open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Price Indices - June 2011
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

The Offerer
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.07.25 17:45:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG

We have not published QENs for 2010 and will most likely not publish them in the previous format but rather moving the Economic Newsletters to more of an annual report. The frequency of the publication is though still being discussed.


There are too many reasons to list here why I do not like THIS at all.

This is denying players information that has been relied upon for years. CCP is really changing too much to soon.

I truly do believe minds have been lost at CCP, they have absolutely no direction, and SEEM to be deliberately ANGERING as many players as can be humanly possible in the shortest amount of time possible.




Well, I can speak for myself only, but looks to me that giving the raw data to the players is a step forward compared to QEN. I can find much better use for raw data, especially if it would be available in CSV format like in this devblog.

After all, we did have an economy expert who isn't involved directly in everyday economy of EVE. Many conclusions and decisions by EVE's economic team were just wrong (or misleading at best). With this new format the players themselves will have enough information to make their own analysis and conclusions.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.07.25 17:56:00 - [32]
 

Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 25/07/2011 17:56:58
Originally by: Krixtal Icefluxor
THERE IS NO NEED. AT ALL. Sweet Jesus what are you trying to do here??? Can you give just ONE GOOD REASON why this should be? Just one?

The QEN costs a lot of time & effort to compile, has lost its novelty value as a marketing instrument and was not especially useful to the people who care about EVE's in-game economy anyways.

Eventually giving us access to an automatically compiled collection of economic data (e.g. similar to FRED) would be cheaper for CCP and allows the community to do whatever analysis it desires.

The past QENs were just fluff pieces with shiny pictures - very little hard substance (which was usually presented in a not very transparent way), no analysis worth speaking of, no evaluation of past policy, no predictions, ... just shiny graphs, mostly useless metrics, and everything kept purely descriptive, ...

Only value was as marketing material and to impress new players.

Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
Posted - 2011.07.25 17:58:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
Originally by: Gripen
Is this blog a replacement for the QEN?


We will change the format of the QEN but this devblog and the data that comes along with it is an addition to other economic information available to the players. This is a part of a larger plan to give more data directly to players so that they can do their own analysis. And yes, this will continue in the future.

We have not published QENs for 2010 and will most likely not publish them in the previous format but rather moving the Economic Newsletters to more of an annual report. The frequency of the publication is though still being discussed.


It has nothing to do with the fact people are interested in what Akita T has to say about the figures and not Dr.Eyjog

Rolling Eyes

Zirse
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:07:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Ferguson
Edited by: Jonathan Ferguson on 25/07/2011 16:55:13
Originally by: J Kunjeh
No more quarterly's? Aww man, that bums me out. Why the sudden change?




Because fudging the numbers to make the economy not look horribly broken is hard? Because CCP stopped giving a ****?

I'd settle for the public release of a few more back issues of Fearless; that would be far more illuminating than an economic newsletter for a 'sandbox' video game whose 'economy' is based on botting/RMTing and now microtransactions/dev interference. Make it happen, Doc!


FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, STOP ****ING WHINING.


Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:18:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
I wonder if the falling price of data cores is related to the lack of demand for ships?

Would people PvP less if their income stream was cut off at the knees?


It has a lot to do with a dramatic decrease in the use of T2 ship fleets for fighting in null.

Ban Doga
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:20:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
We have not published QENs for 2010


Originally by: CCP Fallout
Dr.EyjoG's newest dev blog introduces the most recent Quarterly Economic Report, covering the fourth quarter of 2010.


How's proofreading developing in Iceland?
Anyone tried it yet?

Takashi Kaeda
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:23:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Ban Doga
Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
We have not published QENs for 2010


Originally by: CCP Fallout
Dr.EyjoG's newest dev blog introduces the most recent Quarterly Economic Report, covering the fourth quarter of 2010.


How's proofreading developing in Iceland?
Anyone tried it yet?


Bitter John Spergason alt detected.

Ban Doga
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:26:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Takashi Kaeda

Bitter John Spergason alt detected.


You might want to get your detector looked at.

mvrck22
Posted - 2011.07.25 18:57:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: The Offerer


Well, I can speak for myself only, but looks to me that giving the raw data to the players is a step forward compared to QEN. I can find much better use for raw data, especially if it would be available in CSV format like in this devblog.

