These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Isk Sink.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2012-08-09 22:06:10 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So to quickly summarize Snow Axes problem with the tax.

Its OK for the CFC to put 100% on to T2 ships via OTEC for the benefit of those alliances but it is NOT OK to put a 10% tax on T2 ships for the benefit of the Game.


No.

It's ok for ANYONE to manipulate the market and cause prices of things to rise or fall. That's part of what makes the Eve market great. Look at the price of lowend minerals - they're quite high, and that was because of the scarcity. Same thing with Tech, and it will be the same thing with any other commodity that whatever other players try to game for profit.

It's NOT ok to levy a flat tax (that benefits nobody) on a certain class of ship, especially when the creation of it is under the idea of "taxing rich players" when in fact it'd be taxing everyone, rich or otherwise. It's especially not OK to listen to someone proposing this idea when he clearly hasn't even given 10 seconds of thought as to how much such a change would even "help".

If you actually had numbers or a train of thought that wasn't just "HAY GUYS TAX everyone THE RICH" or "BUT BUT THE CFC TECH MOONGOO", people might actually take your ideas seriously. Then again, if you actually thought about your ideas, you'd probably never post them because they're bad.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#62 - 2012-08-09 22:23:13 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So to quickly summarize Snow Axes problem with the tax.

Its OK for the CFC to put 100% on to T2 ships via OTEC for the benefit of those alliances but it is NOT OK to put a 10% tax on T2 ships for the benefit of the Game.


No.

It's ok for ANYONE to manipulate the market and cause prices of things to rise or fall. That's part of what makes the Eve market great. Look at the price of lowend minerals - they're quite high, and that was because of the scarcity. Same thing with Tech, and it will be the same thing with any other commodity that whatever other players try to game for profit.

It's NOT ok to levy a flat tax (that benefits nobody) on a certain class of ship, especially when the creation of it is under the idea of "taxing rich players" when in fact it'd be taxing everyone, rich or otherwise. It's especially not OK to listen to someone proposing this idea when he clearly hasn't even given 10 seconds of thought as to how much such a change would even "help".

If you actually had numbers or a train of thought that wasn't just "HAY GUYS TAX everyone THE RICH" or "BUT BUT THE CFC TECH MOONGOO", people might actually take your ideas seriously. Then again, if you actually thought about your ideas, you'd probably never post them because they're bad.

As usual you totally missed the point.

Saying that market manipulation is good is right, it is, but you can hardly use the basis of your argument on the same items that are now falling a lot and say that no one could afford an item when it is 40% below what it cost last month.

As to a tax that benefits no one by lowering inflation, I must ask do you know anything about economics?

The reason that I have brought up CFC and moongoo so often is because 2 of the people I am responding to are in the alliance that lined its own pockets to the detriment of the rest of the game at a huge increase to the same items I want to add a small cost too.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#63 - 2012-08-09 23:09:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Dograzor wrote:
Noumena Dingansich wrote:
Dograzor wrote:
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
Dograzor wrote:
Something I don't get:

The heavy dictor (sebo + remote sebo) & huggin combo is far more effective no?

So how is letting frigates on gates improving anything for outlaws?


Cheaper, more available. Even less risk!


True, it's cost effective..

Less risk.. I disagree. Money usually isn't the issue nowdays, k/d ratio's are very important... for some it seems RollPirate


Yes, park a billion isk worth of ships on a gate in lowsec and tell me how it goes.


A billion is cheap nowadays tbh.


A very good example of why we need more isk sinks to curb inflation.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2012-08-10 01:54:13 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
As to a tax that benefits no one by lowering inflation, I must ask do you know anything about economics?


You haven't demonstrated that your proposed 10% tax on certain items would actually affect inflation enough to even make up for the 10% increase in price for said items. Actually, you haven't demonstrated ANYTHING, outside of reminding us ad nauseam that Tech being broken has made you really upset.

That's why I asked questions that you completely ignored, like how much you think this tax would remove from the game, and what kind of an impact you think it'd have with regards to inflation/deflation. Are you going to ignore it again this time?

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#65 - 2012-08-10 01:56:15 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As to a tax that benefits no one by lowering inflation, I must ask do you know anything about economics?


You haven't demonstrated that your proposed 10% tax on certain items would actually affect inflation enough to even make up for the 10% increase in price for said items. Actually, you haven't demonstrated ANYTHING, outside of reminding us ad nauseam that Tech being broken has made you really upset.

That's why I asked questions that you completely ignored, like how much you think this tax would remove from the game, and what kind of an impact you think it'd have with regards to inflation/deflation. Are you going to ignore it again this time?

Oh I see, you cant read, my apologies Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2012-08-10 02:02:22 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Oh I see, you cant read, my apologies Lol


After 4 pages of your drivel, I kind of wish that was true.

