These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Making missions more challenging and reducing the isk faucet

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Yusef Yeasef Yosef
Doomheim
#41 - 2012-11-11 22:43:33 UTC
Yes, "punishing those who don't play as I do, or I want them to" has always been a popular topic with a certain faction of Eve players.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#42 - 2012-11-11 22:49:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Zoe Issier wrote:
No i asked you to back up your claim with up to date official study
Actually, no, you didn't. You asked me to provide a source for my numbers. I did, and now you don't want to go look if it's accurate or not. If you don't like Kefira's numbers, you can always collect your own. It shouldn't take more than a week or so.

Your wilful ignorance does not make numbers random.
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2012-11-11 22:53:15 UTC
Zoe Issier wrote:
Link the large N-studys you say you have that shows most the isk come from missions or is it just a random number you pulled out your @ss

all the carriers running noms in 0.0 av nothing to do with it am i right?



See were i type Link the large N-studys

its ok if you have no up to date official numbers you could allways try pulling random numbers out your @ss

Oh wait!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#44 - 2012-11-11 22:56:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Zoe Issier wrote:
See were i type Link the large N-studys
Yes. I provided you with the reference to them, and then you moved the goal posts because apparently the existence of such data was problematic.

Until you disprove the data in them, the only random asspulls are yours since you can't dispute anything said within them.

So:
900bn ISK/day in bounties paid out — known.
1:3–1:4 ratio between rewards and bounties — empirically tested.
150bn ISK/day in rewards — known.

Thus: 450–600bn ISK/day in mission-specific bounties.
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2012-11-11 22:59:02 UTC
No not realy would just like to see your evidence to back up your claim if you dont have none thats ok random numbers are allways good
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#46 - 2012-11-11 23:02:48 UTC
Zoe Issier wrote:
No not realy
Yes, very really. You asked for one thing, got it, and had to ask for a different thing for some reason…

Quote:
would just like to see your evidence to back up your claim
It's right there, just go look at it. Can you offer anything that might disprove the data available?
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2012-11-11 23:08:44 UTC
All i asked for was a link to these number of studys you claim as back up

up to date and official i asumed would be common sence no point looking at a study from 2008 or one made by a random dude with no evidence to back up theyer number

im sorry for asuming common sence wont happen again

now in the intrest of this thread and you claims could you please provide a link to a official up to date study

thank you

if not random typed numbers will do
Speaker4 theDead
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#48 - 2012-11-11 23:09:20 UTC
Amateratsu wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
so you're suggesting more effort for less reward?

i can see this going down well.


No, the reward would be balance by increasing the LP and adiing more / better items to the LP Store.

For example increase the lp payout to say 25 - 30k for a good mission, add more valuable items to the store for example multiple run bpc's for ships and other factions items.

How about a 5 run faction battleship bpc for say 1.5m LP?

So the reward will be as good as it is now.


And ruin FW in the process?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#49 - 2012-11-11 23:15:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Zoe Issier wrote:
All i asked for was a link to these number of studys you claim as back up
…and I provided you with the references needed. Your wilful ignorance has made me disinclined to help you further than that.

Quote:
up to date and official i asumed would be common sence no point looking at a study from 2008 or one made by a random dude with no evidence to back up theyer number
As luck would have it, the data is there and is not random. As luck would further have it, mission composition hasn't changed since to make the relevant data subject to age decay. You would know all this if you had actually know the topic, known the pre-existing numbers, looked at the data, and stopped trying to move the goal posts because the facts didn't correspond to your wishes.

Quote:
if not random typed numbers will do
Already provided:

900bn ISK/day in bounties paid out — known.
1:3–1:4 ratio between rewards and bounties — empirically tested.
150bn ISK/day in rewards — known.

Thus: 450–600bn ISK/day in mission-specific bounties.

Do you have any data to dispute or disprove these numbers? Hell, I've even given you an obvious opening…
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#50 - 2012-11-11 23:19:30 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Nexus Day wrote:
Mission running injects alot of isk into the economy because....

