Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Martosh Toma
Gallente Fraction Investment
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 19:37:00 -
[61]
Personally I think figure 13 is very intresting showing produced volume compared to transaction volume. On average in december every hulk produced was sold 1.4 times. In addition regardless of actual production figures, traded volume kept hovering at 500M units from july till December.
|
Ceanthar Cerbera
Minmatar Lone Gunmen
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 19:56:00 -
[62]
interesting read, and nice to see such a long report. still id like to point out that the items in eve are not always (seldom) valued by their production cost (ie the miner value that goes into the production). The prices have seen a steady decline and a number of ships can now be had for just about mineral cost for an unresearched bpo. so low that spending time mining and producing items seem like a waste of time to some (like me and my corp).
the reasons behind this is probably more than one but one thing seems clear that RL ways of valuing your "work"-hours doesnt fit and so the percieved mineral value that goes into producing a ship doesnt always reflect the value that the minerals sell for by their own.
Seems though the market have stabalized some in the last month (funny enough right after I posted about this "problem", that in several regions you could buy up battleships for under mineral price..).
But as I see it this is a major problem for eve. Even more so since there are some who dont waste their time on invention because the production of the ship (even on a me0 bpc outcome) will be higher than the ships sell for. makes you wonder what drives all those wasting their time and ISK to produce things at a net loss.
But anyways, thats my main concern. Having a "real life" economy is troublesome when you have major actors in the market saying its "only a game". Normal economic structures dont quite fit when normal "guiding" factors are missing. Only real comparison you can make is how 3rd world labour is used to produce items that sell for 1st world prices.
|
Mariokoli Mianana
Gallente Cloak and Daggers SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.21 21:26:00 -
[63]
Originally by: onikage hirigawa I think the use of shuttles for tritanium leads directly to a change which would improve the economy. NPC economic sinks should react to supply/demand.
Of course this would have to apply to all sinks... a heavily used mission running agent should offer lower rewards, shuttle prices should fluctuate, etc.
Points to NPC Supply and Demand Post
|
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 10:22:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
I would say the QEN is about right on the 19% 0.0 population and I view that as a good portion of the playerbase. Considering what is involved in 0.0 logistics, that is a very good number. I actualy expected about 15-16% tops there.
19% of population vizited a 0.0 system in two weeks but I don't think that we can count them as 0.0 citizens, only ~8% of population spend most of the time in 0.0 as stated in devblog.
|
BlondieBC
Minmatar Rising Knights SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 17:04:00 -
[65]
As a recently moved toon to 0.0, I have noticed that i often have to run to empire for supplies despite my desire to stay away from empire. If the NPC supplied items were also sold by NPC's in outposts, it would help make a more complete game. Items that should be added to outposts include the following:
1) Shuttles - Give us a high price, but easy, source of trit. 2) Secure Cans and Station Vaults - Very hard to haul to 0.0 without a freighter. 3) Discovery Probes 4) NPC fuels for POS's 5) T1 BPO's.
I see no good game reason for NPC sellers to only be in empire. Null Sec is safter than low sec, so if NPC traders go to low sec, they should be in Null Sec.
On a related Note: If mission agents moved to 0.0 outposts based on faction standing of the allaince and the rewards were higher than low sec, many mission runners would move to 0.0. The agents should be assigned based on allaince factions standings, which would be a nice step towards faction warfare.
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 20:12:00 -
[66]
I'd love o give some comments on the GUP, but despite having at least some basic economics experience, most of what was in that section went straight over my head.
I can however say that more data is needed (of course you always need to start tracking data somewhere, granted). The six months of data shown here are interesting, but highly unstable. I hope you can add the second half of 2007 and the first quarter of 2008 (and ideally some 2006 data as well, though I don't know if such data is actually available) to the graph in your Q1/2008 report in three months. Maybe then the graph will be a bit more useful for analysis.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! |
Mioelnir
Minmatar KULT Production Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 11:18:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Fastercart Edit: Figure 16 should have hard numbers for Jump Freighters since we can't see their bars.
That number is 0. Plain simple effect of the jump freighter production time. There were none built in December.
|
Cmdr Sy
Appetite 4 Destruction INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 15:21:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Cmdr Sy on 23/02/2008 15:22:07
Regarding the newsletter's discussion of inflation vs. deflation:
It is important to distinguish between inflation/deflation of prices, and inflation/deflation of the monetary base. The two are different, and unfortunately one receives extensive coverage to the exclusion of the other. This is one reason why most coverage of recent real-world economic troubles misses a trick vital to understanding.
So...
What is happening with the money supply in EVE?
Any chance of a graph going back to 2003 in the next newsletter?
A comparison of money in circulation with mineral price indices and population growth could answer many questions about the balance of sources vs. sinks and perhaps allow us to see a dislocation or two in retrospect.
For example, was the L4 mission driven price inflationary spike in 2005 really accompanied by an exceptional burst of growth of money in circulation, beyond that which can be explained by population growth driven expansion of economic activity? Or was the problem misdiagnosed by the community at the time? Have there been periods where money supply has contracted in spite of population growth? It would be interesting to speculate on our past experiences with the benefit of such hindsight.
These are just the simple questions I can think of right now. If Dr Eyjo could address these points, the community would doubtless be grateful for the whole new dimension added to their understanding of the economy.
Plus, he would be beating CNBC at journalism.
EVE CCG Trinity Booster
|
Fastercart
Gallente Ihatalo Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 21:33:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Mioelnir
Originally by: Fastercart Edit: Figure 16 should have hard numbers for Jump Freighters since we can't see their bars.
That number is 0. Plain simple effect of the jump freighter production time. There were none built in December.
