You offer the least amount of positive feedback to a Pilot than anyone!
You don’t know squat
Claiming you know stuff is your undoing!
You keep saying there is no CCP data on this. But there is. CCP’s own data at Fanfest 2022 states the average player has 2.6 accounts. If it said the average player had 10 accounts then you might have a point…but it doesn’t.
The average being 2.6 means those with 10 accounts are at the extreme end of the scale and are not representative.
Of course…its the Eve forums so those with some axe to grind are never interested in the actual facts.
1 Like
And that proves you are wrong, but you have your special way how to interpret the data to suit your narrative 
True enough. Yourself, for instance. You almost never get facts, math, or details like game mechanics right.
Since the majority of EVE players will in fact have only 1 account (and even further, will have played that account for only a few hours or days before leaving), then for an ‘average’ of 2.6 requires quite a few active players running 5 or more accounts to get that average.
You also missed the fact that same presentation said the average Fanfest 2022 attendee had 8 account (7.9), which is far more indicative of what ‘serious’ players might be doing. For an average of 8, you need quite a few with well over 10. So apparently 10 accounts isn’t that extreme nor even unusual, and is fairly representative of serious players.
It’s amusing that you continue to struggle with numbers and symbols that seem quite beyond your grasp, but something as simple as mathematical averages shouldn’t be too hard even for you to figure out.
1 Like
You know, if you show someone official data, without comment, and they start “interpretating” data in any direction they prefer, in what kind of twisted “discussion” you’ll find yourself bogged down in.
@Kezrai_Charzai I know a guy with 20 accounts. Would you say that’s “not extreme or even unusual, and is fairly representative of serious players” ?
Comparing an official average (2.6 accounts/4.3 characters) - based on an undiscloseddefined “Average EVE Player” by the way - with a handpicked sample (FanFest attendants) says only one thing: FanFest attendants are bigger spenders and that was a special thank you for them, a feel good moment, lol. I never liked statistics because of these (manipulative) vulnerabilities in interpretation. I’m at the other end of the player spectrum, the end with one account and 3 characters (and yes, with one alpha too, at the request of my alliance), and I do consider myself a very serious EvE Online player as well, based on hrs game time spent, not on $ per account…
Just to say that Altara got not only the numbers right, but also the bit of accurate interpretation. The epitheton of “serious” or “active” and even “average” player has no value at all.
That is where you made your mistake: you don’t know what the CCP speaker defined as “average player”. If it was based on total hours spent logged into EvE over the course of a period then his distribution curve obviously peaked on 2.6 accounts per “average player”, and that is what he’s reporting on in that slide. You erroneously assumed that he simply included all accounts, and therefore jump to the conclusion that quite a few must have 5 or more accounts. You let “your” distribution maximize at 1 account per person, he says it maximizes at 2.6 per person …
You’re welcome. And numbers should never be re-interpreted because there is an axe to grind.
And no evidence I don’t either.
Hence …
(KBs aren’t evidence)
Back to topic:
Game population is in a steady downward slope, and below average count, as shown above.
1 Like
Sorry man, but you’re falling into Altara’s mindset of “I want the numbers to mean what I want them to mean” and trying to jimmy them into your personal preference.
“You know one guy” isn’t representative of anything. There are typically around a thousand Fanfest attendees. Given the size of EVE’s player base, this isn’t a small number and would make them at least somewhat representative of the playstyles of the groups they come from (Nullsec, WH, industrialists etc.).
Your own mistake is thinking that CCP would first define an “average player” and then chop out all the other players and check how many accounts this mythical “defined average guy” has. That’s not how these things are calculated.
You take all EVE players. There is some wiggle room there for defining ‘all’ - is it all ever, all active within the last month, all that have played more than 1 hour? No matter how you define it though it’s going to be a lot of players. And CCP’s own data shows that when you take a lot of players, most of them won’t have played very much at all. Which means they’re extremely unlikely to have created multiple accounts.
