Population of the Entropia Universe

[jetsina]

have an index of basic universal economic goods

2006/2014 pre EP metal res. 107% if that isn´t an index, what is?

My question was about the criteria. I agree that metal res could be 'in' such an index, but do you mean Ivo, that the mu of one mat is the criterion of success - an index of one, with mu as the index value?
John's suggestion was plural, and indexes usually have weightings of individual 'elements'. Should lyst and oil be in such an index too?

Of course, how does the population growth (or not) affect such an index, if the idea is for the index to measure the 'success' of the economy and large numbers of players? It seems to me that any mu balances that are achieved can be scaled up many times to larger numbers of players, assuming the skills spread throughout the population also stays fairly balanced... or at least supply and demand chosen by the players (who may be choosing less skilled activities than they are capable of).
This is why I thought John might mean sales volumes as a measure of success, rather than sales mu, for example.

Ivo: do you think EP damaged players' participation turnovers, or shifted the balance to something less healthy but with maybe similar volumes from an MA perspective? What should MA do to increase the active population again?

 

[John B Knight]

My question was about the criteria. I agree that metal res could be 'in' such an index, but do you mean Ivo, that the mu of one mat is the criterion of success - an index of one, with mu as the index value?
John's suggestion was plural, and indexes usually have weightings of individual 'elements'. Should lyst and oil be in such an index too?

Of course, how does the population growth (or not) affect such an index, if the idea is for the index to measure the 'success' of the economy and large numbers of players? It seems to me that any mu balances that are achieved can be scaled up many times to larger numbers of players, assuming the skills spread throughout the population also stays fairly balanced... or at least supply and demand chosen by the players (who may be choosing less skilled activities than they are capable of).
This is why I thought John might mean sales volumes as a measure of success, rather than sales mu, for example.

Ivo: do you think EP damaged players' participation turnovers, or shifted the balance to something less healthy but with maybe similar volumes from an MA perspective? What should MA do to increase the active population again?

The suggestions on what should be on such an index(s) (eg one for hunting,mining,crafting,transport,estate development,etc / some of which should be planet specific/some universal) could be part of the first hearings such an economist panel could be holding with the players.
Obviously it would have to involve some of the most commonly tradet materials/goods and might even have to change over time as the economy evolves.

 

[halftoasted]

The suggestions on what should be on such an index(s) (eg one for hunting,mining,crafting,transport,estate development,etc / some of which should be planet specific/some universal) could be part of the first hearings such an economist panel could be holding with the players.

That is supposed to be what banks are for in EU. Sadly, they mostly end as a bad pawn shop.
If only land owners believe in their lands and invested in the MU that drop there. It would help as well.

Those 2 together would achieve this very goal on many things that matter.
You invested a lot into the Normandie and made 0 peds with that investment. Is the problem of most people mindset.
That SI give you "nothing" so it's worth "nothing". <--- The fallacy of investment. You know it's wrong, most business who survive and strive know it as well.
While there may be others, Buzz Lightyear was one of the rare player who took this opportunity of helping MU of his property when he owned CP. May be more unique loot but the fact remain that this system would work as long as land owners do it.

Still... It often seem easier for many land owner to make something bland that rarely support the hunter and instead focus on putting 5% taxes to give +- 1-3% back +- randomly based on points, global count or global size. Then they blame MA that they joined a Sand Box that isnt automated like a CLD.

 

[jetsina]

Somehow I doubt MA will want to see any such transparency.
Then again, I wouldn't think MA would support any ideas of emergent gameplay either, and may only want to create the illusion of such.

The Cyrene idea of area development driven by player turnovers has also fallen fully flat, but we do see various elements of 'unlocking' creeping in, whether this be turnover-driven loot pool additions or mob-kill-count boss spawners etc.
Maybe the boss idea is a way to compensate for poorer loot qualities due to quicker wave depletion when there is faster turnover in an area. Do you think it is part of a process for enabling larger player populations?