After all, we did have an economy expert who isn't involved directly in everyday economy of EVE. Many conclusions and decisions by EVE's economic team were just wrong (or misleading at best). With this new format the players themselves will have enough information to make their own analysis and conclusions.


Which means you have to trust them to provide meaningful raw data, not the data for those 4 indexes which are not only restrictive but also well, a mess. Go over them for a bit, dig a little deeper, and you can see the preselections of type and category.

Besides, the raw data for those four indexes is out already.

Problem is, not only does this move strongly negate some very deep and binding aspects of EVE's gameplay - for a lot of us with jobs and lives who still like the puzzle even if we can't spend 6 hours a day having amazing fun shooting a structure - it also pushes us into another realm of mistrust. No way to verify data, unless CCP truly aim to deliver actual raw data ... something which in the past they have always refrained from under the argument of this being too much insight.

But I can understand people's concerns that too much insight is not good. Still, I can also understand that structural and consistant insight is required. A balance has to be found. Kneejerking into an extreme, is simply not an option. I would have thought that the last 4 years of such a tradition would have taught CCP that this does not lead to monetary rewards. It's the kind of thing that compromises the experience. But hey, I am sure it is possible to compensate through advertising campaigns to get engaged in another higher paced ratrace for direct sales right.

Look, CCP, if you really want to put your shoulders under it, please learn that communication is a two way street, and one which always requires a sense of urgency and a sense of perspective.

Right now, all that is visible is something too close to the impression of "it's too much, we don't want to do it anymore cause both us and eve being part of the dynamic is just getting too much, so instead of doing what has always worked for growing EVE we're just going to start cutting off pieces".
I'm not saying that this is the situation, but you should understand that in absence of information and in light of established precedents it can not be a surprise that such impressions are created.

So, let's communicate!

And no, this is not something where the excuse of "anyone can write a paper on any position" flies.

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.07.25 19:14:00 - [40]
 

QEN for AUR, calling it now.

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.25 19:36:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: J Kunjeh on 25/07/2011 19:37:39
So yeah, color me disappointed in CCP today, presuming that the QEN really is dead. Jester, as usual, has posted some very pointed and insightful commentary on his latest blog post (why this guy didn't get voted onto CSM6, I'll never understand).

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2011.07.25 20:38:00 - [42]
 

425mm Railgun I
Runs: 14,300,092
Traded: 2,362,769

Hybrids suck except for being a good mineral compression system I guess. Proof that Rorqual needs a buff I'm guessing. Proof that lowsec and 0.0 manufacturing needs buffing.

Perhaps highsec capital ships and rorquals sitting outside stations cooking off will likely be awesome. Also ya most of that stuff is going toward scaps which are ballooning because of the sov 4 nerf which also clearly has been shown not to be effective.

Miscells McGhee
Posted - 2011.07.25 20:57:00 - [43]
 

CCP is slowly but surely taking away everything that made this game unique.

The Economy and the Community are the only two things that interest me about this game anymore, and they're already working to kill the second.

Dealth Striker
Caldari
Striker Ltd
Posted - 2011.07.25 22:02:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: J Kunjeh
Edited by: J Kunjeh on 25/07/2011 19:37:39
So yeah, color me disappointed in CCP today, presuming that the QEN really is dead. Jester, as usual, has posted some very pointed and insightful commentary on his latest blog post (why this guy didn't get voted onto CSM6, I'll never understand).


I agree 100% with you and Jester. I rather enjoyed reading Jester's blog - CCP's was crap and nothing new that one who plays the market could figure out.
I believe that things are going downhill and CCP does not want the numbers to come out. I think they might need more time to try and make things look better by playing with the numbers.

Kandreath
Posted - 2011.07.25 22:06:00 - [45]
 

Oh dear, a second post from me on this thread. Is that against some kind of rule?

I totally missed that the release of this devblog also signals the end of the QEN. ;(

I'm not a hardcore marketer, but I do take a good read of the QEN when it arrives. If nothing else I find the content interesting as it shows "cause and effect" relationships that you can leverage, is it's just interesting for its own sake.

Personally I do try to puzzle out what would be good to make/buy/trade based on QEN's. Just the indices do not give me the same insight.

Lets not forget the QEN gave good information on population, ships, manufactured goods ect. It is this information I'd miss them most. The QEN made my buy my Hurricane and a 5 run copy to try out.

