Arcanaville

Arcanaville
  • Posts

    10683
  • Joined

  1. Quote:
    Originally Posted by FourSpeed View Post
    In the simplest sense, Pareto *always* applies because the statement:
    "X% of a resource is controlled by Y% of the population"
    will *always* be true for any arbitrary value X.

    More specifically speaking though it's usually expected to be (X%, 100-X%),
    and for many natural (or unconstrained) systems it's often 80/20 (see Pareto Principle).
    Specifically because there is always a solution to X/1-X, most people do not consider the Pareto principle to apply to situations where this is true. In most cases, the Pareto principle is held to be true when either the situation explicitly matches the original statement of 80/20, or when the situation matches the generalized Pareto which has a scale invariant distribution curve with a resolvable pareto parameter.

    The distinction isn't purely semantic, because the scale invariant nature of pareto-like distributions allows for more extrapolation of measurements. Non-scale invariant distributions cannot be arbitrarily extrapolated from confined measurements with pareto-like rules.
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mokalus View Post
    But anyway, free stuff is free stuff, can't complain about it.
    You're just not trying hard enough.


  3. Zwillinger's desire for a City of Spies spinoff game was a textbook example of passive-aggressive advocacy.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sentry4 View Post
    I'm unsure how the percents of run speed work with the miles per hour. Super speed base is 350% run speed on mids, but +100% SpeedRunning on Redtomax, but that translates to 50.1 mph.

    Then sometimes I'm unsure how to factor DR with it. Do I DR the +100% SpeedRunning or the 350% Run speed?
    City of Data has a funny bug that seems to crop up sometimes. The +100% it reports for Superspeed is wrong, sort of. Superspeed is actually a scale 1.0 Run speed buff on the Melee_Runspeed table. In the same way that an attack can be a scale 1.0 attack on the Melee damage table or the Ranged damage table, super speed is a scale 1.0 buff on the Melee run speed table. That table starts at 2.5 at level one and increases to 3.5 at level 50 for all archetypes. So SS is a +250% run speed buff at level 1 and +350% run speed buff at level 50.

    Sometimes CoD gets confused and reports the +1.0 buff as a +100% buff when it should actually multiply by the referenced table first. But this seems to be a default display thing. If you change the archetype pulldown for the power to any other archetype (other than the one you're looking at) CoD will "wake up" and calculate what the value should be for that specific archetype at the specified level, which in this case is the same for all archetypes anyway, and give you the right answer (try it). This happens a lot with attributes CoD has to convert to percentages.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Combat View Post
    I NEVER believed I had a perfect understanding of this sort of stuff. It's why I didn't start of this thread with a ton of bad calculations, because I wanted it to mostly be the general feeling I got from the set, which would be fine if I were in favor of it but apparently is horrible when I disapprove of it.
    Actually, from almost the very beginning you were using numbers and calculations, and not observational judgment, to justify your impressions of the set.You stated you were leveling a staff character at the time, which implied that your impressions of the set did not come from experience, but rather from your impression of the raw numbers of the set, which is de facto calculation-based judgment. And even throwing all numbers out, there's still a divergence between your analysis and my actual in-game experience with the set, vis-a-vis your contention that combat always winnows down to one or a few high health targets. My specific experience at all levels suggests that with Staff that's not generally true when using the AoEs often.
  6. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    Doesn't it though? On the other hand it doesn't explain why the store isn't available out of game.
    Actually, I think I now have the entire picture.
  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Liquid View Post
    This is something I was trying to figure out. Did Hulk catch the pilot after he ejected to check to make sure he had a parachute?

    I'm having a lot of trouble not seeing the whole scene with Hulk on the carrier being Hulk manipulated by Loki, and actually wanting to hurt people, but luckily not doing so. The only other possibility I can think of is that he was mad and just wanted to scare the people he was mad at.

    I can't wait for the DVD/Blu-Ray commentary.
    I think Loki's plan was to get the Hulk angry, believing that was the key to releasing the monster. But as we later learn, that doesn't work because Banner is always angry. What does work is when Hawkeye's arrow blows up the room, and that causes Banner's resolve to weaken enough for his subconscious mind to say "this would be a good time for the Hulk to come out, isn't it?"

