EVE General Discussion

She didn't say "unlikely" she said "unlike"

This item was given away for free. The market price for it stabilized at some value due to whatever.

The correct analogy would be if the Government gave people a Pony for free if they did some other action, then started selling Ponies to other people for a nickel.

If, between those times, you bought a pony for something more than a nickel, you lost at your investment. Too bad, so sad.

So you are telling me that those who spent 2B for Ishukone Shirt prior to the devaluation, shouldn't be compensated because that's part of the market risk?

WE HAZ A WINNA

Tippia, are you saying that those who purchased the Shirt prior to this artificial devaluation by CCP's own mistake, doesn't deserve any compensation?

So you are telling me that if you purchased Estamel's module for 2.2B and its market value declines to 22M the next day solely from the artificial devaluation caused by CCP's mistake, you won't care? That you will act like nothing happened? You will consider that as part of the risk and move on without asking CCP for any compensation?

Yep. You entered a market which had nothing propping up the prices beside an artificial rarity. That was your choice. The primary risk you face is the rarity disappearing. You had to judge whether that risk was worth it. If you didn't think that through, that's on you.


Also, this means your OP and Thread title are disingenuous if you bought the item on the market.

How is it a troll to explain the basic risk of the “investment” the OP made? How does what the devs said in any way affect the fact that the OP made the decision to take that risk?

You can quote the devs as much as you like, but just like with my question (that neither of you have been able to answer), it doesn't actually address the point being made.

Once again, the way you and I think are so different that we will never be able to come up with compromising answer that is mutually agreeable by both of us. Just because the way we think is different, doesn't necessary mean one is right and other is wrong.

I label all ingame items that exist in EVE Online as "investments" because they are means to not only maintain the value of our initial capital, but to yield additional returns. As you claim, you are absolutely right that just like any other investments, these assets carry risk where they could also yield negative return. But at the same time, we are not strictly abiding by the Finance-concept of risk because we do not keep these items purely for finance-investment & speculative purpose.

Our purpose extends beyond that. We hold these unique items to satisfy our innate desires as collectors. You also believe in EVE Online being a sandbox where a player could do anything he or she wants? EVE throws a rubric cube at us and it's up to us to decide what the **** to do with it. Perhaps speculation is an unavoidable evil in collecting profession, but we are not holding these unique items just for the sole purpose of seeing our net worth go up. What we ask is some form of "stability" that CCP has generously provided to other professions.

We consider "collecting" as a legitimate profession and the only thing we ask is for CCP to give as much respect to our profession as it does to any other professions in EVE including PvPing, Roleplaying, and PvEing missioners. One way for CCP to legitimize and give equal weight to our profession is to provide a stable environment where our collection doesn't go under water. Have you seen an instance where without a single warning, CCP deprived countless hours of PvPers' collective effort by making the power of the super-capitals equal to that of cruisers? Have you seen an instance where a missioner was deprived of countless hours he put into faction standing by having CCP announce without a warning, that you are only entitled only to level 1 mission? Have you ever seen an instance where CCP ban the provision of outside services to obtain ISK (including corp logo creation, killmail systems, teamspeak for payment), etc, without warning? From time to time, CCP does make continuous changes to the preexisting gameplay that positively or negatively affect players' gameplay, but what CCP did with Ishukone shirt/Women (Gold/red) was not just a small change, but an utter devaluation of something we cherish. We are not merely holding these items for speculation purpose. We hold these unique items because we enjoy collecting and we have a belief that CCP won't do anything to **** over "our profession."

If you can't see the difference, then I have nothing more to say to you. You can keep playing word games of yours, but I can't guarantee you that I will be reading any more of your postings.

CCP already admitted that reissuance of Ishukone Shirt and Women's Executor (Red/Gold) was a grave mistake on CCP's part and they will be providing the disadvantaged parties with appropriate compensation. You can keep telling everyone that we do not deserve a single compensation, but CCP already disagrees with you on that.

I wholeheartedly agree. Losing 6.6B worth of investment is great when the loss stems from Goons suicide ganking which makes a terrific story and I would even compliment Goons for a job well done.

But when I lose 6.6B because of CCP's carelessness mistake, there is nothing glorious about that.

The difference is that your collection is completely untouched, as is, by and large, you “profession”.

You still have your item. It still performs the exact same function. As such, it is completely unlike the incomparables you listed — the nerfed cruisers or removed standings or removed meta-functionality are all just that: removed functionality. Your shirt remains functionally identical and hasn't been changed in the slightest.

Yes, you could argue that its value changed, but then you're talking as a speculator, in which case I have to inform you that this is an insignificantly minute change compared to the vast speculation losses that have been caused by CCP's game changes over the years (cf. the dyspro→tech bottleneck changeover; the PI changes; any mineral adjustment ever made; hell, pretty much any adjustment ever to a set of raw materials).

So that's why we continuously arrive back at that same old question: why should they compensate you for something you got for free? If you're a collector, nothing is lost. If you're a speculator, then that's the name of the game — better luck next time.