open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Quarterly Economic Newsletter, 3rd Quarter 2007 by Dr.EyjoG
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic

Hoshi
Hedron Industries
Red Dwarf Racketeering Division
Posted - 2007.11.13 11:38:00 - [121]
 

See,s the link works again (they changed the name if the file slightly but didn't update the link) but here is an eve-files mirror anyway.
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0711/QEN_Q3.pdf

Lucre
STK Scientific
Black-Out
Posted - 2007.11.13 12:00:00 - [122]
 

Quote:
15 trillion is in accounts that have been defined as inactive

Can I have your stuff?

Wink

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 12:36:00 - [123]
 

Originally by: Lucre
Account averages would be a mistake IMHO - having scout or market alts should not distort apparent skill or isk totals.

Likewise I'm not convinced by "take highest character" suggestions as some people do have significant skill point totals on their alts - lots of transport/freighter and production/refining/T2 alts out there. My feeling is that as you can only train one character at a time, the significant figure is total skill points per account (though a graph of total skill points per player would also be interesting!). Isk OTOH can be accumulated by and distributed over several characters and accounts so would probably best be analysed on a "per player" basis.


I think they all have merit, and it depends what conclusions you're trying to draw as to which is best. Though again, while a "per player" basis would be nice, I'm not sure the information is necessarily there to be able to associate accounts to players definitively.

If you're going for a "capability of a typical main character" sort of question, then the highest SP char on each account is the better choice.

If you're using it as a proxy for age/experience of the player, then total SP per account would probably be a better choice (though this will also be open to distortion through people buying/transferring a second experienced character onto one account).

If you're going for a more general measure where you want to count the experienced alts, but not the throwaway ones, maybe combine ideas and say always count the highest SP char on an account, then count others only if they are above a given SP threshold (e.g. >1mill SP).

What might be an interesting intial step would be to do the plots of the distribution for the highest SP char on each account, the second highest, and the lowest, to get an idea of how prevalent experienced alts are. That would then let us determine how large the potential distortions from things like the "just take highest character" method would be.

Aki Yamato
Posted - 2007.11.13 12:42:00 - [124]
 

OZOM !

Layla
Our Lord Jesus
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:07:00 - [125]
 

Superb report! I was privileged to be at the Fan Fest and to hear this delivered in person by Dr.G. It's even more useful to have all the graphs to see and to ponder over. As something of an industrialist/trader myself, it confirms some of the information I had gleaned from experience and discounts other ideas that I had held.

Unlike one of the previous posters here, I have no fear that such detailed information will jeopardise my trading. I would like even more details, not less. People will read the Newsletter but whether they will act on it or not, and how they act, is another situation entirely.

One of the issues that concerns me is the amount of isk in people's wallets. The money supply is increasing, but a lot of players are simply sitting on it. You mentioned the possibility of a NPC-run bank and I would like to add my (small) voice in support of this. I can see such a venture would be a nightmare to programme to prevent expoitation, but not entirely impossible. It seems a shame to see all those Trillions not being used. It would be nice to hear some details of what might be proposed for an Eve Bank.

The very low percentage of players in 0.0 shocked me. I am a long-term inhabitant of 0.0 by choice. But I know that I can definitely make more isk trading and staying in Empire than 0.0. Imho, the risk vs reward equation is still too skewed towards Empire. I would like to see the devs give 0.0 some more love to attract players out there. They have done a lot, but still more is needed.

One final request; would it be possible to have the figures from which the graphs are obtained included as an appendix. The graphs are useful, but it would be even more fun to be able to play with the real figures (as some others here have already done). Smile

John Newport
Caldari
Newport Family Trust Fund
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:13:00 - [126]
 

Originally by: Redbad
Goodafternoon Dr. EyjoG,

First of all congratualtions on a very nicely presented Economic Newletter. It has some very detailed content. Because you dealt with a digitized Universe you were able to get some very nice statistics and data. On most parts you did an excellent representation of this data.

It is however that I like to warn you that your "might" in the digital universe to obtain this data makes you a very powerful person in the ability to present such data we all have to guess or figure out by experience. You have to use that might wisely sir!

You've now shown with this detailed newsletter the EVE-public you are a very capable person that understands the economic implications surrounding interaction with this digital economy. Your newsletter is in some parts so detailed it can give away a lot of "clues" to the smart players. And the darnest thing is, I consider my competitors all smart players. Wink Ofcourse you can say we all got this info, but I consider it a sport to figure most of this stuff out myself and use it in my business strategy.