    Once the Hulk emerges, Banner's control goes with it and Loki's agitation of Banner translates into a very hot-headed Hulk.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang View Post
    I think the movie alludes to their being bits of Banner and Hulk influencing each other. When Hulk falls off the jet, Banner says he was lucky he didn't hurt anyone when he crash-landed, but the old man says, "Or it was just good aim," which implies Hulk wanted to land somewhere with the least collateral damage. Not to mention he couldn't easily squished Black Widow or the pilot of the fighter jet and didn't.
    I believe that's because the Hulk is "a bit of Banner" in terms of being a piece of Banner's subconscious in the first place. But I don't think Banner's literal conscious mind was in a fuzzy sense lurking in the Hulk. I don't see the Hulk and Banner as two different people where one is in the foreground and the other in the background alternatingly. I think the Hulk is a part of Banner he suppresses when he's not the Hulk. Another way of putting it is I think Banner is a different person when he's the Hulk like a drunk person is a different person when intoxicated, only to a much higher degree.
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Snow Globe View Post
    I believe that someone let slip the name on Ustream (during the Player Summit) of the company that put out said market product: Playspan, which is apparently owned by Visa.
    That actually explains a lot.
  10. It occurs to me I didn't mention my favorite scene. Its the scene where Banner says "that's my secret Cap, I'm always angry" and then turns into the Hulk.

    Earlier in the movie Banner tells the rest of them that at one point he did in fact try to stop the Hulk by attempting suicide: he put a gun in his mouth and "he" spit out the bullet. It reminded me of Peter David's last issue of his run on the Hulk where a future Rick Jones is telling the story about what happened to Banner after Betty Ross died. At one point he recalls that Banner tried to kill himself through increasingly bizarre and spectacular ways, and how it almost seemed like the Hulk was taunting him by letting him get very close to succeeding before changing and saving him.

    So when Banner says "I'm always angry" and turns I was reminded of that same comic when Rick Jones recounts when he last saw Banner. Banner had come to say goodbye, and just before he leaves he stops, takes off his glasses, and then turns into the Hulk. No pain, no struggle, one second he's Banner and the next he's the Hulk. Jones remarks how odd it was, as if Banner had finally given in to the Hulk and for the first time he just let the Hulk emerge.

    That's sort of what I saw. To me Banner was showing everyone how much he struggles with the Hulk by showing what it looks like when he decides to simply let the Hulk loose. No pain, no struggle, no drawn out transformation: the Hulk simply emerges. I found that to be a pitch-perfect encapsulation of the character in that one moment. What we normally see is Banner losing the fight with the Hulk he normally wrestles with constantly. What we see in that last transformation is what happens when Banner decides to stop fighting for a moment.

    I also know there are people who think there are little hints that Banner is in there in partial control of the Hulk, but I think that except for the fact that the Hulk is Banner, or at least a part of him, I don't think that is the case. Rather, I think that unlike the first time the Hulk emerges on the Helicarrier this time Banner allowed the Hulk to simply emerge; his subconsicous and conscious mind were on the same page, and the Hulk behaved accordingly. Banner knew this was a time the Hulk was needed and needed to work with the others, so the Hulk instinctively knew that also and was far more cooperative. I don't think Banner even consciously remembered the events that occurred when the Hulk went on a rampage on the Helicarrier, so he couldn't have taken any satisfaction from sucker punching Thor. But the Hulk obviously remembered.

    At least that's my interpretation of those events, and why I like that one moment in the movie. Its a little thing that evokes a lot of background on the Hulk, possibly better than anything in either of the actual Hulk movies combined.
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nericus View Post
    In the comics the tesseract/cosmic cube is basically a cosmic powered Aladdin's Lamp. What it's wielder wants, becomes reality. Presuming that movie tesseract is on that power level, then it is better off in ODIN's weapons vault.
    It may have that level of power, but it clearly doesn't work like a cosmic cube or the mere act of holding it should have allowed anyone to wield at least some of its power. There would have been no need to build elaborate technology around it. In the movie-verse it appears to be an enigmatic energy source that requires some sophistication to tap reliably and safely, or at least that appears to be true for the puny humans and Asgardians that interact with it.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by FourSpeed View Post
    Let me turn that around - can you show me any compelling evidence why it
    *doesn't* hold other than your vague suspicions about MMO economies?
    Yeah, basically the rest of your post. Pareto is likely to hold for some subset of the player population because its likely that within certain limits players probably earn and spend influence in ways analogous to real world economies. But what I said is that it might not hold across the entire population, and you just stated you agree the evidence suggests that a gigantic swath of the player population may foil Pareto by simply not being played, or played to a high enough extent to generate a meaningful amount of influence. I would add on top that while its easy to generate at least *some* influence below a certain value, and that value is millions of inf, influence is also equally easy to lose or destroy in a variety of ways. Those are de factor arguments against Pareto applying to the entire population, and only applying to a restricted subset of them.

