open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The First Quarterly Economic Newsletter for 2010
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

CCP Fallout

Posted - 2010.06.10 17:12:00 - [1]
 

It's that time! Dr. EyjoG and the Research and Statistics team have compiled the latest, greatest QEN Q1 2010. Check out Doc's blog for more information.

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
Posted - 2010.06.10 17:17:00 - [2]
 

Ahh the numbers! Very Happy

nails
Caldari
Ota Corps
Posted - 2010.06.10 17:38:00 - [3]
 

This is an excellent idea! I will enjoy reading this on my tablet.

Estel Arador
Posted - 2010.06.10 17:57:00 - [4]
 

Nice ugh

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2010.06.10 18:04:00 - [5]
 

Yay!

A new QEN! Woooot!

Smoke Adian
Caldari
League of Gentlemen
Posted - 2010.06.10 18:29:00 - [6]
 

a) How does one person lose 16 T3's in a year?

b) Can I get an invite to the WH system that has 45 strategic cruisers sitting in it?

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror
Posted - 2010.06.10 18:48:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Smoke Adian
a) How does one person lose 16 T3's in a year?

b) Can I get an invite to the WH system that has 45 strategic cruisers sitting in it?

Answers:
a. See profligately
b. Probably not.

Since I can't really say it better than someone else already has, allow me to simply quote her here (edited for format):

Originally by: Mme Pinkerton
IMO a good report on the state of the economy should feature the following:

(1) what are our general policy goals?
(2) what happened since the last report
(3) how did our policies/actions work out during that period?
(4) what do we expect to happen without us doing anything unusual?
(5) in broad terms - what are we going to do to tweak/avoid the scenario in (4)
(6) in-depth review of some topic of general interest

currently CCP does (2), (6) and to a very limited degree (3).

(1) and (4), (5) would add a great deal of transparency and predictability to the economy of EVE.

Some people might want to add
(5*) what is going to happen when taking the actions from (5) into account.
IMO that kind of prediction when made by the policymaker himself will always be unrealistically optimistic and of little real value. there are other arguments for/against this point but I don't think it's a good idea to include this in public reports.


MDD

Proctoria Khian
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.06.10 19:08:00 - [8]
 

Been waiting for this one, drooling over it now.
Great Stuff!

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2010.06.10 19:40:00 - [9]
 

Hooray! Thank you for your work. : >

Yuki Kulotsuki
Posted - 2010.06.10 19:42:00 - [10]
 

Sweet. Although to be honest I'm more looking forward to the next one.

Josehpine
Posted - 2010.06.10 20:01:00 - [11]
 

the part of the t3 stuff is missing an important ingridient. What was the influence of the changes to ancient salvage loot to them, id guess the two spikes, or the drops after them were due to them, but there no mention of that important fact in the dev blog

wr3cks
Reliables Inc
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2010.06.10 20:14:00 - [12]
 

Once again, this sucks.

Ship types in use conveys no useful information, because it obviously consists of a query that says "what ship type are people in RIGHT NOW" with 320k users and no more than 50k online (and I bet you're not running the script at peak usage times -- in fact, are you running it at downtime?).

A useful query would be ships destroyed in the past month or three, preferably broken down into ships destroyed by rats (in pve) and by other players (pvp). Group it by ship classes (battleships, recons) for one report and for specific ships (dominix, falcons) for another. It would also be useful to see the relative popularity of ships within classes (what's the most popular HAC?).

Instead, you tell us that 42% of players are in shuttles or capsules, and 43% are in "other" while there are a couple % of people logged off in hulks, drakes, domis, ravens, and crappy frigates. Worthless.

Population distribution -- if you played the game, you might know that the CVA/provi block fell apart and there was a lot of fighting there. "This can be theorized as being the result of a large shift in the political landscape..." Oh, you can theorize that? What kind of garbage is this? That's something you write on a college exam in some gut class for which you haven't done the reading, like rocks for jocks (geology 101) or physics for poets. One could also theorize that if you played the game, you might have a clue what was going on in it.

