These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE Inflation is being driven by structural factors
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2012-03-13 01:20:34 UTC
Jas Dor wrote:
Really what's the point of talking about numbers and details if a significant portion of this board thinks blowing ships up is an isk sink.


On the other hand their stupidity is distracting them from your real deceit, which was handwaving your patently absurd position that highsec suicide ganking is a greater source of inflation than highsec incursions in the hope of getting support for crusade against suicide gankers. I mean, do you really expect to get away with claiming that the amount of play time players have to invest in incursions changes anything about how much isk flows into the economy as a result?

A faucet is a faucet and a rate of flow is a rate of flow. X liters will overflow the bathtub whether you're hand pumping it or having it dumped in by an army of slave monkeys with buckets.
Adunh Slavy
#42 - 2012-03-13 01:46:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Adunh Slavy
Johnny Marzetti wrote:

A faucet is a faucet and a rate of flow is a rate of flow. X liters will overflow the bathtub whether you're hand pumping it or having it dumped in by an army of slave monkeys with buckets.



Quite true, trouble is no one ever knows how big the bathtub is. With the real world bathtub, when it overflows we get all sorts of nasty side effects, hyper inflation being the one most often cited.

That can't happen in quite the same way on Eve though. For one, the market is hard coded, we do not have a lot of choices when it comes to choosing another money. ISK is not based on debt, having more and more ISK in the system does not have any of the debt related side effects.

What can, and hopefully will happen, if CCP sees the light, prices will rise to the point where doing something other than shooting rats is more worthwhile. Divisions of labor and industrial specialization are the key to solving this. Sadly, few see it.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Aggressive Nutmeg
#43 - 2012-03-13 01:58:17 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
I really dont know how to be any more obvious about this.

Blowing up players results in lost isk. You lost isk. Isk sink. Isk gone! TRUST ME - I HAVE A MONOCLE

Do you really think i would have amassed this much wealth and not know the difference? My shirt cost 800 million isk alone.

ITS AN ISK SINK

You're going to be really embarrassed when the penny finally drops for you.

Also, Monocles <> Economics Degree.

Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana.
Taiwanistan
#44 - 2012-03-13 02:08:39 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
Y U PEOPLE IGNORE TECH MOONS


Becuase they are over owhelmingly NULL SECers using Incursions as a scape goat


damn dawg that's some greek style economics right there yo
how many times must it be told that tech moon goo are bought and sold on the market, the isk exchange hands not created.

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."
Jas Dor
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2012-03-13 02:33:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Jas Dor
Johnny Marzetti wrote:
Jas Dor wrote:
Really what's the point of talking about numbers and details if a significant portion of this board thinks blowing ships up is an isk sink.


On the other hand their stupidity is distracting them from your real deceit, which was handwaving your patently absurd position that highsec suicide ganking is a greater source of inflation than highsec incursions in the hope of getting support for crusade against suicide gankers. I mean, do you really expect to get away with claiming that the amount of play time players have to invest in incursions changes anything about how much isk flows into the economy as a result?

A faucet is a faucet and a rate of flow is a rate of flow. X liters will overflow the bathtub whether you're hand pumping it or having it dumped in by an army of slave monkeys with buckets.


This is also a game. If people are playing the game more hours, then they will generate more isk. One of the main incentives to run incursions is that group play sure beats the hell out of soloing level IVs. If incursions were removed from high sec people would play fewer hours. This would mean less of an isk faucet. People playing less hours would not be good for the game. By your logic the inflation problem could be resolved by permabanning half the game. While this might be effective, the effect on CCPs wallet would moot any need to discuss EvE.

What I find amazing is that when the dev who has actual hard number saying that incursions are not the source of inflation posts the PvPidiots on this board flame him for being wrong. This is the guy with the actual, honest to god, numbers with all the comparative and supporting data.

I'm not saying incursions are not the problem CCP is saying incursion are not the problem.

On the other hand this is a game of risk v. reward. When I undock in a combat ship its for fun. When I undock in an isk making ship I need to get paid for having my ass(ets) hanging out in space. Suicide ganking has increased the risk found in anything above station trading/station production. Greater risk requires greater reward. Systemized greater risk brings about systemic price increases. Systemic price increases are generally known as inflation.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2012-03-13 02:45:40 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Blowing ships up directly removes isk from circulation. You're literally blowing it up.

Your entire point is void (Due To Suicide Ganking)


Blowing up ships removes 0 ISK from the economy the ISK was already paid for & leaks back to the industialist that made it! The ISK is still circulating. The insurance paid actually adds ISK into the ecomony



not always true.


Killing pods is an isk-sink.

FIGHT INFLATION -- KILL A POD! P

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2012-03-13 02:52:35 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Blowing ships up directly removes isk from circulation. You're literally blowing it up.

Your entire point is void (Due To Suicide Ganking)


Blowing up ships removes 0 ISK from the economy the ISK was already paid for & leaks back to the industialist that made it! The ISK is still circulating. The insurance paid actually adds ISK into the ecomony



not always true.


Killing pods is an isk-sink.