    As to your estimate of a lower floor of 1M/hour I wouldn't dispute that, but I would note that if the average player plays ten hours a week, that's a lower bound of 40 million inf per month and about 500 million inf per year, and both values are destroyable or at least consumable by the average player within those same timeframes.

    Here's an interesting sideways way to look at influence earning vs purchasing power. Suppose the average player actually earns about 3 million inf per hour which I think is a fairly high estimate. Question: what is the likely average value of the average level 50 build?

    If the average player that reaches level 50 doesn't slot inventions, then they will have lots of unspent influence if they continue to play 50s. But is it likely that a player generating 3 million inf per hour would not spend any of it on an invention build?

    But if they do spend it on a build, how much are they likely to spend? Is there any benefit to the average player to spend only a tiny fraction of the amount of influence they have on outfitting their characters? Suppose that the average player doesn't really make a serious attempt to make a high end invention build, but they do slot things like common IOs, maybe a few sets, and maybe a few interesting procs like Numinas. A build like that might be a couple hundred million inf, and that hasn't changed too much over time. That might take a hundred hours of play on a level 50 character to generate.

    Of all the players that level at least one alt to level 50, how many hours does the average player put into each 50 on average? If its anything less than a hundred hours, it seems at least plausible a large fraction of them may end up consuming most of the influence they are capable of generating on purchases.

    And my guess is that is because one major difference between the real world and the City of Heroes economy is that most players don't expect to be here forever. Influence's future value is strongly attenuated relative to real money for that reason, and that makes it less attractive to accumulate for many players.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nericus View Post
    Yeah the terms between them weren't specified completely. Basically the Chitauri and their then mysterious leader that gave Loki the staff wanted the tesseract for reasons not stated. Loki gets Earth with the aid of the Chitauri and in turn he gives them the tesseract.

    After taking over Earth, Loki would likely set his sights on the other realms including Asgard and seek to conquer them and then take on Asgard.

    As for why the Chitauri and Thanos wanted the tesseract, well Thanos knows things about the tesseract/cosmic cube and he may well have wanted it for the same reasons he did way back in the 70's......to become the universe itself and thus all powerful.
    Actually, now that I've had some time to remember the scenes in question, I believe the deal was in fact for Loki to get Earth in exchange for Thanos getting the Tesseract. If I now remember correctly, in the opening scene Thanos is saying something like Loki gets the Earth, and we get the universe. So Loki's sights may in fact have been centered on Earth exclusively. I think Thanos' lackey even belittles him for it, mocking his "little ambition" in the scene in the middle of the movie when Loki faces Thanos' minion via the spear.

    As to why Thanos needs the Tesseract, it does occur to me that its raw power may not be the point. It may be the most obvious reason shown in the movie itself: it can be used to transport armies to distant worlds. They apparently needed the Tesseract to transport Thanos' army to Earth. If there was an easier way to do that, they would have probably used it. Thanos may need the Tesseract for the simple reason that it opens the door to reaching any world he sets his sights on relatively easily.

    In the Thor movie Thor mentions the Asgardian cosmology where the universe is separated into different realms. Thanos may be largely confined to one of them, and while he can influence others that ability is limited by the power he currently possesses. The tesseract may be powerful as a weapon, but the ability to allow you to go anywhere in force may be its most important capability.
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man View Post
    Actually, I thought it was because the store interface is actually licensed from a completely external development studio, so the Paragon developers couldn't really tinker with it if they wanted to.
    The notion that it might be licensed, as opposed to a work for hire, reminds me that below the number zero lies an unbounded amount of negative integers.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    Does Electric give you any defence debuff protection?
    Nope; it doesn't offer defense either (only sets that offer significant defense offer defense debuff resistance). In terms of secondary effect resistance, Electric Armor has resistance to drain and recovery debuffs (in static shield), and some resistance to movement slows and recharge debuffs (in lightning reflexes).
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    I think Staff looks amazing.
    Fun to play too...
    And a large component of that fun is that it makes lots of things a lot deader really quickly. In fact, ridiculously by level 13 staff's performance in this specific area had me constantly thinking "this would be a good time for an ambush." Because Staff is a wood chipper that just loves to be fed critters stupid enough to run up to it, rather than wait for the chipper to come to them.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hit Streak View Post
    There is no "system" really. We pick an item to offer up as a Freebie Friday item and we set its cost to zero for the day. If you already own it, then we encourage you to come back next week when we'll have a new item available to you.
    The revised announcement already covers this, but legal is currently reviewing a wording proviso that would specify that the item in question may be an item the player already possesses, because in preliminary testing it was discovered checking a candidate item to see if any of the active accounts of players that satisfy the psychological profile of expressing displeasure at such a collision possessed the item would take approximately eleven thousand two hundred fifty three times longer than the resources currently allocated to the project would allow. Internal audit is currently reviewing if this is a Q&A deficiency, or a producer error.
  18. Based on the feedback in this thread, Paragon Studios has revised its announcement.

