Dr. McB explains the economy in Path of Exile

The curve is taken after one hour, which compared to the long term leagues is like taking a result after a second. It is worthless even before you consider how it can be distorted by the fact that it is a racing league, out of the top of my head:

- Mentioned here already, the one/two pointers.

- Specific segment of the population that actually plays with leagues.

- Further specific segment of the population who is awake during the 1h period

- Relative gear level and wealth is not measured. It is also bound to be distorted as compared to the long term leagues.

And the list goes on. It would at the very least need verification and that is not even considering that it already is starting to slant heavily to the left.

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

Why are all of theses people asking for like scientifically proven and cited data gathering with peer review of many months to be included in a random forum post explaining the basics of a video game economy.

Because if you claim to have knowledge about something it is usually good to back that knowledge up with facts or even just basic logic so you aren't talking out of your rear.

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

I mean you could do it yourself if you think you can do better, this is almost like people asking questions to "counter the the theory of evolution." because they are creationist because they believe there's something wrong with evolution as oppose to actually discussing the theory itself.

The theory of evolution is a scientific theory. A scientific theory becomes one exactly when you can provide verifiable, repeatable experiment/observation data to back your claims. This analogy fails in any way to address that.

"

jamnik_pucek wrote:

The curve is taken after one hour, which compared to the long term leagues is like taking a result after a second. It is worthless even before you consider how it can be distorted by the fact that it is a racing league, out of the top of my head:

- Mentioned here already, the one/two pointers.

- Specific segment of the population that actually plays with leagues.

- Further specific segment of the population who is awake during the 1h period

- Relative gear level and wealth is not measured. It is also bound to be distorted as compared to the long term leagues.

And the list goes on. It would at the very least need verification and that is not even considering that it already is starting to slant heavily to the left.

This is bordering on saying "the league I play in is a unique snowflake, you can't measure it by looking at Path of Exile in general."

But more importantly: "already starting to slant heavily to the left?" Heavily? Did you actually look at the chart?

However, I am not one of those who stubbornly twists data to what I'd like to see. And to those who are of like mind I'd like to share my analysis of the 5-day softcore solo from April 23rd. It has interesting combination of softcore, solo, and long duration.

Quick stats (omitting level 1s): mean 36.63, median 34, std deviation 24.94, nonparabolic skewness 0.105.


The level 70 cutoff for rewards is obvious.

This is something I noticed with other longer solo races: the left skew never gets extreme but it does become more noticeable, and even stranger the data gains multiple "humps" instead of the mono-hump camel which is a normal distribution.

Still, the relationship between mean, median and standard deviation is close enough to a normal distribution, even if some weird symmetry is involved. The effects of supply and demand upon items would therefore still work as I described in OP.

I do wish I knew what those humps meant, though.

I really appreciate the effort that went into this post. I love the in depth analysis this game is capable of. Ignore the haters, I appreciated this information!

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

This is bordering on saying "the league I play in is a unique snowflake, you can't measure it by looking at Path of Exile in general."

You are not looking at Path of Exile in general. You are looking at a very specific aspect of it that has clear differences from the long term leagues.

You cannot generalize theories about a given population based on a population that is not only potentially different (not everyone races, not everyone has the same goals in a race) but has different approaches to playing then the default leagues.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

But more importantly: "already starting to slant heavily to the left?" Heavily? Did you actually look at the chart?

Did you? The peak of the population is already in the bottom half of the level range while the top half is seeing a much higher deviation. More "poorer" people who are comparatively at the same level versus widening gaps among the "rich"

But, again, that chart is not even relevant.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

However, I am not one of those who stubbornly twists data to what I'd like to see.

Right, you just slap any data that suits you and disregards its relevance.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

And to those who are of like mind I'd like to share my analysis of the 5-day softcore solo from April 23rd. It has interesting combination of softcore, solo, and long duration.

Quick stats (omitting level 1s): mean 36.63, median 34, std deviation 24.94, nonparabolic skewness 0.105.

And then immediately do it again, even with meaningless numbers that support (?) what you wrote earlier.

You then proceed to note irregularities that further show that the race populations differ from what you established as the "norm" in your OP and fail to provide anything of relevance that would prove that it is.

Since we are starting to run in circles and repeating ourselves, I'm fairly sure I'm done here unless something new/substantial materializes here.

It is very clear you are arguing against me, jamnick. But what are you arguing for? How would you describe the economy? How do you believe it operates?

"

jamnik_pucek wrote:

Because if you claim to have knowledge about something it is usually good to back that knowledge up with facts or even just basic logic so you aren't talking out of your rear.

Stuff the the OP is basic knowledge or using sound reasoning to make a fact? I mean if your going to dismiss the op, present a better version.

The basic premise behind the op is, there are tiers of wealth in the game. Orbs flow upwards, gear flow downwards (Lower end players cannot use orb to make items on average better then what people are willing to part gear they do not use). Lower end people can trade for gear stronger then they can achieve by trading orbs that flow to the highest level players for them to craft the BIS, lesser failures sold downwards to regain losses.

All I am literally hearing is this is not good enough because in the multiple attempts he tries to explain using certain models and explanations isn't apparently a peer reviewed scientific study which is ridiculous to expect in a video game forum explaining the >basic idea<.

Instead of literally just saying "your not good enough and it's wrong." You could simply present in apparently your superior knowledge how does the economy is working in PoE. You don't even need to go through all of the trouble of the OP in attempting to go in depth, a simple paragraph like I did will summarize it.

"

jamnik_pucek wrote:

The theory of evolution is a scientific theory. A scientific theory becomes one exactly when you can provide verifiable, repeatable experiment/observation data to back your claims. This analogy fails in any way to address that.

There we go again, you are semantics about >what the scientific theory is< as oppose to the idea behind the analogy is that there is someone making a theory using things they observed/attempt at evidence, someone who think the theory is wrong doesn't challenge the theory outside of they will not accept the proof they have given so far. It's like going "But how do you really know, where you acutally there when evoulation happened".

You know why this isn't a scientific theory? Because this is someone in a random game forum attempting to explain the basics of a video game economy in a ARPG with some models to attempt to explain it better, your expecting someone more to accept it as the former.

"

it creates a nightmare for GGG to try to plan game elements for such a dichotomous group of players.

So why just not make all players rich and swimming in godlike gear and make the game ultra rippy?

U know, having white coast gloves in a4 isnt funny. Its infuriating.

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

All I am literally hearing is this is not good enough because in the multiple attempts he tries to explain using certain models and explanations isn't apparently a peer reviewed scientific study which is ridiculous to expect in a video game forum explaining the >basic idea<.

I'm on Jamniks side on this one. If you use such an approach, do it right.

"

Sa_Re wrote:

"

RagnarokChu wrote:

All I am literally hearing is this is not good enough because in the multiple attempts he tries to explain using certain models and explanations isn't apparently a peer reviewed scientific study which is ridiculous to expect in a video game forum explaining the >basic idea<.

I'm on Jamniks side on this one. If you use such an approach, do it right.

[Removed by support]

--------------------------

Scrotie, really solid post. I liked your points about the flow of currency and goods. I also liked your point about how the curve transforms as the league goes on. I agree that it becomes more and more difficult to shift tiers as you go. From my own experience in WB, I pushed relatively hard and probably was in T1. For the first month acquiring exalts and frequently trading 5exa items was easy. Now I kind of took a back seat, and slipped into T2. I notice that I'm having a much harder time making currency.

One thing I'd like to hear your analysis on is how players getting bored and leaving 2/3 of the way into the league affect the dynamics. I'd presume more players from lower tiers leave than higher tiers.