Mineral prices -- Giving us indices without basket compositions is worthless. It would be like reporting on the Dow Jones Industrial Average without telling people what the stocks in it were, and how they were weighted in the index. You might as well tell us that it's 11i+3.

Your discussion of insurance fraud would have been solid had it been done six months ago. You basically reposted what 10 people replied to your last QEN with. Congrats.

Had you any initiative or interest in this game that you don't play, you might have done some research to see how big, in isk terms, the insurance fraud scam was, and given some assessment of its impact on the economy. But I guess it's too much work to do anything but repost some 3 month old replies in a PDF with spaceship pictures.

Treatment of high-ends was actually decent and useful, if brief.

More useless indices. The PPI, comprised of t2 stuff and also ice and drone poo in unknown quantities, went up by smileyface minus interrobang.

Actual t2 ship production meausred in tonnes is useful, information, though, but it's unclear whether the % increases are YOY or consecutive. I'd rather have a chart of this than some randomly constructed index.

The t3/WH section is actually decent and displays some knowledge of the game. Props. Makes me wonder if it was even written by the same person.

Snapshots -- The prereq for Hacking was reduced from a 10 day-2 week skill (electronics upgrades 5) to being less than 2 days. Plus, now noobs have the exploration skill tutorial, which tricks them into thinking that exploration without combat training is a viable career path. Nobody even knows if those stupid ihub upgrades to increase radar site spawns even work; read the forums. Ditto for analyzer.

The prereq for t1 armor hardeners changed? News to me. But who cares, the prereqs were stupid low to begin with.


Bottom line: This is bad. I hope he didn't spend more than two days on it. It was written by someone who has little knowledge of or interest in the game. I have a graduate degree in economics and actually enjoy the game and play it, and no job. Evemail me if you want a resume.

Alice Celadon
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.06.10 20:42:00 - [13]
 

Quote:
The interesting thing is that ancient salvaged materials show two major spikes in
price in May and July. The first spike is almost entirely caused by Neurovisual Input Matrices, while
the second one is primarily driven by Neurovisual Input Matrices and Melted Nanoribbons. It would
seem that the scarcity of these items came as a surprise to the market.


Free of charge, here's the correct explanation for this: CCP Devs twice increased the drop rate for NIMs, because they were an absurd bottleneck driving T3 prices far higher than CCP Devs wanted them to go. The second drop rate increase eliminated NIMs as a significant production cost in favor of a new Melted Nanoribbon bottleneck.

These drop rate changes are nearly impossible to predict, because they show up in patch notes as "The drop rate for Neurovisual Input Matrices has been increased." which is impossible to quantify. What's really troubling is that it seems CCP was "surprised by the scarcity" of these items -- even though CCP Devs should have access to the relative drop rates of T3 production materials. Given all that, the above quote from QEN really disturbs me. Does the economics team really not even get consulted when drop rates are formulated and altered?

iP0D
Posted - 2010.06.10 20:42:00 - [14]
 

Going over the introductory and other comments annex statements in the QEN, I get the impression this was either pieced together quite a while ago, or glued together from bits and pieces ranging from well before Dominion to well before Tyrannis. Either that, or seriously behind schedule in its release to public.


Also, snapshot data. Please stay away from it.

El Liptonez
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2010.06.10 20:59:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: El Liptonez on 10/06/2010 21:03:29
Originally by: wr3cks
Once again, this sucks.Bottom line: This is bad. I hope he didn't spend more than two days on it. It was written by someone who has little knowledge of or interest in the game. I have a graduate degree in economics and actually enjoy the game and play it, and no job. Evemail me if you want a resume.


