These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

[Suggestion] Make mission rewards and NPC bounties dynamic based on inflation and cost of living

First post
Author
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
#41 - 2013-03-12 17:37:33 UTC
Tweaks Huren wrote:
DJ P0N-3 wrote:
Go read back through the econ devblogs about inflation in EVE, as it seems you're missing some back information. Yes, we know it works that way. You're not being paid for out of a pool of NPC corp taxes that will dry up if too many people run missions.

The reason it works that way and not like a "real world" economy is that for most people, their income comes from PvE, not other players. If there were no NPCs who made ISK appear out of the aether, then it would be a real economy. But some players would have to sit around just handing out missions and paying people. Some players would just sit around buying blue loot and then hoarding it because it doesn't do anything. Instead of ratting, you'd have to go find a hotspot of infinite players with huge bounties flying super-expensive ships so you could have a sustainable income from it. Doesn't that sound even more tedious than missioning or ratting? What incentive would your ISK pinatas have to make themselves available to you?

EVE isn't like the real world. We don't have occupations. Our occupations are using our ISK for our amusement. We are all wealthy playboys. We get ISK from PvE and spend it on ships and skills. There's only a handful of people who make their ISK off of services to other players (e.g. Red Frog).

If missioning is boring, try another form of making ISK.

Would you have a link to that blog? I'm interested.

That said, if they made it smart enough, they could still let NPCs manage all that based on supply and demand and simulate a real-life economy that way. Sure, some regions would be poorer than others, and some goods would simply be unavailable in other regions simply because there is not enough offer, but that is exactly what a real-life economy is like.

I'm trying to think of a good reason why it could not be done and I can't see one. If they simulate market activity using NPCs to buy and sell goods, and transport them (with actual haulers) in addition to relying on players to run courier, manufacturing and item exchange missions to haul goods around or increase supply, then it would work.

Point is, NPC money doesn't have to be an ISK sink or free ISK if CCP decides to create a proper simulation and let NPCs act as if they were players (do real transactions based on supply and demand, or increase supply certain things based on political events such as wars, increase NPC buy orders for certain items with prices closer to actual market price, etc...)


There are a lot of econ devblogs. I really recommend that you just sit down with the devblog archives and read back a few years. They even used to put out quarterly economic reports.

I'm not sure what goods you think NPCs are going to be hauling around or why CCP would want more NPC involvement in the market. You seem to be suggesting that NPCs edge players out of the market so CCP can control it through NPC buy orders. If CCP wanted to control the economy that way, they wouldn't have set things up the way they are now.
Tweaks Huren
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2013-03-12 17:51:08 UTC
DJ P0N-3 wrote:
There are a lot of econ devblogs. I really recommend that you just sit down with the devblog archives and read back a few years. They even used to put out quarterly economic reports.
Yes I found them after I searched a bit... thanks.

DJ P0N-3 wrote:
I'm not sure what goods you think NPCs are going to be hauling around or why CCP would want more NPC involvement in the market. You seem to be suggesting that NPCs edge players out of the market so CCP can control it through NPC buy orders. If CCP wanted to control the economy that way, they wouldn't have set things up the way they are now.

Not control; complement and fill gaps where they need to be filled. Basically, play the part of a real player to help balance the economy.

As for goods they could haul, could be anything that can be manufactured, raw materials, blueprints, etc... instead of just "trade goods" that no real player has any use for. That way the missions you'd get (other than the combat ones) could actually be relevant to the economy instead of just being ISK sinks. I mean, who cares about Holoreels and Slaves when there is no purpose for them? For this they would probably have to produce certain goods in certain stations (relevant to the type of corporation it is), and then create a supply chain with other stations, all that without competing overly with the player manufacturing (but rather complementing it).

I'm not sure how it could all work and it would probably be very complex, that's for sure, but it could be done I'm sure as well. It's just another type of AI after all...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#43 - 2013-03-12 17:55:19 UTC
Tweaks Huren wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
if the NPC's did not create wealth they would be dripped of their money in minutes. they pay far more out than they receive.

with an Apoc u can use T1 crystals and run missions with absolutely no expenditure. u would simply take more and more isk from the NPC's until it ran out.

edit - the reason ur missions arent worth very much is because they REALLY arent worth very much. they dnt take much time effort or investment to run. christ, they can be done semi-afk for crying out loud. and u wanna be paid for that little amount of work?

