EVE General Discussion

The game had its greatest numbers when accounts per person was lower than it is today.

Therefore, you have no point.

You are not even looking at the graph from CCP are you?

Hilariously thick of you. I read the text, did you?

1.35 is the lowest number they had from 2006 to 2015. 1.65 is the highest number. median was 1.5

The graph itself shows their tracking of the median, which today is 1.5

Having a moment aren't you?

Answer the question: what numbers at what dates are you basing your claim on?

Can you do that?

No. You have fundamentally misunderstood every single number quoted and drawn hilariously ignorant conclusions form your ridiculous error. I'm hoping that this is because you didn't read the actual text and just heard the numbers second-hand, and not as a result of your not understanding what was said.

Here. I'll quote the original source for you:


Lower bound. Upper bound. Mid point. He is talking about an interval with those being the upper and lower bound of what the numbers could possibly be — actual data points that have changed with time and where the upper bound was itself a bit of a guess — with an estimate that the actual number lies right in the middle of the two. If you had actually bothered to read the graph, you would have seen that the highest midpoint during the period was juuust slightly over 1.5; the lowest was a bit lower than 1.35.

For your further humili… education, look at this annotated version of the graph, where I have sketched in the 1.35–1.65 interval across the entire period (greyed out area), the current and past upper bound (green), the current and past lower bound (red), and the estimated mid point with a ±0.15 area on both sides (blue shading). Note how the highest historical number never even comes close to 1.65. Note how the lowest historical number is a fair bit lower than 1.35.

Now. You were saying something about being thick?

EVE is being more intensively updated than at any time since Apocrypha. In fact I'd point as far back to Revelations for a similar rate of change and updates. The players of most MMOs can only dream of such a "maintanence mode" a month after launch .

You went to a lot of work to look really silly.

Anyone, anywhere with any kind of education would clearly look at that graph and say that historically the number of accounts per player have remained stable to increased over time.

No one could look at that graph and say "Voila, theres the missing player numbers"

You make me sad at how much effort you put into trying to muddy this discussion up simply because you were wrong in the first place.

Even if everything I said was wrong. You are basically saying there has been stability in the ratio of accounts per player right?

Ok, so if there is stability, then this https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6279322#post6279322 is complete hogwash. Which is exactly what I was talking about before you came here with some voodoo magic math where you still can't comprehend that in 2006 CCP "estimated" there was less accounts than today.

What else is that graph showing over time? Do you think you might be very wrong and that current upper and lower bounds are not the same as the ones from 10 years ago? Did you read the other 20 posts from Quant in his "guess how many accounts per player we have" thread?

First to answer your question. The graph from CCP Quant is where I am getting my numbers from.

Second to retort your assertion that the graph is anything other than its very title. Average accounts per player over time. It clearly is labeled as such. Yes Quant talks about bounds, and estimation accuracy. But the graph and the number he gave 1.5, is a firm average. The graph itself clearly shows CCPs best estimate as to the number of accounts per unique player using any and all of the methods of measuring they have available.

http://i.imgur.com/hHxSS0B.png

All the other stuff you are talking about doesn't change what that graph is. Is it a simplification, probably. But It is the data they provided us, and as you yourself have said, only CCP would know.

Quant specifically says that the lower bound you speak of is the accounts per email. 1.35, the upper bound is a algorithm of various methods of calculating. They came up with 1.5 as the average. That is as of September 2015. Using that same method they calculated the average over time. The lower bound in 2006 wasn't 1.35, who knows what it was, Quant doesn't say. But the average in 2006 according to Quant and the graph was 1.35. Again, the graph tracks averages over time, nothing at all to do with bounds (the method for their calculation)

I don't know how much clearer I can make it and in what language you want to hear it in.

CCP Quant posted the image, of a graph with average accounts per player over the course of 2006 through 2015.

In that graph we have a gradual rise. Period. If you can't comprehend the idea of averages over time in a simple x y graph format, then you have no business arguing your senselessness here.

I know its what you do, you grind everything into minutia until someone gives up. So here is me giving up. Take the graph, and your argument and convince yourself it means something other than the point I was making.

Alt account elimination is not the cause of the player number drops, period.

Seems this concept is somewhat misunderstood, so let me clarify.

Active systems are systems that need interaction of the player to continue. As boring as mining it, it is an active system. So is combat (PvE and PvP), obviously.

Passive systems are systems which need little to no interaction of the player, and continue while they are offline. Prime examples are industry, research, planetary interaction, the market, POS and (sadly) sovereignty for the most part (due to the activity window).

The passive systems enable the active ones to happen, and vice versa.

However, currently the balance is tipped toward passive systems as the dominant way to 'progress' and be productive while online. And, because they don't require you to be online all that much to begin with, you will see less people online at a time.

The online percentage of the game (PCU vs total active accounts) used to be pretty near 15%, but it has steadily dropped to around or below 10 over the years. Add to this the massive pushes of CCP for people to get alt accounts, and you can start to see the problem.

Currently, EVE has roughly as many subscribers as it had in 2009 (~330k). However, the PCU in 2009 was consistently ABOVE 45k, reaching peaks of 55k (roughly 50k average). However, over 2015, the PCU has consistently stayed BELOW 45k (roughly 35k average).

Now ask yourself, why are players online much less when the amount of subscriptions is similar? The blue donut is an obvious cause, but the passive systems which enable it to exist in the first place seem a much more likely culprit.