I think this Newletter is much too detailed and would like to see the next newsletter more describing the trends and more opinonation thoughts from players themselves.

You are here to guard our digital economy from harm that can be done by future expansions of the game, not to explain it's workings to every player and his wife and give them a heads up backed up by flawless raw data from the game. In essence this Newsletter, if it gets too detailed like this, can harm that economy itself. Don't give too much details, those are to be discovered by the players themselves.

Good to have someone watching out for the market though, that is a good move on CCP's parts, judging your report, you are the right man for the job. Just don't flaunt it that much. Wink

RB



I agree with you Redbad.

John Newport,
Smalltime investor.

Sun Liping
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:26:00 - [127]
 

Edited by: Sun Liping on 13/11/2007 13:30:49
Hi Dr. EyjoG,

you write that there is only one char with a sec rating of 8.5 and 5 others with 7.0 or more.

Since for quite some time the maximum sec status a pod pilot can reach is 5.0, and all others having more have to thank a bug when flying in a gang and sharing the sec status increase (or are from a time before that limit was imposed), it would be of more interest to know who has reached the allowed maximum of 5.0, and not who has managed to freak out above it.

Sun Liping

Edit: increasing size on the PDF reader helps reading those tiny numbers in the graphics besides :-) foolish me :-)

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:34:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Layla
Unlike one of the previous posters here, I have no fear that such detailed information will jeopardise my trading. I would like even more details, not less. People will read the Newsletter but whether they will act on it or not, and how they act, is another situation entirely.


Likewise. Competition should be about how you use this information, not about having sufficient time and stubborness to extract it from the client.

Originally by: Layla
One of the issues that concerns me is the amount of isk in people's wallets. The money supply is increasing, but a lot of players are simply sitting on it.


Are you sure this is a long-term sitting, rather than just the natural stockpiling in preparation for the Trinity expansion? I can certainly understand a temporary large buildup of balances given the number of changes we see coming up, but as a long-term tactic it just doesn't make business sense.

Remember that the data presented is a snapshot, and isk always has to be somewhere, and that somwhere is almost always a player's wallet. So the existance of some wallets with a lot of isk in is hardly surprising, nor necessarily indicative of people just sitting on it. If you took a snapshot of any manufacturer's wallet, they may look very rich or very poor depending on when you took it, simply because of fluctuations due to the delay between selling product and buying more raw materials. While your snapshot may suggest that producer is "sitting" on a lot of isk, it's quite likely they would be commiting that to market orders within a day. Similarly, in the same snapshot, if the manufacturer looks poor, his suppliers are likely to look rich, similarly, if the manufacturer looks rich, his customers are likely to look poor.

If people were sitting on isk, that would be manifested in a slower isk velocity, not in the amount of isk in people's wallets. Though we would need a time-series graph of the isk velocity to determine what changes have been happening in that regard.

Avon
Caldari
Versatech Co.
Raiden.
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:38:00 - [129]
 

I'm afraid pretty much the whole report only demonstrates the crazy conclusions that can be drawn from misunderstood statistics.

No inflation?
Heh.

Take away the artificial constraints on pricing and you would soon see how much inflationary pressure has built up. As it is, all you can see is inflation in the small areas of the economy where it can actually mainifest itself, and as previously mentioned, that "luxury" goods are becomming the norm because players have more isk than they know what to do with.


I'm not saying that the good doctor isn't doing a worthwhile job, because undoubtedly he has put a lot of effort in to all of this.
Unfortunately, looking at the statistics presented, and the conclusions drawn from them, I don't think he "gets" Eve.

The limitations that are in place due to the game mechanics *must* be fully understood before any meaningful information can be extracted from the statistical soup.

Jifai
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:45:00 - [130]
 

How is ISK escrowed for buy orders counted?

Was it added back into wallets, counted as ISK leaving economy, or ignored?

Valator Uel
Caldari
Mercenaries of Andosia
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2007.11.13 14:16:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Sea Edge
Originally by: Valator Uel
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Valator Uel
[snip]I am Caldari yet I fly Amarr ships. I hope you understand what I mean
I'm Amarrian but fly Caldari ships so that cancels you out, right there Laughing


You cannot draw conclusions based on a single coincidence. What if 10% of Caldari chars fly Amarr and 50% of Amarr chars fly Caldari? Then the statistics change A LOT (although these are exagerated hypothetical numbers).