No I don't, so make them harder then... that's another good point.. Missions are boring AND they don't pay at all.

But then again, this is besides my original point. My point was that due to the nature of the EVE economy and the inflation that occurred over the years, that missions do not give the same "value" they used to when they were first introduced.


thats precisely my point, the income of missions (and most things in eve in general) is far higher than the work needed, when the game first started out u became an overnight millionaire for almost no work at all. if payments were balanced with work done in eve it wouldnt be a game, it would be a job, it arguably already is a job.

in order to get payed well for missions u have to grind for hours just like u grind for hours at work.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2013-03-12 18:25:53 UTC
Tweaks Huren wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
if the NPC's did not create wealth they would be dripped of their money in minutes. they pay far more out than they receive.

with an Apoc u can use T1 crystals and run missions with absolutely no expenditure. u would simply take more and more isk from the NPC's until it ran out.

edit - the reason ur missions arent worth very much is because they REALLY arent worth very much. they dnt take much time effort or investment to run. christ, they can be done semi-afk for crying out loud. and u wanna be paid for that little amount of work?

No I don't, so make them harder then... that's another good point.. Missions are boring AND they don't pay at all.

But then again, this is besides my original point. My point was that due to the nature of the EVE economy and the inflation that occurred over the years, that missions do not give the same "value" they used to when they were first introduced.

Missions are done solo in highsec. they arent supposed to be "omg profits i roll in iskies now".

i know people who run level 3's and 4's and make neough to PLEX every motnh and a little extra, IMO thats even bordering on ridiculous.

highsec missioning is supposed to help newbies get the isk to set themselves up in the SOCIAL aspect of eve online. as in get the money and experience to go out and fulfill a profitable role with other players (and no, im not saying YOU HAVE TO PVP at all). if you move to lowsec for instance, i knwo several pirate corps who have missioning-only members to help both make money for the corp in level 5's, and act as bait so the pvp players can jump people who try to attack the missioners.

highsec missioning should not ever be the be all end all, or even remotely close to "high end" of the isk-making methods, you want good isk from PvE, go do null anoms or wormhole sleeper sites.

TL;DR missions give just enough isk for how long they take to do, people can PLEX accounts with missions, if anything missions are already pretty damn profitable for the time/effort required for them.
Tweaks Huren
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2013-03-12 18:56:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Tweaks Huren
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Missions are done solo in highsec. they arent supposed to be "omg profits i roll in iskies now"..


When is the last time you soloed a Level IV security mission in highsec? It "can" be done, but it's not as easy as you seem to think it is, at least not without proper skills (Level V) and very good and expensive fits. People often fleet up to run those actually, and I don't consider them to be "omg profits i roll in iskies now".


That said...


It's funny (actually not) how everybody seems to be completely ignoring the main point of this thread which is that mission payouts are worth less now than they were originally set to (when first created).

Missions used to be much more balanced before (when they were first introduced) in terms of ISK reward, simply due to the fact that 100,000 ISK was worth more then than it is now in terms of buying power.

That is ALL I was trying to bring across, and everybody started bashing at missions altogether.


  • I'm not saying I want missions in highsec to pay as much as the ones in low or nullsec
  • I'm not saying I want missions rewards to be buffed because they were never satisfying to begin with
  • I'm not asking for free ISK without any work (if they have to make missions harder, so be it!)


All I'm asking for (if CCP admits to this in the first place) is that mission ISK rewards be brought back to the same "value" (in terms of what it was worth then) they were originally set to based on the current economy and inflation that occurred.

If CCP and the rest of the community all agree to say that doing this would make things worse, then you are basically saying it';s okay that mission rewards are practically worth nothing right now compared to what they were originally worth. Mark the words in bold please!
Zircon Dasher
#46 - 2013-03-12 19:08:40 UTC
I think that if CCP made missions more player interactive this would be a great way to encourage people to do them! Agents would have a pool of open missions for anyone to accept, and it would remain open until completed or a timer runs out. Then people can compete for the mission reward,bonus, and standings gain!

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#47 - 2013-03-12 19:20:30 UTC
I am saying yes it is ok.
Missions are easier now with the infrastructure that nullsec has developed to provide t2 gear and ships to hisec.
WH space has provided t3 ships which can run missions as fast as many battleships.

T2 and faction ships and items are readily available.