 

[Ivo Jahrumble]

but do you mean Ivo, that the mu of one mat is the criterion of success - an index of one, with mu as the index value?

yes for metal residue as it was the transformation of mining loot to metal residue. Creating a high turnover cycle mining/crafting that at bottom would be near breakeven. The magic number 107%. It does not have index written on it but was the look to place to know if economy was inflationary at some point in time or deflationary. Telling you preety much what do. Craft or mine i.e At this point only TT contribution to crafting was survey probes is mining amps.

Present time: Still reflects state of economy. Preety stalled. Ep crafters flooded metal residue so badly that its price is way below its price to craft + most crafters don´t have enough volume in sales to buy more cause let´s face it. Who uses unL anymore? jk... or not

Right now the closest we have to an index is tech gizmos 8. That translates how hungry gamblers are and how are players faring supplying them.

Ivo: do you think EP damaged players' participation turnovers, or shifted the balance to something less healthy but with maybe similar volumes from an MA perspective?

Kind of depends on the willingness to work with TT from each player. Since we mostly addicts here, we adapt and keep playing even at a higher price.

For what we know MA is even winning more money than before now. For what most of us see its either TT 80% of loot to keep playing or wait it out for a loong time to sell.

So preety much they have more profits from a "couple" whales, but generally a lot more players had to slow down a lot their cycle or give up to TT.

What should MA do to increase the active population again?

Fix these inbalances even before UE5.

My opinion of fair game for the players is as much loot as possible cycling from hunting/mining to crafting. This puts players in motion and the whole economy moving. I do understand that TT input is necessary to balance things out. However EP producing metal residue from nanos alone is like a sabottage act on the RCE side of things. A to big leak to plug.

Anything that brings the base loot of both hunting/mining closer to the magic number either directly or by crafting it would bring more players in. As it would create a much more transparent economy. Players that want to invest real time and money into a game can put 2+2 together on a rtp of 95%.

The very simple way is adjusting all loot to work like shrapnel, but to nanos. Once transformed can´t be traded. It would bring hunting and mining loot together as a suply for crafters . high cycle of TT with residual value would flow from player 2 player. It would not be worth a lot. But it would flow and makes the economy logic. When loot is born it must die as well.
Knife goes in, guts come out! As Bart Simpson said very well sometime.

Your kids will love it but your not ready for this

The most radical idea I have to achieve this economy is getting rid of repair terminals. UnL repairs from L crafted repair machine at near base cost 103/105. L guns get sold at cost over unL repair. unL does not lose any propertys. high cycle of TT spent from one activity to other created.

That and fixing the Ep leak would go a long way to validating the economy and creating conditions for a big influx of players. Shortages can be expected at some point, but never to the point of failure.

The whole game was built to be played a lot more on averages of 105%/120% as regular loot to counter the 95%RTP. Even LA owners get fu**d currently. You can´t tax 3%/5% for 1%/5% of 150%/200%loot composition. It made sense when you could hardly find lyst in some areas.

 

[jetsina]

long considered answer, thank you.
In short, I think you mean metal residue mu as being almost the ultimate economy indicator if generated almost totally by crafting from looted/mined mats and not tt nanos.
You mention the ratio of miners to crafters could sway a bit depending on the metal mu, but that doesn't give you anything on the total population size, or does it?
However, I get what you mean that more people could more easily participate without being on the high risk side, so would be good for the feeling in-game to make such economy changes before the switch to UE5...

 

[halftoasted]

My opinion of fair game for the players is as much loot as possible cycling from hunting/mining to crafting. This puts players in motion and the whole economy moving.

Do you know what give value to items ? Loss. While the MU tell the story of the DEMAND, that same DEMAND exist only because anyone who would simply casual for clicking some would lose more and not get to average return. Who would pay if its easy to get ?

I do understand that TT input is necessary to balance things out. However EP producing metal residue from nanos alone is like a sabottage act on the RCE side of things

If that is sabotage, then I want Universal ammo and Probes out of the TT and become MU items that only crafters can produce. It is only normal balance to give even footing to each professions.