Amarr players 16%, T1 Amarr ships 14,3%, T2 Amarr ships 20%.


Yes, and of those 14.3 or 20%, how many are Amarr? The higher missile average imo is because there are quite a few Amarr players flying Caldari. What he is insinuating is that people flying Amarr ships have more missile SP than drones (and more than Gallente or Minmatar). While this could be true with the new Khanid ships, I doubt it is true before unless the pilot cross-trains to Caldari. This is just one example of why one shouldn't look at character race to draw conclusions on what ships players of that race fly (or why they train certain skills rather than others).

Maximillian Power
Minmatar
Legio Immortalis
Posted - 2007.11.13 14:31:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: CCP Dr.EyjoG

new players in the numbers so our only option was to include all characters. We have also been thinking about reporting only account averages rather than character averages? What does the forum think about that?

Dr. EyjoG


If you exclude players who have less than 1m sp but have been playing more than 2 weeks it should get rid of most long term alts

Poco Estudiante
Posted - 2007.11.13 14:46:00 - [133]
 

I liked the confirmation of Racial selections. I too would like to see more detail correlating skills with actual ships flown.

Insert standard rant: "Please add to Amarr Character Screen 'Are You Sure You Want Ship Skills With This Toon?' Warning"... ;)

Riddick Valer
Posted - 2007.11.13 14:55:00 - [134]
 

I'd like to see the following

Total SP per account
Total isk per account
% of accounts with a char in each section of space (High-Empire-0.0)


dor amwar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.11.13 15:04:00 - [135]
 

first, nice work. many questions but i think we all have our bits of information that we would like to know but would take years for you to produce.

maybe asked before, sorry if a repeat. i am curious if in the player totals and skillpoint distribution areas, are players no longer playing included? can i assume that it is only currently paying accounts, no trial nor inactive accounts.

lastly, i would like to see a breakdown of player controlled isk in relation to skillpoints in addition to 'isk in wallets' graph shown. i'm sure it would need to be by account to include alts. but it would be interesting to see what % of the liquid economy is controlled by player skillpoints.

Ulstan
Posted - 2007.11.13 15:24:00 - [136]
 

I would have to agree that the alts could be significantly skewing the empire population results: I have 3 alts that perma sit in empire space.

Quote:
That's not right though. The 877k is the amount of new isk added to the game, not the amount of isk an individual will have seen enter their account during that time.


Isn't that the same thing, in terms of averages? Any individual who sees isk enter his wallet through any activity other than those in the faucet is balanced out by an individual who sees that same isk leave his wallet.

Quote:
To gauge that, we need to look at the velocity of isk round the loop, which is the 2.1 trillion per day. Which with the 195k accounts averages to 10.76mill per day.


But surely you're not counting the 2.1 trillion moving around the loop as income. It's simply shifting assets around. No new money is being added to the game. Net average gain in isk terms from a loop is 0. If Player A pays player B a certain amount of isk, on average, their wallet size and earning power has not changed.

Also, I'm not entirely sure how mining is treated here: It effectively, like mission running, ratting, and NPC trading, creates money 'out of thin air'. It's not a transferral of wealth from one player to another, as in the instance of ship and module sales.

However, typically the minerals are sold to other players, so I could definitely see the sales being included in the loop, wheras the minerals themselves are most definitely coming from the 'faucet'. How is the value of mining calculated? This has a rather large impact when trying to determine the average buying power of newbies because a lot of their income is through mining.

And yes yes, I know, there *are* NPC buy orders for minerals, so in a way I suppose it could be NPC 'trading' but currently player prices out strip NPC prices.

Ulstan
Posted - 2007.11.13 15:42:00 - [137]
 

In fact, I'm not entirely sure how the items obtained from mission running are treated either, and that's a huge amount of isk.

The loop as defined as consisting of the activities that do not add value to the market, but merely transfer assets around. However, getting new modules from missions/ratting is definitely adding new value to the market. But, the 'faucet' only lists the bounties; I can understand why, how do you calculate how much value is added by a module whose 'price' is constantly shifting? Maybe just refine value? But that assumes NPC buy orders for all the minerals.