Ignored twice, are we going to go for 3 times?

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#67 - 2012-08-10 02:13:29 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Oh I see, you cant read, my apologies Lol


After 4 pages of your drivel, I kind of wish that was true.

Ignored twice, are we going to go for 3 times?

Go nuts then I don't have to listen to how its ok for the CFC to rip of the same people this tax would effect to the magnitude of 10 times the amount of this tax, lining their own pockets, but a lot smaller amount that would benefit the whole population of EvE is bad.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#68 - 2012-08-10 02:33:05 UTC
TBH I was not expecting a good reaction to these Posts.

Who the hell likes a tax, necessary though they may be.

But never fear I'm sure CCP will bring in a "Loss Adjustment" Tax to EvE if Dust fails just so they can cause more plex sales and get their money back.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#69 - 2012-08-10 08:07:14 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Go nuts then I don't have to listen to how its ok for the CFC to rip of the same people this tax would effect to the magnitude of 10 times the amount of this tax, lining their own pockets, but a lot smaller amount that would benefit the whole population of EvE is bad.


because that's manipulation by players (not the CFC, but OTEC) and not the result of a horrible mechanic

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Ravan Hekki
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#70 - 2012-08-10 19:32:23 UTC
May i suggest myself as an ISK sink.

For every billion isk you make, give me 10mil. Now obviously some people will say this is bad idea, however i am bad at this game, really, really bad. Not only am i space poor, i promise to buy ships that i will whelp at any opportunity. I am in fact known for warping falcons to zero, so you can rest assured that i will keep the eve economy going. Also for every 10mil you give to me i will give 1mil to to a rookie pilot allowing them to blow up too.

See this will work.....seriously give me your isk to save the eve economy.
Frying Doom
#71 - 2012-08-11 03:05:14 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Go nuts then I don't have to listen to how its ok for the CFC to rip of the same people this tax would effect to the magnitude of 10 times the amount of this tax, lining their own pockets, but a lot smaller amount that would benefit the whole population of EvE is bad.


because that's manipulation by players (not the CFC, but OTEC) and not the result of a horrible mechanic

So the fact that CCP screwed up with the tech and made in a few systems in Null allowing OTEC to completely control the market was not a horrible mechanic?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#72 - 2012-08-11 03:08:58 UTC
Ravan Hekki wrote:
May i suggest myself as an ISK sink.

For every billion isk you make, give me 10mil. Now obviously some people will say this is bad idea, however i am bad at this game, really, really bad. Not only am i space poor, i promise to buy ships that i will whelp at any opportunity. I am in fact known for warping falcons to zero, so you can rest assured that i will keep the eve economy going. Also for every 10mil you give to me i will give 1mil to to a rookie pilot allowing them to blow up too.

See this will work.....seriously give me your isk to save the eve economy.

That would only work as an isk sink if you bios massed your self. This way allowing you to function as an isk sink as it removes the isk from the game.

So I think a trial run would be great. Bio-mass your self not and then send CCP an email to see if it removed you isk from the game.Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#73 - 2012-08-11 11:04:50 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
So the fact that CCP screwed up with the tech and made in a few systems in Null allowing OTEC to completely control the market was not a horrible mechanic?


Players being able to manipulate market prices for whatever they like, be it minerals, components, whatever, is not only working as intended, but it's one of the biggest things Eve has in its favor. What OTEC did, in an of itself, was just fine - the problem with it was that the placement of Tech in the universe made it far too easy to be as effective as it was, and that's why it's being changed.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Frying Doom
#74 - 2012-08-11 11:10:51 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
So the fact that CCP screwed up with the tech and made in a few systems in Null allowing OTEC to completely control the market was not a horrible mechanic?


Players being able to manipulate market prices for whatever they like, be it minerals, components, whatever, is not only working as intended, but it's one of the biggest things Eve has in its favor. What OTEC did, in an of itself, was just fine - the problem with it was that the placement of Tech in the universe made it far too easy to be as effective as it was, and that's why it's being changed.


So it was working as intended? So they went mad when they brought in alchemy as a temporary fix till they can get moon mining up and running?

Market manipulation is fine and good, it is a free market after all. But a bad mechanic is still a bad mechanic. It would be the same if they introduced a very unbalanced ship, yes PvP would still be a good thing but the ship would not be.

Were you not going to block me?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#75 - 2012-08-11 11:19:56 UTC
Snow Axe, did say CCP made it too easy to ring up the control of tech, so its fair they did something about it. Of course that was at the end of a bunch of annoying chatter, so it could be easily missed.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Americe Zane
The Lucky Punx
#76 - 2012-08-12 07:04:50 UTC
I think I lost some IQ points reading OPs circular non-logic.