With the availability of these items and ships running missions are faster and easier then they used to be.
While it may seem attractive to you to increase the payouts of the missions, it does nothing to address the rising cost of living within the game. adding isk through the mission faucet does not help you in the long run.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Pan Dora
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#48 - 2013-03-13 00:51:24 UTC
Tweaks Huren wrote:


When is the last time you soloed a Level IV security mission in highsec?


Huh!!??? Last time i was logged.

Quote:
It "can" be done, but it's not as easy as you seem to think it is, at least not without proper skills (Level V) and very good and expensive fits. People often fleet up to run those actually, and I don't consider them to be "omg profits i roll in iskies now".


Not at all, Its still reasonable easy in a battleship with named fitting and most skills at level 3-4. Off coarse you will not make the same isk/hour than someone in a office fitted marauder/faction BS but that is not the point.


Quote:
That said...


It's funny (actually not) how everybody seems to be completely ignoring the main point of this thread which is that mission payouts are worth less now than they were originally set to (when first created).

Missions used to be much more balanced before (when they were first introduced) in terms of ISK reward, simply due to the fact that 100,000 ISK was worth more then than it is now in terms of buying power.


And you are missing the point of their responses: It still make a good amount of ISK, and raising the ISK reward wold lead to more inflation. Nonetheless there is a fair amount of options available, and mostly options that weren't available when mission were designed.

Also mission were way less balanced before in term of extra rewards, LP and salvage made wonder in this regard.


Quote:
That is ALL I was trying to bring across, and everybody started bashing at missions altogether.


People disagree with your proposal and are just pointing out why. Missions are a easy target, so the bashing its natural.

Quote:
All I'm asking for (if CCP admits to this in the first place) is that mission ISK rewards be brought back to the same "value" (in terms of what it was worth then) they were originally set to based on the current economy and inflation that occurred.

If CCP and the rest of the community all agree to say that doing this would make things worse, then you are basically saying it';s okay that mission rewards are practically worth nothing right now compared to what they were originally worth. Mark the words in bold please!


Back on they there was no salvage or LP store. Nor incursions or WH. Those, to name a few, were used by CCP to adjust mission value. While you argue that a direct increase in missions rewards/npc bounties are needed, CCP dont think that way since its value comes to the current level (somewhat) according to CCP plan.



-CCP would boost ECM so it also block the ability of buthurt posting.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#49 - 2013-03-13 03:33:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Tweaks Huren wrote:


When is the last time you soloed a Level IV security mission in highsec?


loads of ppl run level 4's solo in T1 battleships, some ppl solo level 4's in T1 battle cruisers. if u need a fit i can give u one. they are easy because they are not meant to be and end game, they are just there to grind isk out of.

Tweaks Huren wrote:

It's funny (actually not) how everybody seems to be completely ignoring the main point of this thread which is that mission payouts are worth less now than they were originally set to (when first created).

Missions used to be much more balanced before (when they were first introduced) in terms of ISK reward, simply due to the fact that 100,000 ISK was worth more then than it is now in terms of buying power.


wrong, missions were unbalanced before. they gave u a lot of buying power for no work, they are for more balanced now than they ever were.

Tweaks Huren wrote:

If CCP and the rest of the community all agree to say that doing this would make things worse, then you are basically saying it';s okay that mission rewards are practically worth nothing right now compared to what they were originally worth. Mark the words in bold please!


yes, it is ok that mission rewards are practically worth nothing, because they take no work.

little risk + little work = little reward.

how can u not get that?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#50 - 2013-03-13 12:51:05 UTC
Tweaks Huren wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
Tweaks Huren wrote:
BUT

If they drastically change the way NPC manage ISK, products and the market to "simulate" exactly what players are doing, then it would be able to work. (By that I mean moving goods with actual NPC haulers based on supply and demand, auto-adjusting orders based on supply and demand, buying and selling at the actual market median prices, giving missions that are actually helping the NPC corp giving it, such as actually moving real lgoods they need based on supply and demand, and such...). Yes it's a lot of work and it's beyond my original post's suggestion, but it could work if it was done properly. In other words, CCP would need to create a living NPC economy that merges with the player-based economy instead of injecting free-ISK or destroying it.

Too easy to exploit. All it would take is for the people at the top to either horde all the isk they can or release it back into the market again and we end up with boom and bust issues.