Can folks tell if these are included in the faucet, or just in the market transactions?

Demjon
Posted - 2007.11.13 15:48:00 - [138]
 

Extremely well done report, very professional. As a miner I find this report increadibly informative.

Thanks for all the hard work it is appreciated.

P.S. The Doc needs a cool nickname

Cker Heel
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.13 16:23:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
But surely you're not counting the 2.1 trillion moving around the loop as income. It's simply shifting assets around. No new money is being added to the game. Net average gain in isk terms from a loop is 0. If Player A pays player B a certain amount of isk, on average, their wallet size and earning power has not changed.


That is indeed income.

Players sell 2.1T isk of stuff per day,so in that sense the revenue is income (but not profit). Players spend that much too.

The 2.1T number grows as people spend a larger fraction of their wallet per day. There is 75T active ISK to spend out there so plenty of room for growth.

Mining creates ore, not isk. ISK is only created by interacting with NPCs via insurance, bounties, rewards or NPC buy orders. Otherwise, income is ISK traveling around the economy.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 16:38:00 - [140]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
Quote:
That's not right though. The 877k is the amount of new isk added to the game, not the amount of isk an individual will have seen enter their account during that time.


Isn't that the same thing, in terms of averages? Any individual who sees isk enter his wallet through any activity other than those in the faucet is balanced out by an individual who sees that same isk leave his wallet.


The difference is which question you're seeking to answer. If you want to answer "how much isk is each account adding to the game world", then the 877k is correct. However, that is not the same as "how much isk is each account seeing enter their wallet". This second question is the way to determine the actual purchasing power of the account, and is thus more relevant when determining how affordable stuff is.

Originally by: Ulstan
Quote:
To gauge that, we need to look at the velocity of isk round the loop, which is the 2.1 trillion per day. Which with the 195k accounts averages to 10.76mill per day.


But surely you're not counting the 2.1 trillion moving around the loop as income. It's simply shifting assets around. No new money is being added to the game. Net average gain in isk terms from a loop is 0. If Player A pays player B a certain amount of isk, on average, their wallet size and earning power has not changed.

Also, I'm not entirely sure how mining is treated here: It effectively, like mission running, ratting, and NPC trading, creates money 'out of thin air'. It's not a transferral of wealth from one player to another, as in the instance of ship and module sales.


Mining does not "create money out of thin air". It doesn't create money at all, it creates "stuff". If you look at Figure 5 in the QEN, you can see the blue arrows representing flows of isk. But there are also the red arrows going the other way, representing the flow of "stuff". The quantities of "stuff" and isk in the system are unrelated. However, their relative quantities and rates of movement around the loop are linked. If you put more stuff into the system, no new isk is generated, however the existing isk will move faster round the loop, which would increase that 2.1trillion figure.

What we need to be clear on here is the scope of the analysis. What you are saying is (mostly) correct when looking at the economy as a whole. The player selling cancels the player buying. However, the post I was responding to (and thus my response), was addressing a question of affordability for the individual. To answer that question, you need to shrink the orange square in the diagram down to contain only Box B. This represents your own "personal economy", and it's at this level that the 2.1trillion can be considered as income. At a personal level, your isk income is the isk coming in from selling stuff (however that stuff was acquired) + isk coming in from faucet activities (NPC's etc). This then determines the total isk that individual has to spend, and is the figure you need in order to determine affordability of items.

So I was wrong. It should really be:

Individual average income: 2.1+0.536/195k accounts = 13.51mill per account per day.

Now, the individual may spend that income either on buying stuff, or on isk sink activities. Now, if we assume the player spends an average amount on isk sink activities:

365bill/195k=1.87mill per account per day

Which leaves 11.64mill per account per day as the average amount each account can spend on stuff.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 16:40:00 - [141]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
However, typically the minerals are sold to other players, so I could definitely see the sales being included in the loop, wheras the minerals themselves are most definitely coming from the 'faucet'. How is the value of mining calculated?


The problem is that the analysis presented is simplified, and focuses on explaining just the money supply to the economy,. Really, there are two faucets and two sinks, an isk faucet/sink, and a stuff facuet/sink. Mining takes stuff from the stuff faucet, and does not introduce any new isk. The pilot then seeks to sell this stuff for isk (the bottom ark on the diagram), and the isk value of mining is determined entirely by what he can sell the stuff for (which depends on the amount of isk and stuff in the loop). So even though there is no gain in isk for the economy, there is a gain in isk for the individual (which he is then presumed to spend on other forms of stuff (e.g. ships)). Similarly, the rate of sale of stuff determines how much isk flows in through that bottom arc, and thus how much can flow out again on the top arc.