There are a lot more casual mission runners these days that.pay a sub, so...
…they are the perfect target for reductions in ISK injection since you can go a long way with very little. Their large numbers mean that even a small change can have a large effect, all without making the life miserable for them individually so no subs will be lost.

At some point you will have to either adapt or walk into the sunset with your shield on your back.

Blanket changes never have small effects.
Sisohiv
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2012-11-11 23:20:23 UTC
Shederov Blood wrote:
Sisohiv wrote:
Piugattuk wrote:
Sisohiv wrote:
Piugattuk wrote:
Ok, sure.
Just get rid of the need to buy LP store items with isk and tags...whoops, that kills someone else's income, tags, farming tags would be pointless cause who will buy them if you don't need it for LP store, this takes content out of the game.
Sure im for it if I won't need tags and isk to buy pimp items. Big smile
And keep LP prices for items as is.


Nobody uses tags in the LP store.
Most items you can just throw more LP and ISK at rather than build tag shopping lists. Items you can't do that with aren't in the markets.

Oh contrar mi capiton, yes you do.


Yes, you are correct. That 1 in 200,000 guys who puts 800 mill in Navy guns on his ship makes the difference. They are the corner stone of the EVE economy. They are the back bone of trillions.

Cal navy 425's.
34 available in Jita.
To fit a Rokh would run you just under a billion. Roll
Fed Navy magstabs.
Caldari Navy Invuls.
Imperial Navy EANMs.
Republic Fleet warp disruptors.
... and many more. Roll


Show me the thousands of Kill Mails with all these faction fits.
Or is EVE not all about the PvP today? Are we on the tails side of the flip flop coin?

Even if someone is buying 2 Navy Invulns, they are going on his L4 mission ship and won't be replaced for 2 years.
But yes, lets build the econ around over night billionaires that never risk their pimp fits because every now and then a goon will rush to the forums with a one off kill mail worth 40 billion because some guy logged in to EVE after a long day and got sloppy. That's the successful EVE we can look forward to.

You talk out of both sides of your mouth way to often.
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2012-11-11 23:20:33 UTC
Arr still no up to date official link of study

sorry but must dismiss your argument as bull

Claims of studys but no official up to date link of said study for the thread to veiw

exsample of valid argument

i say pigs can fly i link pic of police in helicopter

simplkss
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2012-11-11 23:24:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Search for Kefira's “mission income” threads.

Tippia wrote:
Search for Kefira's “mission income” threads.

Tippia wrote:
Search for Kefira's “mission income” threads.

Tippia wrote:
Search for Kefira's “mission income” threads.

Tippia wrote:
Search for Kefira's “mission income” threads.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2012-11-11 23:29:44 UTC
Why should i

i didnt make the claim why should i search to validate someone els argument

But hey i ear random typed numbrrs are all the rage when validating a debate
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#55 - 2012-11-11 23:31:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Nexus Day wrote:
At some point you will have to either adapt or walk into the sunset with your shield on your back.

Blanket changes never have small effects.
Depends on what you mean by blanket changes and small effects… Blink

But yes, that's kind of the point: the amount of missions being run and the amount of people running them (180k characters the last time I saw any number on it) means that you don't need much to have relatively large effects on the overall inflow of ISK. Shifting, say, 5% of the rewards from pure ISK into LP would mean roughly 15bn ISK less a day coming into the economy. Sure, the market will react and alter prices but on the face of it, that means a (near-)zero net change in income that reduces the daily net influx by 1.5%, and the pain for the individual mission-runner should be relatively minor. I can't think of any other faucet where the same kind of adjustment on the individual level would have anywhere near the same global effect.

Zoe Issier wrote:
sorry but must dismiss your argument as bull
So you still have no data to dispute what we know from empirical research and published statistics? Well, then you can dismiss me as much as you like, but the bull is all yours. I'm sorry that facts were not in your favour, and I'm even more sorry that you couldn't even spot the obvious point of contention in the available data. That's what happens when you rely on fallacies rather than actual arguments or research.