Anything that brings the base loot of both hunting/mining closer to the magic number either directly or by crafting it would bring more players in.

Will destroy any value of any items because people will rather skill and get it themselves turning EU in a near single player game. MU exist only because you need to cycle too much(time) and/or too little(usually terrible return). If you could find pyrite as much as you can click to drop probes, it would have a MU lower than blausariam.

The very simple way is adjusting all loot to work like shrapnel, but to nanos. Once transformed can´t be traded. It would bring hunting and mining loot together as a suply for crafters . high cycle of TT with residual value would flow from player 2 player. It would not be worth a lot.

Yet China production and economy made its place in the world because it work the very other way. Asia workers have wages of lesser value which allow sell of items for cheaper and stimulated the economy. To compare, what you are saying is we should move back products to USA to pay workers 10 times more in order to create the same material at 5 times the price. This does not make any economical logic. There enough stagnation in inventory. We dont need more stagnation in inventory.

.The whole game was built to be played a lot more on averages of 105%/120% as regular loot to counter the 95%RTP. Even LA owners get fu**d currently. You can´t tax 3%/5% for 1%/5% of 150%/200%loot composition.

at 105%-120% you are paid to play or everything has so much MU that your needed value to do activity simply get higher giving you the chances at bigger loss because muscle oil and such will always be sold at a loss considering how easy it is to get yourself. It does not equate to more profit. A gun worth 170% vs 135% because the mats became more expensive does not make a land owner get more money for TT value spent or a hunter get more value out of taxes because that MU item will show 5% less. 5% less of an item worth 120-4000% MU is not 5% loss. Loss of the MU will raise it to 6% + auction fee at 120%. It just raise the total shuffle cost to play the same thing. You will still sell muscle oil at a loss because if a 1000p stack can be sold for 120% as the Eye oil, then simple conductor 1 become 150%. Then crafter buy his mats, craft a gun and ask you 35% more for the gun. Profit will remain the same with more invested. A terribe situation to climb in. Skilling will become way more costly because its based on TT spent.

 

[Ivo Jahrumble]

Do you know what give value to items ? Loss. While the MU tell the story of the DEMAND, that same DEMAND exist only because anyone who would simply casual for clicking some would lose more and not get to average return. Who would pay if its easy to get ?

Price is determined by price of components + accounting for expected loss of production. Nothing new here.
Who buys metal residue? Its easy to get... yet everyone needs it. MU is demand vs offer not just demand. Oil in RL? not that expensive compared to gold...

If that is sabotage, then I want Universal ammo and Probes out of the TT and become MU items that only crafters can produce. It is only normal balance to give even footing to each professions.

Shrapnel? Im all in for your idea, altough i got your sarcarsm...
Not all professions are born equal. Some are there to produce loot, the other one to use it up. You know this is not an issue.

Will destroy any value of any items because people will rather skill and get it themselves turning EU in a near single player game. MU exist only because you need to cycle too much(time) and/or too little(usually terrible return). If you could find pyrite as much as you can click to drop probes, it would have a MU lower than blausariam.

With loot 2.0 this becomes irrelevant. To much to little, its the same as using a finisher or not. It balances out... All that matters to avoid risk of ruin is tuning the ped/instance loot to your BR.

BR/avaliability of item/time is what "makes" the MU.

Yet China production and economy made its place in the world because it work the very other way. Asia workers have wages of lesser value which allow sell of items for cheaper and stimulated the economy. To compare, what you are saying is we should move back products to USA to pay workers 10 times more in order to create the same material at 5 times the price. This does not make any economical logic. There enough stagnation in inventory. We dont need more stagnation in inventory.

Dude using child labour I could be competitive as well in the world economy to EXPORT goods. thats how they made their bucks. Where do you export to in Entropia the goods your underpaid workers produce? Useless comparision unless you use gamblers as the world market...