Finally, there is more to Eve then Phew-Phew/Boom-Boom. The Player driven economy is one of the most amazing things to me about the game. The information in the QEN helps drive that. Sure sure, if the QEN has to go then that is that, but please provide the additional information (on top of the numbers given in this blog) some other way. - An API perhaps? - a supported third party that reports market trends?

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.25 22:51:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Kandreath
Oh dear, a second post from me on this thread. Is that against some kind of rule?

I totally missed that the release of this devblog also signals the end of the QEN. ;(

I'm not a hardcore marketer, but I do take a good read of the QEN when it arrives. If nothing else I find the content interesting as it shows "cause and effect" relationships that you can leverage, is it's just interesting for its own sake.

Personally I do try to puzzle out what would be good to make/buy/trade based on QEN's. Just the indices do not give me the same insight.

Lets not forget the QEN gave good information on population, ships, manufactured goods ect. It is this information I'd miss them most. The QEN made my buy my Hurricane and a 5 run copy to try out.

Finally, there is more to Eve then Phew-Phew/Boom-Boom. The Player driven economy is one of the most amazing things to me about the game. The information in the QEN helps drive that. Sure sure, if the QEN has to go then that is that, but please provide the additional information (on top of the numbers given in this blog) some other way. - An API perhaps? - a supported third party that reports market trends?


A great post and one I agree with. I really like your suggestion at the bottom there about an API so that developers could make applications using the raw data. If they gave us more info via the API, then the QEN going away would sting a little less, though the QEN is a great loss in its own right. Having the Doc's analysis of the markets every quarter was a part of what made Eve real for me.

Kerrisone
Posted - 2011.07.25 23:13:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Kerrisone on 25/07/2011 23:13:32
Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
Originally by: Gripen
Is this blog a replacement for the QEN?


We will change the format of the QEN but this devblog and the data that comes along with it is an addition to other economic information available to the players. This is a part of a larger plan to give more data directly to players so that they can do their own analysis. And yes, this will continue in the future.

We have not published QENs for 2010 and will most likely not publish them in the previous format but rather moving the Economic Newsletters to more of an annual report. The frequency of the publication is though still being discussed.


I am reminded for some reason of the announcement last year that there would be no 2010 fanfest and instead it would be held at a different time in 2011. Which oddly came right after the player rage of the 18months declaration from CCP.

Jim Luc
Caldari
Rule of Five
Vera Cruz Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.26 00:08:00 - [48]
 

Will this data be available through the API?

Gogela
Freeport Exploration
Posted - 2011.07.26 00:18:00 - [49]
 

Numbers that could look bad:

Arrow Total # Of Active Accounts
If this moved down significantly, it may be that advertising it is a bad idea. However, not including a metric that's been in every prior QEN would be a pretty glaring omission and cause some negative speculation, which might be just as bad from a marketing perspective.

Arrow Population Distribution
Did a significant # of players move out of null sec recently?

Arrow Money Supply
If this went down while prices were dropping on minerals, it might be a bad sign.

I wonder if the problem with the QENs was about resources at CCP or about what the data showed.

Too bad... I'm not really a market guy, but I did read the QENs.


E man Industries
Posted - 2011.07.26 04:30:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
Originally by: Gripen
Is this blog a replacement for the QEN?


We will change the format of the QEN but this devblog and the data that comes along with it is an addition to other economic information available to the players. This is a part of a larger plan to give more data directly to players so that they can do their own analysis. And yes, this will continue in the future.

We have not published QENs for 2010 and will most likely not publish them in the previous format but rather moving the Economic Newsletters to more of an annual report. The frequency of the publication is though still being discussed.


Boooooo, Really enjoyed those.

Also a QEN got me into eve,,,,i thought any game with this depth has got to be interesting.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:27:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG
Originally by: Gripen
Is this blog a replacement for the QEN?


We will change the format of the QEN but this devblog and the data that comes along with it is an addition to other economic information available to the players. This is a part of a larger plan to give more data directly to players so that they can do their own analysis. And yes, this will continue in the future.

We have not published QENs for 2010 and will most likely not publish them in the previous format but rather moving the Economic Newsletters to more of an annual report. The frequency of the publication is though still being discussed.


could you provide the equivalent of 10q's with some sort of standard break down of market volumes, total ships sold , ships exploded by type. gross bounties earned, mission payouts earned, isk value of skill books sold by npcs, and a few others

You don't need to take the time to do any analysis.. just give us a few pages of 50 entries a page on excel sheets.