Oh? I thought they were taken later. __ Rorqual AKA Mega Maid
Oh, my God. It's Mega Maid. She's gone from suck to blow. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 04:45:00 -
[70]
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Supreme Feather Edited by: Supreme Feather on 20/02/2008 23:43:52
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Fastercart Edited by: Fastercart on 20/02/2008 19:48:32 Page 5, 5th paragraph,
Quote: However, the Kestrel frigate jumped up from third place to replace the Raven battleship as the most flown ship by the end of Q4, dropping the Raven to second place overall.
I know you explained the place changes, but I think a table or figure with the current rankings should have been included.
I loved Figure 10 though. Now we have some evidence that the Torp change was, in fact, a nerf and not a buff.
/me wish he had stocked up on cruise items before Trinity.
Edit: Figure 16 should have hard numbers for Jump Freighters since we can't see their bars.
indeed
although i thought people went over it like a million times, that to close range pvp it was a buff, to everything else (<- missions go here) it was a nerf.
I really disagree, reason for launcher to drop in price was as all the mission runners (and caldari farmers) had to sell their siege launcher and buy cruise launchers. Which only does one thing: Siege launcher's will drop as everyone places them on market for less than the guy next to and buy cruiser launchers. Also do not miss this is the arb launchers. It is obvious that the arb cruise launcher would be grapped from the market instantly and as they cannot be build the price will increase. It has nothing to do with it being a nerf or not - and certainly not a proof of any of the two. Theres simply more mission runners and farmers using long range than short range raven-PVPers.
yes they changed torpedoes and that in no way caused the mission runners to drop their torps (huge over supply) and go running to cruise missiles (huge demand)....
i honestly thought that i wouldn't have to expand on my point at all.....
I hope I never say anything that dumb
sarcasm
|
|
Cor Aidan
KNIGHT'S OF THE ROUND ROOM ReZZerecteD AlckemisTs
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 16:07:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Cor Aidan on 26/02/2008 16:16:18 Another great read.
One question I'd like to see answered, though, and I'm sure I'm not alone, is what is the amount of Isk generated by missions versus ratting versus insurance.
There have been many opinions that insurance payouts are responsible for much of the isk generation in the EvE economy but there has been no real data to make a firm conclusion.
Also, while QEN_2007Q3 indicated that money supply was growing faster than population, I'd be interested to see how this breaks down in terms of age of character. For instance, it is more or less obvious that younger characters will increase their rate of Isk generation very rapidly as they improve their skills, but it is not clear if "older" characters continue to increase their isk at the same rate. I would argue that this analysis needs to be done for characters that actually generate isk through missions or ratting, rather than just have their wallets increase through transactions.
Edit: Another interesting thing would be to see the distribution of isk generation among characters. Basically a chart which has bins on the abscissa for range of income (0-10k isk/hr, 10k-50k isk/hr, 50k-100k isk/hr, 100k-500k, 500k-1M, 1M-2M, 2M-5M, 5M-10M, 10M-20M, 20M-50M) and frequency on the ordinate. This would be an interesting picture into how many people are generating isk and how many are just trading it around. |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 14:29:00 -
[72]
so much information and so many practical uses for it is there any chance we can have graphs for the top 50 done? its just a bigger and all you need to do is add more entries into the already made graphs Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Sanpaku Deska
flaming logistics Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 14:32:00 -
[73]
I enjoyed Dr. Eyjo's report, and I'd like to see more of the same.
My question is thus:
In any economic analysis, any feature that moves a lot of currency/wealth/specie needs to be taken into account, lest failure to do so invalidate the study. That said, whatever one's feelings about it, GTC sales move a lot of money in the game, and in the real world.
I don't see how any macro-analysis of the EVE economy can be accurate without taking this huge factor into account. I'd love to see this in future issues.
|
Gillbird
Sisco Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 16:26:00 -
[74]
These Economic Newsletter¦s are nice reading and thanks for them.
Some intresting things that i would like to hear is that how these version upgrades has affect to in-game economy, like after invention, hulk¦s prices just dropped. Secondly how much ISKs coming in by bounties in 0.0/low sec/high sec and versus how much ISKs goes out by skill book and PBO selling in day.
|
Demjon
The Last Resort.
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 18:52:00 -
[75]
Broken Economy, There is a fundamental flaw in the design of eve's economy. This flaw is rooted in the npc pirate system. These ships are magically "spawned" into existance. The npc pirate and mission system completely ignors the laws of eve's economy. The fact that these ships are "blinked" into existance without the assistance of mining or building processes leads to a breakdown in eve's economic system. It creates a source of raw materials that is outside the economic system. This has a negative impact of the structure of eve's economics. To offset this inbalance CCP has created a refining loss for players, and a 5% cut that is "blinked" into oblivion. This does not come close to balancing out this issue. The vast numbers of npc pirate ships that are destroyed in a single day in eve creates more minerals by way of loot and salvage then the deletion of minerals due to refinery loss and the "we take" cut of minerals has ever deleted. Until these systems are linked in some logical form there will continue to be an natural imbalance in the economic system of eve. Where do these npc pirates get all these minerals for there ships and modules from? The answer can not be in a storyline or imagined solution, it must be based in the economic system of eve. They can not be "blinked" into existance at the will of CCP or the players. The npc pirates and concord should be based in the reality of eve just like everything else in eve.
|
Raven Timoshenko
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 17:26:00 -
[76]
I would really like to see tables for the following price averages:
1) Ores 2) Minerals 3) Isotopes 4) POS Fuel 5) POS Materials 6) Moon Materials
Just the average rate of sale, including a % change from the last quarter, nothing more. The Great Game System Shock 2 and Mining, Hacking and Archeology |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |