Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
   |
Posted - 2011.03.27 00:43:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Akita T on 27/03/2011 00:43:36
 Originally by: Maplestone
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or you're misunderstanding me, but I think we have our wires crossed here. Pehaps I'm just missing some background of commonly discussed topics?
If you feel the playerbase understands the economy better than he does, what indicator/lever do you suggest predicts/controls the outcomes CCP desires better than the ones being currently measured/used?
You have two examples right in this very thread already, but let's recap'em.
Concrete example : the insurance debacle // the mineral price issue
What he says about it : that adjusting the insurance payout has made a difference
What we say about it : the insurance payout adjustment only made any sense in the extremely short run, the adjustment was way too heavy-handed, and now that the trend has actually not just reversed but gone way back above pre-change levels, they're still not readjusting insurance payouts (why the bloody hell not, it was supposed to be periodic, but last time I checked ONCE and then never is not quite periodic yet - or the period is way, way too long).
What he SHOULD do : realize that insurance was merely a "pressure valve" for a much worse underlying problem, one which was not fixed, but merely just barely touched - the issue lies with the ratios one tends to obtain minerals from in-game sources (and the potential income vs risk and/or workload required) compared to the ratios those minerals are actually required in manufacture of new things. Come to think of it, that's pretty much the same problem he has when talking about moon minerals, but at least there it's simpler (there's only one type of moon mineral source). He needs to collect completely different types of data (which at one time a nice dev did provide to us as a snapshot for just one time interval), namely stuff like percentage provenience of each mineral from the various sources - melted modules (mostly loot, but also mineral compression businesses fit in here), drone compounds and finally, refining from ore. But even THAT data was not sufficiently detailed - it needs to go down on a per-item level, not just overall, to identify WHICH items might be an issue of some kind, or which ore is way too underused for its desired value, and so on and so forth.
ANOTHER concrete example : TECHNETIUM in particular, and moon minerals in general, with a touch on alchemy.
What he says about it : see earlier in the thread - basically "don't know" and/or "can't say" and/or "I'll talk to game design" - which is basically useless and shows just how badly prepared he was in spite of this being a major point of contention regarding the EVE economy right now
What the community HAD to say about it ever since a year and a half ago : Linkage
What he SHOULD be tracking and hopefully sharing with us : total amounts of each moon materials extracted on a monthly basis (split by amount into silos vs amount into reactors directly), total existing stockpiles, total amount of each moon mineral used in reacting (split by reaction type, including alchemy reactions), and last but not least both total amount of advanced materials and total of each T2 component being used up in manufacture on a monthly basis.
TL;DR : he focuses almost exclusively on NEARLY MEANINGLESS statistical data (from a gameplay // game balance standpoint anyway - they might be meaningful from an economic standpoint, if this was a real world economy, but it's not) and refuses to show us that he's capable of understanding the cause-to-effect relationships (assuming he would be).
In other words, he doesn't understand what he's talking about, doesn't know on what to focus to help the devs, HE DOES NOT EVEN HOLD ANY KIND OF DIALOGUE WITH THE PLAYERS EVEN IF HE WAS REPEATEDLY INVITED TO DO SO, let alone acknowledge he received ANY of the advice that has been abundantly given over the past few years.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
_
|