    FOR GENERAL RELEASE

    Paragon Studios is pleased, in a manner consistent with appreciating the likely benefits accrued to the playerbase, and in no way due to the potential profit opportunity exposed through psychological manipulation of the players, to announce a new program for the Paragon Market whose structure and details are intended to be a test case for future development and indicative of the limited resources logically allocated to a non-finalized design, where all players of City of Heroes, whether they are free players, premium players, or VIP subscribers, so long as they are physically and mentally capable of satisfying the mechanical criteria for participation within the limited time window designated below, will have the opportunity to purchase an item that already exists in the store but whose price will be temporarily reduced to zero paragon points; said item to be an item selected by the devs in a manner which does not reveal this purely deterministic decision to the players until the market update occurs. This item could be reasonably inferred to be almost anything currently available in the Paragon Market if you are not one of the people who already know which item has been selected, except for things that are exclusive to VIPs, unusable by premium players, or unable to be awarded on an account-basis which would be logically inconsistent with the descriptions or circumstances of the items released to date. This should not be construed as a guarantee the item will avoid logical inconsistency as no such warranty is being offered. The specific selection of item will be different in adjacent weeks in at least some possibly minimal describable way. At the time of this announcement, Paragon Studios plans for each promotional item to be available for purchase at the previously mentioned zero paragon points for a consecutive 24 hour window of time although this may change at any time, including possibly the moment you are reading this. For the first item in this program Paragon Studios will be altering the price of said item at 4:00PM PDT on Thursday, May 10th, 2012 as determined by the US calendar in any region within the Pacific timezone. The item will be available at the modified zero price until 4:00PM on Friday, May 11th, 2012 as determined by the previously specified criteria. You should be able to locate the "Freebie Friday" item starting on Thursday under the "Featured Items" section of the Paragon Market, although Paragon Studios' development staff does not directly support the functionality of the Paragon Market and we cannot be held responsible for the functionality or any malfunctions thereof of any component of the Paragon Market interface.

    The process by which a player may claim their item, which will be awarded to the account of the login of the player making the claim, and which can only be awarded once per login, has been judged to be relatively straight forward relative to people of average intelligence, as that criteria is judged in the Northern half of California. That process is represented in, but in no way guaranteed to precisely replicate, the list below.

    Step 1a: Wait for the moment in time which corresponds to 4:00PM PDT on May 10, 2012.

    Step 1b: This time can theoretically be spent playing City of Heroes although this is not a mandatory requirement.

    Step 2a: Log into your game account.

    Step 2b: Click on the Paragon Store Icon.

    Step 2c: Retrieve the beverage of your choice while the store performs whatever dynamic loading the programmer incorrectly felt was appropriate to this situation.

    Step 2d: Locate the Freebie Friday item, which may be located under the "Featured Items" section of the store although this currently cannot be guaranteed by the Paragon Studios development team.

    Step 2e: Add this item to your cart and execute the purchase.

    Step 3: It is currently unknown what step would be most appropriate here to maximize the probability of the activity listed in Step 8 to complete successfully.

    Step 4: Obtain a net increase in overall game content as measured by the virtual currency costs associated with those items.

    Disclaimer: Virtual currency costs may not be proportional to material value increase judged objectively by a monetary standard.

    Join the individual employees of Paragon Studios that are either professionally involved in this project or have volunteered to participate with or without the application of duress-inducing circumstantial engineering in performing the described transaction which may or may not be the first in a sequence of such transactions made available at seven day intervals, possibly with minor to significant structural changes in the process, items, or circumstances thereof. Also, you are encouraged to leave any feedback to this preliminary test program which conforms to the usage policies of the discussion forums and is either reasonably relevant to the program or sufficiently entertaining to be considered likely to improve the community experience of the forum readership, and which does not require moderation for content.