FIGHT INFLATION -- KILL A POD! P

How it is a sink?
Installing a new clone is an ISK sink.
Replacing impants could be considered an isk sink as you need to pay isk (as well as the LP) for the item.
Being podded isn't. Its up to you if you replace impants and upgrade clone or not...
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2012-03-13 02:55:15 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
Y U PEOPLE IGNORE TECH MOONS


Becuase they are over owhelmingly NULL SECers using Incursions as a scape goat


Yeah, those NPC buy orders for technetium are sure injecting large amounts of ISK into the system...
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#49 - 2012-03-13 08:30:00 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Terminal Insanity wrote:
Blowing ships up directly removes isk from circulation. You're literally blowing it up.

Your entire point is void (Due To Suicide Ganking)


Blowing up ships removes 0 ISK from the economy the ISK was already paid for & leaks back to the industialist that made it! The ISK is still circulating. The insurance paid actually adds ISK into the ecomony



not always true.


Killing pods is an isk-sink.

FIGHT INFLATION -- KILL A POD! P


Killing PODs I guess could be considered an exception but really its the replacement of 'plants... only times I go to anywhere with bubbles you can guarrenty I got no worth while implants though but I'll give you that point anyways
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#50 - 2012-03-13 08:33:26 UTC
Taiwanistan wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
Y U PEOPLE IGNORE TECH MOONS


Becuase they are over owhelmingly NULL SECers using Incursions as a scape goat


damn dawg that's some greek style economics right there yo
how many times must it be told that tech moon goo are bought and sold on the market, the isk exchange hands not created.


I've always called moon goo a mineral fountain ( guess its really a catlyst but still used to build ) not a ISK fountain. It is still an a faucet just like Incursions are.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Xylia Ailyx
Doomheim
#51 - 2012-03-13 09:17:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Xylia Ailyx
i have yet to see a moon that adds isk to the system
also anyone saying being podded is not a sink is delusional, it's pretty much a tax on SPlevied on those 'dumb' enough to get podded
Mussaschi
No Wise Guy's
#52 - 2012-03-13 09:18:19 UTC

Even if there would be an inflation, that would be fine too, since it means that all people earn more, so that the ratio of income to costs stay intact.

So what we really see, are people that are not willing to adapt to a changing landscape and think that their style of playing is the only valid one, and that the others should suffer for adapting.

Some people seem to forget that eve is not "won" by the man with the most ISK in his pocket. The only valid question is, does the profession you choose pay enough to make it valid.

So what might needs some balancing is the ISK generated by some professions. Candidates for that would be in my view pirates and inventors. So please add ransom contracts, make scanning of ships in low harder, discourage gate camping and reduce other sources of low sector ore to make low and pirating more fun, and change the base material index of invented stuff to -2
Xylia Ailyx
Doomheim
#53 - 2012-03-13 09:20:53 UTC
What we really see is people watching the news for buzzwords and trying to use the same words in an EVE context without understanding how any of it works.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#54 - 2012-03-13 10:36:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
I have to say, this is the best stealth-“nerf ganking”-thread I've seen in a long while… Lol

Anyway, no, ganking is not causing the problems you claim, nor is the loss of NPC POS fuel that much of a problem — it's still a sink even if it has been reduced in size compared to the old NPC sell orders. The only factor in your list that makes any real difference is #3, but not for quite that reason: the factor is that they have given us more numerous and more efficient ways of spawning ISK.
Espen Egak
x13
Pandemic Horde
#55 - 2012-03-13 11:10:25 UTC
Quote:

4. Decreasing ability to arbitage items between regions due to suicide ganking.

You really must be angry at those suicide gankers .. since this is the second threat where you talk about your lag of knowledge about how to get around them.
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2012-03-13 11:12:49 UTC  |  Edited by: J3ssica Alba
Terminal Insanity wrote:
YOU PAID 5 BIL FOR THOSE MODULES - AND NOW IT WAS DESTROYED! POOF!


You are either 1) trolling 2) need to find a school that teaches basic economics since the one you went to failed horribly

The 5 billion you paid for those modules didn't disappear no matter what happened to the modules. They are lining the wallet of the guy who sold them to you. The only thing that disappeared was the minerals that made up the modules were you to reprocess them.
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#57 - 2012-03-13 11:22:39 UTC
Johnny Marzetti wrote:
No no no, dumping baskets full of currency into the economy doesn't cause inflation, preventing people from autopiloting freighters full of loot to Jita causes inflation.


Eyjog alt spotted
Pheusia
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#58 - 2012-03-13 11:26:04 UTC
Jas Dor wrote:

What I find amazing is that when the dev who has actual hard number saying that incursions are not the source of inflation posts the PvPidiots on this board flame him for being wrong. This is the guy with the actual, honest to god, numbers with all the comparative and supporting data.

I'm not saying incursions are not the problem CCP is saying incursion are not the problem...


Last year (or was it the year before?) a Dev who had actual hard numbers said that Gallente ships were fine and he couldn't see any problem with Blasters.

Soundwave was looking at the same data we are; his interpretation of those data differed.
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-03-13 11:28:24 UTC
Pheusia wrote:

Soundwave was looking at the same data we are; his interpretation of those data differed.


He's the dev, you aren't. His interpretation holds more clout. Big smile
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#60 - 2012-03-13 11:30:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
J3ssica Alba wrote:
He's the dev, you aren't. His interpretation holds more clout. Big smile
He's a software designer, not an economist…

Then again, and he didn't actually say that incursions were not a source of inflation. So there's always that speaking in his favour.