Quote:
But hey i ear random typed numbrrs are all the rage when validating a debate
Well, that would certainly explain why you try to use that kind of data. Unfortunately, it's not actually good enough to dispute what we have at our disposal.
Sisohiv
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2012-11-11 23:34:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Nexus Day wrote:
At some point you will have to either adapt or walk into the sunset with your shield on your back.

Blanket changes never have small effects.
Depends on what you mean by blanket changes and small effects… Blink

But yes, that's kind of the point: the amount of missions being run and the amount of people running them (180k characters the last time I saw any number on it) means that you don't need much to have relatively large effects on the overall inflow of ISK. Shifting, say, 5% of the rewards from pure ISK into LP would mean roughly 15bn ISK less a day coming into the economy. Sure, the market will react and alter prices but on the face of it, that means a (near-)zero net change in income that reduces the daily net influx by 1.5%, and the pain for the individual mission-runner should be relatively minor. I can't think of any other faucet where the same kind of adjustment on the individual level would have anywhere near the same global effect.



As long as every alliance gets a nice moon goo basket so they don't need to rely on tax to pay Sov, sure. When you talk macro fixing, it's the alliances that will see the impacts, not the alliance members.
Serena Serene
Heretic University
#57 - 2012-11-11 23:37:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Serena Serene
Zoe Issier wrote:
Why should i

i didnt make the claim why should i search to validate someone els argument

But hey i ear random typed numbrrs are all the rage when validating a debate


Because you said you thought the discussion is interesting.
If you are interested in something, I'd expect you to put that little small effort in to inform yourself when others already point you to information sources.
You don't want to? I guess you are just a troll, trying to get some attention.. which sadly I am even providing *sighs*

You could of course search out the information you were shown the way to and then explain the reasons it is not valid, if you find something to complain.
But that'd require you to have a point, to think, and to do something, so I guess that won't happen.

Edit: ... too heavy usage of the word "point". Changed that a bit xD
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#58 - 2012-11-11 23:40:48 UTC
Zoe Issier wrote:
Why should i

i didnt make the claim why should i search to validate someone els argument

But hey i ear random typed numbrrs are all the rage when validating a debate


And this is why people still think global warming isnt happening and evolution doesn't exist. Info has been provided, go look at it.
Zoe Issier
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-11-11 23:45:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Zoe Issier wrote:
Why should i

i didnt make the claim why should i search to validate someone els argument

But hey i ear random typed numbrrs are all the rage when validating a debate


And this is why people still think global warming isnt happening and evolution doesn't exist. Info has been provided, go look at it.



Ppl care about global warming wow i dnt tbh


bck on topic what data you want from me i didnt make any claims of punch random numbers just asked for a link to you meny number of studys
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#60 - 2012-11-11 23:46:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Sisohiv wrote:
As long as every alliance gets a nice moon goo basket so they don't need to rely on tax to pay Sov, sure. When you talk macro fixing, it's the alliances that will see the impacts, not the alliance members.
How do you mean? Even if they relied on taxes, the alliances couldn't be hit any harder than the members are — they still only collect tax on (some) fauceted ISK.

That said, I was a bit unclear: of course it would have even larger macro-scale effects if bounties as a whole took a hit (since that would affect every kind of normal rat-murdering, not just missions), but outside of missions, there's not currently any mechanic that could replace that lost income. Cutting bounties by 2% would generate the same reduction in ISK as the 5% mission reward shift in the example, but it would unquestionably be a reduction.

The beauty of going after the missions is that the reward and bonus facuets are very neatly matched by the LP store sink, so depending on the elasticity of LP good prices, you can create much larger shifts from faucet to sink compared to how much ISK the user actually loses from the shift. Should your local merchant deity smile on you, you could have a reduction in ISK influx without any loss in income…

Zoe Issier wrote:
bck on topic what data you want from me i didnt make any claims
Yes you did. You claimed that the numbers we have at our disposal are “random” and “BS”. I want to see the data you have that backs up these assertions.