RuneScape talk:Grand Exchange Market Watch/Common Trade Index/Archive 3

Most traded Items in April and volume
Sorry for not making a table. 18:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I made it a table for you. immibis 05:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Raw shrmips? lol 05:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That was a rather useless comment. immibis 09:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Raw Lobsters
It says that they are priced at 1,000,000. Anyone want to fix this? --Mr Luigids 15:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's either vandalism or a broken bot. TBH I can't even see why anyone would waste their time changing prices to ridiculous values, but it happens. immibis 04:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

new index
I know that no one cares but I think there should be a members and non members index. I am a non member so i think that there should be another

P.S.

Please delete some of the stuff above i'm not sure if it's allowed so I didn't pleases let me know if its aloud

Thanks, Ppi80


 * Member and free worlds impact each other's economy, which was the whole point to this index. Not trying to completely kill the idea, but can you give a good example of why a separate index for F2P items would be important? This index certainly has a pretty good sprinkling of both member and F2P items, and frankly I think it is biased strongly toward F2P items. The member-only items on this index are the herbs, snape grass, magic logs, and monkfish. There have been some strongly suggested items that are member only that have been added to this page, but have not really been added to the index. I'll take those under advisement. Considering the new market situation with the introduction of personalized shops, some items ought to be added to this index to make it more accurate of the current economy.


 * The largest problem with creating a new index is mainly just listing the index at all. We have been hitting problems with what is called template expansion, where sometimes even minor changes on the indexes can overflow the "buffer" of the webservers. The GEMW data is very processor intensive, and we are trying to be somewhat kind to Wikia. I think they have moved us over to some more dedicated servers (this site sucks up a whole lot of CPU processor time) and have kind of used the GE data as a sort of stress test for some of the MediaWiki software. If we don't crash the software, it must be relatively bug-free.


 * Otherwise, if you want to suggest some items that you think properly represent the free-player economy, certainly suggest them here. --Robert Horning 23:52, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering
When we update the ge price of an item, do we use market price? I'm wondering cause I just had to change the price for pure essence after someone put it as 2k. --OmegaWarmech 12:12, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, we always use the market price for GEMW values. 12:20, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

A high-price, low volume index
As well as measuring commonly traded, everyday items, which shows supply and demand in the RS economy, perhaps some of the more commonly traded high price items should comprise a second index to show how much Runescapians are saving, how quickly they are saving it, and how much money they are willing to spend on an individual item. For instance, abyssal whips, dark bows, corrupt dragon items, godwars dungeon weapons and armor, robin hood hats, and perhaps ancient staves are all good examples of high-price items that are still traded fairly often. Wrathanet 21:20, November 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm confused... how would that show how much Runescapians are saving? Please explain what you mean by this for everyone's benefit, I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't understand this. Jpv41193 23:16, November 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * This would be a semi-rare index. Actually, I don't think it is a terrible idea, other than I find that these items are rather unpredictable and tend to have a downward trend as more and more of them are found or discovered. Still, it might be an interesting one to put together. The only problem is memory requirements in terms of the template expansion issue that the Wikia server itself has to deal with when creating web pages. That has been expanded somewhat recently, and we've done a pretty good job of optimizing the templates. Perhaps it is time to create a new index. --Robert Horning 01:32, November 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, Jpv, it would show, generally, the wealth of the upper-class of RuneScape's players by showing how much they are willing and able to pay for expensive, but nessecary items. This is versus players spending money buying fish to train cooking or just playing minigames without gaining any profit. If this index were to lower, it would show that those higher players are switching to cheaper alternatives or are simply putting off buying those semi-rare and rare items. This could be used to gauge responses to updates (usually ones that involve PVP, although fluxes may be due to merchanting schemes), instead of the common trade index, which is more based on supply and demand. Wrathanet 21:22, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Since you are proposing this idea, what sort of items do you think should be included in this idea, Wrathanet? I agree with the abyssal whips, Robin Hood hats, and ancient staves, with perhaps dragon armor, and the various ancient visages. I would suggest that rare items be kept from this index... aka the items like a Santa Hat, party hats, and other tradeable but "discontinued" items. --Robert Horning 21:47, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I am actually not sure about adding many of those tradeable, discontinued items. Due to their fixed volume and always increasing demand, they wouldn't really contribute to the index with an always increasing price. I was thinking of items more like godswords, spirit shields, dark bows, robin hood hats, and possibly third age equipment. Things that are very hard to obtain, but enough of them are obtained to balance out an increasing demand. That way, we generally see how rich the upper crust of RuneScape has become and how much they are gaining, saving, and spending. 13:30, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

RSS / toolbar
I would like to have a toolbaar or RSS feed of this index. So I can always see it. It's just a proposal

Legend
It would be nice to have a legend for the graph to explain what the colors mean, to make it easier to read. As well as a description of the meaning of the values on the y axis.