If you believe my suggestion produces more stagnation read again. It is supposed to do exactly the opposite. Almost complete cleanup of generic population inventory and maximum ped cycle for everyone.

at 105%-120% you are paid to play or everything has so much MU that your needed value to do activity simply get higher giving you the chances at bigger loss because muscle oil and such will always be sold at a loss considering how easy it is to get yourself. It does not equate to more profit. A gun worth 170% vs 135% because the mats became more expensive does not make a land owner get more money for TT value spent or a hunter get more value out of taxes because that MU item will show 5% less. 5% less of an item worth 120-4000% MU is not 5% loss. Loss of the MU will raise it to 6% + auction fee at 120%. It just raise the total shuffle cost to play the same thing. You will still sell muscle oil at a loss because if a 1000p stack can be sold for 120% as the Eye oil, then simple conductor 1 become 150%. Then crafter buy his mats, craft a gun and ask you 35% more for the gun. Profit will remain the same with more invested. A terribe situation to climb in. Skilling will become way more costly because its based on TT spent.

On a LA taxed 5%, RTP becomes 90% magic number becomes 115%. I avoid LAs like the plague cause its impossible to get near that in current conditions. So do many others, thats where LAs lose their tt cycled in them. 2%cave sap in 1000ped and 70%oil is not comparable to i.e Oyester Island pre 2014. 45/45 Belkar120%/Niksarium150% and 10% lyst. You could mine punys or you could invest up to a META amp, paying MU to save you time and potentially give you a tower of good MU. LA had a shitload of movement.

Im not saying that lyst/eye oil etc will go up to 110%. Im saying there should be many ways for people to sell it at a lost or transform it in breakeven or near materials at a risk, "having to play it". Thats the premise of the game. The more you transform your loot (play) the more you stand to gain... Not TT 90% of it (always an option) at a worst loss than 102% or 105%. These add up and help players money last more and it forces player to trade or produce something for the economy to turn it around (high turnover cycling for everyone)

In my humble opinion those 5% are lost in EP crafting and to many unL items. If to many players produce MU coming only from TT economy will unbalance/stall. That should be logic. Fix those links and economy will move again.

The MU that is needed currently by unL users from economy in enhancers currently is what? 1/1000th of total ped cycle at 300%.
Some pills that come from boxes that are hunted mostly by hunter on unL weapons.
A bit of nutrio for the reload pet and thats it.

If we don´t win from the house and there is no pocket of MU to be wagered by players in high turnover cycles this becomes close to second life, paid entertainment, not an RCE game.

Next time you try refute all my points Im perfectly good with that and encourage you to do so. But please for each refute bring an idea to the table. Not just cancelling and negativity.

 

[DoOkieMoOves]

Seen this reading a article about another game...Entropia advertising

 

[fredda]

Seen this reading a article about another game...Entropia advertising

They been around for ages, and only show for people already playing the game

 

[jwestonmoss]

This is such a fallacy... You see the thing about markup is... when you're making it, someone else is paying it.

1) That's not what fallacy means. You can look it up. It's not a catch-all term that means "your opinion is ridiculous bs".

2) People only pay the MU they want to pay, and they only pay it because they want what the MU buys. By adding more things people want to buy, or adding more activities for which people might want to buy it for, that stimulates demand, and demand drives MU. If you do not believe this is true, I would love to hear your argument for why that's so.

 

[jwestonmoss]

2006/2014 pre EP metal res. 107% if that isn´t an index, what is? life blood off all crafted L items. At this point the only macroscopic problem was hunting loot not having enough use.

What busted that "bubble" was the lvl13 FOMA exploit and its fix. cap on TT return and loot 2.0.

Pre 2014 miners could come home after a run and have crafters ready to take all his stuff, trade for amps and keep on going.

After 2014 we are all stuck looking at auction cause nothing sells. All professions are stalled in a basic economic level. Instead of several sources to spend loot. We have EPs and tech gizmos 8. Thats entropia economy right now.

Fix it!

This is a big pile of truth right here.

I'm not sure I know what the solution is, but this is definitely a problem.