I made this char after taking a break from Eve because I messed up training my first char, then bio massed it. I was flying T2 ships within the first 2 months, when 200m was a lot of money for me. T2 isn't a luxury. It is more of a specialized role you choose. You don't fly interdictors because you have more money than you know what to do with, you fly them because it helps you achieve a goal. You would be hard pressed to find a T2 ship that doesn't have a specialized role, or fills a role that doesn't exist in the current T1 ships (name a T1 frigate than can cloak and launch bombs).

The closest thing, ship wise, that could be considered luxury items would be faction ships, and that could be argued as specialized as well, I'm sure.
Frying Doom
#77 - 2012-08-12 08:48:55 UTC
Americe Zane wrote:
I think I lost some IQ points reading OPs circular non-logic.

I made this char after taking a break from Eve because I messed up training my first char, then bio massed it. I was flying T2 ships within the first 2 months, when 200m was a lot of money for me. T2 isn't a luxury. It is more of a specialized role you choose. You don't fly interdictors because you have more money than you know what to do with, you fly them because it helps you achieve a goal. You would be hard pressed to find a T2 ship that doesn't have a specialized role, or fills a role that doesn't exist in the current T1 ships (name a T1 frigate than can cloak and launch bombs).

The closest thing, ship wise, that could be considered luxury items would be faction ships, and that could be argued as specialized as well, I'm sure.

Well fair enough I will not bother with ideas for isk sinks.

The net effect is greater than this would have been.

If you like inflation don't complain when things cost a fortune.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Revolution Rising
Last-Light Holdings
#78 - 2012-08-12 10:48:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Revolution Rising
Americe Zane wrote:
I think I lost some IQ points reading OPs circular non-logic.

I made this char after taking a break from Eve because I messed up training my first char, then bio massed it. I was flying T2 ships within the first 2 months, when 200m was a lot of money for me. T2 isn't a luxury. It is more of a specialized role you choose. You don't fly interdictors because you have more money than you know what to do with, you fly them because it helps you achieve a goal. You would be hard pressed to find a T2 ship that doesn't have a specialized role, or fills a role that doesn't exist in the current T1 ships (name a T1 frigate than can cloak and launch bombs).

The closest thing, ship wise, that could be considered luxury items would be faction ships, and that could be argued as specialized as well, I'm sure.


Got to agree with this post. To my thinking, a "luxury item" in eve is like... a Titan or a Station...

Eve is a game based on money sure, but also strategy and tactics.

Adding costs for some stategy or tactics is the equivalent to nerfing a particular strategy or tactic..

Other isk sinks could be completely reworked as I said before, even more added, but certainly not as pertains to ships that every player has the option of using. You are nerfing FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE. Not just the "rich".

Consider t2 moon goo goes to asteroids or mining of some kind, then add in destructible stations and more types of station like the asteroid colony idea.

The "rich" money could possibly disappear within a year or two. Inflation would go down, t2 ship prices would "normalise" being based on supply and demand instead of a closed market system.

Why add a crazy-tax to t2 ships that would nerf everyone in the meantime as a kneejerk reaction to something the economics guy mentioned ?

.
Americe Zane
The Lucky Punx
#79 - 2012-08-13 06:02:13 UTC
I find it odd that a luxury tax proposed to tax the rich turned into a flat tax on everyone. Perhaps looking up what luxury means is in order.
Frying Doom
#80 - 2012-08-13 06:48:34 UTC
Americe Zane wrote:
I find it odd that a luxury tax proposed to tax the rich turned into a flat tax on everyone. Perhaps looking up what luxury means is in order.

I really would love to meet these newbies who fly T2 ships.

Quote:

Luxury goods are products and services that are not considered essential and are associated with affluence.The concept of luxury has been present in various forms since the beginning of civilization. Its role was just as important in ancient western and eastern empires as it is in modern societies. With the clear differences between social classes in earlier civilizations, the consumption of luxury was limited to the elite classes.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_good

So yes T2 ships and Capitals are not an essential good they are a luxury, this would be why they are a better version of a T1 good.


Quote:
A luxury tax is a tax on luxury goods: products not considered essential. A luxury tax may be modeled after a sales tax or VAT, charged as a percentage on all items of particular classes, except that it mainly affects the wealthy because the wealthy are the most likely to buy luxuries such as expensive cars, jewelry, etc. It may also be applied only to purchases over a certain amount; for instance, some U.S. states charge luxury tax on real estate transactions over a limit.

A luxury good may be a Veblen good, which is a type of good for which demand increases as price increases. Therefore the effect of a luxury tax may be to increase demand for certain luxury goods. In general, however, since a luxury good has a high income elasticity of demand by definition, both the income effect and substitution effect will decrease demand sharply as the tax rises.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax

So happy now?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!