. If I were to claim that some principle of microbiology that was published in some paper was applicable to discovery, I'd have to show why its applicable enough to make extrapolate estimates from scientific papers, without making loads of false assumptions.

Now if you could kindly stop whining about technical terms being used .. it'd be appreciated.