The price indexes aren't terribly interesting to me (as I can see them myself for one thing). Data that you have that we have very little abilty to gauge however is

I understand that much of the joy of trading comes from the mystery of discovering specific niches so I think that it is less important to break the data down item by item on module level but ship types, or at least ship class types (battlecruisers, battle****p etc) blown up would be a very intersting metric that wouldn't give huge trade advantage in specific items but would really be economic news for us.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:31:00 - [52]
 

So, I would think that less ships being blown up would be a very material factor in the price of ores and datacores.

and ultimately, less ships being blown up means less ships being built..

If we can see that more ships were being build in March then June, yet than in May they were balanced, we might surmise a massive arming prior to major campaigns, some reshipping, then a lack of ships being blown up as whol nations (corporations) retreated and held back from replacing losses of capital as they had admitted defeat and had no more will to fight.

Jon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:45:00 - [53]
 

I quite like this post over on failheap.

An excerpt:

"The long and short of it is that if CCP had now to write a fair, unbalanced, and objective QEN (or any report really) about the EVE economy, that in it they would have to own up to the fact that over the years a number of their rare interventions have all gone rather poorly to outright badly, and that the consequence of that now is that the EVE economy as a whole, and in particular as an enjoyable player experience, is quite in the doldrums. In the end all the Milton Friedman rhetoric can't hide the fact that sizeable parts of the EVE economy are fundamentally broken while others are sterile wastelands compared to what they should be. I.e., there is something rotten in the state of Denmark and things are not as healthy and enjoyable as they should have been. The idea that players, with their visible hand or not, could or should fix this forgets that for a large part they are patently incapable of doing so with the tools and numbers available and moreover places the burden that should be rightfully CCP's somewhere where it is not wanted and where it can only be misapplied. In the end it is CCP's game to run, and the players game to own. Anything else is just incompetence and a lazy dismissal to act when in fact no one else can.

CCP knows this, it has even admitted as much to the CSM, in black and white, in the minutes (CSM5 to be clear, CSM6 is, as usual, not on the ball). And the reality is that the only one to blame for that is CCP. And CCP simply doesn't want to own up to that because: 1. the 'unique' EVE economy is still something they trod out at every opportunity and they don't want to spoil its marketing value, and 2. the players will, quite rightfully so, point the finger and apportion the blame squarely to CCP and the people it hired for 'guiding' it. The question: "But why didn't you do something about it then", in the end, is not unreasonable. Not any more. Neither option is very attractive if: you are the one hired to 'deal' with it while you are also the one to write the QENs, and CCP just had a number of quite spectacular scandals behind it (all touching on the supposedly healthy EVE economy). So now the QENs, even as deluded as they sometimes were, have become an inconvenience to CCP. OK then.

This is nothing against Dr Eggnog personally, although he'll no doubt feel differently about it. He's probably a nice fellow, and yes, indeed, he may have been trying, or actually pushing, for all of this behind the corporate mask. Perhaps he is ignored or shunted out of the discussions he should, by all rights, be involved in. I have no clue. I don't know how things are dealt with internally at CCP (not very good I from what I do see and hear). But frankly, neither do you. But the buck stops somewhere, otherwise we'll go round and round in circles for ever (insert Pinky Pie clip). But, like it or not, dear Dr Eggnog is the public face for CCP for dealing with the EVE economy. And tallying up the score over the years, whatever the internal communication or situation, it doesn't look good. At any rate, who else do you want me to address? If he himself gets carted, or carts himself, out into the public eye as the 'EVE economy man'?"

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:50:00 - [54]
 

(avoiding walls of text with shorter posts)

Do you have a way to access production numbers of a a give item per day as opposed to numbers of an item traded?

Those numbers could tell different stories and the production numbers might be more of a leading indicator.

- i'm also curious what percentage of the ship production economy avoids markets altogether (manufactured for own purpose, or bartered or sold player to player)

- I'm curious in terms of ship Destructions, how bumpy of a line the ships per day, battleships per day, capital ships per day etc is (and commesurately those same numbers on a weekly and monthly basis). What sort of deviations between an average day/week of destructions and a quiet, or red hot day/week do you see? Do 10% of the days see 5 or 10 times the numbers of ships destroyed or does the size of the universe and numbers of players even that out so that a 20% deviation from average is extreme.