Add Maple logs
I looked at all the items on the cti and thought everything needed is there, except maple logs. Maple logs are really needed especially since they are in the top 3 traded items over the ge. 01:13, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

How to pick items to be measured
CPIs in real life are calculated on a weighted price average. Shouldn't the index be made up of not the items most traded, but the items where the [Price]*[Amount Traded] is maximum? Then the CPI would be more accurate. 59.96.59.57 10:01, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

I agree (lordtoby100) - It should be weighted, because not all items are of the same consequence overall, but in this index are just as important, this is a flaw.

Microsoft Access and the Grand Exchange
So I'm tracking a couple items with the Exchange. Anyone know of a way I can connect to the G.E for prices and use the price as a value for some items?

06:18, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Semiprotect
Does anyone mind if I semiprotect the exchange pages listed here? Vandalism will cause and has before caused errors of the main page, although it is usually fixed somewhat quickly. 01:28, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Um.....+212?
Why does it say the number is in the 300s? 68.35.217.175 18:21, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Adding new items
Hi I think we should add at least one high priced item (i suggest either rune scimi or abyssal whip) to sort of measure expensive items even if they are not most traded its still a very important market
 * I made a suggestion invloving this. See "High price, low volume index" section 00:55, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Weighted items
As a person above me so eloquently stated, real life trade indexes use weighted indexes, based on trade volumes. Our CTI does not do that, making it fairly inaccurate. Pure essence rising 50% will likely have a great effect on the economy than Vial of water rising 50%, because it has a greater trade volume times price. I have set up a sandbox with the top 80 most traded items (minus Spirit shards and pouches) which I believe more accurately portrays the economy. Does this work for everyone? 09:54, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be the correct thing to do. However, we need a bot to extract the data. Then we would have to store the volume data somewhere in this wiki... perhaps in the Exchange page itself, or somewhere else. Try asking the main GE bot ops, SmackBot and AmauriceBot... and see if they are willing to help. Currently, AzBot is not programmed for this type of data extraction. 15:29, September 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * Adding a crystal key to the list would help greatly... You could also put an uncut onyx in there now that it's more stable.--Firefight33


 * There is a problem with this approach, too. You see, the CPI does not measure trade volume. It measures purchases made by households (ie: consumption). Some items (like logs and air runes) might have a high trade volume not just because they are used often but because they are seen as a safe way to bet your gp on the market. For example: I know that air runes, for me, constitutes a miniscule portion of my spending: and I'm a mage! --Agamemnus 05:03, September 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Update to the CTI, I had fixed the calculation for the CTI to include the correct number of items. I have also added 4 items that were on the list, but were not actually in the calculation. The consequence of this is that it will temporarily "dilute" the CTI closer down to 100 since 4 items were added as of 6 October 2010. 22:45, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Adding rune scimitar
After all it's the most popular F2P weapon. I think it should be added to this index. 01:09, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

SUGGESTION FOR A CHANGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK. I think the list for the Common Trade Index is nearly perfect for an all around field of everything, EXCEPT:

The raw swordfish should be changed to cooked swordfish, which is more popular and thus has a greater impact

Rune ore should be added to the list of critical ores for their value

Rune Scimitars should be added, as it is a popular weapon and creates huge amounts of money from players

Adamant Arrows, which sell as the single most popular arrows in F2P

And Finally, A gem to represent the crafting sector better, such as Diamond, Onyx, Dragon, Or Sapphire

These would make the Exchange more realistic and plausible.

PS Other suggestions should be added to this, but these are a must. I am not a member, so I do not know any major member's additions to better this watch.


 * Gold ore, flax, cowhide, and soft clay (gold jewellry, bowstrings, leather, urns) are all more important to crafting than gems. They are also traded in far higher quantities with much more stable prices; gems can be erratic at times.


 * Rune ore is the same way as gems, and Rune scimitars have bottomed out. They alch for basically how much you pay for them on the GE.


 * Also, please sign your posts like so:


 * 24.88.253.204 15:48, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not gonna sign my posts, don't tell me what to do ya jerk.
 * I'm not gonna sign my posts, don't tell me what to do ya jerk.

Nature Rune High Alchemy Price
I've noticed that the Nature Rune's High Alchemy price is in the 2,000s, and I know it's actually right around 240. I don't know how to change this, could somebody else look into it? 21:21, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Add items
The cti must be expanded with popular F2P / P2P items like: - Rune scimitar - Adamant arrow - Cannonball - Arrow shaft - Feather 12:20, March 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * Cannonball? Really? 217.13.129.128 14:54, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

How exactly does knowing the CTI help me?
I'm no economic expert, in fact, far from. Which is probably a bad thing... but anyway. Forgive me if it's already been asked, but how exactly does knowing the CTI help me? I'm sure it's important but I don't know why :) 01:59, October 23, 2011 (UTC)