To break this down a little bit, the pain points I see contributing to the problem are:

• Promulgation of UL weapons and armor (which everybody loves to have, but which reduces demand for crafted gear)
• Some recipes having slowly become obsolete or substandard (certain gear) as power and efficiency has creeped over time.
• Some recipes just being useless dead-ends (stuff nobody wants or buys) which leads to the loot inputs having low MU
• Low crafting turnover in any real economic sense reduces the demand for all inputs except for a handful of cases where low supply keeps the price high
• Velocity of PED is not as high as it could be due to game system and design factors
  • Example: for crafting commodities the game could really benefit from a stock exchange approach, rather than an auction approach, allowing people to buy in smaller or larger quantities without disproportionate fees
  • Other examples, existing cross-planet transfer fees, the relative inaccessibility of space hunting, etc

 

[RickEngland]

I have many fond memories of early 2000's, pre cryengine, packeted socs and huge always busy community. I'm fortunate enough to have experienced those days, EU truly was a wonderful game back then.

MA have made their choices, it really isn't worth fighting for a thriving community, those days are well gone. It's MA's game, they're the Gods and they chose a few 100 or so high value customers, rather than a massive community. That's what MA wanted. The writing was on the wall, when the prots came in, which back then were the most expensive mobs to hunt. Well maybe before that, when many mobs were changed and given hp regen.

It's rather sad really, even 100k players isn't unreasonable in a 15 year old game with global reach. Plus everyone has access to cheap equipment to run it. Back in the day you needed a hardware upgrade when EU released a new VU... not kidding either haha.

So a "million" players should be easy for MA. Trying to justify a few thousand as good and niche is truly pathetic... it's a huge epic fail. It's embarrassing actually how much they f***ed it up. Then they throw on a kid CEO with next to zero life experience to run the family business... yeah OK whatever. Tick it over, make a few dollars.. wow.

I struggled to accept the lack of MA ambition for years. However If they don't care why should I, that's where I'm at now. There's more to life than 'worrying' about a game... true though.

But it's still here, so let it go. Don't stress about something you cant control. Play it, if it makes you happy, or do something else. You got one life, so live it.

Big smile... Rick.

 

[DaisyColdFinger]

As a just one important indicator of "activity", Auction pages overall are massively down from when i last played - was thinking of returning :/

 

[Mika]

As a just one important indicator of "activity", Auction pages overall are massively down from when i last played - was thinking of returning :/

I wondered this one too, but found that in todays day and age, it is largely and seems to almost totally be down to the type of way being played.

Most people today, that stuck around and played either active or at the least semi active enough, have reached what used to be "higher lvl". The "higher" lvls of old, are in todays age the smack bang mid lvl players.

And once you reach 250+ hp, all you really end up needing is a decent healer and dps. Stuff hitting you, matters less and less, armor is obviously needed, but there too, there are options you can get "cheaper" in the sense you don't need to rely on having a massive hof. had i not chipped and sold out when i last played, id still barely be a upper mid lvl today, barely. I'm just scraping into ultra low mid now if even that with how things are today

Viceroy - Probably the single most dabtastic armor ever added, making a lot of stuff borderline obsolete, its cheap to get, and it is well rounded. (at base even it willl last you a long time, costs "nothing" to get and can be upgraded)

Imperium - also not THAT bad or hard to get, all things considered, can even be sold. is also really great

Gorgon - same deal here, obtainable by dedication and long playing.

Weapons, amps etc all have great eco if you know what to use, (L) stuff that is quite great and will last you for a very long time is not to hard to obtain outside of auction. so yeah


Combined with people mostly just grabbing a set of Ghost as its stupidly good for its intensly cheap price, there really is no need for someone to get high end stuff unless you specifically know what you need it for. or will be hunting stuff you know will need it ontop of the HP.

There are just so many things i see that makes the old way, obsolete in these terms. times change So yes, way way way less tuff on auction, but the stuff there generally is more aimed at todays way of life rather than the old way of life when skill was overall way less, and stuff generally was way less.