Ship types in use: So you leave your ship during downtime and then hop back afterwards? While I agree that a snapshot is surely not the best way to see what ships are flown, your idea is just dumb. Ships being blown up shows in no way what ships are flown the most. What it shows is, which are blown up the most. Shocked

Poluation distribution: Ever considered that the guy writing this doesn't even need to play the game? I'd rather have him tell vast theories about what might have happened than write some theoretical ****. It's pretty obvious there has been a shift simply by the whole south moving north plus old providence now living in the north. But who cares?

The mineral price thing I didn't read at all, not the report and not your reply. It's only a ton of rant and tears anyway.

Bottom line: You're a terrible whiny ***** and I hope you die in a fire (ingame) for the **** you posted. The writer surely hasn't spent only two days to write this, as this is in fact a very interesting read, aside the fact that most people know what's said there anyway. We should applaud him for giving us a little snapshot at what happens in EVE from a market angle. And I am more than happy that you don't write these reports, as they'd probably burst my head over the awesome intelligence powers you have.

Your attitude is probably the reason you don't have a job.

ChaeDoc II
Gallente
Sigillum Militum Xpisti
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.06.10 21:12:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Smoke Adian
a) How does one person lose 16 T3's in a year?

b) Can I get an invite to the WH system that has 45 strategic cruisers sitting in it?



Sure, just join 'CCRES Public' channel ingame :)

Pierru
Posted - 2010.06.10 21:30:00 - [17]
 

The report really sucks, but I think is a very good idea .. anyway.

Some interesting data confuses me, as I understand it says that 88% of EVE population actually live in HiSec (and LowSec), and only 12% lives in Aliance/WH space? What the Dev mean when he say "live"? Most players usually move from HiSec to lowsec/null/WH and viceversa.

:)

wr3cks
Reliables Inc
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2010.06.10 21:52:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: El Liptonez
Edited by: El Liptonez on 10/06/2010 21:03:29
Originally by: wr3cks
Once again, this sucks.Bottom line: This is bad. I hope he didn't spend more than two days on it. It was written by someone who has little knowledge of or interest in the game. I have a graduate degree in economics and actually enjoy the game and play it, and no job. Evemail me if you want a resume.


Ship types in use: So you leave your ship during downtime and then hop back afterwards? While I agree that a snapshot is surely not the best way to see what ships are flown, your idea is just dumb. Ships being blown up shows in no way what ships are flown the most. What it shows is, which are blown up the most. Shocked



Ship consumption is valuable information. Static ship usage is not, particularly when 85% of the ships are shuttle, capsule, or other.

Originally by: El Liptonez
Edited by: El Liptonez on 10/06/2010 21:03:29
Poluation distribution: I'd rather have him tell vast theories about what might have happened than write some theoretical ****.



Can't argue with that.

Originally by: El Liptonez
Edited by: El Liptonez on 10/06/2010 21:03:29
The mineral price thing I didn't read at all, not the report and not your reply. It's only a ton of rant and tears anyway.



Sweet. Can you tell me more about things you haven't read?

Originally by: El Liptonez
Edited by: El Liptonez on 10/06/2010 21:03:29
Bottom line: You're a terrible whiny ***** and I hope you die in a fire (ingame) for the **** you posted. The writer surely hasn't spent only two days to write this, as this is in fact a very interesting read, aside the fact that most people know what's said there anyway. We should applaud him for giving us a little snapshot at what happens in EVE from a market angle. And I am more than happy that you don't write these reports, as they'd probably burst my head over the awesome intelligence powers you have.

Your attitude is probably the reason you don't have a job.


+1 for quality trolling attempt.

Solo Player
Posted - 2010.06.10 21:56:00 - [19]
 

Very nice screenshots in that report. Why don't you add them to your media section so I could use them for desktop backgrounds?

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2010.06.10 22:28:00 - [20]
 

No insurance discussion, no t3 salvage bottleneck discussion, no idea why analyzer spiked in usage.

the rest is almost as useful as an akita t post (apart from his posts in mining related threads), and the pictures are pwetty Surprised

Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2010.06.10 22:59:00 - [21]
 

The population increase in the North and the associated decreases in the South are prolly due to the large War we just had up North. I'm looking forward to seeing what happened during April and May, while the conflict raged.