Cker Heel
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.13 16:46:00 - [142]
 

Originally by: Layla
You mentioned the possibility of a NPC-run bank and I would like to add my (small) voice in support of this. I can see such a venture would be a nightmare to programme to prevent expoitation, but not entirely impossible. It seems a shame to see all those Trillions not being used. It would be nice to hear some details of what might be proposed for an Eve Bank.
Yep, bank lending would accelerate velocity to put those trillions to work. Since insurance already exists, an NPC lending service is conceivable with some additional mechanics to ensure the liens.

My worry would be that new players could only compete by going deeply in debt. Starting Eve is hard enough as it is, without adding peonage. The role of repo man mini-profession could be fun.

NPC lending would also amplify economic cycles. An Eve recession when the cycle goes down may be bad for subscription growth.

Ulstan
Posted - 2007.11.13 17:12:00 - [143]
 

Edited by: Ulstan on 13/11/2007 17:13:43
Quote:
That is indeed income.

Players sell 2.1T isk of stuff per day,so in that sense the revenue is income (but not profit).


Well, in terms of 'how long would it take a newbie to buy a battleship' don't we need to look at profit, rather than income from other players?

Afterall, every isk that a player gets from a second player puts that second player that much further away from a battleship. What matters is how great an amount of isk/materials the newbie can aquire on his own and inject into the market. Apparently this is, on the average, 877k.

Quote:
If you want to answer "how much isk is each account adding to the game world", then the 877k is correct. However, that is not the same as "how much isk is each account seeing enter their wallet".[/qoute]

When you consider the population as a whole, are not these two numbers equal? Anything I see enter my wallet from a non faucet source, some other player sees leaving his wallet, so the average effect is... zero. If we're both trying to buy battleships we have to go out and get two battleships worth of isk from faucet activities. Therefore, the rate at which isk comes in from the faucet determines how long it would take to buy a battleship, would it not?

Ulstan
Posted - 2007.11.13 17:23:00 - [144]
 

Quote:
you need to shrink the orange square in the diagram down to contain only Box B. This represents your own "personal economy", and it's at this level that the 2.1trillion can be considered as income. At a personal level, your isk income is the isk coming in from selling stuff (however that stuff was acquired) + isk coming in from faucet activities (NPC's etc). This then determines the total isk that individual has to spend, and is the figure you need in order to determine affordability of items.

So I was wrong. It should really be:

Individual average income: 2.1+0.536/195k accounts = 13.51mill per account per day.

Now, the individual may spend that income either on buying stuff, or on isk sink activities. Now, if we assume the player spends an average amount on isk sink activities:

365bill/195k=1.87mill per account per day

Which leaves 11.64mill per account per day as the average amount each account can spend on stuff.



This viewpoint sounds extremely persuasive as well, and I must admit, comes a lot closer to what I imagined to be the numbers floating around. I just don't know how to reconcile the two!

I think the issue is is that I am saying "we are going to find out how long it takes to add one battleships worth of isk to the loop" rather than wondering how much isk is changing hands in the loop.

Maybe that is the wrong approach to take?

Ulstan
Posted - 2007.11.13 17:30:00 - [145]
 

Quote:
The problem is that the analysis presented is simplified, and focuses on explaining just the money supply to the economy,. Really, there are two faucets and two sinks, an isk faucet/sink, and a stuff facuet/sink. Mining takes stuff from the stuff faucet, and does not introduce any new isk.


Mining can introduce new isk if there are NPC buy orders for minerals out there. I agree that the analysis is simplified and isn't really set up to handle module/minerals faucets, which I can understand, as that would be extraordinarily complicated. However, it does make it hard to assess the earning power of newbies.

I would say that a market loop that sees 2.1 trillion ISK change hands and 1 billion minerals enter the market is far different than a market that sees 2.1 trillion change hands and sees 10 trillion minerals enter the market. The latter economy is clearly stronger and able to produce more ships, yet they would both have the exact same simplified graph.

Lake
The Praxis Initiative
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2007.11.13 17:38:00 - [146]
 

I wanted to comment on something from earlier in the discussion. The notion that we all only earn on average 877k per day.