Which means yes, indeed, from their own data and from various other industry sources, by far the majority of players in any game will only have 1 account. Which means it takes a lot of other players having 5 or more accounts to push the average up to 2.6.
If the total average is 2.6, and if the Fanfest subset averages 7.9, then no, 10 accounts is not ‘extreme’. Sorry if that didn’t work out the way you’d like it to, but them’s the facts.
The long term graph hasn’t helped, they’re deluded.
Clearly she knows her stuff as has 19900 kills, you though have 0. Perhaphs it is you that don’t know squat.
What does that even mean? Do explain.
2 Likes
The population is not dieing - its an age old trope since the onset of time. Stay positive and enjoy your engagements with one another and forget about such details.
As a relic of a bygone era you’re one patch away from some change that brings an end to your current chapter. Enjoy the time and forget the rest.
pew pew.
1 Like
I assure you, neither Altara nor I fell into a particular mindset. We both stuck to the published number, which is official, obtained by a qualified statistician who works at CCP, who did not give full disclosure on the selection he made for the statistical analysis - it’s Fanfest, not a scientific symposium. Could he have / Should he have ? Clearly he did not specify.
What the speaker obviously says is that his distribution peaks at 2.6 accounts/player.
So it’s no use you trying to shift the distribution to 1 account/player - that is outside of the set of data that the official study used.
That is exactly how a professional statistician / data analyzer would operate. A selection called “average player”, without going into the details of the selection itself (what one considers an “average” player), indicates there was a selection criterion and not just a randomized soil sample . And you can’t push me on the path of “ccp doesn’t know what it’s doing”…
See above. Any person serious about doing a reliable, informative study will most definitely define the inclusion criteria for the study. Throwaway accounts will most definitely be avoided, and those include all those that would create your statistical distribution that you want to peak at 1 account/person. Proof ? That’s easy: he states, officially, that his distribution peaks at 2.6. Therefore your inclusion criteria have to be quite different to obtain your result.
You want to harp on about 7.9 accounts for FF attendants, that’s fine. It just proves you are, sorry to say, clueless about the relevance of sample size. You tried to extrapolate back from a subset that has “FF attendant” as inclusion criterion, to re-build the result of the total population contained in the original study. Lo and behold, it does not work. You come to a number that is 2.6 times smaller than the correct answer given by the CCP speaker…
Still your mistake. Ask a math teacher, or a statistician. Too many wrong assumptions, whereas neither Altara nor I made any assumptions at all (apart perhaps from assuming the ccp statistician knew what he was doing as he should).
And that is exactly what I wanted to make you see, because you use the FF attendants as representative (or even driver) in the statistical result and, indeed, your personal foregone conclusions.
1 Like
I hope you’re keeping well and that you’re still farming lots of lols.
You exemplify precisely what you are criticising me for. To argue that the majority have only one account is to argue that the majority are not multiboxing…which is precisely the point that the 2.6 average makes and the point I was making !
So well done in being so eager to score a point that you do in your own argument.
Your own comments clearly indicate you are the one struggling with averages.
It doesn’t matter what data is argued over…there are those such as Kezrai and Vokan who will twist and fit it to suit their prior narrative. And they then add the ultimate twist of claiming you are the one twisting the data. I mean, you could point out on these forums that 2 + 2 = 4 and you’d have some gnarled old bittervet saying that’s twisting the data and they’ve seen clear evidence in Eve that 2 + 2 = 5.
And you are right about the distribution, which even if it is a non-normal curve will still have the median close to the peak anyway. That is how distributions work !
2 Likes
Numbers mean what they mean. Sorry if you struggle with this basic mathematical concept. An average of 2.6 accounts per player is an average of 2.6 accounts per player. Not 5 or 10 or 50. It means that whilst people whine about seeing people multiboxing 20 accounts ‘everywhere’…in fact the average player can only muster 2 accounts online at a time.
That is what the data means…and no amount of being a gnarled old bittervet who hasn’t in any case played the game for years will make it mean anything else !
it’s called forum pvp including dirty tricks 
Dr Phil: “Do you want to be right, or do you want to have a relationship”.