    Note: production has confirmed that the initial item being offered in the first iteration of the preliminary program is not a kick which strikes the players' testicles, or an in-game item which subsequently awards this activity, as no such item is currently available in the Paragon Market at any price and therefore fails to satisfy the eligibility criteria. However, this may change for future iterations.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by UberGuy View Post
    I wonder if the answer to the implied prevalence of poorness is simple, but seemingly impossibly mystifying to those of us who regular these forums. To this day there are people who almost completely avoid the auction houses. Some find the market thematically distasteful, some are afraid of the learning curve, and some just don't care if their characters have the best enhancements, even if that just means SOs at 22.

    It may suggest assume that actually only a small part of the game population uses the market with anything like expertise, and only a small part of that subset of the population is actually toting around even hundreds of millions, let alone billions of inf.

    Another thing to consider: it may be common for people to use the market effectively, but only to the degree they need to buy what they want, when they decide to try and get it. In other words, they may not use the market to earn inf which they keep, but rather only earn enough to buy what they want and then stop, presumably until the next time they want something. See the earlier question wondering why people are storing billions of inf.
    It may be even more direct than that. It may be that the vast overwhelming majority of players do not want to spend any time marketeering at all, but do use the markets for two things: they dump stuff to sell at low prices and buy what they want at the minimum execute-now price. In other words, they treat the markets like a store and execute at the prices that will execute instantly, which makes them high buyers and low sellers. Which means the markets for the majority of players may actually act as a very efficient influence leech.
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by FourSpeed View Post
    We can spin the numbers anyway we wish, but the problem I have with ignoring
    "Rule of Thumb" things like Pareto and Income Distributions is that they have
    a frequent habit of being right.
    Has Pareto been shown to be reasonable in MMO environments where income earning is non-proportional above a threshold and influence doesn't have the same buying power as in normal economies?

    Also:

    Quote:
    85% of ALL accounts are *never* played - at all. There's no other reasonable
    way for them to be *that* poor.
    500,000 accounts were reported to have at least one level 50, but I don't think most people would estimate that all of them are currently active. Assuming 200,000 different people play City of Heroes at least once per month in the post-Freedom era, that means 43 million characters are competing for 200,000 players' attention every month. That's a fanout of over 200 to one. I don't think the average player plays 200 alts per month. If the average player plays five alts per month, that means less than 3% of all existing characters are played in any given month. The real strong influence earners might be only 50 thousand players across maybe ten or twenty alts each. That's only about 2% of all characters in existence. So the numbers could in fact be that big.

    In effect, Pareto might fall down in MMOs because counting all characters in all accounts would be like trying to apply Pareto to an environment where the infant mortality rate was 90% but you still counted the graves as people and 98% of the population were serfs and 2% were feudal lords. Maybe most players aren't interested in earning influence, and to the extent they do they tend to spend it. Heck I *could* have over a trillion influence had I ever felt compelled to earn it, but until I19 I didn't even really know what to do with the couple billion I had at the time. I only have the amount of influence I do have now because at some point I decided to simply begin accumulating influence without limit, much like when I decided to start farming Empath even though using the method I was using at the time it was going to take nine continuous months to earn it. In other words, sometimes I just get that way. But I still have no idea what I'm going to actually do with it: I've just decided to see how large a pile I can eventually accumulate, without putting too much effort into it.

    Unlike any real economy, I can hypothesize that its possible even when players earn tens of millions of inf, their tendency is to spend it on things like inventions. As influence changes hands, it eventually ends up in the hands of extremely rich players that already have everything they want and are primarily sellers and not buyers of stuff. In a reverse osmosis effect, that influence then accumulates in a few high density hands. And perhaps its not a normal compulsion to try to accumulate billions of inf, so even though it should be possible for most players to do so, most don't: they tend to spend it rather than accumulate it.

    I've always been suspicious that MMO economies, and City of Heroes' economy in particular, diverges from conventional ones in certain very fundamental ways. The micro-economics of supply and demand tend to hold, but on the more macro scale things tend to differ substantially due to forces that are unique to MMO economies.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by PRAF68_EU View Post
    Invalid
    Invalid
    invalid
    invalid
    I wouldn't go quite that far:

    Quote:
    1. Melee powersets are sets that primarily exist to do damage in melee
    That one is actually true. That doesn't mean secondary effects are not also significant, any more than a Tanker's secondary is insignificant.