If I earn 100,877,000 ISK in a day, and before the day is out I spend 100,000,000 ISK on a battleship, I've matched the average ISK perfectly but my wealth has gone up by one battleship PLUS 877k.

Wealth is not ISK. Wealth is measured in ISK, but they are not the same thing.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 18:16:00 - [147]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
I think the issue is is that I am saying "we are going to find out how long it takes to add one battleships worth of isk to the loop" rather than wondering how much isk is changing hands in the loop.

Maybe that is the wrong approach to take?


Well, it's a case of the right approach for the right question, and it could be we're just talking at cross-purposes because we are asking a different question.

For "how long it takes to add one battleship's worth of isk to the loop", the original figure was the relevant one (536b-365b/195k)=877k per account per day.

However, the original post that kicked this off then tried to take that number and use it to derive how affordable a battleship was for an individual player. Which is really answering the different question "how long does it take for a player to get one battleship's worth of isk". Which is the question my number of 11.64mill relates to.

Originally by: Ulstan
Mining can introduce new isk if there are NPC buy orders for minerals out there. I agree that the analysis is simplified and isn't really set up to handle module/minerals faucets, which I can understand, as that would be extraordinarily complicated. However, it does make it hard to assess the earning power of newbies.


Well, the real trick isn't in identifying the stuff faucets, it's in valuing the stuff coming in through them. Stuff only has an isk value because someone is willing to pay isk for it, and it's value is only what someone is willing to pay. Therefore, the isk value of the stuff is, by definition, the value of isk that flows the other way when it is traded. Therefore, by looking at the actual isk flow, you are inherently valuing the flow of stuff that's going the other way.

If you wanted to determine the earning power of newbies, you'd first have to decide how to define a newbie, then evaluate the market model just for transactions involving those characters.

Originally by: Ulstan
I would say that a market loop that sees 2.1 trillion ISK change hands and 1 billion minerals enter the market is far different than a market that sees 2.1 trillion change hands and sees 10 trillion minerals enter the market. The latter economy is clearly stronger and able to produce more ships, yet they would both have the exact same simplified graph.


True, they are different. But I would suggest that in order to achieve those conditions, the total amount of isk in the system is going to have to be significantly different. It would certainly be nice to see the flows of stuff as well as isk though.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2007.11.13 18:18:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
Mining can introduce new isk if there are NPC buy orders for minerals out there.


Oh, and picking up on this specifically, it's not true.

Mining still only introduces stuff. If there are NPC buy orders, then the act of selling the minerals introduces the isk, not the act of mining them. The existence of NPC buy orders offers a route for miners to generate isk from the results of their mining, but the act of mining itself does not do so.

CCP Dr.EyjoG

Posted - 2007.11.13 18:54:00 - [149]
 

Thanks for the positive feedback and good discussion.

Data on characters include both active and inactive characters. An in-active character is a character that has not been accessed for some time, but is available for access at any given time. We have seen several examples of characters which have been reactivated after the release of the Linux and Mac clients, and for some reason people seem to come back to EVE, even after several months or even a year away. I wonder why Smile!
That is really the main reason why we decided to keep the in-active accounts in all the character statistics, i.e. it was difficult to identify "truly" in-active characters. But the suggestions from this thread has been great and lets see if I can come up with some new numbers for the next Dev blog, based on the suggestions in this thread.

Quantifying loot items is also a task that we are currently working on and will be part of the January QEN where we plan to make the first attempt to publish the GDP for EVE, or should we call it the GUP (Gross Universe Production)?


Dr. EyjoG

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.11.13 20:30:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: Sun Liping
Edited by: Sun Liping on 13/11/2007 13:30:49
Hi Dr. EyjoG,

you write that there is only one char with a sec rating of 8.5 and 5 others with 7.0 or more.

Since for quite some time the maximum sec status a pod pilot can reach is 5.0, and all others having more have to thank a bug when flying in a gang and sharing the sec status increase (or are from a time before that limit was imposed), it would be of more interest to know who has reached the allowed maximum of 5.0, and not who has managed to freak out above it.

Sun Liping

Edit: increasing size on the PDF reader helps reading those tiny numbers in the graphics besides :-) foolish me :-)


There is at least 1 agent that allow you to reach 5.5 if you do him after reaching 5.0.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

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