(btw, all numbers must be some-how made neutral by the day of the week because we want to compare sundayds to sundays, not sundays to tuesdays.. weekly numbers help I suppose in a way that might be less complicated to quickly grasp yet the day to day numbers are still interesting even if broader themes might not be taken from them.

Llyandrian
Amarr
Livestock Science Exchange
Posted - 2011.07.26 08:00:00 - [55]
 


In future these CONCORD figures should be provided using YC dates.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.07.26 08:36:00 - [56]
 

MAN that was one heap of cliche's strung together without saying anything at failheap

... I do agree that its always a warning sign when there is a sudden change in methods of finacial reporting etc (but I could see it being a resource issue too...too much arguing between developers, marketing and the economists which probably wastes like 12 times the efforts of putting the informational part of the Qen together.

But, I'd need to know quite a bit more of what you're getting at to understand the major blunders and simply obvious routes avoided in making a vibrant virtual world economy.

This is by far ..far far, the best economy i've ever seen in a virtual world and I'd say they've done darn good.

except:

- lack of resources iterating each month on 0.0 sov mechanics, moon revenues , and (hard to simply solve) experimenting on game mechanics changes that would let players easily gang botters yet still have humans beable to farm .. well ..neglect of putting resources constatntly into game adjustments let certain things like spamming super caps etc go a bit awry.

- contrary to many, the love with the player economy hurt the player economy because NPC sales are by far the best sort of isk sink that can be created strategically to lure isk from the players likely to have a bit much....I'm not sure what all teh aurum business was... there are other ways to retire plex.

Louis deGuerre
Gallente
Malevolence.
Posted - 2011.07.26 10:33:00 - [57]
 

It is sad that QEN is discontinued. It highlighted one of the main things that make special and unique, its player-driven market.

I hope this will come back in some form or other as it was fascinating reading.

Mors Magne
Astral Adventure
Posted - 2011.07.26 11:11:00 - [58]
 

A graph I'm always interested in is number of characters against skill points. For example, plotting number of characters on the y-axis, and skill points on the x-axis. Idea

Kamikazie
Amarr
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.07.26 14:23:00 - [59]
 

Quote:
Mineral prices fall considerably for the second month in a row. Mineral volume traded and used in ship production is falling. The market seems to be cooling off after a period of expansion and inflation around the EVE Online: Incursion release.


I would like to see some data mining of ships lost in the war between NC and DRF to include all pets versus the ships lost to incursions through all of EVE. Remember that when your space is besieged you can not mine or rat to the capacity that you once did so most of the ships being destroyed had to come from somewhere... Empire. Not everything in this game revolves around expansions.

Steve Thomas
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.07.26 19:36:00 - [60]
 

Since Councelor Troy has proven yet again that he still does not get it

I will spell out the only real index that matters in EVE

the "Fun per hour" Index. with the realisation that fun per hour will always depreciate because after a while doing the same thing does get boring.

a Breif overview of its interactions with various feature introduced recently should give you some idea as to whats going on

PI, a Clicky annoying boring clickfest that frankly was not fun for most people,

Net impact, Negative fun
Gee I seem to recall there coments about it being considered a non successfull expansion. . .

Incursions New targets to blow up! Fun increase at first, leveling off and beguining a gradual decline as it gets repetative and boreing. . overall impact was an increase in fun with diminishing returns.

Nerfs to anoms, Agrivation Added to feature whos fun value was declining for existant consumers.

Avatar upgrad with new Carbon graphics, A big pile of fun for people that quickly evaporated because there realy was not mutch to do with them besides make a snapshot that mostly gets ignored after the first week or so. overall, Initial net increase in fun that disapates as time goes by leveling off at the meh level for most people, with periodic bouts of "why the hell did I do that" embarasment

WIS (will someone please point out to the developers that WIS is very close to "Wiz" as in take a ****) potential to renue the Fun from new avatars as we get to play Dress up the avatars cut short by idiotic priceing plan. Masive negative hit to fun as people feel that CCP was out to gouge them, ongoing fun deficit as we have to deal with freinds who dont play EVE will think that we are playing "that game created by Greedy stupid idiots" offset by the initial burst of Rioting ingame that was probably a therapudic stress releive, (honestly if Rioting was not fun on some level people just would not do it) however the short term prospect after the initial rioting is that were stuck in a pointless for most players rut for some time now as nothing realy new in the way of fun seems to be comeing. net effect Negative fun.





Pages: 1 [2] 3

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