    Quote:
    2. A set that does more damage is superior to one with inferior damage without the consideration of other factors
    Well that's obviously true, and a truism. When the only thing you consider is damage, the set with the higher damage is better. Of course, whether you should only consider damage is a separate question.

    Quote:
    3. Survivability and endurance are secondary to damage in a damage powerset
    Also true, as above. Just as dealing damage is secondary to taking aggro for a tanker.

    Quote:
    4. Balance metrics should take into account the damage a powerset CAN do, ie the maximum damage a powerset can dish out when focused on damage
    Also true, but critically this is *not* a primary consideration. Its a secondary marginal consideration. How much it actually deals in actual play counts for far more than the theoretical maximum possible under controlled conditions. Core balance metrics take reasonable nominal damage output into account. Maximum possible damage is looked at as an edge case.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Xzero45 View Post
    Next time a red name hops on Nemesis and speaks over the admin chat, mind making him more in character? Give a monologue about how we're all worthless, toss out some threats and call some players out, toss some insults out at the "pathetic" heroes and villains, hint at his master plan without giving away too much.
    Why would you want the person playing Lord Nemesis to roleplay as Matt Miller?
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Another_Fan View Post
    Prestige is going to provide a very poor proxy because of the way prestige is generated below 50. Going from 1->30 in supergroup mode generates roughly 120K prestige or 60 million inf equivalent and something on the order of 6 million inf.

    You also have pressure to exit supergroup mode as you increase in level. The cost to the character to stay in SG mode is greater and the demands for inf to equip the character are greater as well.
    Because you can earn influence without earning prestige, its not a good proxy for earning influence directly. But it might be able to serve as a lower bound, since there's no way to earn prestige without either earning influence or destroying it in conversion. But as I said, the fact that you can both earn and destroy influence in acquiring prestige may be a fatal flaw in using the number at all, except for order of magnitude sanity checks. But I haven't put enough thought into it to say definitively, so I tossed it out there in case anyone else has a better idea.
  24. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hitback View Post
    Give me a link, picture, video, anything that shows a real woman or a fictional character wearing heels while in a suit that looks even close to this:
    If a woman was wearing heels while also wearing something like that, how would you be able to tell?

    Edit: I did find this:

  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by FourSpeed View Post
    Considering the market came out in I-9 (FIVE years ago - May 2007), I can only
    presume that the vast majority of those 43M toons were created very early, and
    largely left for dead in approximately the same timeframe. The number of actual
    inf-earning toons would have to be a tiny fraction of the total for things to make
    any sense at all to me.
    They may include lots of "placeholder" characters created by players and then never really played, characters created by people test driving Freedom, name-parking characters, and alts that were abandoned long before they reached 50.

    That could explain how your calculations imply the vast majority of characters are paupers. Except when they are used for influence storage, its entirely possible most characters are paupers. As I mentioned above, I think most characters below 30 are break-even characters: they spend about the same amount of influence they earn through play, if not more. Those characters can only have lots of influence if they acquire it from other richer characters by direct influence transfers or by market activities. What percentage of alts never make it past 30? Its entirely possible that number is very high. If we're thinking its just a few million level 50s out of 43 million characters, a reasonable estimate might be that 75% or more of all characters don't make it past 30, and those characters are all mostly influence-poor. I can imagine the vast majority of those having less than one million inf.

    Is it possible that only a very tiny fraction of all players hold a massive amount of influence? Actually, I think its not that unlikely. Another_Fan once observed that a very large fraction of all the bids on a particular item were bids he could account for as his own storage bids. If thousands of players were controlling hundreds of trillions of inf, you'd expect to never see that kind of situation, because the number of storage places is limited. And while I'm not one of the top influence accumulators (~90 billion or so liquid at the moment, I think) I also don't see strong evidence that I'm one among many thousands. I think I'm probably among hundreds. If I'm among a population of hundreds of players, that means I'm one out of a thousand or so, or in the top 0.1% of player accounts, but with only on the order of a hundred billion inf.


    One more thing just occurred to me when talking about older accounts. I wonder how much influence was destroyed during the period between Issue 9 and Issue 14 (a period of about two years) when the markets would "expire" listings from accounts idle for more than 60 days by deleting them. It seems likely that this could be responsible for creating a lot of artificially "poor" accounts as a material fraction of the total.