 

[jetsina]

On a finite planet I haven't been keen on population growth, but in vr there could have been so much more than there currently is. MA appear to be perfectly happy being comfortable, instead of making actually not that much effort and making themselves seriously rich! They could have had a cash herd instead of just a cash cow...

However, anybody starting from scratch (zero) now needs almost superhuman dedication to consider EU as more than just some fun for whatever cost. Maybe MA continues to not really care about UE5 being truly successful, and it's just 'homework' to keep the game pottering along.
However, if they do want to actually achieve lift-off, then I think they will need an entire new layer so that the new noobs will have a growth chance in the new environment.
My opinion is that it will focus on food and living, with both farming/harvesting paths and foodstuffs to either keep stamina etc and/or boost it. Maybe strength will be modified too, but also more in the way of backpacks and transportation of supplies. Maybe harvesters will increase to up to lvl 10 or so, like enhancers and such. Maybe clans will send out workers to find rare spawns that need a more skilled member to actually come and click it. The world is your lobster, MA!

 

[jambon]

1) That's not what fallacy means. You can look it up. It's not a catch-all term that means "your opinion is ridiculous bs".

2) People only pay the MU they want to pay, and they only pay it because they want what the MU buys. By adding more things people want to buy, or adding more activities for which people might want to buy it for, that stimulates demand, and demand drives MU. If you do not believe this is true, I would love to hear your argument for why that's so.

1. Fallacy - Noun

1. A false notion.
2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.

The fallacy referenced is the incorrect belief that markup is the problem that should be addressed. And that it's possible to just add more things with markup without there being a consequence to the overall economy in game. This is the same type of fallacy (a statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference) where people think that raising minimum wage actually solves the problem of affordability when it actually makes it worse. Raise minimum wage = company charging more to cover that extra cost = goods become less affordable = raising minimum wage to counter rising costs.


2. This is not always the case and I already outlined why in my original post. You're also mixing multiple things here, you're not just talking markup now, you're talking about adding new activities. But I think you're forgetting about a thing called market saturation. There's only so much to go around in this game with the limited player base, their budget and available time to play.

Adding more options doesn't increase demand and markups, it lessens it. Demand for existing things is less as it's spread out to include other things. Scarcity + demand is what increases prices. In order to generate or increase markups they need to restrict supply in the face of rising demand. Just because they add in 100 new paintings for example doesn't mean that all paintings are going to have increased markups. It means the markups on average will go way down as there are a lot more options available. When Picture A is the only option and people really want a picture they'll bid it up to get it. But introduce Picture B, C, D.... Z and suddenly demand is now generally spread between all pictures. Sure maybe there will still be 1 or 2 that fetch a higher prices if people really like that specific one, which will be increased due to the scarcity of looting it since there's a much larger range of pictures to loot from so the odds of getting the high value one is less. But in general, the demand is spread out.

For a more relatable example. Look at L guns like the Armatrix series. When they added those the markups of other comparable DPS L guns didn't go up, they tanked! (even before eff was a thing) Same when L armors came in... the price of UL armor sets fell off a cliff as there were more options. Rings is another example... tons and TONS of options now and check what the prices have done since seasonal rings first came out... More examples? how about FOMA... back when it was CND it was the only indoor mining and it was a very profitable LA. Now there are tons of places to do indoor mining - it certainly hasn't helped people earn from that LA ownership. FOMA is dead now because people have too many options. Just because there's more places to do indoor mining doesn't mean more people will do indoor mining... I could go on cause there's thousands of examples. But I think you get the idea.

To be clear and reiterate, I do agree they should add more activities that aren't tied directly to a cost as a means to retain players which was more in line with the population "problem" of EU and how that could be handled.

 

[Ivo Jahrumble]

As a just one important indicator of "activity", Auction pages overall are massively down from when i last played - was thinking of returning :/

Don´t bother. They still allow players to spam the game with cards from outside the deck.

That "activity" you saw on auction went to the hands of MA. No more massive bidding orders war for gazzurdite