Please try to give us some analysis of that next quarter, as it was a hell of a fight, lasted exactly 2 months (April 1 to the end of May) and certainly will show predominately pvp ship losses. Also look at Technium during that period as most of the Tech moons in Pure Blind and surrounds spent more time in Reinforced mode than actually producing.

You should also get a good picture of what ships are being used for PVP.

Trader Jen
Posted - 2010.06.10 23:51:00 - [22]
 

someone forget to tell you guys that the first quarter of 2010 ended over 2 months ago?

Shaemell Buttleson
Posted - 2010.06.10 23:54:00 - [23]
 

Going off on a bit of a tangent here I'd like to know how many skill points the pilot lost who lost the 16 Strategic cruisers.




Thoraemond
Minmatar
Far Ranger
Posted - 2010.06.11 01:18:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: QEN 2010-Q1
The number of characters per account is 1.99, which is a slight decrease from the previous figure of 2.1 per account. Given the large sample size, this is actually a statistically significant decrease, but it is too soon to tell whether the change is permanent.

Why would you use sampling at all? I thought these QEN numbers were being drawn from the entire population / database.


Dragon Greg
Posted - 2010.06.11 01:20:00 - [25]
 

I am sorry, apologies if the following comes across a little harsh, but this is not a QEN. This is a marketing document.

Just read carefully the section of Population Distribution, pair the conclusions per paragraph with each other, and see what it says and how the "conclusions" are being presented.

This has nothing to do with EVE's economics, this was written to send off to a marketing campaign, maybe even to send off to joint collaboration projects on virtual economy studies, but that is about it.

Cinori Aluben
Minmatar
Gladiators of Rage
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.06.11 01:31:00 - [26]
 

Berrry good. Will have to chew on these numbers for a bit. Cool

Xyfu
Minmatar
Love From Above
Posted - 2010.06.11 02:48:00 - [27]
 

Holy cr*p page 19, I almost came.

It was all like: SUDDENLY, ART. OUT OF NOWHERE.

orkorde
Oak RnD
Posted - 2010.06.11 03:12:00 - [28]
 

Wasn't Dominion meant to encourage the populating of Null Sec? Based on that report, it failed. (Worse - populations are now more densely focused in the regions North and South, so under the umbrella of a very small number of power blocks.)

Also a pity that you did not report on population density this time. Would have been interesting to see where Providence sits now compared to the end of 2009.

Asiel
Caldari
The Baby Sitters
Caretakers
Posted - 2010.06.11 08:27:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Asiel on 11/06/2010 08:29:52
eve economic experts rofl


some players had figured out just before the 1st release date of tyrannis that there was some isk to be made on market changes.

eve economic experts thought they could prevent that, by completely undercutting there whole pi system and giving people more time to figure out the market changes.

now 100's of millions of those items have been bought at npc market and gonna rule PI product price's for some time to come.


dev economic team + PI is FAIL

ps. i mean why go doing a stupid clickidy clicking mini game when you can get the items on market cheap.

try buying a cheap pos and reprocess it that gives some nice items









iP0D
Posted - 2010.06.11 09:28:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Thoraemond
Originally by: QEN 2010-Q1
The number of characters per account is 1.99, which is a slight decrease from the previous figure of 2.1 per account. Given the large sample size, this is actually a statistically significant decrease, but it is too soon to tell whether the change is permanent.

Why would you use sampling at all? I thought these QEN numbers were being drawn from the entire population / database.




Because first of all it would otherwise be way too much work, when there is so much more really interesting stuff to pursue, like research projects and such. Second of all, different methods would actually rock the boat, in terms of having to report on macro demographical impacts and more interesting demographical patterns which are not very comforting from a commercial point of view.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only