Judge Judy: “In the case of numbers and studies, let’s stick to facts, Phil. You deal with the emotions”.
LMAO.
1 Like
That would imply pretty close to a ‘normal’…Gaussian…distribution where the peak and the average are much the same and the peak is at the centre. And not a skewed ‘non normal’ graph with a peak over to one side or the other. It’s pretty much what you’d expect. The handful of people with 100 accounts would barely skew the graph at all.
I have no idea what you’re going on about, and clearly in this case, neither do you. If I say the “majority of players have 1 account”, that has nothing whatsoever to do with the distribution or the average. CCP and many other games have published data showing that by far the majority of players have 1 account. As in, over 50% of players will have only 1 account. (I won’t bother digging up the links here, you can do your own homework.)
That easily meets the definition of ‘majority’. What the majority has is not what the average has. For a distribution to peak at 2.6, where the majority has 1, would typically mean (due to bell curve), something along the lines of 60% have 1 account, 20% have 2 accounts, 10% have 3-6 accounts, 5% have 7-14 accounts, and the last 5% would be the ‘extreme’ numbers of accounts (15 and up). Depending on your definition of extreme, of course.
No you’re really just going about this entirely wrong. You don’t ‘select’ the average player and then see what he has. You do create inclusion criteria, which I already covered (where, when and how active), then you add all the players in the group together and divide. That’s literally how you get averages. You don’t create a definition for average and then select only people who meet your average - that completely defeats the purpose of the analysis.
Seriously, why are you arguing this stuff when you obviously don’t have any idea of the context of the words you’re using? I support a lot of things you write but sometimes you go way off the rails.
Here is a sample size calculator for you. Go plug in 95% confidence, 200,000 population (very generous for EVE), and 3% margin of error (any statistician will tell you that’s a fairly solid sample). Go ahead, I’ll wait:
Got it? Is, oh, say a thousand? Why yes, yes it is. Is it representative? The problem being that this is a self-selected sample (people who want to go to Fanfest and have the time and money to afford it). It’s a matter of opinion as to whether that group is representative of any larger groups in EVE (eg. Null sec players, industrialist/miners, SP farmers etc.). But it’s in no way ‘clueless about sample size’.
There’s a world of difference between ‘one guy’ and a population of 1,000 out of maybe around 150,000. This isn’t about wrong assumptions, this is about understanding how averages are calculated from a large player base.
1 Like
That’s the funny part about statistics, the average is 2.6 accounts/person. What is that .6 ? Do you get a refund, lol ? The better way is of course to use the baskets and simply say “2 and 3 accounts” have the highest population in this study. It’s handy to have a single number instead of a whole sentence. Whatever … It sure was not 1 account/person.
Yes, part of a Gaussian is what you’d expect if the dataset is large enough. How fast it “drops” and how long it tails out, I’m curious too.
Of course the only true answer is 42, the magic number that catches life, the universe, and everything.
Well, since you’ve imagined an argument I never made, it’s no wonder I didn’t support it.
First, the thread is about whether EVE’s population is increasing or decreasing, and why. Not multiboxing. Owning multiple accounts is not the same as multiboxing, although the two will be somewhat correlated. However, owning multiple accounts strongly implies those accounts are getting used to some extent, which inflates the account login numbers.
CCP’s own numbers have shown clearly that the ‘average accounts per user’ is increasing over time. Since the “account logins” number is slowly declining, or at best remaining stable, this indicates that over time, the number of actual unique players in the game is declining.
This is entirely expected in an older game and obvious to most people who aren’t hung up on some weird data-trip of their own imagining. I’ve only pointed out the obvious because some people insist on denying it, for whatever reason.
I also was not replying to you about the majority multiboxing or not - I was simply pointing out that players having 10 accounts was not ‘extreme’. You and Wadiest both drew a lot of weird conclusions from that, mostly based on completely misunderstanding what was being said. And not being all that great with how statistics works, apparently.
2 Likes