Just thinking out loud here, but how is this kind of "exploit" dealt with in real life and why couldn't they apply the same laws/protections in EVE to prevent it?

You do realise that EvE is a game, right? It's not real. How many people would drive their car head long into a bus for a giggle in real life? There are plenty of people in EvE who would do anything to screw up the system, just because they could.

As for real life boom and busts, there is a reason most of the western world is in a resection right now. Look at post-war Germany or America during the great depression. That is what happens when the RL economic safeguards fail.

Economic terrorism does exist and there are many safeguards set in place to prevent it. But by and by, Joe Public is not multi-trillionaire who decides to convince his mates to flood the economy with his cash then horde it all again. The same cannot be said for the EvE player base.

If CCP did decide to run the EvE economy just like RL, then forget expansions, iteration and new content. They would have to put everyone onto watching and monitoring the economy. And just like in the current world, you would have those with money, and those without. No one could amass a personal fortune without being incredibly lucky and/or devious. The balance of power would literally create a class system, we would all end up working for the coalitions, as it would be them that controlled the economy, even more than they do now.

So, how many people do you think would pay a subscription fee to basically be a nobody?
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2013-03-13 13:09:20 UTC
Lvl 4s are easily done, I solo'd one of the harder ones yesterday when the last high sec incursion popped.

Rat bounties, which is the primary income of missions, is the reason we have inflation. What you propose is making a feedback loop where higher inflation results in faster inflation, which results in even higher inflation, and even faster inflation.... soon the income would surpass the somewhat risky group PvE content of incursions (right now generally requiring high end fits).

Everyone would mission to make ISK, then spend the ISK on PvP, huge ISK flow, nothing gets made, economy crashes....

Just wait... as inflation gets worse, missioning becomes less attractive, less people will do it, it will eventually stabilize where inflation makes missions reach their real value.
Ie when the value (in ISK) of the LP and loot/salvage of a mission is approximately equal to the ISK payout from the reward and bounty.

You want a profession that is inflation adjusted? mine and manufacture. (though you have to compete with mining bots and massive AFK mining lowering your rewards)
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#52 - 2013-03-13 19:22:19 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
Lvl 4s are easily done, I solo'd one of the harder ones yesterday when the last high sec incursion popped.

Rat bounties, which is the primary income of missions, is the reason we have inflation. What you propose is making a feedback loop where higher inflation results in faster inflation, which results in even higher inflation, and even faster inflation.... soon the income would surpass the somewhat risky group PvE content of incursions (right now generally requiring high end fits).

Everyone would mission to make ISK, then spend the ISK on PvP, huge ISK flow, nothing gets made, economy crashes....

Just wait... as inflation gets worse, missioning becomes less attractive, less people will do it, it will eventually stabilize where inflation makes missions reach their real value.
Ie when the value (in ISK) of the LP and loot/salvage of a mission is approximately equal to the ISK payout from the reward and bounty.

You want a profession that is inflation adjusted? mine and manufacture. (though you have to compete with mining bots and massive AFK mining lowering your rewards)

Missions aren't so much the issue per say. It's all forms of isk printing PvE. You can make much more running exploration sites in null than you can on any highsec mission.

We just need a few higher isk sinks to balance it out.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#53 - 2013-03-14 01:35:58 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:

Just wait... as inflation gets worse, missioning becomes less attractive, less people will do it, it will eventually stabilize where inflation makes missions reach their real value.


this^ many times this^

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Saul Elsyn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#54 - 2013-03-14 05:19:52 UTC
Buffing the payout for missions will only accelerate the process, as adding more isk to the economy is what creates inflation. Now... there are other possibilities to increase relative payout I could possibly understand (reworking salvaging to include recovering minerals, trade goods, and t2 components from wrecks in addition to the usual 'salvage' stuff might be viable), but flat up using liquid isk would only increase inflation.

Adding an alternate source of items like T2 components (T2 ship wrecks), trade goods, construction components, and minerals would cause a reduction in inflation or perhaps even deflationary pressure.

What you have to understand is that EVE is a MMO with a player driven economy... they can simulate NPC involvement somewhat with NPC buy orders and so forth, but the developers are quite insistent on it remaining, player driven. Now... I can understand perhaps having NPC buy orders that update every day with a price based on the average buy or sale price of an item, but it should never be NPC driven.
Previous page123